Transcript of Berita Harian’s ‘tBH’ Vodcast Interview on Singapore’s National Drug Policy With Mr K Shanmugam, Minister for Home Affairs and Minister for Law

Interviewer: Delivering his Ministerial Statement on Singapore's National Drug Policy in Parliament recently. Our guest today argued for the death penalty to continue as it is an effective deterrent against drug trafficking. He also said that Singapore is at war and must do all it can to protect innocent lives.

Home Affairs and Law Minister Mr K Shanmugam is here today as our esteemed guest. Salam sejahtera, and welcome
Mr Shanmugam to tBH.

Minister: Thank you.

Interviewer: Well, Minister. In your Ministerial Statement in Parliament last week, you talked about the Singapore’s drug control policy, and your comment on Singapore's tough stance against drugs is well-known. Why is this necessary? And what are the considerations when we have this tough stance?

Minister: Drug abuse is a serious problem all over the world. In the Ministerial Statement, I tried to bring it across to Singaporeans. I think most Singaporeans understand, as the survey results show.

The numbers are mind-boggling. If you look at the World Health Organisation (WHO) Report 2021 – in 2019, drug abuse caused 600,000 deaths around the world globally. And if you look at the World Drug Report 2023 last year, drug use disorders cost an estimated 31 million years of healthy life lost. When people hear these numbers, sometimes they don't realise the severity, because these are just numbers. But 31 million years of healthy life lost because of disability and premature deaths. This is huge. Every region in the world is affected by drugs. It’s a question of trying to get across these numbers, what is happening, what does it mean for people's lives.

If you look at Europe: European countries are first world countries, mostly. They have been very hard hit by drugs because, I would argue, of the policies they've taken. European ports have been described by a major international weekly as drug hubs, and “safe terrain for narcos”.

You take Netherlands: It is a first-world country - well run, well respected and well regarded. Last year, the Dutch customs seized over 60,000 kilograms of cocaine. In the port city of Rotterdam, you have children as young as 14 who are being recruited as cocaine collectors to go to the containers in the ports and get the drugs. Because they are children, you suspect them less. But imagine the child's life – (he or she) becomes a drug courier and gets into gangs.

In January of this year, the Mayor of Amsterdam, (Femke) Halsema said that the Netherlands risks becoming a narco state. Imagine a mayor of a major city giving this description, that it risks becoming a narco state. She has some prescriptions which we don't agree with, but the description is important. The illegal drug trade and I quote, “has grown more lucrative, professional and ruthlessly violent”. If you go to the police, the Chief of the largest police union in the Netherlands, Jans Strujis, he said, that the country had a parallel economy controlled by organised crime groups, shootings and killings.

Moving from Netherlands to Belgium. This is important because all these are countries that we look up to. In Antwerp, in the last decade, there have been hundreds of shootings, grenade attacks, fires, and bombings. Many were linked to gang-related violence; (gangs) who are looking for a piece of the cocaine trade. The Mayor of Antwerp has described the situation as being a much bigger threat than the 2016 Brussels terrorist bombings. The Justice Minister in Belgium, my counterpart – he had to live in safe houses, because the police could not guarantee his safety. Last year the Belgium customs seized a record amount of cocaine, more than the customs and border officials of the entire United States. The incinerators in Belgium couldn't burn the drugs quickly enough.

If you look at South America, 18 out of 21 countries are now the main sources or transit countries for cocaine. Look at the US. The opioid epidemic has taken off one year from every male child born in the US.

You look at specific examples. You look at Oregon. In 2020, they decriminalised the use and possession of ‘small amounts of drugs’ for cocaine, heroin, and meth. What happened from 2019 to 2022? In three years, the number of drug overdose deaths more than doubled. Homelessness became a problem. The situation on the streets got very bad - crime, people felt very unsafe, businesses started leaving. This year, they changed the law. They reversed course and re-criminalised possession of drugs.

Turning to Thailand in Southeast Asia, near us. They legalised cannabis in June 2022. What happened? Within six months, the number of people addicted to cocaine went up four times. Young teenagers, children – they were starting to consume drugs. They take cookies, candy, sweets, with cannabis. Now the Thai government has announced plans to ban the use. I would say that when you experiment with laws like this, you're experimenting with people’s lives, a lot of innocent lives. And it's not easy to reverse course.

I gave many examples when I spoke in Parliament. We have always taken a tough stance. When we look at what is happening around the world, we know that we are a very big target for drugs. This region has been flooded with drugs, but we have kept the situation relatively under control and we go on the basis of evidence, not ideology. We don’t do something because we want to do something. We do something because, what is the end result? We want a crime-free and drug-free situation. Drug-free because the scientific evidence shows that drugs has got very deep and negative consequences for people, on our brain structure.

We make a distinction between drug traffickers and drug abusers. In 2019, we changed the law. If they have only abused drugs and haven't done any other crime, like housebreaking, robbery, sexual assault, and so on, if they've only taken drugs - they receive treatment and are given support to carry on with their lives. They are given job support, emotional support, counselling, depending on their level of risk of re-offending and assessed needs. We try to minimise the disruption to their daily lives, and we try to give them a helping hand to move on with life.

But if they are drug traffickers, we take a tough approach. Why? Because the guy wants to make money. It is a cynical crime. He wants to make money out of the misery and deaths of other people. It’s a crime where the guy thinks it through. We enhance the punishments, particularly for those who sell to young people, and the death penalty is imposed on traffickers who traffic beyond a certain amount. What is that amount? Take heroin. International media will say, oh small amounts. But it’s 15g which attracts a death penalty. 15g or more. What can 15g of pure heroin do? It can feed 180 abusers for a week. That’s the amount. And so, if you bring in 15g, in order to destroy 180 lives, some of whom will die early, some of whom might die immediately, more homicides, more crime, and worse - then I say you face the death penalty. Because that’s a serious deterrent.

And we don’t impose it purely as a punishment – it’s evidence-based, science-based. You look at the evidence. It has been a very effective deterrent against drug trafficking. In the 1990s, we arrested about 6000 drug abusers every year. That number has come down almost by half. That’s 3,000 drug abusers, roughly, now. So I would say, that’s 3,000 lives saved per year. Not a straight line, but it’s a sort of broad indicator. 3,000 people who now can be parents to their children, sons to their parents, brothers to their sisters, not involved in crime, because often they get into crime to feed their drug abuse habit. 3,000 lives per year have been saved. But all things being equal, actually that number of 6,000 should have gone up three, or four times. Why? Because there are more drugs available around the region. Singapore is much richer and our ability to afford is greater. We are a magnet for drugs. It’s a much tougher environment, and yet the number has come down.

Interviewer: We hear you that our tough stance is effective to bring down the number of drugs being brought into Singapore. I think it’s an important distinction that you made – the treatment against drug traffickers and the treatments for drug abusers. But in truth, the number of new abusers arrested in 2023 has increased, and more than half are below the age of 30. Youngest abusers can be as young as 14 years old. What are some of the gaps, perhaps, that we need to address, and some of the ways that we can help these young abusers and help the situation?

Minister: This is a very important issue. Overall, if you look at the numbers, the drug situation is under control. But you know you are swimming against a tide, because internationally there is a more permissive environment. As I said in Parliament, if you look at Hollywood, at fashion, or at stars, many of them openly use and promote the use of drugs. Many of them are also paid by the drug companies to glamorise the use (of drugs).

Interviewer: Part of their lifestyle.

Minister: Part of their lifestyle. We don’t produce Hollywood films, as I said, but I would say despite all that, despite swimming against the tide, the message has gotten through, both to our adult population and our student population. The statistics I gave in Parliament, across the board – and MHA will release these statistics in due course – shows that the importance of not getting into drugs, the seriousness of what drugs do to you, the negative consequences, are understood. But remember, we are exposed to global influences because we are an open system, open society, and our people travel, so it’s a much tougher environment.

We combine our resources and bring together different Ministries. There is an Inter-Ministry Committee (IMC) for Drug Prevention, specifically targeted at youths. I chair that IMC and we’re working with MOE to see how preventive drug education can be better covered, in the school curricula, by extending it to many subjects, including GP. All secondary schools have completed at least one preventive drug education engagement session in the last two years. At the primary school level, 42,000 students from close to about 120 schools have participated in the anti-drug ambassador activity last year.

This year, my Ministry is launching a major event in May, in a few days. It’s called the Drug Victims Remembrance Day, for us to remember the victims of drug abuse. They are not nameless, they are not faceless, and they shouldn’t remain nameless and faceless. You saw some of them come to Parliament, and they were very, very glad. Many of them said, “Sir, we never expected to come to Parliament”. They felt honoured and felt good, because they’ve kicked off the habit, and many of them are now giving back by becoming ambassadors themselves and promoting a drug-free culture amongst their social groups, and volunteering.

Who are the victims? The victims are those who take drugs – drug abusers – and their families. When one or two parents are in jail, or in rehab, what happens to the child? The innocent child is also a victim. Imagine having to be in foster care, or growing up without that kind of love, attention and affection from parents? Their lives are destroyed because the drug traffickers want to make money, the drug trade is lucrative, and they want to profit from this suffering. And we want to bring that across. In schools, Institutes of Higher Learning, some agencies – we’ll be organising activities around the Remembrance Day. And they will see how drugs have destroyed lives, they will light candles in a safe way (different types of candles) but something for them to participate. There will be roving exhibitions too. So many things to bring across this message to our young people, and across Singapore as a whole.

Interviewer: If I can ask a follow up to that, Minister, what is the larger goal or ambition for having this Remembrance Day, other than celebrating the resilience and showing that your life does not end if you choose to move away from drugs?

Minister: Actually, the main message is to have people, particularly young people, understand the negative consequences of drugs. When they see the victims and see what has happened, and they take part in it – they will be encouraged to write essays, they will be encouraged to come and light candles, they will be encouraged to think about it – it’s experiential, it’s not just somebody saying something. They experience it for themselves in terms of what has happened to all these people. It’s a more powerful way of bringing across the message that drugs cause serious damage to you and also get them to empathise with the victims. To promote empathy, sympathy, and understand what victims go though, and realise that they themselves should try and avoid it. It is intended to be a very powerful message against the use of drugs, and a second very important message is to have some feeling for those who have become victims.

Interviewer: Is there a sense that we are, like you said earlier, fighting against the tide, for these young people? They are surrounded, they’re in an environment where there is constant exposure to misinformation. For instance, there are advocacy groups, there are pro-drug users and groups who say that “It’s okay, you can use drugs, the Government may be telling you a different thing, Police tell you a different thing, but it’s okay, you can control what you want”. What can we do to mitigate this?

Minister: There will be people who do that. There will be small groups who actively go out and misstate what the Government says. Anytime I make a speech, they will take some part and try and twist it and mislead people. I don’t know what their agenda is, because if you talk about free speech, we need to have a robust debate. You take a position, I take a position, I explain, let Singaporeans decide which is accurate. But they will immediately say, “I am being victimised”. They can say whatever they want, they can lie, they can mislead, they can misstate, but we shouldn’t respond.

In addition to that, they are basically doing what many groups in other countries have done – actively try and promote a drug lifestyle, a different approach, say that you shouldn’t be so tough, and people should be able to take drugs if they want. I mean, there are various categories of advocacy – some advocate against the death penalty, and I can understand that many serious people will feel upset or uncomfortable with the death penalty, and I have said, I, myself, and my colleagues in Cabinet, in the Government -  who wants the death penalty? Nobody likes the death penalty. But as a policy maker, if you see that it saves more lives, then I think it’s your duty to explain why we need it. So there are various viewpoints, but then there are people who actively try to mislead, and we must stand our ground and explain to the people why what we say is right and back it up, not just by assertions, but by statistics, research, and facts.

Interviewer: Based on your interaction with youths and the younger audience, do you see that their impressions or their ideas of drugs and drug use are different from the previous generations? What was your impression of their views, and do you think it is worrying?

Minister: No, I speak with thousands of them, and so do my colleagues. We go out and we speak in the schools. Young people are no different from you and me. They are exposed to one set of information and then they think that may be right. But when I speak with them, and I explain to them, the research, the background, the facts – I sit with about 300 of them, and I talk to them – they understand. And once they understand, their viewpoints change. It's a question of showing them the facts. It's a question of showing them what's happening elsewhere. It's a question of showing them how Singapore is different. And they realise, they understand immediately, it doesn't take very long.

Which is why, we must continue both the retail messaging, which is to go to schools and explain, both by office holders as well as by other civil servants and so on, but we must also have the schools themselves putting the message across. The Drug Victims Remembrance Day, speeches, and other ways of bringing it across – all of these will help. I think the young people are no different from anyone else. What is important is putting the facts across to them, and then let them come to their own conclusions.

Interviewer: I’m just curious. Because one way I would think, to prevent the younger people from getting drugs or anybody else from getting drugs, is to cut off the supply. Previously, maybe you meet someone on the street, you buy it from them, perhaps. But how do you cut it off now when you can have delivery services, people meeting online, and talking in Telegram chats?

Minister: It's more challenging, and that's part of the challenges we face. The challenges are multi-fold; it’s a softer, more relaxed approach in other countries, including in the region, so that allows the proliferation of drugs and drug addicts. If you move out of Singapore and you go to any of these countries, you are surrounded by this. Either legal or illegal – some places are legal, some places are not legal, but your temptation to try is there.

Second, there are many means of bringing it across to Singapore. To do drug control, I’ve always said there are two aspects to it. One, you need to deal with supply. You need to deal with traffickers, you need to deal with how the drugs come in. You need to restrict that. You wouldn’t be able to completely do away with it, but you need to restrict it. Second, you need to also deal with demand. That involves education, that involves explaining to our people that this is not good for you.

I think we have largely succeeded in explaining to our people. The demand side we have managed. We have also largely succeeded in restricting supply. We have managed to restrict supply and we have managed to constrain that demand, so there isn't that much demand. It could have exploded as I explained just now. But it's a constant challenge. And the traffickers use newer and newer methods. We have to try and catch up. But I'm not saying it's easy. It's very difficult.

Interviewer: Speaking of the supply, bringing in drugs into Singapore, we have very tight border controls but yet, drugs still managed to be brought in. Are there any loopholes in the system? Is there a manpower issue? Where can we improve?

Minister: It’s just that in the region there is a somewhat lax approach, and the drug kingpins go to people around, and they say, “Look, I will give you some money. Would you take it?” Many people know the risks, but they say, “Maybe I will be lucky, and I will get through”, so they take the risk, but because our message and our tough stance is well understood, the drug kingpins find it difficult to find lots of people. If we didn’t take a tough stance, many more multiples of this number of traffickers will be coming into Singapore because the money is good, from their perspective. For us, when we look at what they are getting, we may say, “oh, this is such a small amount”, but for them, that money is worth earning. It’s easy, just come in, deliver the drugs and go off. If we didn’t have tough laws, that number will multiply; the number of people who are prepared to come in. These guys who are coming in, know the risks and, they run the risks, number one. But the key point is not that they run the risk, the key point is that many others are staying away.

Number two, the technology allows new ways of drugs coming in. It is not so much of a loophole in our Telegram chats and drugs coming through parcels. You just have to deal with it. It's very lucrative. There is money to be made. And therefore, people do all sorts of inventive things. It's not so much a manpower issue. It's not so much a loophole. It's just that there is a lot of money to be made and people are prepared to try all sorts of ways to try and make that money.

Interviewer: Talking about the demand and supply of drugs, you also mentioned, just now, about the misinformation and propaganda around advocacy groups for drugs. What are the levers that the Government can use to control these surroundings and the advocacy groups, from doing what they do? Are there any levers?

Minister: They go out there, and they express their views. We don't stop that. When they put out lies about what the Government has said, we may issue a POFMA order. That’s what we do. Otherwise, they do go out and they try and put out their viewpoint. There is nothing to prevent us from going to Singaporeans and explaining that this is wrong or they're misleading, and these are the consequences.

What I find amusing is - they put out their message and when we respond, they play ‘victim’, and go, “Why are we being attacked”, or “Why are these things said about us?”. They can say whatever they like, we mustn’t respond - that’s their idea of free speech.

Interviewer: Minister, perhaps we can touch on the Malay community. Minorities still are the majority drug offenders in Singapore at least, and we see an overrepresentation of Malay/Muslim drug abusers. Where do you think the problem lies, and what can we do to tackle this issue as a community?

Minister: It’s not only the Malay/Muslim community. I would say overall, the minorities are over-represented. That is a fact. Beyond proportions in the overall population. If you look at the overall population and the percentages of drug abusers, there is over-representation. This has always been the case, long been the case.

If you look at it as a glass half-empty, this is worrying. And this is something that I've been concerned about for some time. I wanted an intense laser focus on this, and I asked Minister of State (MOS) Faishal to take charge of this. In order to tackle this, of course, the government has got to come in and look at the problem and do what it can to deal with it. The community has to come in, and parents. The role of the parents is very important. From the government’s perspective, it's not just MHA but it's also the schools and others, who need to be vigilant. I would say that those efforts have borne fruit and results have been good. This is the part where I say, the glass is half-full, the positive part.

If you look at the efforts and the success, the total number of abusers, if you look at percentages then they are overrepresented, but if you look at the total number of abusers, it has come down significantly for new Malay abusers. If you look at 2011, 13 years ago, the number of new Malay drug abusers was about 600. In 2022, 2 years ago, it was about 300. So, in reality, the number has come down by about half when it actually should be going up. Because the Malay community is also wealthier and there are more drugs around. The number from 600 should have gone up three times, at least. But it has come down to 300.

So, our efforts are working. But it is not proper to say, “Oh, we have succeeded” - because you would never succeed in this. I would say, how have they been working - MOS Faishal went out and I spoke with the Malay community leaders and organisations. I said, look, this is a problem for all of us. The government will step in and partner you, but you must come in. You must try and mobilise the parents and the people on the ground for me, including AMP, Jamiyah, Pertapis, MENDAKI, MUIS, madrasahs. We have roped all of them, so this increases our touch points. MOS Faishal even got the barber shops and eating outlets to come in.

This very well-known campaign now: “Dadah Itu Haram (DIH)” campaign has received tremendous support from the Malay/Muslim community. If you compare the time before the campaign and after the campaign. Now, the message is there – everyone understands Dadah Itu Haram.

MOS Faishal has played a very significant role in engaging the community and the different partners. The work is extensive and there are regular efforts to engage the community.

Every month, the team of volunteers would be at all the mosques. The mosques have all come in. After Friday prayers, they hand out collaterals bearing the DIH Campaign logo.  And every quarter, they outreach at the madrasahs, it started last year. We get good support from the madrasahs and the Asatizahs. They also talk about the problem of drugs.

Now, there is a programme called “Date Your Loved Ones Today!”. What is this? It is a flagship programme of the DIH Campaign during Ramadan. They distribute dates and they spread the message. We get volunteers from the community handing out dates at the bazaars. Mosques also hand out dates to the congregants to spread the message. All these are innovative ways. They are doing all these things – - that is why the numbers are coming down.

There are regular touchpoints and outreach at barber shops. They put up DIH posters and stickers, and we get the support of the business owners. The community also has understood the message. There are a lot of ground-up events and tremendous support from the community to try and raise awareness. Mosques, for example, partner with interest groups and organising cycling events to spread the DIH message.

Another important part is the set-up of the FITRAH Office as part of the M3 efforts. This is also led by MOS Faishal. Since its launch, FITRAH has increased the number of volunteers from 60 about 10 years ago, to more than 700 last year. There is a structured religious programme. At every Friday Prayers for the inmates, the sermons are contextualised to the rehabilitation needs of the inmates, and they also provide befriending services and case management support.

FITRAH has galvanised the support of all 71 mosques to provide support to inmates because when you come out of rehabilitation, you need emotional support and you need counselling. We help them try and find jobs. You need family support. Otherwise, the people who got you into trouble in the first place are the people waiting for you outside when you come out. But instead of that, now we have the mosques waiting for you. We encourage and teach the families on how to provide the support. We have networks of desistors and others who have gone through the journey to tell them that this can be done and encourage them in their work.

If you look at the Malay/Muslim Organisations Rehabilitation Network (MMORN), which was formed in Nov 2021, – again led by MOS Faishal. MOS Faishal has been doing a lot of this and bringing everyone together. It is a network of all existing MMOs. You don’t need to reinvent the wheel. They support MHA’s efforts in preventing drug abuse and preventing reoffending. They have been very helpful in creating collaborations amongst the MMOs to provide support again for the abusers, and opportunities for MMOs to increase their own game in terms of dealing with these issues.

These are just some examples. But all of these are gaining traction. If you go out there and you ask many people in the community, they would have heard of the programme. There might have been some touch points, and they will understand. It's a long effort and a hard journey, but it's a very fulfilling one.

Interviewer: Would you say that moving forward, there is a more targeted approach in terms of using culture to tackle the drug issue, since the effectiveness is slowly starting to be seen?

Minister: I would say that every effort helps, and in this, we have to be guided by the community leaders, and religious leaders, and what they feel would be a better way of putting the message across. We are public officials, we have one way of dealing with this. That's why we partner the community leaders. The community leaders will have to tell us - specific to the Malay/Muslim community, putting the message across this way or dealing with this aspect of the cultural issues might be important - so we have to be guided by them.

Interviewer: Speaking of culture, in many other countries, we see that there are studies being done relating drug abuse and drug use with race. I was wondering if Singapore has any such studies - Do we look into why more people from a certain race are abusing drugs more than others? If there's such a study, what have you learnt from it?

Minister: I want to be careful there because I don't want to move to typecasting, nor do I want to have an explanation automatically - Oh, it's because of culture, or it's because of certain characteristics. I start with scepticism about these sorts of suggestions in the first place. And then, if experts tell me otherwise, I will listen. But so far, no one has suggested that to me.

I am more inclined to think that you need to go to where people are and see what kind of leadership they respect. People respect religious leadership. They respect community leaders. They respect the organisations. For those who don't have these touch points, they go to eating houses, they go to barber shops, and our education system is reasonably good. All the communities get the benefit of the education system. From there, they are able to understand facts, they are able to reason, and we support them.

For those who fall through the cracks, regardless of whether they are Malay, Indian or Chinese, you see some characteristics. For instance, how well they feel part of their functional family, how well their family is functioning. What sort of confidence levels do they have about themselves? I don't think that is restricted to, or is a peculiar issue structured around race. It's an individual issue, and we deal with that, and we provide the support.

Interviewer: Part of dealing with repeat offenders and drug abuse, like what you mentioned just now, having a group of desistors, a network of support for these abusers. We cannot overstate the importance of this network. Moving forward, how do you do think we can get even more or do more in this area to get the network?

Minister: We are constantly working on it. As you see the figures, more and more desistors, more and more people coming forward. MOS Faishal is working hard. As I say, I've empowered him. He is doing a lot on the ground and he gets good support from the other MPs too. Minister Masagos has been very supportive in dealing with the community organisations, and encouraging them to work with us.

And the tremendous work the community leaders put in, the mosque leaders, MUIS, community leaders, the organisation leaders, they are all coming in. But you must also remember in Singapore, we all lead busy lives, work takes up a lot of time, and you need time for your family. You need to be understanding of that. But within that framework, the number of people who have come forward is quite good. It's impressive. It's because we provide the structure and more people come in compared with other places. I would say there are a lot of positives you can take away, you will learn the lessons and you try to increase the number. And recidivism rates overall have been coming down, the number of people who reoffend has come down. We would like it to come down even more, but it is coming down.

Interviewer: Talking about offenders. Perhaps female offenders, especially in the Malay/Muslim community, they seem to be largely drug abusers and they are overrepresented in prison. What are your comments on that?

Minister: I don't think it would be fair to say females are overrepresented. In fact, less women get into drugs compared with men, regardless of community. It's usually the men who are the majority in all three communities as well as the other communities. Of course, proportionately there are more Malay women, compared with others, but again, the overall numbers are coming down. And I've made the points earlier about that.

Interviewer: Perhaps, we can revisit our strict anti-drug laws. Are there any misconceptions that people have about our drug laws that you feel are common? Perhaps you can make some comments to correct some of these misconceptions?

Minister: I think Singaporeans understand the Government's stance - the way we have been explaining it - I think Singaporeans understand. But there are attempts to mislead people about our stance and the death penalty.

There is clear evidence that the death penalty is a very effective deterrent. I said earlier, in 1990, we introduced the death penalty if you trafficked more than 1200 grammes of opium. Immediately, you take the four-year period before that, and the four-year period after the death penalty was introduced. There was a 66% reduction in the average net weight of opium trafficked.

In 2018, MHA did a study, six years ago, amongst convicted drug traffickers. Many of them admitted that yes, we look at the amounts and then we traffic below that because we don't want to run the risk - so that they don't face the death penalty. What does this do? It restricts the amount of drugs coming in. It makes it difficult for the drug kingpins because they've got to find more people to traffic the drugs. And, as I told you earlier, the number of drug abusers in Singapore has come down almost by half over the last 30 years. This is very significant.

In 2021, I said, let's go to the region. There are some places from which many of our drug traffickers come that many people know. Let's do a study - How do they view our death penalty? The results were stunning. It was very surprising to me.

86% of them – these are outside of Singapore – believed that the death penalty in Singapore makes people not want to commit serious crimes in Singapore. 86%, nearly nine out of 10, said that Singapore has the death penalty, I think that's very effective. And 87% said, because of this, people will not want to traffic substantial amounts of drugs. That includes themselves, for some of them. And 83%, eight out of 10 said the death penalty is effective in deterring drug trafficking - If it was changed to life imprisonment, it would not have the same effect.

What does this mean? They all understand - our police officers, our CNB officers, immigration officers, are not corrupt. If you go in, there is very high likelihood of getting caught. If you get caught, there is a high likelihood that you will face the death penalty. And I don't want to face the death penalty. That's what eight out of 10 believe. That is why supply into Singapore is substantially restricted.

So, this is an answer to those who say, “Oh, take a tough stance but remove the death penalty and put in life imprisonment.” But this small group of activists, they will focus on one drug trafficker. They will say, “He's got sisters, he's got brothers, he's got mothers. He grew up in this way. He’s a poor boy, please.” They will publish videos, but they will leave out the facts. They will leave out the fact that he was bringing in drugs to make money and destroy the lives of people in Singapore, most of them Singaporeans. They will talk about the traffickers’ children. They will leave out the children in Singapore who are going to die, and who are the innocent victims. The real innocent victims. These victims also have wives, sisters, parents, children.

Last year, a man was convicted of committing incest with his 17-year-old daughter. He was giving her meth, and she became reliant on him. To sustain her addiction, she made no report against him. Just one example. Thankfully, cases like this are small in Singapore overall. In another case, a man under the influence of LSD – I spoke about it in Parliament – stabbed his own mother and grandmother to death. There's also a heartbreaking case of a two-and-a-half-year-old girl. She was assaulted to death by her own father because he was a meth abuser. He was out of control. And then he burned the body. Who speaks for this girl? In Singapore, we count these cases in the fingers of two hands. But around the world, you're talking about thousands.

Then you look at people, do they support the death penalty? I looked at the results in the last two years, from 2021 to 2023, because we did a survey in 2021 and we did a survey in 2023. In 2021, 74%, agreed or strongly agreed that the death penalty should be used for the most serious crimes. Last year, that went up to 77%. 3% is statistically significant.

So, when the international media and the activists say the death penalty is controversial, despite all these arguments, the percentage goes up, because the Government comes out and explains our position, and there is a lot of trust that we care for Singaporeans. And in 2021, 66%, agreed or strongly agreed that the mandatory death penalty is an appropriate punishment. What happened last year? 69%. Went up by 3%. Amidst all the debate, more people are now supportive of the death penalty, and the mandatory death penalty. Why? I think Singaporeans understand the message.

Interviewer: Since we have a little bit more time, I was wondering if, in your interaction with drug abusers or their families, the victims, are there any stories that stood out to you that were most heartbreaking?

Minister: Many. I haven't met with those who killed their child while they're serving time for that crime or did unspeakable things. But I've met with many desistors, many who are now walking the journey of trying to recover from drugs. And the latest was, of course, in Parliament. The warmth, the feeling that they have, the confidence, the gratitude they feel towards the community for helping them, and to us in giving them a helping hand, it's tremendous. Just yesterday, or the day before, I received an email from one of those who had been in Parliament. He said he was there with his wife, and he cannot thank us enough for both recognising that there are many victims, like himself, and that they are not nameless or faceless. And we recognise them, and we help them. They are now grateful that they are on this journey. So, he emailed me. In fact, I'm going to get his permission and put it up on my Facebook, I'll send you a copy.

There are many, and they share their stories with us. It's touching because in any other country, first world country or third world country, this man and those people who turned up in Parliament - many of them would continue to be plagued by drugs. A good number would have gone on to commit other crimes. Some of them would have killed – I'm talking statistically – others. Some would have robbed, and some would have sexually assaulted. The robberies would be to fund their drug habit. And there is no substantive effective system.

Because you can't do this alone. You come out of it. You are out of rehab. You need a job. You need somebody to help you get a job. You need emotional support. You need community support. You need family support. You need counsellors. So many people have to come together and try and help you, and walk with you in that journey. That is not often present in many countries. You would have seen a large number who would have been seriously and badly damaged. And you would have seen the other victims we never remember about, which is the children – their children. Their lives’ gone; their children's lives are gone. Then the cycle will repeat itself because the children will grow up in that environment.

Interviewer: On that note Minister, recently when you were talking to some students, I believe you said that as long as you are Home Affairs Minister, you will continue this fight against the war on drugs and protect the lives of Singaporeans. Perhaps you would like to say any last words?

Minister: Well, it speaks for itself, you come into public service because you believe in things. You need to have a passion. In this context – this is not the only context for me –knowing what I know, knowing the evidence, my conscience will not be clear if I went and softened our stance on drugs. We need compassion, but we need clarity of thought as well. So, compassion goes towards the drug abusers; clarity of thought has got to be there because trafficking is a cynical crime. It is done by people who are doing things which will destroy the lives of Singaporeans and people in Singapore. Some of them may not be Singaporeans, but they are living here. And I cannot in good conscience, take or approve a change that will kill more lives in Singapore. And I cannot look into the eyes of a two-year-old girl, knowing that, because I've changed my system, one day she or others like her will get killed and will face violence and assault. How can you? So that's what I meant.

Interviewer: Well, on that note, thank you so much, Mr. Shanmugam, for appearing on tBH. We thank you for your candid sharing and for your time here.

Minister: Thank you.