Should there be harsher penalties for animal abusers? Lawyers weigh in
Should there be harsher penalties for animal abusers? Lawyers weigh in
Source: Straits Times
Article Date: 18 May 2025
Author: Claudia Tan
Given the spike in animal abuse cases, is it time to re-examine the law and implement harsher penalties?
In the space of less than a week, two community cats have died.
One was found on the road near an estate in Yishun on May 9, disembowelled and with its eyes gouged out.
Another was discovered to be severely injured in a carpark in Punggol on May 12. Cat rescuers took the feline to a vet, but it eventually died from its injuries.
The National Parks Board said on May 17 that the cat had likely sustained its injuries due to a vehicular accident.
Nonetheless, the two incidents sparked outrage among members of the public, with some going to the extent of hiring a private investigator to catch the perpetrator.
In 2024, the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) received 961 reports of animal cruelty and welfare concerns involving 2,190 animals – numbers which hit a 12-year-high.
More than half of these were cats, with 1,330 cases.
Given the spike in animal abuse cases, is it time to re-examine the law and implement harsher penalties?
Limitations of the law
Under the Animals and Birds Act, first-time offenders convicted of animal cruelty can be jailed for up to 18 months, fined up to $15,000, or both.
Repeat offenders can be jailed for up to three years, fined up to $30,000, or both.
Despite the large number of reported cases, very few are taken to the courts, said criminal lawyer Josephus Tan, who represented a man who threw a cat over the 13th-floor parapet of his block in Yishun Ring Road in 2016.
On Feb 7, Barrie Lin Pengli was sentenced to 14 months' jail for abusing five cats and killing two of them over a period of one year and eight months. The prosecution, which originally sought a jail term of 24 months, appealed against the sentence on Feb 11.
'There is still a disproportionate number of cats killed compared with perpetrators who are arrested and charged. Optically, it looks very bad because it seems to suggest that (society) does not value the lives of animals,' said Mr Tan.
Head lawyer Gloria James of law firm Gloria James-Civetta & Co told The Straits Times there are several limitations to the current laws when it comes to prosecuting and sentencing offenders.
'A significant challenge is that animals are voiceless and cannot plead their case, which makes it difficult to gauge the extent of their suffering. This can impact the ability to impose a punishment that truly reflects the harm caused.'
Associate Professor Razwana Begum Abdul Rahim, who heads the public safety and security programme at the Singapore University of Social Sciences, said cases of animal abuse often lack direct evidence or credible witnesses.
'CCTV footage is rare, and animal carcasses may be disposed of before analysis can occur,' she said.
'The time lapses between the act of abuse and its reporting can also diminish the strength of cases and make it difficult to arrest and charge suspects.'
Harsher penalties as a strong deterrent
In its 2024 report, the SPCA called for stronger animal protection laws and enforcement, which included stricter penalties as a deterrent.
Mr Tan said that amending the law to introduce tougher penalties is the right way forward.
'The law is dynamic, and it must reflect the cultures and trends of society. If there is a surge in the number of animal abuse cases, then it is something Parliament should look into.'
He suggested that the jail term for first-time offenders be increased to three to five years, and even caning offenders to send a 'strong message' of deterrence.
He likened it to the Ministry of Home Affairs considering caning for some scam offences, given the record amount of scam losses in recent years.
Ms James hopes to see enhanced sentencing for offences committed in aggravating circumstances, as she thinks the current laws are insufficient.
'For example, harsher penalties could be mandated where the act of cruelty is prolonged, involves multiple animals, is committed in the presence of children, or is filmed or shared online.
'These aggravating factors are not currently specified in the Animals and Birds Act. Codifying them would provide greater consistency in sentencing and signal a stronger moral condemnation of particularly egregious conduct,' she said.
Alternatives to punishment
Veteran criminal lawyer Ramesh Tiwary, on the other hand, feels the current laws are adequate.
He said simply meting out harsher punishments is a 'one-dimensional' approach.
'There are many other factors that come into play when somebody commits a crime – he might be frustrated, angry or not thinking straight.'
Rather, more emphasis should be placed on tackling the root of the problem.
'I think enhancing or increasing sentences is not going to prevent the offence. It is more necessary to find out why people are doing these things. If we can find out why people are being cruel to animals, then perhaps we can work at removing the reasons and solving the problem.'
Mr Tiwary believes in educating offenders, which can be done by taking them to a shelter to take care of animals, for example.
'This way, you teach the (offender) that animals deserve love and affection, rather than just sending them to prison.'
Beyond fines and jail terms, Prof Razwana suggested a longer disqualification period from animal ownership, up from the current 12 months.
Ms James echoed similar sentiments: '(12 months is) manifestly inadequate in cases involving severe or repeated cruelty. The revised Act should empower courts to impose longer-term or even permanent disqualification orders in appropriate cases.
'This would better reflect the gravity of the harm caused and provide greater protection for animals in the long term.'
Ms James recommended post-sentence behavioural reviews for convicted offenders, which assess whether offenders have internalised the consequences of their actions, and if they remain a risk to animals.
Prof Razwana said public education efforts should also be ramped up to inform the public about their duty of care towards pets and animals. She added: 'Tackling animal cruelty requires a multi-faceted approach: stricter laws, better enforcement, deeper psychological intervention and systemic education.'
Acknowledging that the Government's move to review the Animals and Birds Act is a 'step in the right direction', Prof Razwana said its success will depend on how well it integrates legal reforms with public education and offender rehabilitation.
'It is also critical to work with affected stakeholders, the communities and individuals in addressing the root cause and the aftermath of such cruel incidences,' she said.
Claudia Tan is a journalist at The Straits Times covering the crime and court beat.
Source: The Straits Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction.
Print
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Singapore Law Watch
3 days ago
- Singapore Law Watch
S'pore has no jurisdiction over Audrey Fang case, can't prosecute suspect if he's deported: MHA
S'pore has no jurisdiction over Audrey Fang case, can't prosecute suspect if he's deported: MHA Source: Straits Times Article Date: 30 May 2025 Author: Aqil Hamzah & Samuel Devaraj The Ministry of Home Affairs said on May 29 that it has communicated its position to its Spanish counterparts, and that the Singapore Government would assist them within the ambit of Singapore's laws. As the fatal stabbing of Singaporean Audrey Fang took place in Spain, Singapore has no jurisdiction over the alleged murder, and thus would not be able to investigate or prosecute Singaporean suspect Mitchell Ong if he were to be deported. This follows the news on May 28 that an attempt to deport the 44-year-old by Spanish immigration authorities had been rejected by a Spanish court. In response to queries, the Ministry of Home Affairs said on May 29 that it has communicated its position to its Spanish counterparts, and that the Singapore Government would assist them within the ambit of Singapore's laws. Law enforcement agencies there, meanwhile, have told the ministry that they are currently prosecuting Ong in Spain. News of the deportation request being blocked was first reported by Spanish daily La Opinion de Murcia on May 28. The deportation request was made by Spain's General Commissariat for Aliens and Borders, a national police agency that manages immigration and border control matters, and was supported by the lawyer representing Ms Fang's family. However, a judge ruled that Ong did not meet the criteria outlined in Spain's laws pertaining to the expulsion of foreigners, one of which states that immediate deportation can take place if an individual has been charged with a crime and is given a jail sentence of fewer than six years, or is given an alternate sentence, such as a fine. As the minimum jail sentence for Ong's potential murder charge is 15 years, the former insurance agent does not meet this criterion. Ong's lawyer, Ms Maria Jesus Ruiz de Castaneda, had told The Straits Times earlier in May that she is opposing the request. The Spanish immigration authority had also requested that Ong be banned from returning to Spain for 10 years, if the deportation had gone through. Ms Ruiz de Castaneda had earlier told Spanish media that an expulsion would be a violation of the rule of law and international treaties Spain has signed and ratified. 'He is involved in ongoing criminal proceedings in Spain, where he must be tried with due process,' she said. 'Expulsion would be contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights, the principle of non-refoulement and Spain's commitments against the death penalty.' She had previously called for the case to be dismissed, saying that all necessary evidence had to be examined and that Ong 'firmly and consistently' insisted he did not kill Ms Fang. Ms Fang, a 39-year-old architect, was found dead near a parking space for lorries in the town of Abanilla on April 10, 2024. She left Singapore on April 4 to travel alone to Xabia in the Valencia region of Spain, and was supposed to return eight days later, but became uncontactable on April 10. Her body was found with knife wounds and head trauma. Ong was arrested six days later. Testimonies from two of Ms Fang's friends on June 26, 2024, said Ms Fang and Ong had met on a social dating network. Her family's lawyer said she had told her friends she was meeting Ong during her holiday in Spain. In March, La Opinion reported that DNA from two men was found on her clothes, raising the possibility that more than one person was involved in her death. Ong, meanwhile, was also found to have been nominated as the sole beneficiary of Ms Fang's Central Provident Fund savings, with the accounts reportedly containing about $498,000. Source: The Straits Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction. Print
Singapore Law Watch
3 days ago
- Singapore Law Watch
Woman who claimed ‘voices' told her to abuse maid has jail term more than doubled to 7 years
Woman who claimed 'voices' told her to abuse maid has jail term more than doubled to 7 years Source: Straits Times Article Date: 30 May 2025 Author: Selina Lum Anita Damu, 57, was initially sentenced to two years and seven months' jail in 2018. A maid abuser had her prison sentence more than doubled to seven years after she appealed to the High Court to avoid jail time on grounds that she heard voices telling her to hurt the domestic worker. Anita Damu, 57, was initially sentenced to two years and seven months' jail in 2018, after a district judge accepted two psychiatric reports that she had abused the victim under the influence of auditory hallucinations. This explanation has since been rejected by the court. In increasing her sentence on May 26, Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon said the sentences imposed by the lower court on each of the charges she faced were manifestly inadequate. 'Among other things, they were infected by the erroneous assumption that the acts of abuse were caused by the auditory hallucinations,' he said. Anita, who is also known as Shazana Abdullah, had inflicted serious physical and psychological abuse on her 29-year-old Indonesian helper between 2014 and 2015. The abuse came to light in April 2015 after a Ministry of Manpower officer received information that the maid was being abused by her employer, and visited the flat. The officer reported the matter to the police after observing that the helper had welts on her face, burn marks on her hands and scars on her body. In September 2018, Anita pleaded guilty to five charges: one each for depriving the victim of rest, splashing her with hot water, burning her with an iron, poking her with a metal prong, and hitting her in the face with a slipper. Four other charges – for slapping the victim, pinching her with pliers on two occasions and pushing a cup of hot water towards her mouth – were taken into consideration for sentencing. During a sentencing hearing in October 2018, while her lawyer was arguing for her to be given a fine, she suddenly felt giddy and had to be taken to hospital. In December that year, she was sentenced to two years and seven months' jail. She was also ordered to pay $8,000 in compensation to the victim. Both she and the prosecution appealed against the sentence. The prosecution also appealed for a higher sum of compensation. She has paid an additional $4,000 in voluntary compensation on top of the ordered sum. When the appeal was first heard in 2019, Chief Justice Menon ruled that the psychiatric reports alone were not sufficient for the district judge to conclude that the woman was hearing voices when she abused the maid. The Chief Justice sent the case back to the lower court to determine whether she had suffered from such a condition. He said the offender should take the stand, as it was incumbent on her to present the best evidence available to support her assertion. Before she could testify, Anita was diagnosed with schizophrenia. She was assessed to be of unsound mind and unable to understand and follow court proceedings. Since June 2023, she has been confined at the Institute of Mental Health. On Aug 5, 2024, she was certified to be of sound mind and capable of standing trial. She and her family members eventually took the stand to testify before the district judge. In a judgment dated April 2, the district judge concluded that she did not suffer from auditory hallucinations and that her claim was a 'fabrication'. The appeal before Chief Justice Menon resumed on May 26. Deputy Public Prosecutor Timotheus Koh sought a jail term of four years and seven months, standing by the prosecution's submissions in 2019. He also sought a further $9,588 in compensation. Chief Justice Menon said the sentence sought by the prosecution was 'manifestly insufficient', looking at the totality of the offending behaviour, the harm to the victim and the cruelty towards the victim. He said he will explain his sentencing decision in a written judgment at a later date. He also allowed the prosecution's appeal on the compensation order. This means Anita has to pay a total of $21,588 to the maid. Chief Justice Menon noted that while most foreign domestic workers are well-provided for, occasionally some do not adjust well or have employers who fail to care for them. 'At times, they even fail to accord them the basic dignity due to a fellow human being. Sadly, this is such a case,' he said. He added that it was a 'matter of regret' that the case has taken this long to be resolved, in large part because of the litigation choices made by the accused. Selina Lum is senior law correspondent at The Straits Times. Source: The Straits Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction. Print
Singapore Law Watch
4 days ago
- Singapore Law Watch
Audrey Fang case: Spanish judge blocks suspect's deportation to S'pore over death penalty concerns
Audrey Fang case: Spanish judge blocks suspect's deportation to S'pore over death penalty concerns Source: Straits Times Article Date: 29 May 2025 Author: Aqil Hamzah As such, it is unlikely for the 44-year-old to face the death penalty if charged with murder, as a murder charge in Spain carries a jail sentence ranging from 15 years to 25 years. An attempt by Spanish immigration authorities to deport Mitchell Ong, the suspect in the fatal stabbing of fellow Singaporean Audrey Fang in Spain, was blocked by a local court over death penalty concerns. As such, it is unlikely for the 44-year-old to face the death penalty if charged with murder, as a murder charge in Spain carries a jail sentence ranging from 15 years to 25 years. News of the deportation request being blocked was first reported by Spanish daily La Opinion de Murcia on May 28. The deportation request was made by Spain's General Commissariat for Aliens and Borders, a national police agency that manages immigration and border control matters, and was supported by the lawyer representing Ms Fang's family. However, a judge ruled that Ong did not meet the criteria outlined in Spain's laws pertaining to the expulsion of foreigners, one of which states that immediate deportation can take place if an individual has been charged for a crime with a jail sentence fewer than six years, or given an alternate sentencing, such as a fine. Ong's lawyer, Ms Maria Jesus Ruiz de Castaneda, had told The Straits Times earlier in May that she is opposing the request. If the deportation had gone through, the Spanish immigration authority had also requested that Ong be banned from returning to Spain for 10 years. Ms Ruiz de Castaneda had also earlier told Spanish media that an expulsion would be a violation of the rule of law and international treaties Spain has signed and ratified. 'He is involved in ongoing criminal proceedings in Spain, where he must be tried with due process,' she said. 'Expulsion would be contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights, the principle of non-refoulement and Spain's commitments against the death penalty.' She had previously called for the case to be dismissed, saying all necessary evidence had to be examined and that Ong 'firmly and consistently' insisted he did not kill Ms Fang. The 39-year-old architect was found dead near a parking lot for lorries in the town of Abanilla on April 10, 2024. She left Singapore on April 4 to travel alone to Xabia in the Valencia region of Spain, and was supposed to return eight days later, but became uncontactable on April 10. Her body was found with knife wounds and head trauma, and Ong was arrested six days later. Testimonies from two of Ms Fang's friends on June 26, 2024, said that Ms Fang and Ong had met on a social dating network, with her family's lawyer saying that she had told her friends she was meeting the former insurance agent during her holiday in Spain. In March, La Opinion reported that DNA from two men was found on her clothes, raising the possibility that more than one person was involved in her death. Ong meanwhile was also found to have been nominated as the sole beneficiary of Ms Fang's Central Provident Fund savings, with the accounts reportedly containing about $498,000. ST has contacted the Ministry of Home Affairs for comment. Source: The Straits Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction. Print
