Caning in Singapore
It is applicable to only male convicts under the age of 50 for a wide range of offences under the Criminal Procedure Code, up to a maximum of 24 strokes per trial.
Boys aged between 6 and 19 may be given up to three strokes with a light rattan cane on the buttocks over clothing or the palm of the hand as a punishment for serious misconduct, often as a last resort.
"[2] Caning, as a form of legally sanctioned corporal punishment for convicted criminals, was first introduced to Malaya and Singapore during the period of British colonial rule in the 19th century.
Subsequent legislation has been passed by the Parliament of Singapore over the years to increase the minimum strokes an offender receives, and the number of crimes that may be punished with caning.
[9] It was not uncommon for the courts to extend, by up to 12 months,[13] the prison terms of offenders originally sentenced to caning but later found to be medically unfit to undergo the punishment.
[18] While most of Singapore's laws on offences punishable by caning were inherited from the British legal system through the Indian Penal Code, the Vandalism Act was only introduced in 1966 after independence, in what has been argued[19] to be an attempt by the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) to suppress the opposition's activities in the 1960s because opposition supporters vandalised public property with anti-PAP graffiti.
Vandalism was originally prohibited by the Minor Offences Act, which made it punishable by a fine of up to S$50 or a week in jail, but did not permit caning.
Once he has removed his clothes, he is restrained in a large wooden trestle based on the British dual-purpose prison flogging frame.
[44] Men who were caned have variously described the pain they experienced as "unbearable", "excruciating", "equivalent to getting hit by a lorry",[42] "having a hot iron placed on your buttocks",[44] etc.
[43][60] M Ravi, a human-rights lawyer, described the injuries of his client, Ye Ming Yuen, who received 24 strokes, as follows: All over his buttocks were multiple marks and deep lacerations.
[60] Judicial caning is also used as a form of legal punishment for criminal offences in two of Singapore's neighbouring countries, Brunei and Malaysia.
[71] This form of caning was originally intended primarily for use on recalcitrant teenage conscripts serving full-time National Service in the SAF.
[72] Military caning is less severe than its civilian counterpart, and is designed not to cause undue bleeding or to leave permanent scars.
The offender must be certified by a medical officer to be in a fit condition of health to undergo the punishment[73] and shall wear "protective clothing" as prescribed.
The Singapore Boys' Home has youths aged 11 through 18 who have been sent there by the courts for committing offences such as theft, robbery or rioting, or because they have been deemed to be Beyond Parental Control.
[78] The superintendents of reformatories are allowed to impose corporal punishment, in the form of caning, on only male residents as a last resort for serious misconduct.
[81] A former Singapore Boys' Home resident who received 10 strokes for absconding when he was 18 said that his buttocks took two weeks to heal sufficiently before he could sit down properly.
[82] Although these juvenile institutions are legally allowed to administer corporal punishment on male offenders in the same way as the state-run reformatories, they must obtain the management committee's authorisation before carrying it out.
The student then places his hands on a desk or chair, bends over or leans forward, and receives strokes from the rattan cane on the seat of his trousers or shorts.
[95] Based on first-hand accounts, the student typically feels moderate to acute pain for the first few minutes, depending on the number of strokes.
[96][97][91][98][99] In 2004, Ng Lee Huat, the principal of Nan Chiau High School, controversially stepped down after admitting to hitting a 14-year-old female student with a soft-cover book.
"[117] In a 2004 interview with China Central Television, Lee explained why caning should continue in Singapore with reference to the 1994 Michael Fay incident: "Every country has its own problems to face, we know, certain things.
Edmund Ng, a candidate for the Singapore Democratic Alliance in the 2006 general election, said, "For criminals, caning serves as a deterrent [...] I would not change a winning formula.
"[121] The severity and humiliation of the punishment are widely publicised in various ways, mainly through the press but also through other means such as the education system.
[124] The Singaporean government has defended its stance on judicial caning and said that the punishment does not amount to torture and is conducted under strict standards and medical supervision.
[125] While most Singaporeans either support or are indifferent towards the practice of judicial caning, there is a minority – including dissident Gopalan Nair,[126] lawyer M Ravi[127] and businessman Ho Kwon Ping – who are completely or partially opposed to it.
[128] A recipient of nine strokes thinks that even though it may be a nightmare the first time, an offender who has been caned before will have experienced the extent of fear of criminal punishment and so may not find it as much of a disincentive to commit repeat offences.
Among them, Criminal lawyer Johannes Hadi called the age limit of 50 "an arbitrary line in the sand", and questioned the exemption of females from caning based on sexist ideas about the physical difference between men and women.
"[133] As Singapore evolves, some citizens may perceive that schools are refraining from using corporal punishment due to their fears of a strong backlash from parents.
[134] Educators, when interviewed, say that they are cognisant of Singapore's changing landscape, both in terms of the family structure as well as the influence of social media, in the reduction of corporal punishment in schools.
