Parliament: Supreme Court judges to review detention orders and act as safeguard, says Shanmugam
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox
Home Affairs and Law Minister K Shanmugam said sitting Judges of the Supreme Court would chair the independent advisory committees that review police supervision and criminal detention orders.
PHOTO: GOV.SG/YOUTUBE
Follow topic:
SINGAPORE - The independent advisory committees that review police supervision and criminal detention orders will be chaired by sitting Judges of the Supreme Court from March, said Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam on Tuesday (Feb 6).
Speaking during a debate on the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) (Amendment) Bill, Mr Shanmugam said the move will make the processes under the Bill more robust.
"The Advisory Committee, as I mentioned above, is an essential safeguard for the system," he said.
Mr Shanmugam also justified the proposed amendments to the Bill, such as to insert a list of the types of criminal activity in the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act.
This follows the Court of Appeal's decision in 2015 to free alleged Singaporean match-fixing kingpin Dan Tan, noting it did not accept the Act's "loose or open-ended remit".
On Tuesday, Mr Shanmugam said: "We decided to list the types of criminal activities. There is more certainty and clarity in such an approach."
The list of offences to be prescribed include secret society activities, unlicensed moneylending, drug trafficking, kidnapping and organised crime.
The Act, which has been around 60 years, allows the detention of criminal suspects without trial.
The proposed Bill seeks to extend the Act for another five years, starting from October next year, and also to empower Central Narcotics Bureau officers to investigate breaches of police supervision orders.
Mr Shanmugam also tried to allay concerns about a proposed change that states that the Home Affairs Minister's decision on detention is final in two aspects: Whether a person is linked to criminal activities and whether detention is necessary for reasons of public safety, peace and good order.
He clarified that this was not new and has always been accepted by the Courts. "The courts are not to substitute their views of the facts, or engage in the exercise of scrutinising the evidential basis of detention," he said.
Mr Shanmugam said the Courts can still review the Minister's decisions based on the traditional tests of illegality, irrationality, and procedural impropriety.
