新加坡每年逮捕3000名吸毒者！平均年龄相当于中四学生？

新加坡是本地区毒品的主要目标，毒品正大量涌入这个地区。尽管我们受到严厉的惩罚，但一些贩毒者还是会铤而走险，因为他们可以从中牟利。新加坡的街头毒品价格远高于本地区的许多其他地方。我们的购买力要高得多，我们的国内生产总值 (GDP) 高得多，我们的财富也要高得多，所以，这是显而易见的。

移民与关卡局 (ICA) 和中央肃毒局 (CNB) 曾在关卡的灭火器、家具甚至水果中发现了毒品。人们想出了许多创新的毒品偷运方式。去年，中央肃毒局缴获了价值约 1500 万美元的毒品，捣毁了 25 个贩毒集团。被捕的吸毒者人数比上一年增加了 10%，而吸食可卡因者的数量达到了 10 年来的最高水平。

心理卫生学院（Institute of Mental Health）于 2022 年进行的“健康与生活方式”调查显示，新加坡非法吸毒的平均发病年龄为 15.9 岁，这是一个中四学生的年龄。各位议员可以看到，其他国家面临的问题，我们也不能幸免。

现在让我谈谈我们管制毒品的方法。我们采取循证药物管制方法。2019 年，我们改变了政策，重点帮助纯粹吸毒者。如果他们只是吸毒，没有犯下其他罪行，他们就会被引导接受治疗，不会留下犯罪记录。

干预措施以吸毒者的风险状况为基础。例如，低风险、首次吸毒的成年吸毒者通常会在社区接受咨询，并定期进行尿液或头发检测。这样既能尽量减少对他们日常生活的干扰，同时确保他们的成瘾问题得到解决。

除了强制监管期之外，新加坡监狱管理局 (SPS) 还继续与新加坡黄丝带 (YRSG) 及其社区伙伴合作，帮助吸毒者。例如，新加坡黄丝带协助刑满释放人员进行职业指导和就业安置。

这些努力取得了一些成果。从 1993 年到 2021 年，我国从戒毒中心 (DRC) 释放的两年再犯率下降了两倍半以上，从 73% 降至 27.7%。

戒掉毒瘾、重获新生的例子不胜枚举。例如，Francis How先生，他中学辍学，12岁时加入了街头帮派。为了满足吸毒瘾，他参与了毒品和其他犯罪活动，包括入室行窃和赌博。到32岁时，他已经在监狱服刑近11年，这几乎是他成年后的整个人生。但后来，他决定放弃毒品和犯罪。他现年50岁，已婚，有4个孩子。他经营着自己的造船厂修理业务，已经戒毒17年多了。

戒毒之路并不容易。它充满挑战。它需要许多帮助。我们不仅应该认可戒毒者戒毒的努力，还应该向支持他们戒毒的家人致敬。

今天，我们邀请了几位戒毒者和他们的家人来到公众席。总共有 120 人。他们向我们展示，戒除毒瘾和过上充实人生是可能的。请各位议员和我一起向他们致敬！[掌声]

在帮助吸毒者的同时，我们对贩毒者采取严厉的态度。我们对那些为了钱而毁掉他人生命的人零容忍。贩卖特定数量毒品的人将被处以死刑。例如，贩卖15克纯海洛因的人将面临死刑，这足以让大约180名吸毒者吸食一周。证据清楚地表明，死刑是一种有效的威慑手段。1990 年，我们对贩卖超过1.2公斤可卡因的人处以死刑。在随后的四年里，贩卖的可卡因平均净重减少了 66%。

2021 年在该地区部分地区进行了一项研究。我们是基于证据的，因此我让我的部门从许多毒贩来自的地区进行一次调查，看看这些地区的民众对我们的刑罚有何看法，我们的刑罚是否具有足够的威慑力。因为处理毒品问题要从供需两方面入手。新加坡的需求–通过公众教育管制措施、积极的宣传、解释毒品的危害；供应–通过控制流入的毒品数量和使用威慑手段。

因此，我们在许多毒贩来自的地区进行了一项有科学依据的统计研究。结果显示，87%的受访者，即十分之九的受访者认为，死刑可以阻止人们将大量毒品贩运到新加坡；83%的受访者，即十分之八的受访者认为，死刑比终身监禁更能有效阻止毒品贩运；86%的受访者认为，死刑可以遏制新加坡的严重犯罪。

这意味着，当毒枭四处招募人员进入新加坡时，人们会非常小心。许多人会拒绝，如果他们真的受到诱惑，他们可能会说，“好吧，我只会贩卖低于一定数量的毒品”。因此，贩卖大量毒品到新加坡变得更加困难。

那些建议用终身监禁代替死刑的人应该看看这些数字。这两种惩罚的威慑作用非常不同。

对于我们——议员、决策者、部长——来说，决定将死刑作为法律惩罚的一部分并不容易。但证据表明，为了保护我们的人民，防止成千上万的家庭被摧毁，防止成千上万的人丧生。这就是我们保留死刑的原因。

各位成员必须明白，这无异于一场战争。我说我们正在打一场战争，之所以用这个比喻，是因为受害者和生命损失的规模如此之大。本地区的其他国家也用战争来比喻，并引起了不同的反应。但大家知道，在新加坡，我们以逮捕贩毒者、根据国会通过的法律处理有关案件为基础，并在这一框架内打毒品战。

在美国，每 14 个月，死于滥用芬太尼的美国人比美国自第二次世界大战以来从朝鲜战争到阿富汗战争的所有战争中死亡人数的总和还要多。事实上，美国男性的预期寿命下降有两个原因：一是枪击、凶杀案数量增加：二是毒品和阿片类药物滥用。2021 年，世界卫生组织报告称，2019 年有 60 万人死于药物滥用。这是同年因枪击造成的死亡人数的两倍多。

据《世界毒品报告》估计，同年，因吸毒导致残疾和过早死亡，有3100 万年的“健康”寿命被剥夺。这些不仅仅是统计数据。他们是父亲、母亲、兄弟、姐妹、儿子和女儿的生命。这就是为什么我用战争来比喻。我说的是一场针对那些以成千上万无辜生命为代价从毒品贸易中获利的人的战争。

要从战争的角度谈这个问题，请允许我引用伯特兰·罗素在第二次世界大战中提出的一个观点。他在 1943 年的论文《和平主义的未来》中指出，“如果要防止战争，就必须明确表达出为某些目的而参战的意愿”。换句话说，如果你想要和平，你就必须做好为和平而战的准备。

我认为，这同样适用于禁毒战争。在这场战争中，我们必须做出决定：我们是否要服软，冒着像我前面提到的那些国家的风险？我们是否要成为一个“毒品国家”，或一个“臭名昭著的棕色城镇”，或成为毒品和暴力的温床？

人们可能会说：没有人要求你心慈手软。请施行非常严厉的惩罚，只是不要判处死刑。我已经说过，死刑与其他刑罚的威慑效果明显不同。

根据证据，我的观点是，如果取消死刑，贩毒活动将大幅增加。将会出现更多的抢劫、入室盗窃等案件，因为吸毒者需要钱来购买毒品。证据表明，性侵犯和凶杀案也会增加，肯定会有更多的人死在新加坡。这就是为什么我们采取严厉的措施，我们的严厉措施挽救了成千上万人的生命。

20世纪90年代，中央肃毒局每年逮捕约6，000名吸毒者。现在，这个数字几乎减少了一半。中央肃毒局现在每年逮捕约3，000名吸毒者。在其他条件都相同的情况下，新加坡的吸毒者数量在过去 30 年里应该有所上升。本地区的毒品供应已经爆炸性增长。我们的购买力大幅提高。6,000 人这个数字应该增加两到三倍，因为应该有更多的人吸毒。但这个数字反而下降了。

仅凭这一点，我就可以说，我们挽救了成千上万潜在吸毒者的生命，也挽救了他们的家人，使他们免受因家中一人吸毒而造成的严重后果。正如我们在其他国家所看到的那样，后果可能是：凶杀、暴力、分手、儿童的不良结局。在许多地方，这种情况是相当悲惨的。我们避免了这种情况。

这是我们新加坡正在进行的一场战争，如果我们不打这场战争，或者我们输掉这场战争，那么新加坡成千上万的人将会受害。因此，每一个要求我们放松毒品管制或取消死刑的人，实际上都是在为一个不同的新加坡鼓与呼–在那里，会有更多的人死去；会有更多的儿童受到影响；会有更多不利的结果，尤其是对低收入群体而言。

With that, let me now turn to the situation in Singapore and the threat we face here from the drug trade. We are a big target for drugs that this region is being flooded with. Despite our stiff penalties, some traffickers try their luck because of the profits they can earn. The street price for drugs is much higher in Singapore than many other parts in this region. Our purchasing power is much higher, our gross domestic product (GDP) is much higher, our wealth is much higher, so, it is obvious.

The Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) and Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) have found drugs at the borders in fire extinguishers, furniture, even fruits. People find many innovative ways of trying to smuggle in. Last year, CNB seized about $15 million worth of drugs and dismantled 25 drug syndicates. The number of drug abusers arrested increased by 10% from the previous year, while the number of cannabis abusers reached a 10-year high.

The Health and Lifestyle survey conducted by the Institute of Mental Health in 2022 showed that the mean onset age of illicit drug consumption in Singapore is 15.9 years old. This is the age of a Secondary 4 student. Members can see that we are not exempt from the problems that other countries face.

Let me now turn to our approach to drug control. We take an evidence-based approach towards drug control. In 2019, we changed our policy to focus on helping persons who are pure drug abusers. If they only abuse drugs and have not committed other offences, they are channelled to receive treatment and do not get a criminal record.

The interventions are based on the risk profile of the abuser. For example, low-risk, first-time adult drug abusers will generally undergo counselling in the community, together with regular urine or hair testing. This minimises disruption to their daily lives while ensuring that their addiction issues are addressed.

Beyond the mandated supervision period, the Singapore Prison Service (SPS) continues to work with Yellow Ribbon Singapore (YRSG) and its community partners, to help the drug abusers. For example, YRSG assists ex-inmates with career coaching and job placement.

These efforts have produced some results. From 1993 to 2021, our two-year recidivism rate for those released from drug rehabilitation centre (DRC) decreased by more than two and a half times, from 73% to 27.7%.

There are many examples of ex-drug abusers who have kicked their habit, leading new lives. For example, Francis How. He dropped out of secondary school, joined a street gang at the age of 12. He was involved in drugs and other crimes, including housebreaking and gambling, to feed his drug addiction. By the age of 32, he had already served close to 11 years behind bars, almost all his adult life. But then, he decided to turn his back on drugs and crime. He is now 50 years old, married with four children. He runs his own shipyard repair business. He has stayed clean for more than 17 years.

The journey to recovery is not easy. It is challenging. It requires many helping hands. We should recognise not just the efforts of the ex-abusers to stay drug-free but also pay tribute to their families who support them in their journey.

Today, we have invited several ex-abusers and their families to join us in the Public Gallery. All in, about 120 of them. They show that it is possible to quit drugs and to live a fulfilling life. I ask Members to join me in recognising them. [Applause.]

While we seek to help abusers, we take a tough approach against drug traffickers. We have zero tolerance for those who destroy the lives of others for money. The death penalty is imposed on persons who traffic specified amounts. For example, a person who traffics 15 grammes of pure heroin, which is enough to feed the addiction of about 180 abusers for a week, will face capital punishment. The evidence shows clearly that the death penalty has been an effective deterrent. In 1990, we introduced the death penalty for trafficking more than 1.2 kilogrammes of opium. In the four years that followed, there was a 66% reduction in the average net weight of opium trafficked.

A 2021 study was conducted in parts of the region. We are evidence-based so I told my Ministry let us do a survey from the regions where many of our drug traffickers come from, to see what the population in those areas think about our penalties and are our penalties sufficient deterrent. Because you deal with the drug situation by dealing with both supply and demand. Demand in Singapore – through public education, through control measures, through active campaigning, explaining the dangers of drugs; supply – by controlling the amount of drugs that come in and through the use of deterrents.

So, we did a statistically, scientifically valid study in the parts from which many of our drug traffickers come from. It showed that 87% of those surveyed, this is nine out of 10, believed that the death penalty deters people from trafficking substantial amounts of drugs into Singapore; 83%, this is eight out of 10, believed that the death penalty is more effective than life imprisonment in deterring drug trafficking; and 86% believed that the death penalty deters serious crimes in Singapore.

The implications are when the drug barons go around trying to recruit people to come into Singapore, people will be very careful. Many would say no and if they do get tempted, they might say, “Well, I will only traffic drugs below a certain threshold amount”. So, it makes it much more difficult to traffic substantial amounts into Singapore.

Those who suggest that the death penalty can be replaced by life imprisonment should look at these figures. The deterrent effects of the two penalties are very different.

It is not easy for us – Members, policy-makers, Ministers – to decide to have capital punishment as part of the penalties in law. But the evidence shows that it is necessary to protect our people, prevent the destruction of thousands of families and prevent the loss of thousands of lives. That is why we maintain the death penalty.

Members have to understand – this is nothing short of a war. I say that we are fighting a war and using that analogy, because that is the scale in terms of victims and lost lives. Others in this region have used the analogy of war and that has drawn different sorts of responses. But people know here in Singapore we go on the basis of apprehending the traffickers, dealing with the situations in accordance with laws passed by Parliament and we fight the drug war within that framework.

In the US, every 14 months, more Americans die from abusing fentanyl than from all of America’s wars combined since the Second World War, from Korea to Afghanistan, every 14 months. In fact, the life expectancy of male Americans has come down for two reasons. One, the number of shootings, homicides. And second, drugs, opioid abuse. In 2021, the World Health Organization reported 600,000 deaths in 2019 which was attributable to drug abuse. That is more than twice the number of deaths caused by firearms in the same year.

The World Drug Report estimates that in the same year, 31 million years of “healthy” life were lost due to disability and premature deaths as a result of drug use. These are not just statistics. They are lives of fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, sons and daughters. That is why I use the analogy of war. I am talking about a war against those who profit off the drug trade at the expense of hundreds of thousands of innocent lives.

To put it in the context of fighting a war, let me refer to a point that Bertrand Russell made referencing the Second World War. He pointed out in his 1943 essay titled, “The Future of Pacifism”, that “if war is to be prevented, there must be a clearly expressed willingness to go to war for certain ends”. In other words, if you want peace, you have to be prepared to fight for it.

I would argue the same applies to the war against drugs. In this war, we will have to decide: do we want to go soft and risk ending up like the countries I have spoken about earlier? Do we want to become a “narco-state”, or an “infamous brown town”, or a hotbed for drugs and violence?

People may say: no one is asking you to go soft. Impose very tough penalties. Just do not impose the death penalty. And I have said, there is a clear difference between the deterrence effects of the death penalty as opposed to other punishments.

My view, based on the evidence, you remove the death penalty, drug trafficking will go up significantly. There will be more robberies, house breakings and so on, because drug abusers will need money to buy drugs. Evidence shows there will also be more sexual assaults, more homicides and definitely many more people will die in Singapore. That is why we take a strict approach, and our strict approach has saved thousands of lives.

In the 1990s, CNB arrested about 6,000 drug abusers per year. That number has now come down by almost half. CNB now arrests about 3,000 drug abusers per year. All things being equal, the number of drug abusers in Singapore should have gone up in the last 30 years. The supply of drugs in the region has exploded. Our purchasing power has increased significantly. That figure of 6,000 should be two, three times more because more people should be consuming drugs. But instead, the number has gone down.

By that alone, I say we have saved the lives of thousands of potential abusers and we have saved the lives of their families from the consequences of one person in the family taking drugs. Consequences can be, as we see from other countries: homicide, violence, break-ups, poorer outcomes for children. It is a pretty sad situation in many places. We have avoided it.

This is the war that we are fighting in Singapore and if we do not fight it or if we lose it, then thousands in Singapore will suffer. So, everyone who is asking us to go soft on drugs or remove the death penalty, is in fact advocating for a different Singapore – where there will be more people dying; there will be more children affected; there will be more unfavourable outcomes, particularly on people of lower incomes.