S’porean Home Affairs Minister Challenges Billionaire Richard Branson to Debate on Death Penalty

Over 6 months ago, convicted Malaysian drug trafficker Nagaenthran Dharmalingam was executed in Singapore despite pleas from people all over the world.

Although it was argued that it was inhumane as Nagaenthran was allegedly intellectually disabled, Singapore’s Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) defended its stance and said that it wasn’t the case.

His case drew international attention from celebrities and notable figures such as British billionaire Richard Branson who recently criticised Singapore for executing him.

But, it seems that the Singaporean government is holding true to its system.

In a response to Branson’s blog post which slammed the Singaporean justice system, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has since rebutted his criticisms and invited him to a live televised debate with Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam.

Responding to the blog post, MHA said Branson had made untrue statements about Malaysian Nagaenthran and also made false assertions about alleged racial bias and the treatment of capital defence lawyers.

Referring to the proposed live televised debate, it said, “Branson may use this platform to demonstrate to Singaporeans the error of our ways and why Singapore should do away with laws that have kept our population safe from the global scourge of drug abuse.”

It added that his flight to and accommodation in Singapore will be paid for.

One of the points in Branson’s blog post was that Nagaenthran had a “well-documented intellectual disability” and was hanged despite that.

However, the ministry said, “We have clarified on several occasions that this is untrue. The Singapore courts held that Nagaenthran knew what he was doing and that he was not intellectually disabled.”

“Branson also suggests that Singapore had breached our international commitments to protect people with disabilities by carrying out the capital punishment on Nagaenthran. This too is untrue, as Nagaenthran was not intellectually disabled.”

Meanwhile, on Branson questioning Singapore’s approach to drugs, the ministry said its priority is to protect Singapore and Singaporeans from the scourge of drugs.

“The capital sentence has had a clear deterrent effect on drug traffickers in Singapore. It has also helped prevent major drug syndicates from establishing themselves here,” it said.

The ministry concluded by saying, “Branson is entitled to his opinions. These opinions may be widely held in the UK (Britain), but we do not accept that Branson or others in the West are entitled to impose their values on other societies.”

“Nor do we believe that a country that prosecuted 2 wars in China in the 19th century to force the Chinese to accept opium imports has any moral right to lecture Asians on drugs. Singapore’s policies on drugs and the death penalty are derived from the country’s own experience.”

The statement said, “Nothing we have seen in the UK or in the West persuades us that adopting a permissive attitude towards drugs and a tolerant position on drug trafficking will increase human happiness.”

“Where drug addiction is concerned, things have steadily worsened in the UK, while things have steadily improved in Singapore,” it concluded.

‘World Day Against the Death Penalty: What’s the matter with Singapore?’

In a post on his blog on October 10, Branson repeatedly criticised Singapore for its death penalty.

“Sadly, one issue where Singapore still finds itself on the wrong side of history is its continued, almost stubborn use of the death penalty.”

He went on to reference Nagaenthran’s case and wrote, “The truth is that Singapore’s government seems bent on executing scores of low-level drug traffickers, mostly members of poor, disadvantaged minorities, whilst failing to provide clear evidence that it has any tangible impact on drug use, crime, or public safety.”

He then went on to provide his evidence on why the death penalty system in Singapore is broken and said, “All of these developments tell me that Singapore’s system of capital punishment is fundamentally broken, inherently unfair, and completely disproportionate to the challenge at hand.”

As of now, Branson has not responded to the invitation by Singapore to have a televised debate.

Stay tuned for more updates.

Also read: “It was the working of a criminal mind” – Despite Global Outcry, SG Defends Nagaenthran’s Execution