top of page
Writer's pictureDarren Mak

Disneyland With The Death Penalty…and 377A – Darren Mak


a man wear headphone, glasses, adn batik in front of a mic with smiley

When you think about the controversies surrounding the death penalty in Singapore, it is difficult not to think about M Ravi, an activist and lawyer who has made headlines several times due to his involvement with touchy legal issues in Singapore.


The topic of the death penalty in particular has made headlines both locally and internationally due to the taboo surrounding it in the international community, often in connection to drug related offences. A recent high profile case was that of Nagaenthran Dharmalingam, a Malaysian man who, his lawyers claim, is mentally disabled. He, along with many others in similar situations over the years, was represented by M Ravi.

5 people standing with mask bring a poster

His case drew protests in Malaysia and other parts of the world. Picture Credits: Al Jazeera


Speaking with M Ravi about his life’s work in anti-death penalty advocacy, he shared his motivations and philosophy towards working on such a charged and difficult subject. He often represents death penalty cases pro-bono, but has faced setbacks and challenges in a field that sees human rights lawyers imprisoned or even killed in other countries.


He shared that his view on the death penalty is that there should be no ‘but’s or ‘if’s against it. The death penalty has recently sparked some discussion in the Singapore Parliament, but a Ministry of Home Affairs survey still showed that a majority of Singaporeans were in favour of keeping the policy. However, it did also show that younger Singaporeans were more split on the issue when it came to drug trafficking.

a paper with words "WARNING. DEATH FOR DRAG TRAFFICKERS. UNDER SINGAPORE LAW"

A familiar sight for any at Changi Airport. Picture Credits: Asia Times


Indeed, in my personal interactions with my peers, responses to the death penalty often depend on what crimes one talks about. Murderers often received less sympathy than drug traffickers, as there is an understanding that those most often convicted for drug trafficking are also most often low level mules and lackeys, while the masterminds and drug lords sit comfortably back in the Golden Triangle. Interestingly, I have also heard some calls for the death penalty for especially heinous sexual crimes – a view put forward back in 2014 by then Minister for Law K. Shanmugam.


M Ravi shared a slightly different perspective, which was that the death penalty is simply too high a punishment to be meted out by a system that can never be waterproof in its convictions. A feature of any human institution anywhere is that errors can sometimes happen. Even in a country like Singapore, administrative errors or wrongful convictions have happened, albeit rarely. A recent high profile case was that of Parti Liyani, whose initial conviction was overturned on appeal. How do you square an irreversible penalty with a system that can sometimes produce errors?

8 person take a close up photo, various kinds of gender and etc

Faces of death row inmates eventually exonerated in the US. Picture Credits: National Geographic


Ultimately, Singapore’s laws are never static. As with any country, laws are sometimes subject to review – sometimes to modernise and simplify, sometimes because of strong public opinion, and sometimes simply because society’s values and norms shift with time. However, given the apparent relatively strong support for the death penalty and the serious drug situation in our geographical region, it does not seem like this particular change will come anytime soon.


However, M Ravi does not only campaign for the abolishment of the death penalty. Another touchy legal area in recent years has been section 377a, often cited as a benchmark for the country’s stance on homosexuality that gained renewed attention after India struck down parts of section 377 of the Indian Penal Code.

a person use Queen mask and bring a poster with words "out with 377 antiquated british law love queenie"

And out it went. Picture Credits: Oneindian 377


Singapore had its own constitutional challenge against the law, but it was dismissed in February 2022. M Ravi had represented one of the individuals challenging the constitutionality of the law, but even though the challenge did not lead to a repeal, it did spark a series of reactions from various segments of Singapore society – both from those for and against the wider issue of ‘maintaining family norms’. While differing views on the law still exist, the common ground that individuals should be treated with respect and empathy regardless of their orientation or individual beliefs has widened considerably over the past decade, signalling a steady shift in public opinion on the matter.


Most recently, a public survey on the issue by REACH, the Government’s feedback unit, was overwhelmed by responses and taken down abruptly. While a criticism of the survey was that particularly zealous individuals could submit several responses, the 30,000 – up from the usual couple of hundreds or thousands – demonstrate the strong opinions among the Singaporean public.


Chan Sek Keong photo editing with a many lamp with words "READY"

Ex-Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong also has something to say. Picture Credits: MustShareNews


Be it the death penalty or section 377a, it is important to keep in mind that Singapore’s story has not ended and continues to be written for the generations to come. In an age of unparalleled activism and civic participation, it is almost certain that more interest and discussion on such touchy subjects is inevitable. Whether or not that leads to a country that finds common space and progresses together, or an increasingly divided and polarized one, will depend solely on us.


Click on the links below to listen to the 3-part podcast on Plan B on Spotify.

Part 1: M Ravi

Part 2: M Ravi

Part 3: M Ravi

Comments


RECENT NEWS

GET LATEST UPDATES

Join Our Newsletter

Thanks for subscribing!

bottom of page