1.
On Sep 20, 2018, I
served my 4th imprisonment and was released from Changi Prison. On
Nov 17, 2018, I sent an email to Minister for Home Affairs K. Shanmugam
complaining about prisoner abuse and claimed that Changi Prison was a slave
camp. I haven’t received any reply from the Minister so far.
2.
On Mar 15, 2019, I
was remanded in Changi Prison and was released on Aug 13 after serving my 5th
imprisonment. Now I still think it is a slave camp. My 5th stay shows
that Changi
Prison is a totalitarian authority because justice has failed there. It rules
with absolute power and in a cruel and oppressive way, which makes
rehabilitation of prisoners impossible.
3.
While
the underlying principle of rehabilitation programs is to remove criminals from
crime-ridden environment and to place them in the morally pure environment to
improve their moral fibre, there is no justice in Changi Prison so inmates are
unable to be transformed into law-abiding citizens before they enter into
society. On the contrary, inmates have to “go bad” to adapt to unfavorable
prison culture. As a matter of fact, I have learned in prison to make one
inmate to listen to another inmate by bullying him.
The absolute power
of prison officers
4.
For
three reasons, prison officers have an unfettered power over inmates. First, prison
officers generally have an unsatisfactory level of competence and integrity so
they tend to abuse their power. Most prison officers don’t have good education
and thus don’t have a proper sense of justice. They stay at their job for money
only and for some reason, don’t act in accordance with the law. Their primary duty
is to ensure that inmates are healthy or at least alive on the date of release.
Prison officers’ questionable competence and integrity have caused the widespread
abuse of power in Changi Prison.
5.
Secondly,
there is a lack of accountability mechanism in the prison. The top management
such as Commissioner of prisons, Minister for Home Affairs are not aware the
real situation in prison cells. Even if they have been informed of the gross
misconduct on the part of prison officers, they will tend to will cover it up. The
lack of checks and balances in prison system have failed to counter the widespread
abused of power.
6.
Thirdly,
the justice system in prison is not meant to do justice but to punish inmates
to maintain prison order. The so-called adjudicators knew little about laws,
and they didn’t accept inmates’ arguments concerning abuses of power by prison
officers. In addition, inmates were not allowed to appeal to the court or to a
visiting justice. Any inmate who challenges the prison system will fall into a
vicious cycle and will be punished again and again.
The cruel and
oppressive rule
7.
The
prison authorities’ cruel and oppressive rule is clearly demonstrated in prison’s
response to inmates’ hunger strikes. While it is common sense that a hunger
strike is an act of protest with the objective to achieve a specific goal,
prison officers generally see an inmate going on a hunger strike as a person of
unsound mind. Instead of taking into consideration the official certificates
issued by IMH, prison officers prefer to forcibly transfer him to solitary
confinement for involuntary psychiatric interview by prison psychiatrists.
8.
An
inmate’s hunger strike against the abuse of power by prison officers is bound
to fail, because prison officers generally deliberately ignore a striker’s
health condition. They even deliberately encouraged the striker to continue his
hunger strike in the hope that the striker would end his hunger strike for
good. If an inmate goes on a hunger strike too long, say over 3 days, officer
will order him to see a prison psychiatrist.
9.
Inmates
have also suffered from cruel and inhumane treatment such as misdiagnosis and forced
medication. On average, each cell has at least one inmate taking medicines. It
is safe to say that more than 12.5% (1/8) of inmates are taking medications
including psychiatric medications on a daily basis, and the percentage of
long-term prisoners who take medications is much higher. However, the inmates I
asked didn’t take psychiatric medications after they were released from the
prison. In other words, some inmates took psychiatric medications only in
Changi Prison.
10. The forced
medication doesn’t mean involuntary drugging of inmates. When ordered to see a
psychiatrist, an inmate had to attend the psychiatric interview even if he
declined to give the psychiatrist his informed consent. After the interview, the
inmate would have to accept the diagnosis and to take the medication. About
half of the prison psychiatrists who interviewed me didn’t both to ask for my
medical history and arrogantly made their diagnoses within a few minutes. When
requested to testify in court about their diagnoses, all of them rejected my
request. Psychiatrists such as Dr. Rajesh Jacob from Novena Medical Centre and
Dr. Lim Chee Min from Changi General Hospital, simply saw inmates as animals
and made directions to forcibly transport inmates to IMH.
11. It is fact that the
prison officers didn’t accept inmates’ complaints about doctors and medical malpractice.
The inmate had to take psychiatric medications ‘voluntarily”, since nurses and prison
officers would ask him to take the medication every day. On the evening of Apr
17, 2019, one inmate in HU2 of B4 died after he took his medication. It was
said that while he was reluctant to take it, nurses persuaded him to do so and
assured him that doctors would take care of him the next day. He didn’t come
back after he was sent to the hospital.
Prison officers’
competence
12. When it comes to
professional competence, it should note that none of prison officers is legally
trained. As a result, they have wrongfully seen the internal rules of the
prison but not the statute law such as Prison Act and the Constitution of
Singapore as the legal basis for their daily operations. In addition, they have
genuinely believed that the internal rules were independent of but not derived
from the Prison Act and the Constitution. Prison officers firmly believe that those
relevant laws are for lawyers sitting on the armchair, and they don’t even
bother to the Prison Act once.
13. In April, May and
June of 2019, I did talk to B4 management including Supt. Faisal Mustaffa, a
female 2nd Superintendent and Supt. Khoo Boo Wah, about their limited
understanding of the law. The 2nd superintendent and Intelligence
officer Mr. It firmly rejected my request for a copy of Prison Act to settle
the issue about how to handle prisoners’ complaints in accordance with the law
on the grounds that Prison Act didn’t cover all aspects of officers’ daily
operations.
14. In response to my
offer to report officers’ insufficient legal knowledge to Ministry of Home
Affairs for legal assistance, B4 management kept silent. Finally, I had to set
out the inherent problems with the prison system at the end of my appeal
document that was submitted to the Supreme Court on Jun 24, 2019 for external interference.
15. Prison officers
generally had no intention of adjusting their established practice in response
to inmates’ feedback. They pressed ahead with what they believed to be right
such as various courses for inmates, but paid no attention to how much benefits
inmates could obtain from them. I once asked Operation commander (OC) Loius Woo
of HU4 a question about how to be a model prisoner. He answered he didn’t know
and suggested that I asked Supt. Faisal for an answer. I was sure Supt. Faisal
was unable to give me an answer.
16. It was
self-evident that there was no way for an inmate to make himself a model
prisoner due to a lack of opportunity for him to stand out among the rest
inmates. Locked up in cell for 23 hours a day and spent one hour on out-door
activities from Monday to Saturday, inmates cannot get any assignment or work
from the prison. One inmate can do whatever the other inmates could do, so there
is no chance for inmates to prove themselves.
17. I once suggested
that an inmate choose a course he interested and then apply for it by
submitting a written application. Although I thought it was a good idea for
officers to offer courses to inmates based on the merits of their written
applications, OC Louis Woo pushed aside my suggestion. When questioned about
the selection criteria, he declined to give a clear answer and I was puzzled
why I was selected for a course for O-level holders. Although he did indicate officers’
impression about an inmate, OC Louis Woo failed to realize that a large number
of inmates were double-faced. They smartly saluted prison officers every day and
routinely deceived their cell inmates for their own benefits.
Cell politics
18. Social isolation
can have harmful effect on health, and no inmates want to put in solitary
confinement. Silent treatment, or cold violence, has been universally adopted
by inmates as a tool for exerting power over their cellmate who was out of tune
with them. It is a fact that 5 inmates in a cell could avoid all interactions
with one inmate as if he wasn’t in the cell. Inmates generally ignore prison
regulations and prefer to settle all issues in absence of prison guards. Given
the fact that prison officer didn’t do justice, an inmate had to take the side
which seemed to bring him maximum benefits.
19. The first thing each
inmate needed to find out in a new cell was who was dominating the cell. Inmates
were expected to comply with prison rules; however, they had no choice but to
support their friends unconditionally in exchange for his friend’s reciprocal
support. It was routine to see building up, maintenance and dissolution of
alliance between cellmates after an inmate came in or left a cell. Justice
failed in the prison, and an inmate generally took every opportunity such as
where he put his mug to indicate his attitude towards his cellmates and the conflict in the cell.
20. Consequently, an
inmate is more likely to go bad than to reform his bad habit. I had learned how
to bully an inmate to make him listen to me after having been bullied several
times. Prison bullying is not equivalent to beating up, and it consisted of a
series of acts to test, harass and intimidate another inmate. I am confident to
call Changi Prison a slave camp, because I the only person (not inmate) in
Changi prison who comply with Prison Act in the strictest sense.
Prison officers’ integrity
21. According to
Wikipedia, integrity is the practice of being honest and showing a consistent
and uncompromising adherence to strong moral and ethical principles and values.
In my opinion, most prison officers lacked integrity and routinely tell lies to
shift their responsibility for their own mistakes.
22. Since my first
jail term in 2016, I had repeatedly asked prison officers about the rights and
duties of an inmate, but received no reply. Prison officers were not supposed
to let inmates know the details of prison regulations because they obediently
followed whatever the higher management said. An OC of a housing unit or a Superintendent
of an Institution have authority to exert their influence on a lower-level officer’s
contract with the prison. A lower -level officer refers to an officer whose
rank is below Deputy Superintendent.
23. It was natural to
expect that honest lower-level officers had to fall into acquiescence and to follow
instructions from higher management, even if the instructions were against
justice. Inmate Ang Han Boon
(S064922018) was my next-door cellmate. From Jul 27, 2019 to his release date
of Aug 10, he had harassed me 10 times a day by shouting “ China Dog, Go back
to China” in his cell and threated me with “ I will kill you on Aug 13, I will break your legs after I get out of the jail”. In response to
my repeated written and verbal complaints, some lower-level officers simply
answered they were not in a position to take action against inmate Ang without
OC Lim Wei Kiat’s order. Their only action was to play an inmate orientation
video on the afternoon of Aug 3 to remind all inmates not to make
troubles.
24. In early August, I
reported to RO Ahmad Naufal right after inmate Ang threatened me in front of
all inmates. In response, RO Naufal intentionally refused to take my report. OC
Lim Wei Kiat explained that I must provide him with witnesses to support my
complaint of discrimination. When requested to subject both me and inmate Ang Han
Boon to a cross-examination for truth finding, he repeatedly rejected my
request on the ground that I was good at debating so the cross-examination
would put inmate Ang in an inferior position. I told and OC Lim Wei Kiat it was
prison officers who had a duty to carry out investigations, but he answered
that they were talking with provost officers about the investigation.
25. On Aug 10, or 3
days before my release date, OC Lim Wei Kiat simply told me there was no racial
discrimination at all in HU2, but declined to take action against me for making
false allegations. It was evident that B4 management had maliciously covered up
widespread issue of discrimination and harassment. In Changi Prison, there were
a number of petty dictator officers who were dependent on their immediate
senior. For example, RO Ahmad Naufal was OC Lim Wei Kia’s person, who was in
the pocket of Supt. Faisal. As for Supt. Faisal, he maliciously withheld all
complaints from his seniors such Benjamin Chia, the Commander of Cluster B, and
Commissioner Desmond Chin.
26. Most prison
officers didn’t have a strong sense of justice and they didn’t bother to have
one. On Jul 8, 2018 in HU1 of B4, RO Kim Yong Jun blamed me for not getting
along with 5 other inmates in cell 216 but couldn’t find any evidence of my fault.
When questioned for the legal basis of his opinion, RO Kim was unable to answer
and denied the possibility that 5 inmates acted together to give me a hard
time. When asked for a cross-examination of the rest 5 inmates to establish their
credibility, RO Kim Yong Jun flatly rejected my request and ignored the fact
that one inmate deliberately insulted me by calling me “Chinaman”.
The corrupt
justice system in prison
27. On Aug 23, 2018, I
repeatedly asked Sergeant Ahmed
Ashraf Bin Ismail of HU1 for his rank to lodge a complaint about him. He wouldn’t
give me an answer and finally handcuffed me. After he activated the duress
alarm, all officers in B4 came to HU1 to help him. Although prison officers had
a duty to provide an inmate with his rank when questioned, Sergeant Ahmed Ashraf Bin Ismail didn’t get any
punishment. On the contrary, Adjudicator Sze Chuck Huang found me guilty and sentenced
me to 5 days’ imprisonment in punishment cell from Aug 28 to Sep 1.
28. On the afternoon of Aug 28, I was order to serve 5 days’
imprisonment but I refused to go to a punishment cell on the grounds of unfair
hearing. OC Lim Wei Kiat directed SPEAR force officers to forcibly transported
me from cell 116 to a punishment cell. In response, I refused to leave the
punishment cell after serving the imprisonment on Sep 1. In protest of the use
of excessive force by SPEAR officers, I voluntarily stayed in the PC for 4 more
days from Sep 1 to Sep 4 and requested the B4 management to forcibly take me
out of the cell again,
29. Although prison officers had never experienced a voluntary
stay in a punishment cell, they didn’t feel any guilty about the use of
excessive force. OC Calvin Tan of HU1 even
persuaded me to get out of the punishment cell so he could put me on another
trial for refusing to go to the punishment cell on Aug 28. On the afternoon Sep
5, Adjudicator Sze Chuck Huang sentenced me to 3 days’ PC for refusing to go to
punishment cell on Aug 28. It was evident that any inmate who challenge the
prison administration would be caught in a vicious circle by prison justice
system.
30. OC Calvin Tan was a total hypocrite. When questioned why
he hadn’t persuaded me to get out of cell 116 on the afternoon of Aug 28, he
answered he was around at that time. One the one hand, he pretended to see me
as a friend and even asked about my background, my salary and the persons I knew.
On the other hand, he persuaded me to accept unfair punishment and always
disappear when I needed assistance from officers.
The malicious
cover-up
31. The following is a
typical case of abuse of power by Supt. Faisal Mustaffa. On Apr 14, 2018,
inmate Eddy in cell 703 of HU4 in Institution B4 deliberately harassed me but
Chief Warder Maran followed his senior’s decision and declined to look into
this matter. Eddy’s harassment continued but officers wouldn’t intervene. On
the morning of Apr 15, I protested against Eddy’s harassment by turning my back
to the door during muster check (head counting) in the cell. The protest didn’t
break any prison regulations, but I was still placed in a PI cell “pending an
investigation”. After taking my statements on the morning Apr 16, provost
office Azini Bin Abbass officially informed the B4 management to release me
back to cell 703.
32. Although the
24-hour lighting in a PI cell could cause serious sleeping problems to an
inmate, the newly appointed Supt. Faisal Mustaffa (he was appointed in Mar 2018)
insisted that I must stay in the PI cell but declined to justify his decision. In
response, I went on a hunger strike from the dinner time of Apr 20 and refused
to standby for muster check on the grounds that the detention was unlawful.
Supt. Faisal Mustaffa wouldn’t talk to me but released me unconditionally on
the afternoon of April 23.
33. On May 9, Adjudicator Sze Chuck Huang found me guilty
for not standing by for muster check when I was imprisonment in the PI cell. I
was sentenced to 3 days’ imprisonment in the Punishment Cell. On May 23,
I submitted a complaint letter to Commissioner Desmond Chin against Supt.
Faisal about the illegal detention in the PI cell. To my surprise, Supt. Faisal
completely disregarded the conflict of interest and ordered me to submit the
letter through him.
34. On Jul 1, he told
me that Commissioner had turned down my appeal against Adjudicator Sze’s
decision made on May 9. As for Commissioner’s response to my complaint of abuse
of power against him, Supt. Faisal wouldn’t let me know. This case showed
clearly that what counts in Changi Prison was the will of the Superintendent
but not Prison Act.
35. From Sep 5 to Sep 9, 2018, inmates Lee Wen Jun
(L200282017), Ng Jun Wei (S024852018), Lee Yung Sheng (S041042018) and Hu Xi
Dong (S025312018) in cell 211 of HU1 repeatedly harassed me. Officers including
OC Calvin Tan completely ignored my repeated written and verbal complaints. On
Sep 9, I had to request to transfer from 211 to PI cell 206 to ensure my
safety. On Sep 19, one day before my
release date, intelligence officer Mr. It told me they were looking into this
mater.
36. On Apr 18, 2019, I was transferred to HU1 of B4 to serve
my 5th imprisonment and came across Lee Wen Jun. I found he didn’t
get any punishment and was even promoted to work as a cooki, an inmate working
outside their cells as an errand boy to help prison officers reduce their
workload. When asked for outcome of investigations against Lee Wen Jun and
other inmates in cell 211, OC Calvin Tan declined to give me an answer but told
me to forget the past and move with my life.
37. On May 10, the female 2nd Supt. and Intelligence
officer Mr. It explained that provost officers did look into my complaint made
in 2018 against Lee Wen Jun but didn’t find an issue in my complaint. I asked for a cross-examination of Lee Wen Jun
and subsequent punishment of making false allegations against me, the 2nd
Supt. and Mr. It didn’t reply. It was
self-evident that B4 had maliciously covered up Lee Wen Jun’s misconduct to
shift their responsibility for ensuring inmates’ safety.
Conclusion
38. Despite the fact that Singapore mainstream newspapers
papers have described the Changi Prison as a positive turning point for their
lives. My experience in Changi Prison has shown conclusively that Changi Prison
is a slave camp.
