trc networks business telephone systems
trc networks on twittervoip telephones rss feed

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Arrested persons can now appear for first mention in court via video-conferencing


SINGAPORE: Arrested persons can now be brought before a Magistrate for First Mention through video-conferencing.

Under the new constitution passed in Parliament on Monday, Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng said there are several benefits in expanding the usage of video conferencing to First Mentions.

First, there will be a "reduction in security risk as movement of arrested persons will be minimised".

In addition, there will be a "reduction in the multiple handing over and taking over of arrested persons from one officer to another during the process".

Mr Wong said: "This will enhance the management and security of the arrested person and will also lead to more efficient use of limited manpower resources".

In case of medical contingencies, further mentions can also be conducted via video conferencing without the need to send field magistrates to hospitals.

The Constitution presently requires a person to be brought before a Magistrate within 48 hours of arrest.

This is meant to allow the Magistrate to verify his identity and ensure the protection of his fundamental liberties.

This requirement has its roots in the Constitution of Malaysia and was instituted at a time when video conferencing technology was not available.

Mr Wong said video conferencing technology has advanced considerably.

He said video conferencing usage for criminal proceedings, including First Mentions, has been introduced in overseas jurisdictions such as New Zealand, Australia, UK and some states in the US.

In Singapore, video conferencing has been used in Court proceedings for some time now.

Singapore's Subordinate Courts first used video conferencing with prisons for criminal mentions in 1996.

Since then, the Subordinate Courts, Prisons and the Attorney-General's Chambers have gradually expanded the use of video conferencing to cover pre-trial processes.

These include further mentions, bail reviews, as well as represented and unrepresented pre-trial conferences.

Mr Wong said there will be safeguards to ensure that the use of video conferencing does not affect the fundamental liberty of the arrested person.

"What has changed is just the mode of producing the arrested person before the Magistrate," he said.

First, the arrested person will still be detained for not more than 48 hours unless the Court makes an order for his further detention.

Second, the Court will retain the discretion to call for the arrested person or consider the application of the arrested person to be physically produced in Court at any time before or during the first mentions.

Third, certain groups such as juveniles, by virtue of their age, will continue to be produced in court in person.

Fourth, video conferencing will not be used for accepting pleas or sentencing.

Separately, the new Constitution will also abolish the Citizenship Advisory Committee.

The Citizenship Advisory Committee was introduced via a Singapore Citizenship Bill more than 50 years ago in 1957.

Mr Wong said "there was no concept of Singapore Citizenship prior to that".

After the Constitutional talks that resulted in Singa¬pore becoming self-governing, the Singapore Citizenship Bill was introduced to provide for the granting of Singapore Citizenship to eligible persons so that they could vote in Legislative Assembly elections.

"Many long-term residents were migrants from China, India and the Malay Archipelago, and were called 'aliens'. Those who were born in Singapore were called 'British subjects'. Most of both groups were eligible to be registered as Singapore citizens and become voters," said Mr Wong.

"A Citizenship Advisory Committee was set up to ensure that eligible persons who were qualified to become citizens under the law would not be unfairly excluded, especially in view of the impending general elections for the Legislative Assembly," explained the Deputy Prime Minister.

"The concern that migrant residents who have lived in Singapore for many years might be denied their rights to become Singapore citizens is no longer relevant today. Today's context is very different from the late 1950s. We no longer have the issue of local domiciles," said Mr Wong.

"The applications for Singapore Citizenship that we receive today are from foreigners who want to make Singapore their home. The granting of citizenship to foreigners is a privilege. Singapore Citizenship is not an entitlement or a right of the foreigner resident."

Mr Wong said it is therefore no longer necessary to send all rejection cases of foreigners applying for Singapore Citizenship to a Citizenship Advisory Committee to review.

But even with the abolition of the Citizenship Advisory Committee, foreigners whose applications for Singapore Citizenship are rejected by the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority can still appeal to the Minister, under Section 3 of the Third Schedule of the Constitution. - CNA/vm

By Imelda Saad | Posted: 26 April 2010 2050 hrs

No comments:

Post a Comment