November 22, 1996

STATEMENT BY

MS FOO CHI HSIA

THIRD COMMITTEE

ON AGENDA ITEM 110 (B)

HUMAN RIGHTS QUESTIONS,

INCLUDING ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES FOR

IMPROVING THE EFFECTIVE ENJOYMENT OF

HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS

Madam Chairperson

1 My delegation would like to limit our comments today to the interim report on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions in document A/51/457 of 7 October 1996 and the interim report on the elimination of all forms of religious intolerance in document A/51/542 of 23 October 1996.

Interim Report on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions

2 Singapore unreservedly condemns extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions. But a clear distinction must be made between extrajudicial, arbitrary or summary executions, and capital punishment administered in accordance with national or religious laws after due process. Confusing the two separate issues, or attempts to merge them, will only dilute prohibitions against extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions.

3 In paragraph 105 of the interim report on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions in document A/51/457, the Special Rapporteur notes that capital punishment is not yet prohibited under international law. Yet, in paragraph 145, the special Rapporteur requests the General Assembly to adopt a resolution calling for the abolition of the death penalty. This is potentially a very divisive and contentious issue. The General assembly will not be able to reach consensus on it. The mandate given to the Special Rapporteur is only to continue monitoring the implementation of existing international standards and restrictions relating to the imposition of capital punishment. My delegation is of the view that the Special Rapporteur has exceeded his mandate when he made the recommendation that the General assembly should adopt a resolution calling for the abolition of the death penalty.

Madam Chairperson

4 Singapore understands and respects the position of other countries which oppose the death penalty as a matter of principle. Singapore hopes that other countries also appreciate that certain countries, like Singapore, have decided that the death penalty is a necessary component of their system of justice and punishment, and extend us the same courtesy and respect for our position.

Madam Chairperson

5 Singapore's approach to law and order is based on two basic principles. First, we believe that the legal system must give maximum protection to the majority of our people who are law-abiding from a small number of criminals. We make no apology for clearly tilting our laws and policy in favour of the majority. Second, arrested persons have the right to due process of the law. But when found guilty, offenders must be punished sufficiently so that they, and others, will be deterred from repeating the offence.

6 Singapore will not accept attempts to seek the abolition of capital punishment in Singapore, or other countries, through decisions of the General Assembly when there is no universal consensus that capital punishment is contrary to international law. There are two main reasons why the abolition of capital punishment has not passed into international law, and why it may never be so. First, although the issue of capital punishment has often been characterized as a human rights issue, the promotion of human rights, in the context of the right of the convicted prisoner to life, must be weighed against the rights of his victims, and the greater rights of the community to live in peace and security. Second, capital punishment is a integral part of some religious laws which can never be compromised.

7 The abolition of the death penalty does not necessarily contribute to the enhancement of human dignity and the progressive development of human rights. On the contrary, the retention of the death penalty has served to preserve and safeguard the interests of the community and society as a whole in the maintenance of law and order. The death penalty serves as the ultimate deterrent.

8 Article 6(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that the death penalty sentence may be imposed for the most serious crimes and can only be carried out pursuant to a final judgment rendered by a competent court. Drug trafficking is a case in point. This is indisputably a serious and heinous crime. The drug situation in Singapore has remained under control and stable since the 1970s despite our proximity to the "Golden Triangle" in mainland Southeast Asia and our position as a major international transshipment hub because of our strict laws which include the death penalty for trafficking.

9 Singapore firmly believes that is the sovereign right of States to determine the appropriate legal measures and penalties to combat serious crimes effectively. Singapore does not claim universal validity for our approach. But our legal system works in Singapore and we have no intention of changing practices that work for us.

[...]

Thank you Madam Chairperson