Oslo Carnage-Singaporean Perspective

93 lives vaporized in a matter of about 90 minutes in Oslo on 22 July 2011 because 32 year old Anders Behring Breivik wanted to ensure that the authorities gave his beliefs the necessary attention. This event would change the Norwegian way of life like what 911 did to USA. Instead of taking his own life, he allowed himself to fall into the hands of the law and face the prospect of 20-30 years behind bars if convicted and accorded the full force of the law as Norway has no death penalty. Perhaps he wanted his day in court to promote his far-right ideology as by default, court proceedings are open to public and journalist. However, from his indictment proceedings which is unprecedentedly a closed one, his newsprint hours in court might not be that full. It was a surprising move as closed proceedings are the norm mostly in cases involving minors or of a sexual nature. Even the 911 court proceedings were open in US.

His actions are definitely pre-mediated over a period of 9 years but it most probably would not qualify for first degree murder as the victims are sort of random in nature. As of now, they prosecutors have not actually decided on what to nail Breivik and court has allowed a special 8 weeks of solitary confinement where only his lawyer is allowed access to give the prosecution more latitude in the conduct of the investigation and finally arriving at a charge. Perhaps extraordinary events call for extraordinary measures. On a lighter note on this very grave issue, perhaps it is a sort of reverse class action.

This event set me thinking on what can Singapore and Singaporean learn and take precautionary measures beyond policing and intelligence spheres but also on public, political, economic arenas and also rethink the meaning of justice beyond the restrictive meanings of those in the lawyering and judiciary profession. Perhaps also the parliament where our laws are made.

Punitive Measures
As a maturing society, we ought to come to terms that no amount of effort is enough to totally prevent such risks. On the same note, much can be done by our government and society acting in concerted effort to minimize the risks. To throw caution to the wind and do nothing just because it is an impossibility would amount to gross negligence.

The maximum punishment that laws in various countries differs widely but it can be classed as 3 broad categories. Death sentence by which ever means, time limited life sentence which can vary from 20-30 years and life sentence till death with no time limit. Various comparative especially between death sentence and life sentence and its impact on serious crime rates has not been totally conclusive that death sentence reduces serious crime rates. This is not a pro-life debate and one thing we can conclude that death sentence appears to be a cheaper alternative for the government in terms of managing such criminals. There is some co-relation that most first world nations consider the death sentence as cruel and so do away with it but in many states in USA, the death sentence is still the order of the day for serious crimes. It is rather conclusive that in almost all countries, the law is sufficient or perhaps too punitive in some cases.

Besides the law,the co-joining factors relates to policing and judiciary process. Being mostly libertarian at heart, I think that we need to titrate the level of policing to a sufficient level to have an acceptable level of public safety and law and order and not be driven to the extreme of being a police state with little or no freedom for the citizenry. This is a complex issue that the government in consultation with the citizenry must decide not only on the level of policing but also the matter and form as well.

Judiciary process is a very loaded item and I would be very careful else I run foul of the law. Basically, the two main categories are a judge based or jury consisting of the citizenry. There is no conclusive evidence of one over the other. I stand very economized here.

In terms of punitive measures, I am of the opinion that we overall fairly sufficient altogether there have been some controversies on both end of the spectrum. We had to contend with and grow up as a nation with regards to the escape whilst under Singapore custody of a key potential terrorist element Mas Selamat arrested by the police of our neighboring country Malaysia succeeding man hunting down Mas Selamat and extraditing him back to Singapore. On the other hand, we have also been criticized by NGOs like Amnesty International for Internal Security Act which allows for detention without trial. I recognized that this act is a caricature left behind by the British that used to be our colonial masters. I also see reasons for not dropping or changing this Act as Singapore was facing substantial struggle from communists or communalists elements both internally as well as externally like the Communist Party of Malaya and fast breeding of communism in our corridor like Vietnam, Cambodia and Burma with their larger over lords of Russian and China. This dispensation is most probably passe with communism running out of style as well as being reformed greatly like in China. Let not in our haste for popularism throw the baby out with the bath water by eliminating the Internal Security Act altogether but can explore changes to it to fit the political climate. USA enacted the Patriot Act and created a Homeland Security Bureau in reaction to 911 and perhaps having the backbone of an Act of similar nature, we can revise the Act instead.

As in all things, we must sought for balanced and well considered position rather than a knee jerk and more extremists measures. No doubt time is of the essence but we can always have temporary legislation subject to further review with a given time frame perhaps. The Patriot Act in USA is not without detractors internally as well as fear of turning the country into a police state or fear of misuse by those in powers for their own ends.

Social Glue-GINI index and Social mobility
There are research evidence co-relating high GINI with either terrorist activity, revolt and war. I see social mobility as part being a big part to address high GINI index overtime. It is my worry here as a Singaporean that our GINI index has been increasing even with a growing GDP. I am all for a meritocratic value system but it must be tampered with a humane heart and safety net for the those at the bottom of society as well as those that falls through the strict rules of the safety net. I know that the current PAP government is very resolute in not encouraging a lethargic socialist populace by holding back on expanding the social safety net. I am very concerned in this arena as a widening rich poor gap coupled with fairly porous immigrant labour laws which is a major part of the ingredients capitulating into the Oslo carnage.

Back on social mobility, history has shown that it is easy for a meritocratic society to transform into a class stratified society.  The rich and powerful overtime will be tempted to change the rules of the game to preserve their place in society. Our now retired but still influential statesman Lee Kuan Yew recently was quoted by the press that he will feel sorry for Singapore if we were to have a two party government granted he has various merits for a one party system. History has proven in Animal Farm speak that absolute power corrupts absolutely. This is a very common tendency based on the strength of self interest as stated by Adam Smith. Many have mis-quoted or misunderstood his self interest for selfishness and if we look deeper, there is a big differential between self interest which is lawful, moral and normal to selfishness which can disintegrate a society into the vestiges of hell surely though it might not be immediately.

We have to be true to ourselves that in the same breathe that we speak of meritocracy, we cannot deny the fact that blood the flows in us is thicker than water. This is why I was very concerned when the PAP government decided to scrap Estate Duty totally as estate duty is there as one of the tools to guard against poverty trap. In addition, we ought to watch out and arrest the spread of nepotism as we push towards an equal opportunity society as it is a very human tendency to do so. The spread of the tax burden is also a very key policy instrument and I am in favor of an across the board consumption like our GST as a good and efficient tax practice as it is easier to administer, has fewer tax loopholes as well as encouraging savings for future versus consumption. GST also tend to have a negative effect of shifting the tax burden towards the poor as generally, the poor will save less than the rich as a percentage of their income. To add injury, we have also lowered corporate tax as well as skewed the personal income tax in favor of the rich by reducing the tax rate for those on the higher tax brackets. The rationale explained by the government for the corporate tax to for us to stay competitive with neighboring economies like Hong Kong and the tweaking of the personal income tax to discourage 'tax planning' activities. Perhaps we ought to re-examine the corporate tax, personal income tax, estate duty and GST holistically together.

I am certainly no anglophile but I endorse their making equal opportunity, transparency and equitable society as non-negotiable. England was as feudal state as one can be and remains one of the last few larger economies to continue constitutional monarchy. It took England about 200 years to transition itself from an executive monarchy to constitutional monarchy in a fairly peaceful manner although there has been bloodshed compared to the number of people that died in the communist revolution that overthrew the executive Tsar monarchy in one swoop.

This is not an opportunistic endeavor to use the stage of Oslo carnage to further my personal views but looking at the Oslo Carnage through Singapore looking glass.

Cheers,,,,, Pete

My Fellow American