extracted from ST forum.
Mindef owes it to S'poreans to take clear stand on NS evaders
I refer to Mindef's Colonel Benedict Lim's much anticipated letter
'Pianist dealt with though he's no longer a citizen' (ST Nov 24).
Section 33 of the Enlistment Act states that any person within or
outside Singapore who
(a) fails to comply with any order or notice issued under this
Act;
(b) fails to fulfil any liability imposed on him under this
Act;
(c) fraudulently obtains or attempts to obtain postponement,
release, discharge or exemption from any duty under this Act;
(d) does any act with the intention of unlawfully evading
service;
(e) gives the proper authority or any person acting on his behalf
false or misleading information; or (f) aids, abets or counsels any
other person to act in the manner laid down in paragraph (a), (b),
(c), (d) or (e),
shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to
a fine not exceeding $5,000 or to imprisonment for a term not
exceeding three years or to both.
This section covers a list of offences with varying degrees of
seriousness. It thus gives various punishment options to the courts
in determining a suitable penalty for offenders.
In pianist Melvyn Tan's case, is it not right to say that his
failure to fulfill National Service obligation is one of the more
serious offences under the Act? If so, why was the lightest of
possible punishments given?
I am disappointed with Col Lim's reply as he did not address our
concerns. I believe we do not want a typical customer service type
of response here.
Instead, Mindef owes the men of Singapore a more definite stand on
this issue. Fine or jail? Make it known to all.
Looking ahead, it may want to review the Enlistment Act with the
Attorney-General Chambers to state categorically the kind of
punishment for a clear-cut offence like this.
Henry Ong Ling Tiong
