Extraditing a graffiti artist – ARE YOU FOR SERIOUS?!
I know I have already blogged about this (see here), but after reading The Straits Times article ‘MRT regrets lapse‘, I simply had to return to this topic.
A week after the arrest of Swiss national Oliver Fricker, SMRT has finally spoken about the graffiti incident. They explained that SMRT employees had not reported the graffiti on the side of the train “because they brushed it off as an advertisement or artwork”. They also admitted that the hole in the fence at their train depot had been undiscovered for two days. SMRT’s chief executive Saw Phaik Hwa apologised for the “serious lapse”. Well, I should say so! If Mr Fricker had been more inclined towards mass murder than street art, we’d probably all have been blown to bits by now. SMRT would be really sorry then, wouldn’t they?
What I want to know is, what was SMRT’s security personnel doing? Why did it take them TWO WHOLE DAYS to realise that there was a hole in their fence? (A hole big enough to let in two full-grown men too; no rabbit burrow!) Did no one patrol the grounds? Or if they did, why were they so ineffectual? Who is in charge of this whole system? Who is taking the responsibility? What is happening to the SMRT security department now? What measures are they taking to improve the system? What steps are they taking to ensure that such security breaches never happen again?
Personally I think these questions and issues are much more urgent, important and pertinent than making an example out of Fricker. It certainly is much more important than Singapore’s current attempt to extradite Fricker’s accomplice Lloyd Dane Alexander from Hong Kong. I can’t help but imagine the exchange between Singapore and Interpol going something like this:
It is yet another busy day at the Interpol office. Files on all sorts of hardened criminals - murderers, drug barons, terrorists - are being passed about. The paperwork is intense. The phone rings.INTERPOL Hello?SINGAPORE Hello, this is Singapore here. We would like to issue an international arrest warrant for one Lloyd Dane Alexander, currently believed to be in Hong Kong.The Interpol officer sighs. Yet another warrant; more work again.INTERPOL (resigned) Right. Lloyd Dane Alexander... believed to be in Hong Kong. The crime?SINGAPORE Vandalism.INTERPOL Say what?SINGAPORE Vandalism. He spray-painted on one of our Mass Rapid Transit trains.Interpol This is Interpol, the International Criminal Police Organisation.Singapore Yes, we know. We want to have Lloyd Dane Alexander extradited for punishment.INTERPOL For spray-painting a train.SINGAPORE Yes.INTERPOL ARE YOU FOR SERIOUS?!Meanwhile in Romania...SILVIU IONESCU NEH NEH NEH NEHNEH NEHHHHH!!!
Is this single-minded desire to get these two culprits and make a big show of punishing them simply distracting from the real issues here? And if we’re in the business of punishing people in the name of justice and national security, then who in SMRT is going to be taking the rap for this “serious lapse”?
I loved your Interpol dialogue…..hilarious and very telling at the same time! This lapse does make me way more nervous about taking an MRT. This is not the first security lapse either.
Definitely more attention needs to be given to SMRT’s slack security, so they can’t just sit tight and hope that everything blows over only to let the same thing happen again! The next time someone cuts through a fence they might not be armed with just spray paint…
real funny interpol chat there.hehe…this petty criminal is something that singapore government would like to make it such a big deal now anyway.maybe singapore government has insufficient problem to solve so they are trying to make this case into something big so that they can at least do something.haha…
btw how is your life kirsten?everything well then? I’ll keep commenting in your blog though eventhough you’re not replying me here.hehe…
I really hope that the government doesn’t decide to, as you said, “make an example” out of them. I think it’s already been established that they view vandalism as a serious crime. What should be the focus here is on SMRT’s security lapse rather than the comparatively minor offence. The government should be putting pressure on SMRT to shore up their security rather than wasting resources in capturing vandals, especially in light of the recent suspected Orchard MRT bomb plot.
Methinks they should give Fricker an award for exposing the systemic failures of our centrally-controlled public transport system. If not for a harmless vandal like him, how would we have known that our state scarcely practises what it preaches?
Why use harsh punishments as strong deterrences? The fact that so many security lapses have happened just indicate that deterrence won’t make a difference if perpetrators can go scot free. Anybody remember our local celebrity Mas Selamat? I don’t mean that harsh punishments are unnecessary — I feel that the harsh punishments scare nobody but the us complacent Singaporeans. The example, even if made, is cosmetic because it does not solve the root issue of poor security. We fear our own law and will not commit such acts, but Singapore isn’t a closed country and there are many who know our actual security level is meagre at best, and will exploit it for their purposes.
I like that you reminded us of Berlusconi. It is abhorrent to know that our local media is raising a giant fuss about Fricker when the real criminals are still out at large.
And lastly, I sense that public art is a can of worms that the state does not want to address. It seems as if even considering that public art may be a form of free expression or rejuvenation of the city (with authentic vibrance) will undermine Singapore’s macho image of a strict city. Unfortunately our state does not realise that pumping all the dollars into resculpting downtown or campaigns like Uniquely Singapore or YourSingapore can easily be shredded with all the incredulous bad press.
All these harsh punishments are merely reactive. Surely our priority should be PREVENTIVE instead?
We always claim that harsh punishments are necessary because they act as deterrents, but there is never any proof that this is true and that punishments actually really work as deterrents. So if we keep using punishment as a fallback we are simply taking a gamble and hoping that people would be scared and deterred from committing crimes. Whereas if we focused on PREVENTIVE measures, we’d be safe even if people DID want to commit crimes, because they can’t get past the security!
Surely the latter is the more logical choice?
hmm i can’t help to think:
Objective: divert attention from the security lapse. Scapegoat required.
Goat, run! run! Grim Rotan is coming!
脑羞成怒 : that probably sums it up…
Vandalism? I think the trains looked better after the graffiti artwork, so he was probably doing SMRT a favor instead.
Essentially, SMRT got a free spraypaint upgrade on one of their trains.
They should get him to do more. It would make me happier to see the trains.
On one hand, vandalism doesn’t sound like a serious crime. On the other hand, what does it mean when these foreigners come to Singapore and think that they can commit a crime (yes it is a crime no less) and get away scot free? It is only fair that they are meted the same punishment as any other Singaporean would receive should a Singaporean commit the same offence. Extradition may sound severe, and costly, only if the other country tries to object and delay.
If the current laws states that vandalism shoud receive so and so punishment, the offender has to receive the punishment. If we believe that graffiti is a crime, punishment must be meted out regardless. If we think that graffiti ought not to be constituted as “crime”, then that is something we shall debate and think about. The offence should not be recinded retroactively because the perpetrators knew clearly what the existing laws are!
I don’t think that anyone, foreigners or locals, should be flogged for vandalism. In fact, flogging on the whole is archaic and barbaric and is actually torture. But if Singapore is not ready to completely abolish flogging, we should at least use it only for very very serious crimes like murder and rape.
Extradition seems to be over the top for such a petty offense because I doubt the other country would really comply because it just seems a bit stupid. Plus they know they’ll be shipping the guy back to be whipped. Plus, we can’t even extradite Ionescu who actually KILLED someone… why is it that the govt. seems to have conveniently forgotten about that?
On the subject of lawbreakers coming from foreign shores – here’s another case
http://www.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20100610-221396.html
Ahaha that’s probably exactly what happened at the Interpol headquarter…
They are probably all laughing at us over their lunch breaks.
I don’t blame them….how embarrassing for us!!
INTERPOL
after putting down the phone) SIAO one! think we very free izit?
Then went back to watch World Cup…
Hehehehe…
That was a funny read.. I’m confused, because alot of other websites (like this one: http://hurtyoubad.com/?p=5931) are saying that McKoy and Banos are over in Europe right now painting trains all over the place still. And your government and police say one of them is in singapore with his passport confiscated? And is in court today? How can that be?
Singapore must be the strictest place on earth, you have no graff on trains? No wonder why i guess. I also heard you are not allowed to buy chewing gum? is that true? lol how weird!