We Who Witness

29/03/2022

At 10am today, the Court of Appeal dismissed two applications brought by death row inmate Nagaenthran a/l K Dharmalingam (Nagen). One application was for an independent psychiatric assessment of Nagen and the other application was around his fitness of ex*****on on the basis of recent mental deterioration.

The Court of Appeal found both applications to be “baseless”, having “no legal or factual merit”. Particularly, the affidavits of Nagen’s lawyer and brother that stated their observations about Nagen’s mental disorientation were found to be inadmissible evidence because they are not qualified to assess someone’s mental state. The Chief Justice described the both of them as “interested parties” and stated that as a further reason for their evidence lacking merit. He also said that the evidence provided for the defense by psychiatric doctors like Dr Sullivan were not admissible because they have not assessed Nagen themselves. Meanwhile, they found that the Prison Superintendent who had testified to Nagen’s mental competence had provided reliable evidence as he had “no interest in seeing him executed”.

The Chief Justice also remarked that even if there exists in international law a rule that countries cannot execute persons with mental disabilities, Singapore laws don’t prohibit such ex*****ons. Further, he said, the framework of the Misuse of Drugs Act is unambiguous, and apart from the exemptions provided in the Act, the Court cannot create new carve outs where they may impose a sentence apart from the mandatory death penalty.

The Court found both applications to be an “abuse of process of court”, saying that it was a “manifest stopgap measure to delay the sentence” and therefore further ground to deny the applications. The Chief Justice said it was “improper to engage in or encourage last ditch attempts” to stall or stop an ex*****on, called the case “hopeless” and granted leave for the prosecution to seek costs from the defense counsel.

Transformative Justice Collective is profoundly disappointed with the decision of the Court of Appeal.

(Sketch by Lai Yann Ting)

28/11/2021

Traducción española por cortesía de la Redesfera Latinoamericana de la Diversidad Psicosocial. ¡Muchísimos gracias!

Nosotros, las personas con discapacidad, pedimos al gobierno y al presidente de Singapur que detenga la inminente ejecución de Nagaenthran a / l K Dharmalingam, una persona con discapacidad intelectual y psicosocial.

En este comunicado, queremos informar al público y al estado sobre puntos que entendemos que pueden no ser tan conocidos, pero que son fundamentales para garantizar los derechos y la dignidad de las personas con discapacidad a la vida y el acceso a la justicia.

Explicaremos:

1. ¿Quién es una persona con discapacidad?
2. Por qué ha habido llamamientos específicos para dejar de imponer la pena de muerte a personas con discapacidad intelectual y / o psicosocial
3. Barreras al debido proceso y garantías procesales, y la necesidad de ajustes al procedimiento para las personas con discapacidad
4. Acceso real a la justicia para personas con discapacidad
5. La necesidad de reconocer lo que dicen las personas con discapacidad sobre lo que necesitamos y de darnos un cronograma accesible para hacerlo.

Nosotros, las personas con discapacidad, pedimos al gobierno y al presidente de Singapur que detenga la inminente ejecución de Nagaenthran a / l K Dharmalingam, una persona con discapacidad intelec…

28/11/2021

感谢国际的倡导者把声明翻译成中文！

我們是一群身心障礙者，我們呼籲新加坡政府和總統，停止處決智力障礙及心理社會障礙者 納加德蘭（Nagaenthran a/l K Dharmalingam）。

我們希望透過此聲明告知公眾及國家，某些不太為人所知，卻對保障殘障人士的嚴尊、生命權，以及獲得司法正義的權利而言，至關重要的概念。 涵蓋的內容包括：

1. 誰是殘障人士？
2. 為什麼有人會特別呼籲停止對智力和／心理社會障礙者判處死刑？
3. 保障正當法律程序和公平審判時遇到的障礙，以及為殘障人士提供程序便利的必要性。
4. 對於殘障人士而言，什麽是真正獲得司法正義？
5. 肯定殘障人士就自身需要的發言權與話語權，並為此此項權力提供可行的時間表

我們認為核心問題不在於 納加德蘭是否通過某些符合「精神異常」的測試，從而免除他對其行為的精神責任，或免除其死刑。核心問題是國家有或沒有為他提供什麼。 在這種情況下，國家是沒有提供的。 我們強調，新加坡刑事...

06/11/2021

We, persons with disabilities, call on the Singapore government and president to halt the imminent ex*****on of Nagaenthran a/l K Dharmalingam, a person with intellectual and psychosocial disabilities.

In this statement, we would like to inform the public and the state about points that we understand may not be so well-known, but that are essential to ensuring the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities to life and access to justice. We will address:

(1) Who is a person with a disability?
(2) Why there have been specific calls to stop imposing the death penalty on persons with intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities
(3) Barriers to due process and fair trial guarantees, and the need for procedural accommodations for persons with disabilities
(4) Real access to justice for persons with disabilities
(5) The need to recognise what persons with disabilities are saying about what we need, and to give us an accessible timeline to do so

We, persons with disabilities, call on the Singapore government and president to halt the imminent ex*****on of Nagaenthran a/l K Dharmalingam, a person with intellectual and psychosocial disabilit…

10/09/2021

From Project LETS:

"Addressing su***de on an individual level, and engaging in prevention measures that do nothing to address structural (social, political, and economic) forces will always be a giant failure.

We know what we need. It starts with:

🌎 justice for our planet: How can we tell people to stay alive for a future we're not even sure will exist? The destruction of our planet is becoming more apparent by the day.

✊🏾 justice for our people: When we live under perpetual conditions of trauma, violence, and oppression, wanting to die is a completely understandable and logical response.

🌱 healing justice: We cannot possibly find healing in a mental health system so rotten to its core. We need access to non-carceral, anti-force, affordable, trauma-informed, healing options that aren't just clinical in nature or centering white people's [Chinese Singaporeans'] experiences.

Su***de prevention month can be extremely difficult for attempt survivors, those who have lost loved ones to su***de, and those who live with chronic suicidality. When we are not centered (or even included) in campaigns, we can tell. When you use the same tired lines, we are unaffected. When you tell us to reach out for help, we've already tried.

Su***de is not just an individual issue. It is collective. It is political.* It is on all of us to create a world that people want to show up for. Where people feel safe and valued. Where people can get their basic needs met.

*Check out our Su***de is Political panel discussion held last Fall: projectlets.teachable.com

A world where the conditions of our built environment aren't overwhelmed with isolation, loss, violence, emotional distress, and deep exhaustion.

Posting a crisis line number without structural change is meaningless. Many people's equivalent of mental health care is stopgapping death from one crisis to the next. That is not sustainable. That is not real care. That is not healing. We deserve better.

During this month & always, Project LETS is committed to creating, sharing, and amplifying anti-carceral, Disability Justice informed information and resources on su***de that come from directly impacted people — and that honor the agency and self-determination of those who have made the decision to end their lives."

From Project LETS, by way of Kiva Centers.

30/05/2021

We feel this in Singapore too.

"And yet institutional powerholders assigned direct responsibility for care sometimes if not frequently ask the question "why aren't more people coming forward to seek help" - THIS IS WHY. If your whole system of "care" provision is rooted in surveillance and policing, it's bound to make those who are looking for someone trusted to turn towards turn away instead. Too many of us have had terrible experiences with enforcement authorities in the name of our well-being and supposedly for our own good. Too often this explicitly translates to powerholders telling us we have to report and seek help through formal channels or we will be deemed irresponsible to the community or at risk of harming them, but when we do exactly that, the fact that we even filed a report or requested to seek help at all - through your systems - is cited as reason to exclude us from fair access to opportunities subsequently supposedly because we are deemed unsound.

"And you wonder why we struggle to trust such services - especially when you literally tell your people it is our responsibility to baotoh one another in distress to the system because "we are a risk to ourselves and others" and blame us when we opt not to do so precisely because we are too painfully aware how much harm these systems do to the ones it attends to. No surprises there - when we are treated as risks or threats to be contained and managed by protocol rather than human beings seeking trustworthy care and safety, of course this is bound to follow. After all, even your rationale for asking us to come forward has nothing to do with supporting our needs and is instead justified in terms of upholding some nebulous myth of public order and safety that was never safe for us to begin with, and that relies on making us unsafe in the name of keeping everyone safe.

"Not to mention that in so many instances we are in distress because of you, and the numbers of us in distress are severely underreported partly because the system is so unsafe for us that we cannot afford to come forward, and partly because you opt to ignore the fact that this is not an anomaly or the problem of a tiny minority few, but a systemic problem that affects so many of us and can be traced back to these structures causing us harm repeatedly. We cannot turn to the same structures that harm us in hopes that these structures will somehow relieve the harm done to us by its own doings."