S’pore’s tough stance against vaping signals loud and clear the nation’s zero-tolerance approach

SINGAPORE – The message that Singapore takes a zero-tolerance and no-apologies approach to vaping is loud and clear. It will be no different from how matters like hate speech and the death penalty are dealt with.

Legislative changes announced on Aug 28

, that kick in from Sept 1, are designed to choke the supply of vapes into Singapore by cutting access to online platforms. They will also prevent those in the illicit trade from profiting from the business.

For now, the attention is on Kpods, which are e-vaporisers laced with etomidate, and on the support that will be given to those seeking help with their addiction.

Among other things,

etomidate will be listed as a Class C drug

under the Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA), with significantly heavier penalties compared with laws under the Poisons Act, where the current maximum penalty is two years’ jail and a $10,000 fine for possession, use and trafficking of the anaesthetic drug.

This will go up to a maximum sentence of 10 years’ jail and a $20,000 fine for illegal possession and use under the MDA.

Also from Sept 1, up to 15 strokes of the cane and a maximum 20 years’ jail can be meted out to Kpod suppliers to tackle the vaping scourge here.

But it is not just about Kpods. The legislative changes also cast light on vaping in general, with the Government describing it as a delivery system for drugs.

Instead of a tobacco harm reduction device, as has been marketed heavily online by advocates and social media influencers promoting vaping, an e-vaporiser will be treated in Singapore like a drug implement.

From Sept 1, certain vaping offences under the Poisons Act and the Tobacco (Control of Advertisements and Sale) Act will also fall under three powerful laws usually reserved for major crimes, including large-scale money laundering and terrorism.

They are the Online Criminal Harms Act, the Organised Crime Act and the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act.

The Online Criminal Harms Act gives the authorities more bite, as it allows the Government to direct a range of actions.

These include requiring online service providers to disable specified content or restrict an account on a platform from communicating with the audience in Singapore, and even requiring app stores to remove an app to prevent further downloading.

Directions can be issued to any online service provider, entity or individual, as long as there is reasonable suspicion that an online activity is linked to a specified offence.

Social media influencers peddling vapes, including the new so-called vitamin diffusers, which they are marketing as a healthy alternative to vaping, may see themselves blocked from audiences in Singapore.

Under the Organised Crime Act, sellers may see themselves defined as members of a larger syndicate. The law also contains a provision that allows for a non-conviction-based civil confiscation regime to confiscate the benefits from organised crime activity. 

It complements the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act, which is used to deprive convicted criminals of the benefits of their activities.

Taken together, the changes make it clear that international criminal syndicates are tapping social media influencers and messaging platforms in the supply and marketing of e-vaporisers.

Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam said on Aug 28 at a press conference to announce the changes that the approach the authorities apply to the illicit drug trade will be applied to e-vaporiser traders.

“It’s a cynical crime. They (sellers) want to make money and profit from the misery of other people,” he said.

“They know it’s an offence, and they calculate how much money they’re going to make and in return, what are the risks they run. They need to be dealt with harshly.”

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime had warned in a report in May of a looming crisis in East Asia and South-east Asia, with international drug syndicates converging with organised crime groups to tap the vaping industry to push synthetic drugs.

The tough anti-vaping stance has resonated with health experts and activists in Malaysia, who are calling on their government to look into Singapore’s approach of treating vaping as a drug offence. 

With the supply of e-vaporisers in Singapore primarily coming from overseas, the authorities here will need to consider approaches that will allow cross-border cooperation to cut the supply of vapes into Singapore.

This will be challenging. Despite reports from Malaysia showing that two in three e-vaporisers seized in the country were found to contain dangerous drugs, there is no national ban on vaping.

In Indonesia, the country’s drug enforcement agency has said it will not ban vaping but prohibit the use of illicit substances in vape juice.

The zero-tolerance approach in Singapore to vaping has come in for some criticism from tobacco harm reduction advocates, including a grassroots group based in New Zealand.

They argue that the Republic’s decision to treat vaping as a drug offence undermines what they claim is evidence on harm reduction approaches. Instead of a ban, they are calling for vaping to be regulated in Singapore.

While vaping may be allowed in some countries overseas, the legislative changes from Sept 1 mean Singapore citizens and permanent residents could be subject to random drug testing at the borders.

With reports showing that synthetic drugs are prevalent in e-vaporisers overseas, that puff in a foreign country could result in a conviction in Singapore with etomidate listed as a drug under the MDA.

Singapore’s “no apologies” approach will be watched closely, even as law enforcement authorities globally grapple with spikes in drug use, and deaths from narcotics and drug-related crime.