Ten years ago on
this date, 2 December 2005, a Vietnamese Australian convicted Drug Trafficker, Van Tuong Nguyen was executed by hanging at Changi Prison in Singapore. He was
arrested at Changi Airport on 12 December 2002 when he was caught with 396.2g
of heroine strapped to his body. I will post this article on why he deserved to
die.
INTERNET
SOURCE: http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/why-nguyen-must-die/2005/11/29/1133026469782.html#
Why Nguyen must die
By Joseph
Koh
November 30, 2005
Page 1 of 2
November 30, 2005
Page 1 of 2
Singapore's
decision to execute Nguyen Tuong Van for drug trafficking is correct and
responsible.
ALTHOUGH
opinions in Australia are not unanimous, many Australians strongly oppose
Singapore's decision not to commute the death sentence on Mr Nguyen Tuong Van
for drug trafficking. I respect these views, which spring from a deep sense of
human compassion. However, the outcry has also made it difficult to separate
fact from fiction.
Fiction No. 1: Singapore has breached international law.
There
is no international agreement to abolish the death penalty. Capital punishment
remains part of the criminal justice systems of 76 countries, including in the
United States, where it is practised in 38 states.
We
respect Australia's sovereign choice not to have capital punishment. We hope
Australia will likewise respect Singapore's sovereign choice to impose the
death penalty for the most serious crimes, including drug trafficking. The
overwhelming majority of Singaporeans support this.
Fiction No. 2: The death penalty has not deterred drug
trafficking.
This
logic is flawed. The death penalty has not completely eliminated drug
trafficking, but it has certainly deterred drug trafficking. Since the
introduction of tough anti-drug laws in the mid-1970s, drug trafficking and drug
abuse in Singapore have come down significantly. Potential traffickers know
that, once arrested, they face the full weight of the law.
Fiction No. 3: Mr Nguyen is an unsuspecting victim
Mr
Nguyen may not be a hardened criminal, but he is not an unsuspecting victim
either. He knew what he was doing and the penalty if he was caught. Had he
succeeded, he would have made a lot of money. If we let off a convicted courier
because of age, financial difficulties or distressed family background, it will
only make it easier for drug traffickers to recruit more "mules",
with the assurance that they will escape the death penalty.
Fiction No 4: The punishment does not fit crime.
Mr
Nguyen was caught with 396 grams of pure heroin, enough for 26,000
"hits", with a street value of more than $A1 million.
Yes,
he was transiting Singapore, and not smuggling drugs into the country, but
Singapore simply cannot afford to allow itself to become a transit hub for
illicit drugs in the region.
Fiction No. 5: Mr Nguyen can testify against Mr Bigs.
All
drug syndicates assume that some of their couriers will get caught. They never
let the couriers know enough to incriminate themselves. The information that Mr
Nguyen provided to the Singapore authorities was of limited value, and was, in
fact, intended to mislead and delay the investigation.
Page 2 of 2
This is an old falsehood propagated by Dr Chee Soon
Juan (Singapore opposition leader). He has alleged that the Singapore
Government had invested in projects in Myanmar (Burma) that supported the drug
trade. When this first surfaced in 1996, the Singapore Government explained
that its investment in the Myanmar Fund was completely open and above board.
The fund held straightforward commercial investments in hotels and companies.
Other investors in the fund included Coutts & Co, an old British bank, and
the Swiss Bank Corporation. The Singapore Government offered to set up a
commission of inquiry so Dr Chee could produce evidence to prove his wild
allegations. Unfortunately, Dr Chee never took up the offer.
Fiction No. 7: Singapore has
treated Australia with contempt.
Singapore highly values good relations with
Australia and with Australian leaders. We share a common belief in the sanctity
of the law. The Singapore cabinet deliberated at length on Mr Nguyen's clemency
petition. It considered all relevant factors, including Mr Nguyen's personal
circumstances, and the many public and private appeals from Australian leaders.
Unfortunately, finally the cabinet decided that it could not justify making an
exception for Mr Nguyen. It had to treat Mr Nguyen consistently with similar
past cases, and apply the law equally to Singaporeans and foreigners.
Singapore's leaders have taken pains to explain our
decision to Australian leaders, both in writing and in person. Singapore's
Foreign Minister had also informed Foreign Minister Alexander Downer confidentially
in advance of when the family would be notified of the execution date, and
explained to Mr Downer that that the family should be the first to learn of the
execution date. So when Singapore's Prime Minister, Lee Hsien Loong, met Prime
Minister John Howard in Busan, he could not inform Mr Howard of the execution
date either. Mr Lee did not know that the letter of notification had by mistake
already been delivered to Mrs Kim Nguyen, one day early. Once Mr Lee discovered
what had happened, he promptly apologised to Mr Howard.
Australians who oppose the death sentence on Mr
Nguyen will not agree with everything I have said. But I hope they will accept
that the Singapore Government has a responsibility to protect the many lives
that would otherwise be blighted and destroyed by the drug syndicates, and to
prevent Singapore from becoming a conduit for illicit drugs in the region. We
are all touched by the pain and anguish of Mr Nguyen's mother, but if we waver
in our firm position against drug trafficking, many more families will be
shattered.
Joseph K. H. Koh is Singapore high commissioner in Australia.
No comments:
Post a Comment