Singapore’s use of the death penalty has been under the spotlight locally and internationally.
One prominent critic of the policy recently had been British entrepreneur Richard Branson.
Earlier this month, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) invited him to speak in a live televised debate with Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam.
On Monday (31 Oct), Mr Branson declined this invitation, saying it “reduces nuanced discourse to soundbites, turns serious debate into spectacle”.
In a blog post on Monday (31 Oct), Mr Branson penned an open letter to MHA and Mr Shanmugam.
Source: Virgin
He expressed that he has enormous respect for Singapore, Singaporeans, and everything the country has achieved.
But he has decided to decline the invitation to debate the death penalty in Singapore.
He explains that a television debate is limited in time and scope. Such a debate risks prioritising personalities over issues, which do not do the complexity of the death penalty any service.
Mr Branson said,
It reduces nuanced discourse to soundbites, turns serious debate into spectacle. I can’t imagine that is what you are looking for.
Singapore needs a constructive, lasting dialogue involving multiple stakeholders and a true commitment to transparency and evidence.
Mr Branson shared that he is not alone in raising Singapore’s “horribly wrong” use of the death penalty. The conversation requires local voices.
In the case of Singapore, global advocates like him were inspired by various people and organisations.
These advocates, lawyers, and journalists have experience, knowledge, and data on the topic.
Mr Branson said the brave thing for Mr Shanmugam would be to engage these Singaporean stakeholders.
He then mentions stakeholders Transformative Justice Collective, lawyer Mr M Ravi, Nagaenthran Dharmalingam’s lawyer, and regional group Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network.
These people should be treated as equals who are interested in Singapore’s progress. He said they deserve to be listened to, not ignored or harassed.
Singapore remains one of a small group of countries to impose the death penalty for drug offences.
In his opinion, it is a disproportionate and ineffective response to the world’s drug problems.
The abolition of the death penalty is not, as some would argue, a Western concept imposed on the rest of the world.
He stressed that it was an issue about universal human rights and humanity’s shared aspiration to advance equality, justice, dignity, and freedom for everyone.
He hoped that Singapore would realise that it was an inhumane, brutal practice. Instead of saving lives, it casts a dark shadow on Singapore’s reputation in the world.
Pointedly, he concluded by saying, “There is no evidence to support its continued existence. Just ask those in Singapore who know”.
Have news you must share? Get in touch with us via email at news@mustsharenews.com.
Featured image adapted from Virgin and K Shanmugam SC on Facebook.
The customer had only wanted a small apology, but then the rider volunteered the punishment.
The man, too, was shocked to find himself more than 120m above the ground.
It is uncertain why his daughter, who lives with him, did not report her father's…
The deceased lived alone and kept a low profile, neighbours said.
"I don't appreciate being misled," said the judge.
The driver was "too focused" on looking at Google Maps, police said.