COR160
Assignment 02
SIM University
The case for Reformative Training in Singapore is complex. As Reformative Training is applied to younger offenders, scale and gravity of charges vary considerably for each case as to render enforcement of Reformative Training questionable. For opponents, Reformative Training is not enough and more harsh sentences should be applied to younger offenders since, to opponents, younger offenders are not rehabitable. For proponents, Reformative Training is an effective rehabilitation method for younger offenders since younger offenders are different from older offenders. There are, indeed, numerous aspects to Reformative Training. For current purposes, Reformative Training is defended as one most practical – however partially ineffective (for reasons discussed in further detail) – method of integrating younger offenders into Singapore's society at large. This paper aims, hence, to support Reformative Training as an effective rehabilitation and correction measure for young offenders in Singapore.
According to Attorney-General's Chambers, Reformative Training is
a more severe punishment [compared to probation] which requires the young offender to be detained in a structured environment for at least 18 months. However, there will still be emphasis on rehabilitation. When deciding between probation and reformative training for a young offender, the Court will consider the seriousness of the offence, the offender’s record, and how likely he is to be rehabilitated. ("Understanding Legal Processes," n.d.)
This emphasis on rehabilitation is critical in defending Reformative Training as, at least, initial legal measure against younger offenders who fall between seven and twenty-one years old (Chan, 2010). As noted, younger offenders are recognized as different from older offenders, Reformative Training can be viewed as an appropriate correctional measure. Given how younger offenders are handled in Reformation Training Centers (RTCs) – rehabilitated in multi-phase processes involving counseling as well as academic and vocational training ("Rehabilitation," 2014) – future integration into society is achievable.
In contrast, opponents reject Reformative Training as ineffective. The repeated offences, "unforthcoming" behavior of most young offenders on probation and lack of unanimity in Singapore's Court System exact scale and gravity of a juvenile offence (as shown in an interesting example shortly) – all combine to make a case against Reformative Training. Further, opponents believe many young offenders are non-rehabitable and hence harsher sentences and longer imprisonment in prisons for adults, not RTCs. The jail / prison periods spent by juveniles and/or young offenders is an effective punishment method, according to opponents of Reformative Training, not only for law enforcement (questionable as is against younger offenders) but also to "correct" wrong behavior. This argument is, indeed, invalid since juvenile and younger offenders are repeatedly shown to be different from adult offenders (as is shown later).
The argument by opponents of Reformative Training is, at best, flawed. First, Reformative Training is, as noted, Singapore's only formal, legal approach to juvenile offence. By eliminating Reformative Training altogether and lumping together younger and older offenders means, if anything, equalizing all offenders in punishment. In so doing, punishment loses a critical purpose for which a penalty is imposed initially. That is, if punishment for adult offenders is meant to "correct" a wrongdoing (and hence integrate into broader community after recognizing and repenting for a wrongdoing), punishing younger offenders would result in adverse effects by imposing sentences harsher in impact on younger offenders psychologically, mentally and socially well beyond a committed offence.
Second, by rejecting Reformative Training, judges would be at a legal dilemma of which most appropriate "correctional" sentence should be made for each case.
Third, by brushing aside Reformative Training, sentences made against younger offenders based on a similar approach to older ones would not consider for psychological and social needs of younger offenders, decidedly different from needs of older offenders.
The case of Amos Yee is, probably, most illustrative of current dilemma of harsher sentences against younger offenders (Ho, 2015). Having been put on probation and later sentenced for Reformative Training, Yee has been charged based on obscene photos he has uploaded on his blog of Singapore's former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew and former British premier Margaret Thatcher as well as sharing remarks intended to hurt Christians (Ho). According to his defense, Yee has received a sentence well beyond committed offence. True, Yee is a repeat offender. However, his sentence appears to be disproportionate to his "offence". By sentencing Yee, he might not, in one's view, be rehabilitated but become more adamant in his rejection of all sorts of "moral" authority. If Reformative Training should be applied in order to rehabilitate, more judicious judgment should be made by balancing benefits and harms.
More broadly, juveniles and young offenders in U.S. receive similar inappropriate handling. Notwithstanding Supreme Court's assertion, in writing, of inappropriateness of adult prison system for juveniles and younger offenders, rulings in state-level courts continue to issue harsh sentences on non-adult offenders ("Children in Prison," n.d.; Scott, 2012).
References
Chan, W. C. (2010). Juvenile Offenders in Singapore. British Journal of Community Justice, 8(3), 63-77. ProQuest. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/
Children in Prison. (n.d.) Equal Justice Initiative. Retrieved from http://www.eji.org/childrenprison
Ho, O. (2015, June 2). Amos Yee back in prison for 3 weeks; to be assessed for reformative training. The Straits Times. Retrieved from http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore
Rehabilitation. (2014, July 30). Ministry of social and Family Development. Retrieved from http://app.msf.gov.sg/NYGR/Our-Programmes/Rehabilitation
Scott, G. (2012, June 5). Prison Is Too Violent for Young Offenders. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/
Understanding Legal Processes: Sentencing in Singapore. (n.d.) Attorney-General's Chambers Singapore. Retrieved from https://www.agc.gov.sg/DATA/0/docs/ULP/Sentencing%20Process.pdf
