Singapore

Provides a listing of articles on restorative justice developments in Singapore. Articles appear in the order in which they were added to the site with the most recent appearing first.

"Restorative justice" to reintegrate youth-at-risk into society

from Wayne Chan's article in ChannelNewsAsia.com: Minister of State for Home Affairs, Masagos Zulkifli recommended using "restorative justice" to divert delinquent youth away from the court justice system. He said this at the 1st Singapore Restorative Conference which kicked off on Thursday.

Desai, Murli. Singapore A comparative study of measures for children in conflict with the law in Goa and Singapore.

This article aims to compare the measures undertaken for children in conflict with the law in terms of strengths and gaps, similarities and differences, and the profile of children who enter the juvenile justice system in a progressive state of India, namely Goa, and Singapore. The measures for children in conflict with the law are examined with reference to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC, 1989), ratified by (among others) India and Singapore. (author's abstract). This includes a discussion of Singapore's inclusion of restorative principles in responding to juvenile offending.

Wachtel, Joshua. Report from Singapore: A High School Adopts Restorative Pratices.

In 2005, Ping Yi Secondary School in Singapore was chosen by the Ministry of Education as one of four pilot schools to receive training and begin using restorative practices (RP). The school is now entering its fourth year of the pilot and is working to train teachers and administrators to use RP reactively in cases of discipline, but also proactively to create a restorative school culture. (excerpt)

Mean Luck Kwek. The Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency in Singapore.

This article examines the reforms made in Singapore in the 1990s in response to the increase in juvenile delinquency and evaluates their effectiveness in reducing juvenile delinquency. It begins by exploring the juvenile justice reforms in Singapore, where a transition was made from a model of general deterrence to that of restorative justice. It argues that there is a need to move beyond reforms focusing mainly on the juvenile justice system, to a wider embracement of an approach that involves the prevention of juvenile delinquency at its roots. It traces the initial steps taken towards prevention in Singapore, and outlines the possible directions for a more comprehensive strategy of prevention. (author's abstract)

Tin Keng Seng, Eric. The Four Justice Models: Organised Creativity in Judicial Administration

The Justice Achievement Award was established to recognize outstanding achievements and projects that enhance the administration of justice. In this paper, Eric Tin Keng Seng, a magistrate for the Republic Singapore, profiles four justice models that provide the structure for the Singapore courts: civil justice (fair and effective dispute resolution); criminal justice (protecting the public); family justice (protecting family obligations); and juvenile justice (restorative justice). For each model, he identifies the target groups, the core work team, and significant justice initiatives. Moreover, he evaluates the effects of the justice initiatives on the Singapore community.

Ozawa, Joseph Paul. Transformative Justice: Psychological Services in the Criminal, Family, and Juvenile Justice Centres of the Subordinate Courts of Singapore

In addition to being a centre for the expeditious, fair, and effective administration of justice and the disposition of deterrence, the Subordinate Courts of Singapore have developed as a centre of innovation. Courts are also conceptualised as a crucible of human conflicts, traumas, and relational dysfunctions, thus requiring expertise in dealing with complex human problems. Psychological Services go beyond the conventional notion of providing expert criminal profiling to becoming a driving force behind individual, familial, and societal transformation. Three functions of the Psychological Services are presented-Family conferencing; the Juvenile Offender Behavior (JOB) criteria; and Project HEART. Each function reflects transformation within a forensic-legal framework.

Maxwell, Gabrielle and Wing Lo, T and Wong, Dennis and Maxwell, Gabrielle. Diversion From Youth Courts in Five Asia Pacific Jurisdictions: Welfare or Restorative Solutions

This article examines how juvenile offenders are diverted from prosecution in juvenile courts in five Asia Pacific jurisdictions: Queensland, Australia; New Zealand; Hong Kong; Singapore; and China. In all of these jurisdictions, there has been a trend away from punitive and retributive approaches to the diversion of juvenile offenders from prosecution in a court to the community-based welfare model and the restorative model. The community-based welfare model relies primarily on counseling, community support, and educational assistance and is usually led by professionals. This model tends to categorize juvenile offenders as having problem behaviors and emotional conditions that require treatment and supervision. The restorative model emphasizes the accountability of juvenile offenders for the harms their behavior caused and uses negotiation among the youth, their victims, and the youth's family to develop measures for repairing the harm done and addressing the youth's behaviors that caused the harm. This model limits the involvement of professionals in decisionmaking about the disposition of the case. New Zealand and Queensland use the restorative model. Criticisms of this model have included the lack of due process and protections for the rights of offenders, as well as the potential for undue influence by the police. Hong Kong and Singapore have adopted a traditional rehabilitation and welfare orientation whereby police divert juveniles from the courts through police cautions and referrals to community support and guidance services operated by social workers. In China, community-based practices such as police cautions, mediation, and educational assistance are used in diverting youth from court-based processing. Community-based sanctions are particularly susceptible to the influence of personal power and persuasion, and outcomes may favor those who have close affiliations with or hold powerful positions in the government. Abstract courtesy of the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, www.ncjrs.gov.

Kamal, Chomil. Directions of Juvenile Justice Reforms in Singapore

The Children and Young Persons Act (CYPA) Chapter 38 is the key legislation governing the administration of juvenile justice in Singapore. Though enacted as early as 23 September 1946, the spirit, intents and purposes of the CYPA remain progressive and very much relevant in our present Singapore society. Welfare of the juvenile is a guiding principle of this Act. Juveniles in conflict with the law are not excused of responsibility or accountability for their misconduct. The Act determines the jurisdiction of the Juvenile Court for persons aged 7 to under 16 year olds and spells out clear principles for care and protection orders, f it person orders, social work and supervised treatment, approved home and young offender in custody. The CYPA balances parental authority and State intervention. As a nation, Singapore’s response to youth offending has been to pursue a fine equilibrium in the management of juvenile offenders such that the justice and restorative models are not opposing paradigms but that they actually compliment each other as mutually supportive elements of the juvenile justice system. (excerpt)

Wing-Cheong Chan. Victim-Offender Mediation, Making Amends and Restorative Justice in Singapore

The Community Mediation Centres Act was passed by the Singapore Parliament on October 7, 1997, and the first such center was established in January 1998. Its purpose is to give effect to the government's intention to promote mediation as a means of resolving social and community disputes. The act allows the disputing parties to retain control of their dispute through the mediation of a neutral third party. Attendance and participation in a mediation session is voluntary. Matters eligible for referral to mediation are those "concerning a family, social, or community dispute that does not involve a seizable offense under any written law." No dispute can be accepted for mediation except with the consent of the Director of the Community Mediation Centre. Regarding compensation to crime victims, there is no general system of compensation by the state to victims of violent crimes, expect for any person killed while attempting to make an arrest or keep a person in lawful custody. An offender may be ordered by the court to pay compensation on conviction to the victim of the crime. Community service orders have been instituted to enable probationers to make amends for their offenses, not just in service to the general community, but also in service to the victims who have been injured or directly harmed by their offense. Family conferencing has been introduced in the juvenile court to allow the victim, the offender's family, friends, and school teachers to meet in a conference to discuss how to hold the offender accountable and ensure that victim needs are met through restitution and reparation by the offender. The Minister for Home Affairs has community-based sentences will be introduced, including community service orders as a sentencing option on its own and the extension of family conferencing to other than juvenile offenders. Abstract courtesy of National Criminal Justice Reference Service, www.ncjrs.org.

Developing Holistic Approaches in Singapore.

Joseph Ozawa is the Senior Director of the Family and Juvenile Justice Centre (FJJC) of the Subordinate Courts of Singapore. He is active in FJJC’s development of restorative and holistic practices. In this article, he describes three programs now in use in Singapore and relates how the format is important in the Asian context.