Procedure for Consulting Authorities of Intended Receiving Countries before Proceeding with Deportations of Foreigners Convicted of Offences in Singapore

As regards whether the Government has a standard protocol of consulting the authorities of the intended receiving countries before proceeding with the deportations of foreigners, the short answer is that there is no such standard protocol.

As stated in my Ministry's reply on 2 July 2024, foreigners who are being deported can leave for any country to which their passports allow them to go. [Please refer to "Factors Considered in Deciding Deportation Destinations for Foreigners Who Have Served Their Sentences in Singapore", Official Report, 2 July 2024, Vol 95, Issue 137, Oral Answers to Questions section.]

The foreign country can, as a sovereign state, choose to allow entry or it can choose to disallow entry when the person arrives on its shores, or it can take subsequent actions to expel the person after entry. The way we treat these persons is no different from any other traveller. We do not consult the foreign countries beforehand as a general rule as to whether a traveller is allowed to go there.

As regards Ms Lim's second specific question, the general position is that we do not disclose specific discussions. Discussions may sometimes take place for operational security reasons, for intelligence reasons, other similar purposes.

[Deputy Speaker (Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo) in the Chair]

But since this particular question seems to interest the Member of Parliament (MP), because she asked last month and followed up with several supplementary questions, and now, again. I will say no, we did not discuss with the Cambodians or the Cambodian authorities. But having made that position, for future, let me make it clear to MPs, the general position that my Ministry takes about discussions with foreign governments on deportations is that we should not be disclosing this. It is not in the public interest to disclose it because there are a variety of reasons why we may be in touch with foreign governments, and likewise, we may want people to be deported from foreign governments as long as the law allows it and we sometimes will not want that publicly disclosed upfront. Otherwise, others who are collaborating with such persons of interest may then get wind of it.

So, these are, sometimes, matters of operational security. But here, in answer to the question, no, we did not discuss with the Cambodians.

Deputy Speaker, I have two supplementary questions for the Minister. First, I accept that there could be some operational considerations and not revealing too much information. So, I would like to say that upfront.

I would like to ask the Minister, because it was indicated in this House that offenders are permitted to indicate their choice of jurisdiction, to where they would like to be deported. So, my question is, is the Ministry concerned that the offender would tend to choose a jurisdiction which he considers to be favourable to him? By that, I mean that he might be concerned about possible prosecution for the predicate offences which led to the money laundering, for instance. Would that be something that the Government would take into account, that he may choose a jurisdiction that would actually facilitate his avoiding prosecution for certain other crimes that he may have committed overseas? That is the first question: whether the Government is concerned about this in giving the offender the choice.

Secondly, I wonder whether the Minister could confirm whether or not the choice of the deportation country is part of the plea bargain process.

Madam, on whether offenders can choose to go to where they want to go, we have said it several times. They can choose to go to where they want to go. The law allows them to go where their passports allow them to go to.

So, what we think about what will happen to them in the receiving country, whether it will be more favourable or less favourable, as Ms Lim will appreciate, is legally irrelevant and is not something that the Government can take into account.

Second, as regards the choice of deportation and whether that is part of the plea bargain process, again, strictly speaking, if the offender, the person who is asked to leave, can choose to go wherever he wishes to go to, then the relevance of it becomes small. I do not engage in plea bargains. That is a matter between the Attorney-General's Chambers and the defendant's lawyers. I cannot rule out that these discussions take place, but I can tell you what the legal position is.

Thank you, Deputy Speaker. One further supplementary question. Earlier, the Minister mentioned that what might happen in the jurisdiction that is chosen is legally irrelevant. But I am just wondering whether he will agree with me that money laundering, being transnational in nature, that we would also like to be seen to be doing our part to ensure that the offenders face justice for whatever offences they have committed. So, as such, are we not interested in the likelihood of such offenders facing prosecution or being charged for any predicate offences that they may have committed overseas and to that extent, we should play our part as well?

Well, in the first place, they would have served time in Singapore if they have committed an offence here. Second, of course we are interested, which is why we are the chair of the Financial Action Task Force. We take this very seriously. But it is wishful thinking to think that every other country will take the same approach or that we can control how other countries can or cannot operationalise their legal position.

If the Member were to ask any country, they will all tell the Member that they take it very seriously. We should not be making those value judgments. However, rather than engage in this back and forth, Ms Sylvia Lim may be aware that we have amended our legislation last year such that once it is operationalised, which should be sometime later this year or next year, the law will allow us to decide where to send such a deportee. But the only consideration cannot be what we think of the different legal systems. There has got to be a multiple set of considerations.