The Legal Janitor

(Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and even if I do become one eventually the area of law which I have the best understanding of is NOT criminal law.)

So the Penal Code is undergoing some changes, going to be updated for modern times. Given that my training in criminal law is under the Victorian Crimes Act 1958, a simple comparison will leave one with an indelible impression that Singaporean criminal laws dealing with sexual offences are not just “archaic”, as put so eloquently by ChannelNewsAsia, but positively medieval.

There are two very glaring examples, based on the CNA news report. First is on the issue of rape, within the marriage context.

Current laws do not allow for prosecution against a husband for raping his wife because he enjoys marital immunity.

The new Penal Code aims to remove this legal protection, on the condition that the wife is legally separated from her husband, or has taken a Personal Protection Order to prevent her husband from having sex with her.

While the prior law was mediaevally patriarchal (yes, you ladies belong to your husbands as chattel, which is why he can do with you as he wish), the updated position is just plain ludicrous.

If the “wife” is legally separated from “her husband”, then its no longer a marriage issue, but a simple case of rape by one individual of another. How does this qualify as an “update”?

The idea that a woman would have to take out a personal protection order first before she can receive legal protection against rape by her husband is crazy. Women who face rape from their husbands are more likely to be from lower socio-economic backgrounds. How likely are they to have full awareness of their legal rights, and that they have to take out a PPO first before the police will pursue criminal charges against the perpetrator?

The second glaring issue is the one regarding the criminalisation of homosexual acts.

On sex between homosexuals, the Ministry has plans to keep the status quo.

“These should essentially be seen as private matters within the home. One of the bigger issues is whether this is a signal by the Government of greater acceptance of homosexuality in Singapore,” says Associate Prof Kumaralingam Amirthalingam.

“I don’t think the Government is prepared to make a statement on this. But if you look at the history of prosecution under Section 377, which is the relevant provision here, I don’t think you’ll find any prosecutions of homosexual sexual activity between consenting adults within the home.”

“So in that sense, it’s a typical Singapore way of managing this issue without getting embroiled in the political and social problems that we’re not ready to face,” adds the law lecturer.

In other words, its ok to be gay, as long as you don’t actually have sex or anything. Or if you DO do it, make sure that no one else finds out, otherwise people will complain, and we will have to do something about you doing icky gay stuff.

Not enforcing the law is not a good reason for keeping the law on the books. In fact, this line of reasoning makes a mockery of the law: what is the purpose of the law if it is not enforced? It hangs like the Sword of Damocles over the head of consenting adults engaging in private behaviour that has nothing to do with the government.

I know that in all likelihood this result is more of a compromise to appease those elements of our society who are “conservative” and frown upon such things. The question is, is it proper that legislative policy be held hostage by religious fundamentalist, slack-jawed mouth-breathers?

According to CNA, the Sultan of Johor says:

And for the economic region to develop and grow, the Sultan of Johor has suggested demolishing the Causeway linking Johor and Singapore.

He said that without the Causeway, the Johor economy would prosper.

I don’t understand why the opinions of people who live within the pinnacle of privilege in society AND who have no idea what they are talking about should have any weight at all.

For readers of The Economist, check out their blog!

Free exchange | Economist.com