Search the Community

Although I will normally curse and swear at any increase in penalty for traffic offences, I fully understood the need for this particular changes and fully support it. Good initiative to keep our seniors and young children safe. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/mha-traffic-offences-silver-zones-school-zones-fines-demerit-14924670 Fines will be increased by S$100 while an additional two demerit points will be incurred for specified offences committed in these zones. In a media release, MHA said: “Elderly pedestrians continue to account for a disproportionate number of traffic accidents resulting in pedestrian fatalities - in 2020, the elderly made up more than 80 per cent of pedestrian fatalities. “While jaywalking by elderly pedestrians contributed to some of these accidents, many accidents also arise from irresponsible driving behaviour on the motorist’s part, such as failing to slow down when approaching a pedestrian crossing. “The situation may be improved with greater care on the part of motorists.” Silver Zones, introduced in 2014, are located in areas with a large population of senior citizens. These zones typically have a lower speed limit of 40kmh and additional traffic-calming and senior-friendly road safety features, such as additional crossing points and narrower lanes to slow down traffic. School Zones, which are demarcated areas fronting schools, also have enhanced road safety features, with a reduced speed limit of 40kmh during three time blocks on school days and whenever school events are in progress.

What do you think? http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/penalties-crime-must-reflect-public-opinion-shanmugam Penalties for crime must reflect public opinion: Shanmugam SINGAPORE — How society feels about the punishment meted out in criminal cases has to be something the Government must pay heed to, but this does not equate to bowing to public pressure, said Law Minister K Shanmugam. This is because, if penalties do not reflect the weight of public opinion and people do not find them fair, the law would lose its credibility and would not be enforceable, he added. “You enhance the penalty (for a certain law) to reflect what people feel is the right penalty, what conduct should be more severely punished — that is not bowing down; that is understanding where the weight of public opinion is,” said Mr Shanmugam in an exclusive interview with TODAY last week. He added: “(Paying attention to public expression) is important because these people represent the ground feelings ... Penalties and criminal laws can only be enforced if people believe that they are fair and that certain conduct ought to be made criminal ... Otherwise they lose credibility.” Reviews of laws for a string of offences have been announced by Mr Shanmugam, who is also Minister for Home Affairs, in recent days, including some in high-profile cases that attracted close public attention, and even outcry. For instance, he directed his ministries to relook the sentences for sex offenders such as Joshua Robinson, a mixed martial arts instructor who had sex with two 15-year-olds and showed an obscene film to a six-year-old. The American was sentenced to four years’ jail, which was deemed too light by some — an online petition calling for a harsher sentence has since garnered almost 30,000 signatories. In a Parliament sitting earlier this month, Mr Shanmugam said reviews of the laws relating to the abuse of foreign domestic workers was also being conducted. While he did not cite any specific cases, news of the review came in the wake of a Singaporean couple who starved their maid, causing her weight to plunge from 49kg to 29.5kg in 15 months. The man was sentenced to three weeks’ jail and a S$10,000 fine while his wife was sentenced to three months’ jail. Public outcry over penalties in individual cases do not necessarily lead to a review of the laws, Mr Shanmugam stressed, noting that reviews have been announced by ministries for laws in cases that did not attract any public attention. Drugs, drink-driving, and false and malicious allegations against public officers are some offences that have been flagged recently for review. He said: “Even without public expression, when I see a sentence (and if) I see these needs to be looked at ... (where) I feel need a review, I announce them. And that is our job.” But, he noted: “When there is a reaction to a sentence by the public, as in the Joshua Robinson case, then I think it is important for us as policymakers to sit down and understand why people are upset ... It is important because these people represent the ground feelings — they are mothers, they are sisters, they are people who want their children to be safe.” He added: “But it doesn’t mean automatically you agree with it. You must assess it, whether it is also fair. So, there are two parts to it — one, whether it is fair; two, what does the public believe is right.” In a similar way to how he had urged the public against personal attacks on the High Court judges who recently reduced the sentences of six City Harvest Church leaders for misappropriating church funds, Mr Shanmugam said the announcement of reviews for laws should not be taken as an indictment of the work of the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC). The Public Prosecutor can only apply the law of the day and it is up to the Government to decide what the laws and penalties ought to be, he noted. “It is the task of the Government to decide what is the appropriate legislative provision. And that is the mixture of ... what is fair, what is right and also where is the weight of public opinion.” A deputy public prosecutor, who declined to be named, had reservations about reviews being announced soon after a case concludes in court. “When the Government says these things, it ties our hands,” he said. A former prosecutor, who wanted to remain anonymous, said that while public perception is a “relevant” concern, it “must not be the overriding consideration”. “Otherwise we may run the risk of undermining the rule of law with mob justice ... In my view, it would help if the AGC engages the public more actively and explains its decisions,” said the lawyer, who is now practising in a private firm. “This way, concerns of bowing to political pressure of public opinion would be allayed to some degree.” Lawyers TODAY interviewed agreed there was nothing wrong with public uproar leading to legislative reviews. Mr Sunil Sudheesan, president of the Association of Criminal Lawyers of Singapore, said: “The Government ultimately is a servant of the people. And if people are legitimately outraged (over a particular court sentence), then it should be of concern to the Government.” He added that the Ministry of Law reviews a whole host of laws, noting “it just happens there has been a number of high profile cases lately”. Legislative reviews are also a “product” of a more vocal and involved citizenry, said Mr Sudheesan. “I hope and trust that the engagement between the authorities and the public carries on for a long time ... The public should continue to speak up.”

Irresponsible motorists to face harsher penalties; new dangerous, careless driving offences to be created https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/irresponsible-motorists-to-face-harsher-penalties-new-dangerous-careless-driving-offences It has begun....

Irresponsible motorists to face harsher penalties, with new rules to deter dangerous, careless drivinghttps://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/irresponsible-motorists-to-face-harsher-penalties-new-dangerous-careless-driving-offences?utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=STFB&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR3VpsJheXc5ih8KOg79Adyvofk8g-qcHxCdZR7c80G6HdpB5EkwoDUBaZI#

A friend of mine gonna caught. What's the penalty? And yes he has regretted his actions.

Didn't know that cyclists below 16 year old are not allowed to ride motorised bicycle. Effective 1 Jan 2011, penalties include court action for some offenses which are currently not an offense. Max speed limit with power assistance - 25kmph. Above 25kmph, use your kaki power Please share this information to your friends and families who possess or intend to possess a motorised bicycle. Heavier Penalties for Motorised Bicycle Offences 1 From 1 January 2011, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) will impose heavier penalties on cyclists and retailers of motorised bicycles that do not meet LTA's technical requirements. Most of the fines will be doubled for errant cyclists and suppliers. Cyclists will face a fine ranging from $100 to $500, up from the current fines of $50 to $200. Retailers will face more severe penalties, with fines starting from $500. (Please refer to the Annex A for the full list of enhanced penalties for various offences.) 2 LTA will roll out a public education programme to educate suppliers and cyclists on safety requirements of motorised bicycles and on how to identify approved models. Posters and brochures will be distributed to community centres, foreign worker dormitories as well as motorised bicycle retailers (Please refer to Annex B for the safety requirements and Annex C for examples of a motorised bicycle that meets LTA's technical requirements versus an illegal model.) 4 Mr Colin Lim, LTA's Group Director for Vehicle and Transit Licensing said, "For the safety of cyclists and other road users, only low-powered models of motorised bicycles which are approved by LTA and affixed with an LTA seal, are allowed on public roads. With the increase in offences relating to illegal motorised bicycles over the last two years, we see a need to enhance both public education and the penalty framework to stress the importance of safety related to the use of motorised bicycles." 5 Members of the public can visit www.onemotoring.com.sg or call LTA at 1800 CALL LTA (1800 2255 582) to obtain information on the requirements before purchasing and using a motorised bicycle.

Motorists who speed, beat the red light or drive carelessly within enhanced school zones will be slapped with a demerit point under enhanced road safety measures rolled out by the Ministry of Home Affairs. These zones have red textured surfaces on the road and special road markings and signs to remind motorists to slow down and look out for schoolchildren. The additional demerit point will cause a new driver who is on probation to have his licence revoked if he is caught, said Second Minister for Home Affairs S Iswaran during the Committee of Supply debate yesterday. Several Members of Parliament (MPs), such as Dr Janil Puthucheary and Mr Gan Thiam Poh, had earlier raised concerns over the increase in traffic violations, even though the number of fatal accidents decreased last year. There is also a trend of worsening road habits and behaviours, MP Christopher de Souza noted. Following a

Second Minister for Home Affairs S Iswaran said there are some possible areas that the authorities are looking into -- errant drivers could face harsher penalties, while more speed cameras will be installed and more Traffic Police officers will be deployed to make the roads safer. Speaking to reporters on the sidelines of a visit to the Police Security Command on Thursday, Mr Iswaran highlighted concerns such as speeding and beating the red light. He said the authorities will step up road safety in areas that are more prone to accidents and better protect road users, such as young and elderly pedestrians. Mr Iswaran said besides enforcement and penalties, road users have to be educated. His comments came on the heels of an accident in Tampines on Monday, when two boys died after they were hit by a cement mixer. Asked about a suggestion by Tampines GRC MP Baey Yam Keng to re-route heavy vehicles in residential estates, Mr Iswaran said it is not possible to completely avoid having heavy vehicles going through residential areas. He said heavy vehicle drivers have to understand their responsibilities because the accidents they could be involved in have severe consequences. Source: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/sin...1251376/1/.html

A need for harsher penalties? LTA reviewing penalty framework as more are caught for illegally modifying their vehicles by Sumita Sreedharan 04:45 AM Aug 23, 2012 SINGAPORE - As the number of summonses issued for illegal vehicle modifications rose by 41 per cent in the first six months of this year, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) is reviewing the penalty framework to determine whether there is a need to "enhance their deterrent effect". According to the LTA, the average monthly figure for such infringements was 863 for the first six months of this year, an increase from the monthly average of 611 last year. Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew had revealed this in a written parliamentary reply to Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC Member of Parliament (MP) Gan Thiam Poh last week. The MP had asked Mr Lui if the LTA would consider prohibiting the sales of motor vehicle parts and accessories that may enable motorists to modify their motor vehicles to produce noise beyond prescribed or acceptable levels in Singapore. When contacted by TODAY, Mr Gan said that such vehicles were not only noisy but could also pose a danger to other road users if modified incorrectly. He also felt the authorities should do more to control "potential troublemakers". "It's an islandwide problem so the authorities should do more to control the problem at the source," said Mr Gan, who is a member of the Government Parliamentary Committee for Transport. In response to TODAY's queries, the LTA said the most common offences are modified exhausts, tinted windows and various lighting infringements. These offences are commonly detected during periodic and ad-hoc vehicle inspections, added the LTA. In his written reply, Mr Lui said the LTA, the National Environment Agency and the Traffic Police are cognisant of the noise problem associated with illegally modified vehicles and have stepped up joint enforcement actions. Transport consultant Tham Chen Munn felt that no matter how small the infringement, the same punishment should be meted out to curb irresponsible behaviour on roads here. "This is simply because the intentions of the driver are quite clear: The car will be used beyond its normal operating intention, and this endangers lives," he said. Mr Tham further suggested that the authorities step up enforcement and conduct "raids" at car workshops to ensure that such illegal modifications do not take place. In a bid to clamp down on modification done across the Causeway, Mr Tham felt that the LTA should collaborate with the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority of Singapore to detect such infringements at the checkpoints. In his written response, Mr Lui said there are no plans to restrict the import and sales of after-market vehicle parts and accessories as there are legitimate uses, for instance, on off-road vehicles or for export to other countries.

The National Environment Agency (NEA) will be reviewing the penalty regime against vehicles which emit excessive smoke, according to Minister for the Environment and Water Resources Vivian Balakrishnan. The NEA will also harness new technology such as remote sensing technology to enhance enforcement against such vehicles, he added in a written reply yesterday to Nee Soon GRC Member of Parliament Lee Bee Wah, who had asked about the ministry's efforts to control vehicles from across the Causeway which emit excessive smoke. Smoky vehicles entering Singapore will be stopped for a smoke emission test, explained Dr Balakrishnan. A composition fine ranging from S$70 to S$500 will be issued to the driver of a vehicle that fails the test. Diesel vehicles that emit smoke exceeding 70 Hartridge Smoke Units, a measurement of smoke opacity, will be turned back. The NEA also conducts regular enforcement on Singapore roads, and drivers of buses that fail the smoke emission test for the first time will be issued with a composition fine of S$150. In the last two years, a total of 7,950 foreign-registered vehicles, including 2,339 motorcycles, were booked for excessive smoke emission. Source: http://www.todayonline.com/Singapore/EDC12...eview-penalties

Man United won the Carling Cup final 4-1 on penalties. One in bag with 3 more to go!

Just read the papers that penalties can be 1.5 times more than normally if judge thinks it is race or region motivated. Are you for or against this 1.5 times penalty? If assualt is assualt, the intention is not considered in conviction. Adding this element will make it likely that someone who is not motivated on race or religion to be unfairly convicted. Is sg law moving in the right direction? Yes - for support this change No - for this change will be bad/unfair as motivation can be hard to show in court