Singapore on Monday passed a law to hold "dangerous offenders" indefinitely, even after they complete their jail sentences. The legislation applies to those above 21 who are convicted of crimes such as culpable homicide, rape and sex with minors, who are deemed to be at risk of reoffending upon release. In a speech in parliament, Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam said: "An offender who continues to pose a real danger to others should not be released."

By Xinghui Kok

SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Singapore on Monday passed a law to hold “dangerous offenders” indefinitely, even after they complete their jail sentences.

The legislation applies to those above 21 who are convicted of crimes such as culpable homicide, rape and sex with minors, who are deemed to be at risk of reoffending upon release.

In a speech in parliament, Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam said: “An offender who continues to pose a real danger to others should not be released.”

He gave an example of a man jailed for raping his 6-year-old stepdaughter, who, after his release started sexually assaulting his sister’s granddaughter who was 10 in 2015. In 2017, he sexually assaulted the girl’s younger sister who was 9.

“We have to deal with these kinds of menace and protect our society,” said Shanmugam.

The new law means that instead of being automatically released after completing their prison terms, such offenders would need the home affairs minister to decide that they were no longer a threat to the public.

The minister would be advised by a review board made up of experts such as retired judges, lawyers, psychiatrists and psychologists, and the offender and his lawyers can make representations to the board. Those found unfit for release will have their case reviewed annually.

Singapore estimates this law will affect fewer than 30 offenders a year.

  • NateNate60@lemmy.worldEnglish
    25·
    9 months ago

    I understand the sentiment but the way that they are going about this is just going to blow up in their face and make them look bad.

    If they had just quietly changed the sentencing laws to say “A sentence of 25 years imprisonment issued against a defendant convicted of culpable homicide is interpreted to mean a sentence of life imprisonment with a minimum tariff of 25 years”, nobody would have batted an eye.

    • Otter@lemmy.caEnglish
      6·
      9 months ago

      Yea I didn’t quite understand the change. Is this the lazy way of changing it so that each individual sentencing doesn’t have to change (ex. 25 years changed to life sentence with parole hearings after 25 years)? I guess the problem then would be that the decision making becomes more arbitrary and prone to bias.

      Same with the example given. How does it work right now in Singapore for repeat offenders?