Effectiveness of Caning as Deterrent to Serious Crimes

26 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether and, if so, what studies have been conducted on the effectiveness of judicial caning as a deterrent to serious crimes such as rape and sexual offences against young children; and (b) to what extent such application of judicial caning has shaped (i) public confidence in the criminal justice system and (ii) the public's sense of safety against such serious crimes.

Mr K Shanmugam: Caning in Singapore serves two functions – deterrence, and proportionate punishment for the crime. Both are equally important.

For the serious crimes cited by the Member – rape and sexual offences against young children – they have been punishable by caning ever since they were introduced as offences in the law.

The public understands that caning is part of a set of penalties, and generally applicable to very serious crimes. At the same time, MHA is mindful that laws have to keep pace with societal mores and values.

Its relevance and necessity is something that MHA regularly reviews.