Between Justice and Human Rights: Singapore's Death Penalty Dilemma
Singapore has captured the world’s attention for its extensive use of the death penalty for drug traffickers. The country stands among 35 nations that sentence people to death for drug-related offences. With over 400 executions since 1991, it holds one of the highest execution rates in the world relative to its population of just over four million people per capita. Since resuming executions in March 2022, after a pause of over two years, thirteen people on death row have been hanged. The Transformative Justice Collective (TJC), an organisation dedicated to criminal justice reform, has stated that there are currently 54 individuals on death row in Singapore, with all but three of them convicted of drug-related offences.
More recently, the case of 46-year-old Tangaraju Suppiah gained significant attention as the first person to be executed in the country this year. In 2018, he was sentenced to the mandatory death penalty for his role in facilitating the trafficking of 1,017 grams (35.9 ounces) of cannabis into Singapore in 2013. The conviction was primarily based on statements he made during police interrogation, where he was not provided with legal representation or an interpreter. Tangaraju consistently denied being involved in communication with others connected to the case. However, his sister Leelavathy Suppiah told CNN that her brother had been executed and that the family had received a death certificate.
This execution garnered widespread international criticism. British Billionaire Richard Branson, in his April blog post, argued that giving the mandatory death penalty to people from marginalised communities is unlikely to effectively combat a global illicit drug trade valued at hundreds of billions of dollars annually. He further asserted that investigators and prosecutors based their actions on the fact that Tangaraju's phone number was stored in the actual drug traffickers' phone, interpreting phone records and text messages as "evidence" of his involvement.
Nevertheless, Singapore's Home Affairs Ministry refuted these allegations and stated that the death penalty is "an essential component" in a multi-pronged approach that had been "effective in keeping Singapore safe and secure." The Ministry stated that the Misuse of Drugs Act specifies the death penalty for amounts of cannabis exceeding 500 grams. In the case of Tangaraju Suppiah, the quantity involved, 1017.9 grams, surpassed the capital threshold by more than double and would be sufficient to sustain the addiction of approximately 150 users for a week.
Furthermore, the Ministry asserted that after the mandatory death penalty was introduced for trafficking over 500 grams of cannabis, there was a significant decrease of 15 to 19 percentage points in the likelihood of traffickers surpassing the capital sentence threshold. The ministry pointed to a study conducted in neighbouring regions which found that 87% of respondents believed the death penalty discourages trafficking substantial drug quantities into Singapore, and 83% considered it more effective than life imprisonment in deterring drug trafficking.
Limited Public Debate and Racial Disparities
Public debate on the death penalty in Singapore is limited. The government consistently asserts that capital punishment is not a human rights issue. Press and civil society organisations face government-imposed restrictions that hinder freedom of expression and impede independent monitoring of human rights issues, including the death penalty. According to Human Rights Watch's World Report 2023, Singaporean authorities targeted lawyers and activists assisting defendants and their families, advocating against alleged racial bias in death row cases, and challenging the government's assertion that the death penalty acts as a deterrent against drug trafficking.
The ethnic backgrounds of individuals on death row are not disclosed by Singaporean authorities. However, the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination pointed out in 2021 that a significant majority of those convicted and sentenced to death for drug offences in Singapore belong to ethnic minorities. Experts from the committee revealed that between 2015 and 2020, out of a total of 44 individuals sentenced to death for such offences, 4 were of Chinese ethnicity, 3 were of Indian ethnicity, and 37 were of Malay ethnicity. Many lawyers in Singapore are also hesitant to handle death row cases at later stages due to concerns of being accused of misusing the court system if they do not succeed.
International Response
Experts designated by the UN Human Rights Council called for an immediate halt to capital punishment in Singapore, condemning the government's persistent use of the death penalty for drug-related offences. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) stated: “States that have not yet abolished the death penalty may only impose capital punishment for the ‘most serious crimes.’ “Under international law, only crimes of extreme gravity involving intentional killing can be considered as ‘most serious’. Drug offences clearly do not meet this threshold.”
The EU Delegation, along with the diplomatic missions of EU Member States, Norway, and Switzerland, emphasised their strong opposition to the use of capital punishment under any circumstances. They urged Singapore to implement a moratorium on all executions, as a crucial initial step towards its total abolition. Similarly, Amnesty International Deputy Regional Director Ming Yu Hah said: “This unlawful execution shows yet again the staggering failure of Singapore’s stubborn embrace of the death penalty. The many flaws in the case, from lack of access to legal counsel and of interpretation from the point of arrest to the lack of disclosure of key evidence from the prosecution, as well as the continued reliance on the mandatory death penalty render this execution arbitrary under international human rights law.”
He further stated that Singapore's punitive drug policies have failed not only to tackle the use and availability of drugs in the country but also failed to offer effective protection from drug-related harm. Therefore, he stressed the government of Singapore to take note of the growing trend around the world towards abandoning the death penalty and act accordingly, first by establishing an official moratorium on all executions, then moving towards full abolition.
Global Trend Towards Abolition and Singapore’s Response
Amnesty International holds that the death penalty breaches human rights, in particular the right to life and the right to live free from torture or cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment. Presently, 106 countries worldwide have abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 36 other countries still retain the death penalty for serious crimes like murder but have either refrained from executing anyone in the past decade or have made international commitments against using the death penalty. Nevertheless, Singapore retained the death penalty upon gaining independence from Malaysia in 1965. In 1993, Singapore was controversially dubbed “Disneyland with the Death Penalty.”
A 2020 paper by Ariel Yap and Shih Joo Tan from Monash University in Australia, stated that Singapore has consistently maintained an "ideology of survival" since independence, using it as justification for capital punishment, partly due to its proximity to the Golden Triangle—an area notorious for drug production where Thailand, Laos, and Myanmar (formerly Burma) meet. Therefore, Singapore extended the death penalty to encompass drug offences in 1973 and made it mandatory for certain offences in 1975. For this, the country has repeatedly been called by the international community to halt its execution of drug offenders.
Yet, the Singaporean government states that each country retains the sovereign right to decide on the imposition of capital punishment within its criminal justice system, considering its own circumstances and in accordance with its international obligations. Last year, when the UN adopted its ninth resolution in favour of a moratorium on executions, Singapore, consistent with its previous stance, voted against the resolution. Singapore’s representative at the UN called the resolution an effort “to export a particular model of society to the rest of the world,” which “betrays an attitude of arrogance and an attitude of cultural superiority.”
Conclusion
Singapore's excessive use of the death penalty for drug-related offences has sparked international criticism. Despite concerns about fairness, limited public debate, and restrictions on freedom of expression, Singapore maintains its use of the death penalty as an essential component of its approach to ensuring safety and security. The international community, including the United Nations and human rights organisations, have called for a moratorium on executions and the eventual abolition of the death penalty. They emphasize that drug offences do not meet the threshold for the "most serious crimes" deserving of capital punishment. The ongoing debate highlights the diverging perspectives on the death penalty and the need for Singapore to reconsider its position in line with global trends and human rights principles.
Image Credits: Christopher Corneschi — Edited by GorStra team