Singapore decriminalizes chewing gum? Really!

Hi there! Imran here with a brief 'hello' from sunny (and often rainy) Singapore! 

Greetings from Singapore! It's your friendly host from the Little Red Dot (aka Singapore) with the latest edition of my newsletter.* If there is one 'fact' about Singapore everyone knows it's that chewing gum is illegal here. But is it really? And why does this one obscure fact define Singapore for so many foreigners? The manufacture, sale and distribution of gum has been banned in Singapore since 1992. However, gum is to Singapore as recreational marijuana is to many European countries (and US states); that is, possessing a small amount for personal use is acceptable but just don't try to become a drug (or gum) kingpin by importing and selling in large quantities! By 2003, Singaporeans had learnt to live without gum (and think without having to chew at the same time!). Nonetheless, the law was liberalized – a teeny bit - as a result of the US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (FTA) signed in 2003.  It seems passage of the FTA by the US Congress was in jeopardy unless Singapore's gum trade was liberalized!  A congressman from Illinois – the home state of Wrigley's – made the sale of gum in Singapore a prerequisite for supporting the FTA. The congressman insisted bilateral trade in chewing gum be as free as in any other 'commodity.' A face saving compromise had to be found to give the stalled FTA a push. The solution was ingenious. In 2004, gum was classified as a 'medical' product. Subsequently, certain types of gum, including sugar free and nicotine gums, became available for sale at pharmacies across the island. The catch: these 'therapeutic' gums could only be purchased with a doctor's prescription. Gum cannot be bought over the counter! (So remember, if you wish to chew gum during your stay in Singapore, please either leave some time to visit a doctor to get a prescription or 'smuggle' in a few packets for your personal consumption. There is no black market for chewing gum so don't assume you can buy gum in a back alley somewhere!) Now why was gum banned in the first place? To be sure, having chewing gum stuck to the city's pavements did not keep with Singapore's aspirations of becoming a clean and green metropolis. As anyone who has had gum stuck on their shoes (or clothes) knows removing gum is a time consuming affair. Still, on it's own that wasn't enough of a reason to warrant a ban. That all changed when people started sticking gum onto the city's subway train doors causing their automatic door sensors to malfunction. The ensuing delays and disruptions to the Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) subway system pushed the authorities to legislate the ban. The ban is best summed up by former Singapore Prime Minister Lew Kuan Yew's reply to a BBC reporter's question on the chewing gum ban. "Putting chewing gum on our subway train doors so they don't open, I don't call that creativity. I call that mischief-making. If you can't think because you can't chew, try a banana." And that's the story of Singapore's world famous chewing gum ban.  Imran February 2022 February 2022 promotion: Book an Amazon Explore tour during the month of February (you may take the tour in March, April or even May!) and obtain promotional rates of USD 5 (per person for group tour) or USD 10 (private tour) for Singapore: the story of a church, a mosque, a temple & Michelin starred street food in old Chinatown. To arrange a (Singapore focused) customized live virtual tour please get in touch by WhatsApp (+65 9786 7210) or email (imran.ahmed.sg@gmail.com). Please feel free to forward this newsletter to interested persons.  PS – You may visit earlier editions of my newsletter here. * You are receiving my newsletter as you have either been on a tour with me (earlier this century) or we are connected via LinkedIn. If this intrusion is not to your liking, fair enough, it is easy for you to unsubscribe. Simply use the unsubscribe button in the footer of this email. Singapore: the story of a church, a mosque, a temple & Michelin starred street food in old Chinatown   Though ethnic Chinese comprise almost three quarters of Singapore's population, the city-state is religiously and ethnically diverse, and this live tour along the Street of Harmony, Telok Ayer Street, is a great way to see Singapore's multiculturalism.  Along the route we'll also see a street food hawker center and colorful shophouse architecture. Book now» Sights and sounds of Singapore's Little India: from Hindu temples to UNESCO recognized street food   Singapore's Indian community - though small in numbers - is an integral part of Singapore's food, culture and architectural landscape. At the heart of the community is the Little India district where all this and more are on display. Join me as we stroll through the streets and side lanes of Little India and take in the sights and sounds (not the aromas!) of this vibrant district. Book now» Facebook Instagram YouTube LinkedIn Copyright © 2021 Singapore Locally La, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you opted in via our website. Our mailing address is: Singapore Locally La 363 B Sembawang Crescent #03-727 Sun Natura Singapore 752363 Singapore Add us to your address book Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list.

Islam’s front line is not in Europe or Ulema: time to catch up with your flock

After the recent spate of attacks by Islamic extremists in Europe many have suggested the international media mans the front line against Jihadist Islamic terrorism. Undoubtedly, the Western media constitutes a prime target for Islamic extremists, especially since the provocative cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed became a rallying cry for opposing sides in the debate. However, the real front line for the war of ideas rests neither in Paris nor the rest of the Western world. The true battleground lies in the conservative Islamic heartlands of countries like Pakistan, Egypt or Turkey.

This is a war for the soul of Islam. A war which will be won not by American or NATO soldiers but by Muslim theologians reinterpreting religious edicts in line with the aspirations of the modern Muslim community. These aspirations do not include killing civilians, denying girls' education, making women sit at home or killing polio vaccinators doing their job.

Similar to their non-Muslim counterparts across the world, most Muslims lead humdrum, boring lives. Muslim adults send children to schools, watch their kids start families, become grandparents and lavish affection on their grandchildren. Muslim adults, too, visit dentists and doctors, socialize with friends, watch television and movies.

Muslim hopes and fears are no different from non-Muslim hopes and fears.

Thus, it was encouraging reading the transcript of Egyptian President Sisi's speech to senior Muslim theologians at Al-Azhar University. The Cairo based university is one of the world's oldest and most respected institutions of Islamic learning.

In the speech, Sisi essentially exhorts the Ulema (qualified Islamic theologians) to play a genuine leadership role by returning Islamic dialogue to the realms of normalcy, especially in so far as Islamic law deals with interactions with non-Muslims. In actuality, theologians are simply being asked to endorse the common sense approach to life already employed by the majority of Muslims around the world.

One must applaud Sisi's efforts to galvanize Islamic clerics in the battle for the Islamic mind. Unfortunately, the influence of ultra-conservative clerics fed by a steady diet of petrodollars by oil rich nations remains powerful. It may take many more Islamic philosophers with the fervent vision of Allama Iqbal before a clear consensus about the Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam becomes a reality.

Meanwhile, the ordinary Muslim walking the streets of Karachi - not Cannes - is the one in the firing line for her 'moderate' beliefs. By challenging ideas propagated by Islamic extremists in her daily life, she moves us closer to the final victory against obscurantists currently polluting Islamic beliefs.  

__________________

Imran is a business and management consultant. Through his work at Deodar Advisors and the Deodar Diagnostic, Imran improves profits of businesses operating in Singapore and the region. He can be reached at imran@deodaradvisors.com. 

Singapore: police powers and the Little India riot

I am a 'Law and Order' man. Generally, Singapore's tough laws are fine with me. Want to hang convicted drug traffickers? Be my guest. Wish to cane criminals convicted of vandalism? Carry on. If anything, I find the punishments for certain crimes, e.g. drink driving, too lenient. Nonetheless, I cannot get myself to support the proposal to enhance police powers in Singapore's new 'Special Zone,' i.e. Little India.

The proposal will permit the police to strip search individuals to look for alcohol. Additionally, police officers ranking Sergeant and above may raid any establishment within the Special Zone without a warrant, in case of suspicion that an offence is taking place. Individuals may also be banned from entering the Special Zone for up to 30 days if their presence is deemed detrimental to maintaining order.

Certainly, Singapore's police must have adequate authority to ensure there is no repeat of December 2013's Little India riot. Hence, having a more stringent alcohol licensing regime makes eminent sense. Particularly, as seems likely, alcohol was a contributing factor to the Little India violence.

However, don't the police already have enough powers to control 'miscreants' all over the island? Of course they do. Act in a 'suspicious' manner and see if the police present you with a warrant before carting you off to the nearest police station! Better still, walk around with a can of spray paint near an MRT subway train depot and see how long it takes for the police to 'interview' you? This is not just about a car entering Singapore illegally from Malaysia but preempting a serious act of vandalism!

Surely, Singapore's first riot in decades requires a drastic response from the authorities but I cannot see more policing taking Singapore to a better place. Already, some analysts suggest unskilled and semi-skilled foreign labor (as opposed to foreign talent) felt persecuted and intimidated by police measures in place prior to the December 2013 riot.

The answer lies in taking a more balanced approach. For example, by providing greater recreational facilities and outlets for Singapore's hordes of semi-skilled workers, while at the same time ensuring wrong doers are dealt with harshly (under existing laws). Needless to say, unless Singapore stops functioning, the thousands of foreign laborers on our island are not going anywhere. (Do we have any locals prepared to act as sanitation workers?)  

Giving the police a freer hand to stop, question, strip search and detain individuals – foreign or local – creates a dangerous precedent which can only lead Singapore down a slippery slope ... particularly when it will inevitably result in racial profiling of persons belonging to non-majority races (Caucasians exempted?). How long before individuals from minority backgrounds (like me) are asked to justify their presence in 'Special Zones' around Singapore?

Singapore is ahead of its time in many aspects of urban organization. I hope Orwellian style '1984' policing does not become one of these areas.

__________________

Imran is a licensed Singapore Tour Guide. Please contact Imran if you wish to arrange personalized tours of Singapore, including walking tours of historic districts such as Little India, Chinatown and Kampong Glam. Imran can be reached at imran@deodaradvisors.com or +65 9786 7210. 

Singapore’s medical tourism and the law courts

Singaporeans, particularly those involved with Medical Tourism, should take heart from recent news reports that Gleneagles Hospital must pay a patient damages amounting to SGD 250,000 (approximately USD 201,000) by the law courts as compensation for a botched operation. The patient, a Hong Kong resident, claimed aggravated damages for "grave mental anguish, distress and depression."

Certainly, no one wishes to see Singapore become a trigger happy legal environment – where individuals sue each other over the slightest of grievances. However, maintaining professionalism requires accountability. In turn, accountability implies a fair and transparent legal framework. In this regard, the court's decision must be applauded by doctors, patients and hospitals alike.

The Doctor

Awarding damages to a patient for a poorly executed medical procedure sends the right message to everyone. Patients – already nervous about complicated medical surgery – gain comfort from knowing a doctor's scalpel is answerable to local law courts. Hospitals understand the seriousness of maintaining the sanctity of medical records. Doctor's will be more careful undertaking surgeries for fear of paying damages in case something goes wrong. The positive ripples are numerous.

Presently, patients looking at international jurisdictions for medical services may find Singapore less expensive than most European countries. Nonetheless, in today's globalized world, medical tourists have many alternatives available, including several countries cheaper than Singapore (e.g. Thailand).

Still, Singapore's medical industry can take heart from the resounding endorsement by none other than Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe's dear ruler! The Zimbabwean President seems to visit Singapore for medical attention every few months.  

__________________

Imran is a business and management consultant. Through his work at Deodar Advisors and the Deodar Diagnostic, Imran improves profits of businesses operating in Singapore and the region. He can be reached at imran@deodaradvisors.com. 

Singapore’s aspiring democrats turn to violence

With the vandalism of Singapore's Cenotaph, politics in the nation crossed another 'Red Line.' Violence has crept into Singapore's political sphere.

Let's be clear, spray painting a national monument is violence, not 'graffiti art.' Sure, the structure was not destroyed. Nor does the damage appear irreparable. However, violence against Singapore's history eats at the nation's soul.

Singapore's Cenotaph monument located in the Esplanade Park

Singaporeans, like people everywhere, are shaped by shared historical experiences. The colonial era, including participation in the last century's two world wars, is part of Singapore's recent history.  

As Singapore builds upon its history, citizens aspire for greater freedoms. However, the Cenotaph's vandalism may be interpreted as a sign that some Singaporeans are not ready for greater personal responsibility, a by-product of freedom.

Civil society is a prerequisite for democracy. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, 'Civil' means, "Adequate in courtesy and politeness; of, relating to, or based on civil law; established by law."

Democracy is more than 'one person, one vote.' Democracy is a culture - a way of thinking. Democracy grants freedoms but requires respect. Democracy is a way for society to establish laws; laws which are just and in line with the ambitions of society.

Respect for the law is paramount for any 'wannabe' democrat.

Undoubtedly, there are those who disagree with some prevalent laws. Consider the gay community with its repugnance for Section 377A of Singapore's penal code. To their credit, those opposed to Singapore's homosexuality laws are encouraging change in a mature manner – by challenging the statute through Singapore's Supreme Court.

Additionally, there is the example of Singaporean cartoonist Leslie Chew arrested for sedition. The cartoonist proclaims his views openly, not hiding behind a cloak of anonymity. He overtly confronts the system and appears prepared to face the legal consequences. In other words, if laws are perceived to be unjust then transparent, civil disobedience is the answer.

Violence – call it vandalism if you like – is not a catalyst for change. Vandalism in democracy's name is as abhorrent as violence in religion's name.

Misguided passion will not engender more political freedoms, leave alone democracy.

__________________

Imran is a business and management consultant. Through his work at Deodar Advisors and the Deodar Diagnostic, Imran improves profits of businesses operating in Singapore and the region. He can be reached at imran@deodaradvisors.com. 

Singapore’s corruption: only the taker pays?

Commerce relies on personal relationships. It is a fact of human interaction that commercial relationships frequently become friendships. I can attest to having met many people I now count as friends, initially through professional interactions. Nonetheless, there are certain ‘red lines’ which demarcate appropriate and inappropriate relationships within a commercial relationship.

Mostly, these factors pertain to conflicts of interests between the two parties. Often there is no black and white clarity about where / when the line is crossed. Instead, it normally relies on following one’s own conscience and judgement. However, other instances fall plainly on weak ground, legally and ethically.

Take the case of a National University of Singapore (NUS) Law Professor allegedly receiving sexual and material gratification from a student in consideration for improved course grades; or senior Singapore government officers allegedly obtaining sexual fulfilment in return for preferential treatment of a particular company’s bid to provide services.

I must point out that these cases are still before the courts. As of today, neither an innocent or guilty verdict has been pronounced.

Still, one thing bothers me about these cases. In neither case has the ‘bribe giver’ been charged with a crime. In other words, the NUS student who supposedly gave a Mont Blanc pen, had sex or paid her law professor’s bill remains free as a bird. Only her reputation has been sullied by the turn of events. Likewise, the marketing persons who had sex with senior government civil servants purportedly to facilitate sales to government agencies also continue to be untouched by the law.

The situation baffles me because were an individual to bribe a government servant (or professor) with cash in return for certain treatment both parties will face the courts, i.e. the person giving the bribe and the person receiving the bribe. Try bribing a policewoman handing you a parking a ticket and see whether you get hauled off to court?

After all, does it matter whether the bribe was paid in cash or kind? What matters more is that consideration was illegally received by one party in return for inappropriately using his influence to benefit the ‘bribe giver.’ Even if a lawyer can explain to me the legal niceties allowing these ‘bribe givers’ to get away scot free, the situation does not pass my ‘smell test.’ The circumstances stink of rottenness. At the very least, justice is not seen to be done.

To top it all off, the general public receives a mixed message. It is illegal to receive bribes but acceptable to offer bribes. Surely, that is not the signal Singaporeans should be receiving from the law enforcement authorities?

__________________

Imran is a business and management consultant. Through his work at Deodar Advisors and the Deodar Diagnostic, Imran improves profits of businesses operating in Singapore and the region. He can be reached at imran@deodaradvisors.com.