The past week or so, I've been quietly watching the entire media hoo-haa about Singapore (my country)'s excution of a certain well-known drug-trafficking Australian named Nguyen Tuong Van. I find it disgusting, I find the reaction of some Australian citizens, their media and their politicians downright disgusting.
Nguyen tried to smuggle drugs (some 26,000 doses of it) into Singapore. Period. It doesn't matter where its final destination is, why he did it, how he did it. The thing is, he tried to smuggle drugs, and failed. When you break the law in Singapore, you get punished the Singapore way. The same thing, if a Singaporean breaks the law in Australia, I would expect the Singaporean to be punished the Australian way. Period.
So why does Australia think that her citizens are above the law in Singapore? Not only in Singapore, but quite a number of other countries as well, notably in ASEAN countries. The fact that trafficking drugs above a certain weight will warrant you a mandatory death sentence is WELL-KNOWN internationaly. So unless you've been living in a hut, cut away from all sources of information, please don't tell me you didn't know.
Nguyen tried to traffick drugs and claimed he did it to help his twin brother whose life was wrecked by DRUGS. Since his own twin's life was ruined by drugs, why did he try to traffick the very thing that ruin his twin's life, in turn destroying the lives of countless others? Perhaps it was for the quick buck, but where was his conscience? His morals? His integrity? Did he not think of the consequences should he be caught or if he had been successful?
It was argued that he showed that he had repented prior to his hanging. Can we ever prove that? People can write letters expressing their regret without ever meaning it. People can act as if they feel the pangs of guilt without ever proving it. So yes, I do think that there is that possibility that he could have acted out his remorse in the hope of clemency from the President or the courts.
Is death by hanging painful? I have no doubt that it is. But it is only a fraction of the pain that would have been inflicted if that 26,000 doses of drugs had gone through. To sacrifice one life to say many others is an act I find perfectly justifiable. Another argument put forth would be the effectiveness of capital punishment. Is our drug problem significantly less severe than many of the developed countries that don't kill for trafficking (mind you, Singapore doesn't even belong to that league of developed nations) like America, the UK and Australia? Don't deny it. It is. We have a significantly more drug-free society, and who or what can you credit that for? Our legislation (other than education and the police). So don't tell me that the death sentence doesn't work. It does, and you know that, so don't quote studies to tell me so-and-so. The death of a few people in exchange for a safer society is fine by me.
I liken letting Nguyen get away with a jail sentence for trafficking with spanking the hand of a murderer. In fact, I think drug traffickers as mass murderers. They inflict more pain and suffering on drug addicts, their friends and families as they affect a far larger number of people. Do you know how many people have died from overdoses? How many have died in rehab from trying to quit? How many have had to commit crimes like theft, robbery, kidnapping and even murder to get drugs? So what if Nguyen supposedly offered to help the police nab the person behind this? The thing is, he tried to lie and cheat his way out of trouble before the law (and police) clammed down on him. It was a last-ditch attempt to save his life. Is that honourable? No. Is there sincerity in trying to help the authorities? No. All these in pursuit of a far narrower objective; to save his own skin.
It is heartening to see other countries (notably in ASEAN, once again) coming to Singapore's defense. Yet, I see the most pressing issue of this whole hoo-haa as Australia's attempt to infringe on Singapore's sovereignty. Singapore has the right to protect her citizens against people like Nguyen who traffick drugs and ruin our youths. We have the right to protect ourselves, to a safe and drug-free society, to implement our laws the way we deem fit and punish criminals in our country, regardless of their nationality, accordingly, all without any international pressure. The fact that Australia keeps intervening in situations where her citizens end up in trouble (think Michelle Leslie in Indonesia, who threw her tudung away the moment she was set free despite claiming her faith in Islam during her trial) shows that Australia doesn't exactly denounce the death penalty, just that it doesn't approve when it's being carried out on her citizens. What do you think Australia would have done had the Indonesian government set the Bali bombers free? The lack of respect of Australia for her Asian neighbours is disappointing. More disappointing is how certain organisations have taken this entire issue into their hands and boycotted Singapore goods and exclude Singapore users from enjoying their product/services. It shows that they have failed to acknowledge my country's right to sovereignty. To the pain of the drug addicts (have they ever asked how drug addicts and their loved ones feel?).
Australia cannot be the boss or the Big Brother of Asia. It can dream on. Countries like Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore don't have to yield to Australia's every wimp and demand. For a change, Australia should start respecting the laws of other countries other than her own.
Socially, exaggeration is often whimsical. But when a government dramatically inflates numbers to help justify a death sentence, the integrity of both the trial and its governing body becomes questionable. In this case, the government is Singapore, the trial was for Van Tuong Nguyen, and the bloated number is 26,000.
Press from around the world quotes Abdullah Tarmugi, the Speaker of Singapore Parliament, in writing about the potential consequences of Van's actions, "almost 400 grams of pure heroin, enough for more than 26,000 doses."
But how was 26,000 doses (or "hits") derived?
It turns out that what constitutes a hit of heroin is not an easy thing to count. There are dozens of factors to consider; contact your local Needle Exchange for a comprehensive list. However, after collecting statistics from over a dozen sources (including police reports, narcotics web sites, health information, and workers from needle exchanges), the number of hits from a gram of pure heroin averages out to little more than 14.
Van Tuong Nguyen trafficked 396.2 grams of heroin into Singapore. This is approximately 5,600 doses.
The numbers 5,600 and 26,000 are obviously incongruous, as are reports that 400 grams of heroin would "ruin 26,000 lives". In fact, 400 grams of heroin would not come close to ruining even 5,600 lives. Rather, the heroin would most likely supply people already abusing it. With a little more research, we can estimate how many lives would be adversely affected by 400 grams of heroin during one year:
As many as 67, and as few as 6.
Van Tuong Nguyen would not have sent 26,000 people to their deaths from 400 grams of heroin. Nor would the lives of 26,000 people have been ruined. Far more likely is that six people would get a year's worth of hits. And for this he was executed?
Call it dreadful, call it dense, call it incomprehensible ... but do not call it justice.
Assuming that the whole 26K was indeed blown out of proportion and the actual number is indeed 5.6K, it doesn't change the fact that Nugyen broke the law. Archaic and barbaric, yes (the law that is). All to deal with an action that is cruel and ruthless enough to ruin lives? Fine by me.
You say that most of the drugs would have gone to abusers of the drugs, not first time users. But have you ever thought of who supplied these abusers with their 1st doses of the drugs, causing them to become addicts in the first place? And who's to say that these drugs wouldn't have reached the hands of teens and young adults dumb enough to try them for the first time due to peer pressure or what-so-ever? There's always that risk, and you probably know it.
Don't call it justice? Justice has many definitions, one of which refers to "the administration and procedure of law". By upholding the law by punishing those who break it could fall under justice in that sense. It may not necessarily be morally right, but it is still, after all, justice. Yes, perhaps the government could have shown more compassionate towards a proven drug trafficker like Nguyen, in the hope that he will actually repent and do good in the future. But doing that and risking the lives of others? That in itself is questionable.
You claim as 6 to 67 people could have had their lives ruined by what Nguyen did. Let's do a little Math, shall we? ONE man smuggles in some 400g of drugs into a country, and ends up feeding the drug habit of SIX others. These SIX others get so addicted to the drug, they have to use increasingly larger doses to get the same "high" feeling. Penniless and unable to afford more drugs to feed their habit, they turn to crime like petty theft and robbery (or steal from their parents, or worse, become drug traffickers themselves). While on a more direct scale, only 6 people would have their lives ruined. But multiply that with the cascading effect brought about by the problems they bring to society and you would have a far larger number of people adversely affected. Even on the direct scale, 6 outnumbers 1. To save ONE person, you'd sacrifice SIX?
Sure the whole human rights thing seem to justify saving Nguyen. Human rights ensure the rights of traffickers, but who ensures the rights of innocent people on the street from people like Nguyen?
The larger issue isn't what kind of person Nguyen is, because you can argue till your face turns blue and still not be able to bring him back to life. Rather it is allowing the judiciary of countries to administer their law, their way. SO don't be surprised and scream "bloody murder" if any of the Bali Nine is later executed by the Indonesian goverment.
I'm a 3rd year student in what is probably the largest autonomous university in Singapore majoring in a Science-related subject (well it sorta IS SCIENCE). I'm known to be introverted, sarcastic (at times), funny when I rant (which isn't a good thing lol) and somewhat of a loner. I miss LA and would move there in a heartbeat :(
Socially, exaggeration is often whimsical. But when a government dramatically inflates numbers to help justify a death sentence, the integrity of both the trial and its governing body becomes questionable. In this case, the government is Singapore, the trial was for Van Tuong Nguyen, and the bloated number is 26,000.
Press from around the world quotes Abdullah Tarmugi, the Speaker of Singapore Parliament, in writing about the potential consequences of Van's actions, "almost 400 grams of pure heroin, enough for more than 26,000 doses."
But how was 26,000 doses (or "hits") derived?
It turns out that what constitutes a hit of heroin is not an easy thing to count. There are dozens of factors to consider; contact your local Needle Exchange for a comprehensive list. However, after collecting statistics from over a dozen sources (including police reports, narcotics web sites, health information, and workers from needle exchanges), the number of hits from a gram of pure heroin averages out to little more than 14.
Van Tuong Nguyen trafficked 396.2 grams of heroin into Singapore. This is approximately 5,600 doses.
The numbers 5,600 and 26,000 are obviously incongruous, as are reports that 400 grams of heroin would "ruin 26,000 lives". In fact, 400 grams of heroin would not come close to ruining even 5,600 lives. Rather, the heroin would most likely supply people already abusing it. With a little more research, we can estimate how many lives would be adversely affected by 400 grams of heroin during one year:
As many as 67, and as few as 6.
Van Tuong Nguyen would not have sent 26,000 people to their deaths from 400 grams of heroin. Nor would the lives of 26,000 people have been ruined. Far more likely is that six people would get a year's worth of hits. And for this he was executed?
Call it dreadful, call it dense, call it incomprehensible ... but do not call it justice.