For first-time offenders who feed monkeys
Andre Yeo, The New Paper 29 May 09;
FEED monkeys and you could be fined $3,000 - even if it's your first time.
Drink and drive, and if you're a first-time offender, you could be fined $1,000.
Why the disparity? Why is the seemingly lesser offence drawing a heavier fine?
Mr Wilson Choo, 53, wrote to The Straits Times Forum page on 15 May, pointing this out. He was referring to the recent case of a housewife, who was fined $3,000 for feeding sweets to monkeys at Old Upper Thomson Road last February.
But four of the five lawyers The New Paper spoke to said making such a comparison may be simplistic and unfair as the offences are different.
Feeding monkeys comes under the Parks & Trees Act with a maximum fine of $50,000 and a jail term of up to six months.
A first-time drink driver can be fined between $1,000 and $5,000 or be jailed up to six months. He would also be disqualified from driving all classes of vehicles for at least a year, which would mean he will have to re-take for his driver's licence.
But Mr Lim Kia Tong, 57, a lawyer for 29 years, said that under the Parks and Trees Act, the $50,000 fine for feeding monkeys is a maximum sum. Depending on the judge, a person can actually be fined only $1.
Mr Lim said that the range of punishment for each offence had already been legislated, taking into account factors like the harm the offence could cause to others.
He said it was up to the judge to exercise his discretion to impose the fine that fit the offence.
Referring to another monkey-feeding case, Appeals Judge V K Rajah had said there was a need to send a clear message that feeding monkeys increased the risk of them behaving aggressively. He also said the fines could go higher or lower, depending on the circumstances of each case.
Lawyer Dennis Singham also pointed out that a first-time drink driving offender who injures or kills someone would not be charged with drink driving, but with dangerous driving.
That offence carries stiffer penalties including a fine of up to $3,000, and a jail sentence of up to a year.
Repeat offenders can be fined up to $5,000 and also be jailed up to two years. Anyone convicted of causing death by dangerous driving could be jailed up to five years.
Too easy on drink drivers
Lawyer Gloria James, 41, however, felt that a driver who kills someone might get off lightly if charged with causing death through a negligent or rash act under Section 304A of the Penal Code.
She said the offender would usually get a fine of $6,000 to $10,000 and would be disqualified from driving for three to five years.
She added: 'Here, a life is lost because of the offender's negligence and a fine seems too lenient to compensate the family. Though the offender would also be slapped with a civil suit (fatal accident claim), this payout is usually by the insurance company and the punishment would appear to be too lenient.'
Mr Choo told The New Paper he wrote to the media as he felt the punishments for drink driving were not effective.
In his letter, he had suggested confiscating the driver's vehicle, imposing a fine 10 times the list price of the car involved in the offence, immediate jail time until the case was heard in court, and a life ban on driving.
He also suggested increasing the prison term to a minimum of five years.
He said: 'If a person can buy a car for $50,000, what's a $5,000 fine for a third offence? There are more drink drivers than people feeding monkeys, so they should get a heavier fine.'
When asked about the perceived disparity between the punishments for drink driving and feeding monkeys, and to comment on Mr Choo's suggestions, all the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) would say was that sentencing was a prerogative of the courts.
Said a spokesman: 'The maximum is set by Parliament. Within the range set out in a statute, the trial judge has a discretion.'
Lawyer Mark Goh, 42, however, suggested the law may have to be reviewed. A lawyer for 15 years, he said drink driving offences were common in court and the tariffs and fines were reviewed very frequently.
But the monkeys were a separate matter.
He said: 'The feeding monkey legislation may be an old piece of law and may not have been reviewed recently. This was probably a case which came up suddenly and AGC did not review it to see how it compares with other statutes.'
He said there could be instances where crimes were not only found in the Penal Code but in obscure or little-used acts like the Parks and Trees Act, which could contain legislation which are not in sync with modern times.
He added: 'This is quite normal and that is why we have reviews to update these odd pieces of legislation.'
DIFFERENCES IN FINES
FEEDING MONKEYS
# $3,000 fine (starting point)
# 154 fined in '08
# 31 fined, so far, this year
DRINK DRIVING
# $1,000 min fine
# 3,586 arrested in '08
# 1,141 caught so far, this year
