Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) had issued a statement, penned by Dr Chee Soon Juan, Secretary-General of Singapore Democratic Party, on the Parliamentary speech made by Minister for Home Affairs and Law, Mr K Shanmugam in regards to the death of 14-year-old Benjamin Lim.
Below is the SDP’s statement in full
It is unfortunate that Minister for Law K Shanmugam has blamed The Online Citizen and the Law Society for the Benjamin Lim saga.
Benjamin committed suicide on 26 January 2016. Did it have to take five full weeks for the Minister to address the issue? Contrast this to another case where a 4-year-old boy had fallen through a grille-less open window to his death. This happened on 6 October 2015. On 15 October 2015, Mr Shanmugam published a post on his Facebook, commiserating with the boy’s family and lambasting the contractor for not doing his job.
Why could the Minister not have responded sooner in Benjamin’s case especially since it was his Ministry – the Ministry of Home Affairs – at which many questions were directed.
Unfortunately, Mr Shanmugam chose to remain silent despite widespread calls from the public for him to address the incident and it was his protracted silence that irked the public and fueled speculation over what happened that fateful day when the boy committed suicide.
Mr Shanmugam said that it was out of respect for the Lim family that the government did not make any statements. This does not make sense as Mr Shanmugam was very quick off the mark over the incident where the 4-year-old boy fell through the window. Besides, Benjamin’s family had issued a public statement questioning the state’s actions.
If not for TOC’s and the Law Society’s statements – the SDP had also issued a statement (here) – the pressure for the government to address the matter would not have been as intense.
In any matter that is of public interest, the people have every right not just to know about the facts of a case but to also have it in a timely matter. The fact that there was such a delay in the government’s response over the Benjamin Lim episode is unacceptable. To blame other parties for its tardiness is even more reprehensible.
One is reminded of the Mas Selamat escape in which Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong remained silent over the matter for an inappropriate amount of time despite intense public anger over the debacle. At such times, it is incumbent upon political leaders to step forward expeditiously and provide the public with answers.
In the present case, there are still questions that need to be answered:

  • Was it absolutely necessary to dispatch 5 police officers to bring in a boy for questioning?
  • Will suspects, especially if they are young persons, be allowed to be accompanied by counsel or other appropriate persons?
  • Will an independent investigation be carried out into how Benjamin Lim was treated while under police custody?

Mr Shanmugam must remember that the most important thing here is that a young life is gone and a family has lost a loved one. Steps, not finger-pointing, have to be taken to ensure that this never happens again.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

ST journalist: 62.5% of younger S’poreans say FTs contribute to SG’s development

Straits Times Journalist Adrian Lim wrote an opinion piece today saying that…

DFS烟酒店明年6月退出樟宜机场,预计近百名员工失业

DFS烟酒免税商店近日表示,将在明年6月退出樟宜机场,预计会有近百名员工失去工作。 去年12月,樟宜机场集团透露,DFS将延长与樟宜机场的合作,由2020年4月9月直至2022年4月8月,不料却在近日爆出不延续合作关系,预计将在明年6月8日终止。 据《海峡时报》报导,樟宜机场的招标活动于昨日(26日)截止,这次的招标活动将会签订将近六年的合作关系,即指预计从2020年6月9日至2026年6月8日。 然而,DFS烟酒免税商店并没有在昨日申请竞标其商场经营权。 据悉,DFS烟酒免税商店与樟宜机场已有近40年的合作经验。对此,樟宜机场发言人表示,“对于DFS退出的决定感到非常遗憾,因为DFS已是合作38年的好伙伴。尽管如此,我们仍然会彼此合作,确保能够顺利衔接新的合作商。” DFS总裁布莱南(Ed Brennan)则向媒体表示,该决定是基于对樟宜机场商业环境的特殊理解,尤其是在修改购买烟酒商品的规则下,若继续留在樟宜机场销售,就财政而言,并无其可行性。 业内人士表示,我国一直收紧有关烟酒消费的法规,已对烟酒零售商产生影响。 7月,卫生部宣布所有烟草商品包括雪茄、香烟、手卷烟等都必须开始标准化的包装,以及强调健康资讯。 布莱南补充道,“尽管这项决定有利于我们的生意,但并非一蹴而就。DFS自1980年开始,与樟宜机场进行合作,期间我们也不断根据机场环境作出调整,因此,我们对我们所能提供的服务感到骄傲,同时深深感谢这期间不断为此贡献的人们。“ “我们衷心感谢樟宜机场集团在过去的帮忙,也为祝福未来新的烟酒商店”,他说。

为改善烟霾问题 国人赴印尼修复泥炭地

我国“停止烟霾民间运动”(People’s Movement to Stop Haze)慈善组织组队到印度尼西亚,和当地村民合作修复泥炭地,为改善烟霾问题尽一份力。 据《路透社》报导指出,该慈善组织已前往印尼,并在该国2014年遭受严重林火侵袭的村庄进行泥炭地修复项目。 该国农民每年为了扩张农业范围,都会进行烧芭清地工作,所引起的烟霾问题甚至影响到我国在内的东南亚地区。 组织执行董事Benjamin Tay指出,他们意识到良好的泥炭地管理对治理烟霾来说非常重要,通过在当地进行防火和燕麦问题,可以防止烟霾进入我国。 干燥时期的泥炭地特别容易燃烧,火灾区域经常蔓延到预期外的领域就是这个原因,而且泥炭地被排干或燃烧时会释放处碳(carbon)到大气层,聚集热量,影响到气候变化。 该组织目前处于印尼苏门答腊附近盗用上的一个耕农村庄,改善该处双溪多河(Sungai Tohor)附近的运河,以便确保该处泥炭地的湿润度。…

李显扬一家出席“粉红点”集会

步入第11个年头的同性恋平权活动“粉红点”(Pink Dot)集会今日(29日)下午5时在芳林公园举行。而主办当局脸书专页则分享,总理弟弟李显扬一家一同出席活动的合照。 李显扬儿子李桓武与伴侣Heng Yirui医生,刚在上月24日于南非开普敦结婚,引来国内外各界人士瞩目。 而在今日的“粉红点”活动,李桓武和伴侣,父亲李显扬、母亲林学芬以及Heng Yirui医生父母都到场出席,为活动增添亮点。 大多网民留言较为正面,除了表达祝福之外,一些性少数群体也感谢李显扬一家的出席,认为这是最实际的支持,具有重大意义,也意味着家庭成员间也能展现包容态度。 早在去年7月,李桓武就公开在脸书和伴侣合照,并表态支持第10届“粉红点”活动: 早前,总理李显龙曾表示,刑事法典377A条“”仍“将保留在法律中一段时期”,但不代表新加坡会将性少数族群(LGBTQ)边缘化,犹如刑法第377A条并不阻止粉红点每年的聚会。 不过,也有许多性少数群体和性别平权人士仍呼吁,应该先废除377A条文,并且多聆听他们的意见,才可能保障该群体平等权益、能受本地社会的接纳和免受歧视。 根据我国刑事法典第377A节条文,男性同性性行为属犯罪行为,一旦罪名成立可被判监禁长达两年。 不过,对于同性恋者,已故建国总理李光耀生前也曾表明不同意见。…