Presentation on theme: "Group 2 BAO Jiaqi Brian LEE Daryl ONG Nicholas PHUNG-ZHANG"— Presentation transcript:
1Group 2 BAO Jiaqi Brian LEE Daryl ONG Nicholas PHUNG-ZHANG English Project Term 1Group 2BAO JiaqiBrian LEEDaryl ONGNicholas PHUNG-ZHANG
2Topic Selection Philosopher: Immanuel Kant Landmark Cases: Sony Hacking IncidentRevision to Singapore’s Drug Law and Death PenaltyComparative Study China vs Middle East vs Canada and Europe
3Philosopher [Immanuel Kant] German Philosopher22 April February 1804
4Kantianism Two Questions Will everyone act as I propose to act? Does my action respect the goals of humanity rather than merely for my own purpose?Is a form of deontological moral theoryActions being right or wrong are not based on consequences, but on whether they fulfil our moral dutiesHence, even if everyone benefits, (e.g. bring about happiness), once against moral ethics, action should not be carried out-those without a conscience mind should not be judged-e.g. don’t blame lion killing its prey (animal instinct)
5Categorical Imperative Kant believes there should be a supreme principle of moralsA ultimate set of rules to guide our actionsKant referred this to The Categorical Imperative
6The three formulation of categorical Imperative *Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law without contradiction.Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an endTherefore, every rational being must so act as if he were through his maxim always a legislating member in the universal kingdom of ends.
7Moral Worth of a personActions being right or wrong are not based on consequences but on whether they fulfil our moral dutiesE.g. One give money to charity because he feels a special feeling when others are happyIn terms of kantianism, this person is not moral worthyHe did it out of selfish reason--for himself to be happyNot based on moral obligation--even if he will not be happy, he will still do itfirst point: as mentioned before
8But... Doesn’t mean that one cannot make himself happy E.g. Someone wants to get an ice-cream because he likes itPermissible as it is not immoralHowever, it does not make you a morally worthy personAction is ‘neutral’
9Flaw with Kantianism Contradiction arises in terms of moral duty Example: LyingBased on 1st formulation (Principle of Universalizability)1. We cannot lienot universally acceptable and adopted--lead to distrust and suspicion2. We lie to save a person lifeuniversally acceptable--would not lead to distrust among people
10Retributive Theory of Punishment Those who commit certain kinds of serious crimes, deserve to suffer a proportionate punishmentPunishment itself is morally correctIt is impermissible to punish the innocent and to use disproportionate large punishment against an offenderboth sides--commit crime, punishif innocent shld not be punished
11Purpose NEVER to promote another good including benefiting the civil societyIs not utilitariannot to be confuse with vengeance (revenge)Just to inflict a proportionate punishment to someone on the basis that a crime was committedmoral duty and commitment to punish accordinglypublic catharsis is just a side effect, make it appealing to people, but not its purpose
12Aspects of Punishment 4 Elements Offender must forfeit something in returnHardship, withdrawal of benefitsMust be intentionalE.g. Offender sentence to a jail term, family emotionally affectedThe emotional harm inflicted on the family is not part of the punishmentMust be fair, only given when an immoral action is performedRegardless of race etc.Condemns an actionTaxes and fees not included
13Vengeance 2 forms Paying a debt to society Lex talionis However, these should be differentiated with retributive theoryJust measure of proportionalityRetributive Theory: Commitment to inflict proportionate punishment
14Problems with retributive theory Excessive emphasis on the pastPunishment given based on past mistakes, not forward-lookingMight not have an effective deterrence effectPunishment not harsh enough--Social contractBut only in theoryE.g. Killer Litter (SG)--residents fail to remove objects that are placed in a hazardous manner (object didn't fall off), maximum fine of $2,000+$100 per day if object not removeInnocent inevitably be punishedBound to be error in human-based system
16BackgroundHacked on 24 November 2014 by the "Guardians of Peace" (a group of hackers motivated by political ideologies)Demanded that Sony pull The InterviewRelease of confidential information such as:Personal information about employees and their familiess between employeesInformation about executive salaries at the companyCopies of unreleased Sony films
17ResponsesSony initially decided to pull the film, but announced limited release in the US on 25 December 2014Requested media to stop covering hack, threatening legal actionUS intelligence officials allege that the attack was sponsored by North KoreaNorth Korea has denied all responsibility, alternatively proposing that current or former Sony Pictures employees may have been involved in the hack
18US response North Korea to blame Disappointed with Sony’s initial decision to pull the movie (giving in to threat from another country’s dictatorship)“expressed irritation”Hacking was unjustified“Human rights abuses”, “violence against theatregoers”Need to preserve ideology of freedom and democracySources: cnn.com, newyorker.com, nytimes.com, washintonpost.com
19North Korean response (KCNA) Source: NK official responseDenies all responsibilities for cyberattackCriticizes movie for hurting the leader of NKPraises the Guardians of Peace for their “righteous deed” (cited from another list of concordance; not enough space to put it here)US is to blame (“justice prevails over injustice”, “justifying and inciting terrorism”, “the crimes he has committed”)
20China response (Xinhua) Denies accusation from the US that China was involved in the caseOpposes all forms of cyber attacksPrepared to safeguard peace and security in cyberspaceUrges all parties to keep restraint (typical style of the Chinese government)must have full, professional and complete facts before making judgementsneed to be in line with law
22UK response (These are not responses from the UK government) Neutral party -- 2 sided views from the mediaquestions FBI’s logic and evidence that seems to prove that NK was behind the hackingquestions the logic and evidence that question the FBI
23US and NK: directly involved Ideological differences:US: freedom and democracyNK: dictatorship, Juche Idea/Kimilsungism (Kim is God)Both need to preserve own ideologies and deny threats from the other partyThe movie: incorporates US ideology and ridicules NK ideology⇒ NK condemning the USThe hack: retribution towards US, supporting NK⇒ US condemning NK, giving new sanctions, expressing disappointment towards Sony’s initial decision; NK praising the hackNeutral partiesChina: incorporates none of the ideologies of US or NK (sounds weird, but true)⇒ neutral stand, no support or condemnation towards either parties ,no direct conclusion about the caseUK: ideologically similar to US, but still keeping a 2-sided view (no preference in the news and analysis on UK media) (This is strange)
24Cycle of retribution http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-30661973 Jan 19, 2015
26Landmark Case 2 [Changes to Singapore’s Drug Law and Death Penalty] announced in parliament 9 July 2012amendments to abolish the mandatory imposition of the death penalty under certain circumstances in drug trafficking cases1. Trafficker only played role of courier, not related to supply/distribution of drugs2. Offender must show signs of cooperation with the CNB (Central Narcotics Bureau)3. Have mental disabilitiesCourt then have discretion to sentence offender to death penalty or life imprisonment + <15 strokes of the cane
27Prominent Case before amendment Nguyen Thuong Van--25 years oldtransporting 396 grams of heroin through Singapore airport in December 2002, en route from Cambodia to AustraliaSentence to death, hanged on 2 December 2005First Australian to be executed in 12 yearsHelping to pay off legal bills of A$30,000 (£13,000) incurred by his twin brotherLawyer state he was rehabilitated and reformedBut death penalty was mandatory (once >15 grams)Relationship with Australia soured
28Prominent Case after amendment Abdul Haleem Abdul Karim--29 years oldFirst person to escape death penalty after revision in Singaporegrams of diamorphine (a Class “A” controlled drug)Carries mandatory death penaltyBut after revision, was sentence to life imprisonment + 24 strokes of caneFound to be playing the role of a drug courier only
29Singapore perspective Death penalty is for those who committed serious crime and is a necessary and effective deterrenceSingapore is trying to make amendments to the death penalty moderately(Straits Times, Channel Newsasia, Today Online)
30Death penalty is relevant in our societyE.g. important, effective deterrent, continue to apply, retain in laws, maintain death penalty, necessary, reaffirmed relevance
31Death penalty is still the best choice E.g. amendments send wrong signal, only available sentence, (crime rate) fell sharply, parliament bears heavy responsibility
32Gentle words used(indicating change)E.g. Spared, allowing, moving away, reviewing, no longerConditions were given for changesE.g. Certain types/instancesUsing conjunctions like ‘but’, ‘if’
34Response on Capital Punishment (Western view--Europe and USA) Usefulness and relevance of Capital Punishment is limited“...limiting the application of Capital Punishment”“relationship between Capital Punishment and crime rates inconclusive”Against Capital Punishment and that it should be abolished“I don’t believe in Capital Punishment”“Capital Punishment can never be justified”“... Capital Punishment has come under criticism”(New York Times, The Guardian, BBC News, ABC News, Washington Post)in gerneral
36Response to Singapore’s Death Penalty Death penalty did help keep drug related offense lowSingapore has overly harsh laws (death penalty)not in favour of Singapore having the death penalty
37Key words stating the positive effect of the death penalty E.g. protecting, lowest prevalenceStatistics to prove crime rates are low--proving deterrence has been effective
38‘Impactful’ phrases describing Singapore’s death penalty E.g. hanged hundreds of people, executes anyone, out of step, mandatory death sentence
39Repetitive description of Singapore's Laws with regards to capital punishment E.g. Strict, stiff penalties, mandatory, tough stand
40Strong and harsh words used E.g. ultimate denial, shameful use, mandatory sentencing regime, authoritarian
41Conclusion Western View Singapore one of the most developed cities in the worldCapital punishment is ‘uncivilized’ and undemocraticHence, Singapore must scrap death penalty to be in line with global developmentSingapore ViewDeath penalty necessary deterrent for societyFulfill social contractWill try to make some compromisesBUT, will not scrap it
42Comparative Study China vs Middle East vs Canada (Et. EU)
43What are we comparing China (strict laws, Death penalty used) Middle East (Strictest laws, Death Penalty used)Canada (lax laws, death penalty not used: like Europe)
44 CanadaYesYears before asking for parole:25 years minimum for 1st degree murder; 10 years minimum for 2nd degree murderMax:NoneDefinite crimesHigh treason, murder, war crimes, and crimes against humanityPossible crimes:Various crimes including armed robbery, extortion, and most offenses resulting in deathunder 12: Never prosecuted12-13:First degree murder – maximum 10 years (maximum six years in custody and remainder in the community with conditions and under supervision).Second degree murder - maximum seven years (maximum four years in custody and remainder in the community with conditions and under supervision).Serious indictable offences - maximum three years (for a crime where an adult might receive up to life in prison).14+: YesCan be released? Abolished in 1976
45Definite crimes: non existant Many crimes Minors can be jailed People's Republic of ChinaYesYears before parole:10 years for non-violent crimes; never for murder, rape, kidnap, arson, explosives offences, putting hazardous materials or other organized violent crimesMax:NoneDefinite crimes: non existantMany crimesMinors can be jailedRelease?:By courtsDeath penalty
46Middle East Life without parole exists Death exists some publically executedCrimes: drugs, witchcraft, homosexuality, murder, treason, terrorism, rape, kidnapping, violation of Islamic Law, espionageCan NOT request for paroleMinors CAN be jailedNote: some countries do not use Life imprisonment. They just use capital punishment
47Effectiveness e.g. RapeSummary: There is much less crime in countries where there are strict laws.
48UNODC murder rates most recent year CountryRate perCountRegionLocationYearRankHonduras90,47.172AmericasCentral America20121Iran3,93.126AsiaMiddle East121Libya1,7103Africa166Canada1,6543Northern America170China1,013.410East Asia2010188Germany0,8662EuropeNorthern Europe2011201Saudi Arabia234--Singapore0,211Home216
49Interesting countries to note Liechtenstein, MonacoBoth have abolished the death penalty.Murder rate=0USAMurder rate is 4,7 ranked 111It has the death penalty though
50Context - China Japanese invasion Communist rule China has been a historic strong power with strict laws. E.g. Stealing will get your hands chopped offCorrupted during Chiang Kai Shek’s regime: need to root out corruptionLarge with ⅔ mountainous regions :Hard to enforceEmigration and immigration now balanced out
51Context – Canada and EU Classic European lifestyle and culture WW2: witnessed the massacre and mistreatment of people (Germany too)Relatively peaceful countriesDemocraticCanada: Large with dense south sparse north: very efficient enforcingEurope: a collection of small countries that are very developed: mostly flatlandImmigration widespread
52Context - Arabia Strict Islamic Laws e.g. stealing will warrant hands being chopped outwere colonies: viewed colonial powers as mistreating themdesert landscape with highly dense urban centers : hard to maintain law and ordere.g. Cairo in EgyptNote: most countries are dictatorships even though these countries are more orderly than ‘democracies’e.g. Ex Libya vs present day LibyaMass emigration to Europe and America
53Context - Singapore Malayan Emergency (1947 to 65) Student protests (1959)Conservative center-right government (PAP)However, supposedly follows british lawSmall Land Space: easier to enforce (701 sq m)
54ConclusionSmaller and more developed countries have laws that are easily enforcedCountries with a civilized history have more kind lawsMore human rightsThere are exceptions
55Human rights evaluation Canada: the most protectorate of human rights.e.g. very lax drug laws and no death sentenceChina: somewhere in between. While torturing is illegal nowadays, and chopping of hands do not exist, Death sentences are regularly commutede.g. Death for drug crimes and corruptionArabia: Revenge seeking nationse.g. the murderee's family has the right to kill the murderer or to let him go
56Laws-Canada/EU Murder: life imprisonment Rape: 18 months to 10 years (CA) 1 to 10 years (EU-DE)Drug possession: 6 months (Eu not very certain)can openly criticize the government.
57Laws-China Murder: Death Rape: death (normally) some loopholes exist Drug possession: Deathcannot openly criticize the government.
58Laws-Arabia Murder: Death by cruel methods. eg stoning or revenge Rape: death (by cutting of genitals and other cruel methods)Drug possession: Deathcannot openly criticize the government (Tunisia excepted)
59Specific cases-murder Singapore: Death by hangingChina: Death by either shooting or lethal injectionArabia: Varied forms of death, including stoning, hanging falling from height and flogging.nb. Public executions exist in Saudi Arabia and IranCanada/EU: Life imprisonment with all human rights met. Parole sometimes granted after 25 years.
60Specific cases-Immigration Singapore: Strict emigration laws for malesNot an immigrant countryChina: Harsh lawsVirtually no immigration or emigrationArabia: Emigration in droves to Europe and Americavirtually no immigrationCanada/EU: More free but problems arise when locals do not like the immigrants and vice versa
62Suggested method for Singapore Singapore, being a small country and having a safe environment, should consider using Canada’s model, but retaining the death sentence for extraordinary casesThis would ensure that death would not be deprived of those deserving. While at the same time giving those who had made rash decisions a second chance
63Detailed evaluation for Singapore The police force is already very effective in singapore already.To ensure that crimes do not repeat, double the sentence for repeat offenders.For drug related crimes, we would like to commend Singapore’s death sentence in managing the drug trafficking despite being in the Golden Triangle.We would also like to compliment Singapore’s tough anti corruption laws and low corruption rates.
64However, we would like to criticize Singapore's harsh laws on the discharge of firearms. Currently ,this warrants the Death Penalty . We recommend Probation and prison sentences. Repeat offenders or if caused hurt, will be commuted to life w/o paroleWe would also like to criticize the inability to express one self. Singapore, being a first world society with no security problems like China, should be allowed free speeche.g. In 2010 British author Alan Shadrake published his book Once a Jolly Hangman: Singapore Justice in the Dock, which was critical of the Singapore judicial system. Shadrake was arrested whilst promoting the book in Singapore and Charged with criminal defamation and Contempt of court. He was detained first for 2 days Without any charge by the district attorney.
65Smoking laws are advised to remain. Environmental protection laws to remainAdvises the government to focus more on saving the environmentE.g. China spends 9 Billion on planting trees, have strict (sometimes violating American version of Human Rights) Laws on pollution (i.e. Cars with odd and even plates to cycle thru the week) and ban all cutting of trees. Eurozone and Canada also focus on the reforestation. However, Singapore, Being a first world nation, Has made NO effort to do this. (conversely, singapore prefers to mow down large tracts of pristine forests to build Rail Lines, Highways and New Towns)
66Immigration laws are advised to remain, preventing mass immigration yet keeping the talents in Singapore at the same time and also keeping the population in Singapore constant.Singapore should look towards other countries to see what we can do to improve.
68Law In Singapore in comparison Every law in the world has its pros and consSingapore’s law is commendable such that they are mostly fairHowever, Singapore overlooks certain points of development and also suffers based on low land space
69Good location and size of Singapore. Good for enforcementWe have a lot to learn from other countries but their solutions may not work here.Immigration may cause problems to traditional society= present immigration already causing problems, we should not encourage further amounts of immigration.Nb. Immigration is necessary for Singapore
70Sources http://www.iep.utm.edu/kantmeta/#H8 AGC chambersOfficial Canada Law Website