Louis spoke up for persons with intellectual disability in part of his Criminal Justice Reform Bill speech as follow.

Louis: Can I also ask if, in line with the spirit of these amendments, the Minister consider providing our Criminal Courts with more alternative sentencing options?

A recent case illustrates the difficulties that courts face because of limitations in sentencing options. The Judge will be releasing written grounds and what I will discuss is informed by media reports.

In this case, an individual was convicted for sexual assault and rape of a 16-year-old girl and sentenced to reformative training. There are some who may consider this a light sentence. They may change their mind when they learn that the offender was 14 years old when he committed the offence and has a low IQ of 61.

I do not, for one moment, suggest that the actions of this young offender should be minimised in any way. His actions have severely traumatised a young girl and she is likely to remain scarred for life. What is notable from the press reports is the difficulty that the Judge faced with the limited sentencing options that were available.

In this case, the defence lawyers had asked for reformative training. The prosecution asked for a jail term of between 15 and 18 years with at least 15 strokes of the cane. The prosecution argued that the offender lacked the requisite cognitive abilities to understand the programmes because of his low IQ and was unlikely to benefit from reformative training.

I am not sure though if this is the signal that we want to send out as a society when dealing with such an offender. Ultimately, Justice Woo had said that this case had exposed larger issues at stake, including limited sentencing options available to a court faced with a young offender who has some intellectual disability.

I would thus like to ask the Senior Minister of State if this concern can be addressed and whether we are looking into the sentencing options available to a court faced with a young offender with some intellectual disability.

Ms Indranee Rajah: Mr Ng also asked whether we will consider giving the courts more alternative sentencing options. He asked this in the context of a recent case where reformative training was imposed on a young intellectually-challenged offender for the sexual assault of a 16-year-old girl. Mr Murali made a similar observation about the limitations in that case. We have taken note of this case and MHA will consider this in the context of a broader policy review on sentencing.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether the Minister will consider reviewing the Criminal Procedure Code to (i) provide the courts with sentencing discretion for offences mandating imprisonment and caning where the offender is intellectually disabled and (ii) expand the sentencing options for intellectually disabled offenders such as mandatory treatment orders.

Mr Amrin Amin (for the Minister for Home Affairs): We will study the issue. There are a number of considerations that we will need to balance.

First, intellectual disability occurs along a wide spectrum of severity. Persons with severe intellectual disability to the extent that they are incapable of understanding the nature and consequences of the act they had committed, are acquitted. However, in other cases, intellectual disability may not negate the culpability of the offender.

Second, we will need to take into account other sentencing considerations. Offences which attract mandatory imprisonment and caning are generally serious and involve violence, such as robbery and aggravated rape. Such offences cause great distress to victims and threaten public safety. As such, punishment, deterrence and public protection are key considerations in sentencing for such offences.

As for Mr Ng's second question, mandatory treatment orders (MTOs) are imposed when an offender is suffering from a mental illness which is treatable, and which contributed to his offence. However, psychiatric assessments of offenders have found that those with merely intellectual disability are unsuitable for MTOs as their conditions were not assessed to be treatable. 

Louis: I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the reply. Can I just check the timeline for the review? And two, I understand that currently, programmes under the RT regimes have already been modified for the intellectually disabled inmates. But I think the limiting factor is the prison officer's time as well as resource constraint. So, while we are undergoing this review, will the Singapore Prison Service consider providing more resources to the RT officers so that they can modify these programmes for the inmates who are currently in there with intellectual disability.

Mr Amrin Amin: We will conclude the review in good time. Generally, the prison service takes extra precautions to manage inmates who are diagnosed with intellectual disability. Those with mental illnesses and who require treatment are currently housed separately at the psychiatric housing unit. And those who are able assimilate with the mainstream population and are housed with them, they generally undergo the same rehabilitation programmes like other inmates. However, prison staff will monitor them closely to pick any incidents of bullying or difficulties in adjustment.

Louis: I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the reply. But the concern really is that they are saying they do not have enough time and resources. So, I am just wondering whether on MHA's side, we can pump in more resources so that the RT officers can have time to modify programmes for the intellectually disabled.

Mr Amrin Amin: I think the time and resources issue, that will be considered as part of the general review and we will certainly be keen to ensure that our inmates get the proper support to help with their rehabilitation process.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for National Development whether the Ministry will consider providing more incentives, including partial funding, for shopping malls to install tactile paving to aid the visually impaired.

Mr Zaqy Mohamad (for the Minister for National Development): Speaker, BCA’s Accessibility Fund (AF) provides co-funding for eligible building owners to upgrade their buildings with accessibility features. These features would also include aid for the visually impaired, such as tactile paving and information signage. For eligible private buildings, including shopping malls, the AF co-funds up to 60% of the construction cost for such features, capped at $300,000 per development.

More information on the AF, including how to apply for funding, is available on BCA’s website. BCA will continue to reach out to building owners to raise awareness of the AF.

Louis: Thank you, Sir. This feedback actually came from a visually-impaired person who came to a dialogue session. He was sharing how at the Yishun Integrated Transport Hub, it really is very good. And I tried it. If you close your eyes, you can walk there, following the tactile paving. But his question was, it is very hard for him to get to there, to use the tactile paving because at the Northpoint City, there is no tactile paving. 

I understand we are encouraging the building owners to provide these for the visually-impaired but I am just wondering whether we can perhaps make it compulsory so that the visually-impaired can find it easier to get around. 

Mr Zaqy Mohamad: I thank the Member for his question. Today, under our building accessibility codes, the new buildings will certainly have such accessibility features on board. The AF is to encourage older buildings to come on board. I know Northpoint City is probably an older building. There are certain limitations with buildings that did not come with such designs. When they undergo A&A, BCA will try to encourage as much as we can. But to enforce it on all buildings is quite difficult because many of these buildings may or may not necessarily have the design features or they were not purpose-built for these. When buildings are being designed, we understand the newer ones, like the Member mentioned, are better equipped to provide such tactile pavings.

For the older ones, to be fair to building owners, we will encourage them as they undergo A&A. They can still tap on to the Fund.

The Fund is quite substantive – 60% and up to $300,000. It is not a small sum either, to encourage more building owners to come on board.

To give an example, more than 90% of existing buildings in the Orchard Road shopping belt have already achieved barrier-free accessibility. Certainly, we can do more, and in the heartlands, especially, and see how we can make it better. 

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

(Supplementary Question) Louis: Thank you, Sir. Just one supplementary question. Could I just check whether there will be sign language available for the live-stream, as well?

Mr S Iswaran: Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for his question. At this point, we do not have the provisions for sign language. However, the English stream on YouTube will have auto-captioning available. In other words, that which has the translations of the vernacular as well. So, that will be our starting position in terms of how we make it more accessible for those who may be hearing impaired.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)