Speaker 1: It's a Singapore Today top story with Lance and Daniel.
Speaker 2: It's still unbelievable because if you think about it, $1.1
Speaker 2: billion lost in scams. That's about $3 million a day.
Speaker 2: And I was also reading this, Daniel. The world lost
Speaker 2: about a trillion dollars two years ago in scams. A
Speaker 2: trillion dollars. I'm not even sure how many zeros there
Speaker 2: are there. Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 2: So what do you guys think about it? Because according
Speaker 2: to Minister of State for Home Affairs, Sun Xui Ling,
Speaker 2: in a speech during yesterday's Committee of Supply debate for
Speaker 2: the Home Affairs Ministry, she did bring up this case
Speaker 2: that yes, Singapore's going to start considering this. Currently, here's
Speaker 2: how caning is used, OK? Offenses that warrant caning under
Speaker 2: Singapore law include robbery, drug abuse, vandalism, sexual abuse, and
Speaker 2: illegal money laundering, right.
Speaker 2: Now that we're extending the use or considering now Singapore
Speaker 2: is considering it, let's talk about the role of this
Speaker 2: form of punishment in our legal system. Noel Teo is here,
Speaker 2: associate lawyer from GJC Law. Noel, welcome back to the show.
Speaker 2: Hi, Lance, Daniel, thank you for having me. When you
Speaker 2: first heard about this idea of extending this form of
Speaker 2: punishment to be included for to potentially be included for
Speaker 2: very serious scam cases as well, can you give us your,
Speaker 2: your legal mind perspective on it? Have we, do we
Speaker 2: see this in the legal world often that certain forms
Speaker 2: of punishment which traditionally have been used for certain crimes
Speaker 2: can also be extended into the use of other types
Speaker 2: of crimes?
Speaker 2: I think it's undisputed that Singapore has a very low
Speaker 2: tolerance towards crime, and I guess for scam-related offenses, Singapore
Speaker 2: has taken a very strict and harsh stance towards such offenses,
Speaker 2: and as the minister has mentioned, the starting point is
Speaker 2: an imprisonment sentence. Of course, it includes cases where even
Speaker 2: a person handing over their bank account.
Speaker 2: SingPass account, or even the new law, which where you
Speaker 2: hand over your SIM cards to be used in scam-related activities.
Speaker 2: And um I guess imposing caning on scammers is probably
Speaker 2: consistent with the firm and uncompromising stance towards scams and
Speaker 2: with harsher penalties, including physical punishment.
Speaker 2: Parliament is probably sending a very strong message that scam-related
Speaker 2: activities will not be tolerated. Yes, but can, but in
Speaker 2: the the legal framework, can one form of punishment be
Speaker 2: extended to other types of crimes? I mean, we have
Speaker 2: grown used to caning being used for these types of
Speaker 2: things for robbery, drug abuse.
Speaker 2: illegal lending, right? Yeah, something that's, that's very deep, like
Speaker 2: very personal, very abusive, very serious, um, so the idea
Speaker 2: of that form of punishment being extended into something else,
Speaker 2: which maybe is not as physically harmful but definitely emotionally
Speaker 2: scarring and life ruining scamming is, but can a form
Speaker 2: of punishment in one area be extended to use in
Speaker 2: another area?
Speaker 2: I guess this has, this is a decision with parliament,
Speaker 2: of course, if they decide to amend the law to
Speaker 2: include caning as a form of punishment, that is what
Speaker 2: the parliament will decide.
Speaker 2: Um, this is probably because you need a strong deterrent
Speaker 2: and sometimes maybe financial penalties or imprisonment may not fully
Speaker 2: deter scammers, particularly if they are in a syndicate and
Speaker 2: they may treat imprisonment or fines simply as a cost
Speaker 2: of doing business. So, you know, having the possibility of
Speaker 2: caning may make them think twice and discourage local and
Speaker 2: foreigners from engaging in scam-related activities. Right. OK. No, but
Speaker 2: what's the quantum, you know, are we talking about someone
Speaker 2: who
Speaker 2: Maybe scams and individual or a group of people of
Speaker 2: over $500,000 a million dollars, there must be some sort
Speaker 2: of um benchmark.
Speaker 2: Understand. I, I think the challenge here is defining what
Speaker 2: is a more serious case and is it only going
Speaker 2: to apply to large scale syndicate leaders or is it
Speaker 2: going to apply to even local individuals who become involved
Speaker 2: in a scam-related event. Again, this is something to be
Speaker 2: dealt with by parliament and the company is scams. Yeah,
Speaker 2: this is pretty much.
Speaker 2: But of course there is the Sentencing Advisory panel guidelines. Um,
Speaker 2: there are certain considerations that they have brought up for
Speaker 2: other scam-related offenses, such as whether it was motivated by
Speaker 2: personal gain, whether there's an abuse of position of trust,
Speaker 2: whether there was the value of the scam proceeds that
Speaker 2: you mentioned, whether there was a syndicate element, and whether
Speaker 2: were there vulnerable victims. Right, OK, so.
Speaker 2: Are we looking at at something like this as well?
Speaker 2: I know it's up to parliament, but we're just spitballing here.
Speaker 2: Would it apply to Singaporeans or anyone that's caught here
Speaker 2: in Singapore, they will, if this does go ahead, they
Speaker 2: will have the roan.
Speaker 2: I believe that it would, it would likely apply to
Speaker 2: both because um I think a lot of scams are
Speaker 2: conducted overseas and and in a way, when the harsh
Speaker 2: punishments are held towards people who hand over accounts in Singapore,
Speaker 2: it is to cut off their supply.
Speaker 2: So it really depends on how parliament and the court
Speaker 2: interprets this moving forward, but um I believe that if
Speaker 2: they do, they would not probably will not discriminate between,
Speaker 2: you know, whether or not they're Singaporeans or whether or
Speaker 2: not they are foreigners. Actually, that brings up an interesting
Speaker 2: point because of the nature of scams, which are transboundary
Speaker 2: in nature and because that may be different jurisdictions as well.
Speaker 2: First, I mean, yes, it's all well and good to
Speaker 2: have this as a punishment or form of pun punishment potentially.
Speaker 2: But what if the man on the street is gonna say, I,
Speaker 2: what's the point? Can you catch a person?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, of course, there is a difficulty there
Speaker 2: because it is um like you said, transnational and it
Speaker 2: is a bit difficult to trace if it's conducted online.
Speaker 2: But like I mentioned just now, sometimes it's pretty much
Speaker 2: to deter people. I think similarly to how Singapore's stance
Speaker 2: towards drugs and you know, how we treat certain offenses.
Speaker 2: It is quite clear that Singapore has a very harsh
Speaker 2: stance towards such things and scammers twice. Will the scammer twice?
Speaker 2: If the scammer is in country X 10,000 kilometers away,
Speaker 2: they're like, what's the point? You have the law, but
Speaker 2: you can't, you can't, I I'm not going to end
Speaker 2: up in a Singaporean jail.
Speaker 2: Of course, like I said, we're not sure how they're
Speaker 2: going to apply the law. If they're going to apply
Speaker 2: it to locals who become involved, that could also, yes,
Speaker 2: that could also be possible because like I said, when
Speaker 2: they target the locals, it's pretty much to sort of
Speaker 2: cut off the supply for the overseas scammers, and when
Speaker 2: you cut off their supplies, they tend to not be
Speaker 2: able to conduct, you know, the scams anymore because you
Speaker 2: you're basically targeting them from the source. Can I just
Speaker 2: tell you guys
Speaker 2: Fun fact, there are about 120,000 people now working in
Speaker 2: scam centers in Myanmar. I know, I know. 120,000 people.
Speaker 2: Some of them have been kidnapped, some of them have
Speaker 2: gone there thinking they've got job opportunities, they go there,
Speaker 2: next thing you know.
Speaker 2: They're working under terrible conditions, paying back debts. I'm not
Speaker 2: sure what else, maybe even being tortured just to make
Speaker 2: money for these scammers. That is scary. It's larger than
Speaker 2: multinational corporations, you know. So it, it goes to show
Speaker 2: you how organized these scammers are as well. It's, it's
Speaker 2: how they're doing things. So that's why we need to
Speaker 2: fight back.
Speaker 2: So other than giving them the Rotan as well, are
Speaker 2: we also looking at maybe seizing all their assets, property, cars,
Speaker 2: bank accounts? Are we looking at stuff like that? Do
Speaker 2: you think we need to look at that to make
Speaker 2: sure it's severe, it's harsh?
Speaker 2: I think there is twofold, so there is, of course,
Speaker 2: the possibility of disgorging any of the proceeds of scam
Speaker 2: that is that is already currently in place. The other
Speaker 2: part is there is also a law introduced to also
Speaker 2: allow authorities to take control of the accounts of targets
Speaker 2: and to freeze, suspend money transfer. Of course, in this way,
Speaker 2: you know, instead of just only punishing, we deal with
Speaker 2: protective measures against scams. So that that's sort of a
Speaker 2: twofold kind of thing.
Speaker 2: Where you're not just punishing people, but you're also warning
Speaker 2: people against going towards scams, um, you know, protecting people
Speaker 2: who are just stubbornly going to continue transferring money to scammers.
Speaker 2: I'm just out of curiosity, this form of punishment, I mean,
Speaker 2: does draw international flack and, and makes headlines around the
Speaker 2: world sometimes. If you're old enough like me, uh, and Nance,
Speaker 2: you'll remember the Michael Fay case, for example, which made
Speaker 2: headlines around the world, right? And so, so I'm curious,
Speaker 2: like is this form of punishment still actively utilized in
Speaker 2: the judicial systems around the world? Is this very unique
Speaker 2: to Singapore from a legal point of view, is it
Speaker 2: still used elsewhere?
Speaker 2: Um, yes, it is actually used in Asian countries. I
Speaker 2: believe Malaysia, Indonesia, they still use it as well. Um,
Speaker 2: of course, for different offenses and like you mentioned just now,
Speaker 2: generally reserved for violent crimes, drug offenses, sexual offenses. Interesting. OK. Uh,
Speaker 2: can we talk about Telegram as well because we know
Speaker 2: this was brought up in parliament. Should we go after
Speaker 2: the platforms in a, in a much bigger way, because
Speaker 2: we know Telegram.
Speaker 2: A lot of people go on to Telegram to do
Speaker 2: these jobs and investment scams, so.
Speaker 2: Other than the individuals that need to be keen, how
Speaker 2: can we handle these big social media platforms to, to
Speaker 2: maybe send a message that their platforms are being used
Speaker 2: for scams and we need to do something about it
Speaker 2: if they're not doing something about it?
Speaker 2: Yes, I think we have spoken quite a few times
Speaker 2: about how social media is being used for offenses and scams,
Speaker 2: all this while. Um, I think there needs to be
Speaker 2: some sort of guidelines and control in terms of how
Speaker 2: these these these platforms actually deal with such um
Speaker 2: Users, I guess, when you call them users who actually create,
Speaker 2: you know, channels and messages that leads to scams. Um,
Speaker 2: we have cases where, you know, clients sort of fall
Speaker 2: prey to such scammers from Telegram thinking that it is
Speaker 2: a job.
Speaker 2: And, and in the, in the end, you know, they
Speaker 2: get into trouble. So, um I think there needs to
Speaker 2: be some sort of, you know, I don't know, moderator
Speaker 2: control whether or not someone can flag out certain words
Speaker 2: because they tend to use similar words like, you know,
Speaker 2: fast cash, they use words like quick loan.
Speaker 2: Like that sort of sounds. Yeah, and it does sometimes
Speaker 2: it does sound legal and particularly of course for people
Speaker 2: who are not as savvy, maybe the younger generation or
Speaker 2: even the older generation, um that is something that is
Speaker 2: a bit we need to be a bit more cautious
Speaker 2: about um and the platforms can actually come in to
Speaker 2: sort of do.
Speaker 2: Um, some sort of control. Yeah, but we've been having
Speaker 2: this chat for a long time too. You know, we
Speaker 2: keep saying they need to do better due diligence, but
Speaker 2: nothing is being done or very little is being done.
Speaker 2: Maybe they, they may do it for a little while,
Speaker 2: but how can we make sure that they do any
Speaker 2: idea at all? I think we should hurt them.
Speaker 2: Where it is, uh, where, where it hurts them in
Speaker 2: their pockets. So maybe heavy, heavy fines. That could be
Speaker 2: a possible thing. So for example, like, you know, companies
Speaker 2: who sort of maybe under the PDPA they they unable
Speaker 2: to
Speaker 2: certain confidential data, they end up being, you know, fine
Speaker 2: for certain offense for certain of these disclosures that could
Speaker 2: be something that could be considered, but again, I said
Speaker 2: these are businesses, so sometimes it could be just a
Speaker 2: business cost for them.
Speaker 2: Out of curiosity, when things like this happen where the
Speaker 2: government is considering extending the use of this form of
Speaker 2: punishment for these types of crimes, and let's, let's say
Speaker 2: it takes X amount of months for this to be considered,
Speaker 2: but in terms of implication and utility in the legal world,
Speaker 2: is it fairly straightforward? Like the judge is like, OK,
Speaker 2: so this is now part of
Speaker 2: Punishments that we can roll out. It it is very
Speaker 2: smooth the transition in order to be able to utilize it.
Speaker 2: So of course, once the law is passed and and
Speaker 2: it depends on whether or not they decide it can
Speaker 2: be applied retrospectively, um, then the courts will then apply
Speaker 2: it for cases that they are dealing with generally.
Speaker 2: Is it also a bad look that we are going
Speaker 2: to cane scammers if it does become law? How would
Speaker 2: countries in the region look at it? How would the
Speaker 2: world look at it, you know, because people may say
Speaker 2: it's a white-collar crime and we're being a bit too
Speaker 2: harsh here. Do you think that there will be um
Speaker 2: some people who may or some countries that may say
Speaker 2: don't kill our people.
Speaker 2: Um, I'm not sure whether that will happen, but that
Speaker 2: is something to be dealt between the different countries, but
Speaker 2: I think being able to do swift punishment and and
Speaker 2: certain punishment reinforces public trust and also shows that the
Speaker 2: government is committed to holding people accountable.
Speaker 2: And that this has a profound impact on our community.
Speaker 2: It also fosters a sense of safety and confidence. You
Speaker 2: don't want your maybe your grandmother going out and accidentally
Speaker 2: falling into a scam as well, right? So, so things
Speaker 2: like that, I think um it's not just punishment, like
Speaker 2: I said, there's also public education, there's also protection measures
Speaker 2: that we have to take in order to work together
Speaker 2: to to solve counter the crime the crime of scams.
Speaker 2: But do you also like, I'm curious, like from the
Speaker 2: like when you go to international legal conferences and things
Speaker 2: like that.
Speaker 2: Other people that like, oh, that's the one that's the
Speaker 2: lawyer from the country that's the house cleaning, you know.
Speaker 2: I think Singapore is quite well known for being harsh
Speaker 2: in terms of our crimes and, and I don't think
Speaker 2: that's a big problem because um it does, it does
Speaker 2: give us, gives our country a sort of safety kind
Speaker 2: of thing. People see Singapore as a safe place and
Speaker 2: and it helps with, I guess the tourism, it helps
Speaker 2: with many, many things, you know, when Singapore is seen
Speaker 2: as a safe place where there's no confidence.
Speaker 2: In the justice system, that's very important, I believe. Yeah,
Speaker 2: you always hear that every time you're flying back to Singapore,
Speaker 2: the plane will always have the announcement before you land, right, about,
Speaker 2: you know, bringing in drugs and blah blah blah, and
Speaker 2: how it's illegal in Singapore. I like hearing that, you know,
Speaker 2: I'll I'll tell you a story as well when I
Speaker 2: was in New Zealand and I was staying there with
Speaker 2: my family, and one morning my wife was going to
Speaker 2: work and she opened the door and then I hear
Speaker 2: her stomping up the stairs and she says my car
Speaker 2: is not there. So I called the police and I,
Speaker 2: and I reported it.
Speaker 2: And the police said, Why are you calling us? So
Speaker 2: I said, the car has been stolen. Are you gonna
Speaker 2: come around and CSI the place just to take a look?
Speaker 2: And they said, no, just call your insurance people because
Speaker 2: cars are stolen in New Zealand every day. So no
Speaker 2: longer my job description to investigate. So yeah, they didn't
Speaker 2: even bother asking me to make a report, so they said, just,
Speaker 2: I'm not kidding, but don't you need a police report
Speaker 2: in order to make the insurance claim?
Speaker 2: I, I didn't have to make one. I just told
Speaker 2: them my car's not here. It's stolen, and then I just, uh,
Speaker 2: claimed the money that I lost on the car. I'm
Speaker 2: not kidding because it happened, but you see, in Singapore,
Speaker 2: if a car is stolen, it makes front page news, Daniel,
Speaker 2: you know, people will be talking about it, you know,
Speaker 2: but in New Zealand, it's nothing, you know, it's nothing.
Speaker 2: It's just one of those things. It's scary.
Speaker 2: I think interesting, maybe an interesting story. I actually ever
Speaker 2: left behind my laptop. So I left behind my laptop
Speaker 2: at a coffee shop after dinner and I actually reached home,
Speaker 2: then I realized that my laptop is not with me
Speaker 2: and a friend went back and it was still there.
Speaker 2: This at least one hour later, right? It was more
Speaker 2: than an hour later.
Speaker 2: This is Singapore for you. So is. One person was like, OK,
Speaker 2: that's somebody they'll come and take it, blah blah blah.
Speaker 2: Another person is like, this person go and choke the
Speaker 2: table for so long with their laptop. Well, I never
Speaker 2: come back. Or they will just pass it on to
Speaker 2: the staff to say someone's left it behind. Please look
Speaker 2: after this and, and, and they will return it. This
Speaker 2: is how we are here.
Speaker 2: Of course we can't take it for granted, yes, yes,
Speaker 2: but you know when you do lose something, people are
Speaker 2: talking about it. What? It was stolen here in Singapore.
Speaker 2: So that's the thing Singapore does have this of trust.
Speaker 2: We're not saying that no crime happens. does absolutely happen.
Speaker 2: I had a friend who
Speaker 2: Who had to use the toilet, so he parked his bicycle,
Speaker 2: went inside quickly, we came back out, bicycle gone, for example,
Speaker 2: you know, stuff does happen unfortunately, but, but, but it's
Speaker 2: nice to know that I think a majority of Singaporeans
Speaker 2: will be OK with this because the quantum.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's, it's just scary, right? $1.1 billion and
Speaker 2: it went up 70%, you know, from the previous year.
Speaker 2: So if it's going to go up like that, you're
Speaker 2: looking at, hopefully not, but what if it hits $2 billion?
Speaker 2: What if it hits $4 billion? Is is that it, Noel?
Speaker 2: I mean, in your legal world, are you all seeing
Speaker 2: the quantum of the cases involving scams increase so much
Speaker 2: that no one can ignore them. Everybody has to divert
Speaker 2: resources to it. It is critical right now.
Speaker 2: I think everybody sort of know anybody who has fallen
Speaker 2: to a crime, to a scam and and.
Speaker 2: It can be something as small as, you know, a
Speaker 2: couple of hundreds of dollars. It could be something as
Speaker 2: big as 2000 to $30,000 per time. Um, unfortunately, it
Speaker 2: is something that has has gone on and I think
Speaker 2: it has been described as a growing menace. Yeah, we
Speaker 2: got to fight back. Do you think
Speaker 2: We work
Speaker 2: I'm not sure it remains to be seen. Yeah, we
Speaker 2: want to see what the discussions will be like and
Speaker 2: whether it will be used as a form of punishment
Speaker 2: for scammers too and serious scam offenses, as was announced
Speaker 2: by Minister of State for Home Affairsan Xui Ling during
Speaker 2: her speech yesterday during the Committee of Supply debate for
Speaker 2: Home Affairs Ministry. Hey, thank you so much, Noel Teo,
Speaker 2: associate lawyer. Good to talk to you as well. Noel
Speaker 2: is an associate lawyer out of GJC Law. This has
Speaker 2: been Singapore today's top story.