Laws of our land: Part I

On February 27, 2005 · 56 Comments · In Laws of our land

Being the kay­poh that I am, I got myself caught up in the furore that was unfold­ing on FF’s last couple of posts, in which she described how out­raged she was at a din­ner companion’s pho­tograph­ing her cleavage/bosom/chest/blouse.

So, I looked up the Penal Code to see if, at law, what the dirty bas­tard did was a pun­ish­able offence, here in our coun­try vaunted for our pro­tec­tive jus­tice system.

If you’ve been here long enough, you’d have heard the term ‘out­rage of mod­esty’ being bandied about: How some women have their mod­esties out­raged in the lift, on the bus, in the mrt and at the super­mar­ket check­out queue.

So, I thought maybe the first port of call might be Section 354 of the Penal Code.

But as far as I see (pretty near), the law does not define how one's modesty is outraged, and if anyone knows where I can find the definition, set in stone, please leave a trail in the comments.

Some other inter­est­ing things I found from our Penal Code today:

  1. If you (a male) entice a woman with the false belief that she is mar­ried to you in order to make her your flat­mate or to have sex with her, you’re a crim­i­nal: s493.
  2. If you entice a married woman away from her husband, you're also a criminal: s498

What gives? The women of our land are as thick as trees? Would a woman not know whether she's married to the guy she's about to give her body to (or sign a co-tenancy agreement with)?

But honey, we're married. Come to bed leh!

Is it? Since when we were married?

Neh, last month, you were uncon­scious, but I took you to the ROM and made you sign every­thing by prop­ping you up and hold­ing the pen in your hand? Remem­ber or not?

But back to the issue at hand. The boy who used his phone cam to take pic­tures of FF’s ample (she said it her­self) cleav­age, I think, could be guilty of an offence under Section 509.

If not, she might wanna do something really nasty to him, but then she could as a result, find herself guilty under Section 508: Act caused by inducing a person to believe that he will be rendered an object of divine displeasure.

iTunes’ party shuf­fle is play­ing a copy of: Force Of Nature — John Mayall - Archives To Eighties, of which I have the original CD and therefore didn't steal music.
Tagged with:
 
Facebook Twitter StumbleUpon
← Older Comments
  • Anony­mous

    I like to clar­ify my pre­vi­ous com­ment. I typed the com­ment with­out refer­ing to FF’s post directly, just based on what My Miyagi & the other com­men­ta­tors have wrote.

    After read­ing her ver­sion of the story & tak­ing a look at the Penal Code, she may have a cause of action under s 354 of the Penal Code on assault or use of crim­i­nal force to a per­son with intent to out­rage mod­esty, read with s 350 on the def­i­n­i­tion of crim­i­nal force.

    How­ever, in order to suceed, there is still a need to prove intent or knowl­edge (based on the ele­ments required in the statute), the require­ment of proof beyond a rea­son­able doubt in crim­i­nal cases, & whether there is suf­fi­cient evi­dence. So FF could have made a police report but as to whether the mat­ter will go to court & succed, it’s a dif­fer­ent story.

  • Anony­mous

    I like to clar­ify my pre­vi­ous com­ment. I typed the com­ment with­out refer­ing to FF’s post directly, just based on what My Miyagi & the other com­men­ta­tors have wrote.

    After read­ing her ver­sion of the story & tak­ing a look at the Penal Code, she may have a cause of action under s 354 of the Penal Code on assault or use of crim­i­nal force to a per­son with intent to out­rage mod­esty, read with s 350 on the def­i­n­i­tion of crim­i­nal force.

    How­ever, in order to suceed, there is still a need to prove intent or knowl­edge (based on the ele­ments required in the statute), the require­ment of proof beyond a rea­son­able doubt in crim­i­nal cases, & whether there is suf­fi­cient evi­dence. So FF could have made a police report but as to whether the mat­ter will go to court & succed, it’s a dif­fer­ent story.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/1321731 lun

    anon: hmm i think u have to re-read my com­ment on s 13A and 13B. at the end of it i do believe i’ve noted that s13A requires the pres­ence of “intent”. in the case of s13B, it is defined as “likely to cause harass­ment, alarm or dis­tress”. if FF can prove that harass­ment, alarm and/or dis­tress has been caused by his actions irre­gard­less of whether there was “intent” involved, it is now up to the accused to prove his defence, in the avenues as stated in the section.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/1321731 lun

    anon: hmm i think u have to re-read my com­ment on s 13A and 13B. at the end of it i do believe i’ve noted that s13A requires the pres­ence of “intent”. in the case of s13B, it is defined as “likely to cause harass­ment, alarm or dis­tress”. if FF can prove that harass­ment, alarm and/or dis­tress has been caused by his actions irre­gard­less of whether there was “intent” involved, it is now up to the accused to prove his defence, in the avenues as stated in the section.

  • http://www.forumics.com snow­cookie

    A large part of the Penal Code was based on the Indian Penal Code. The last time the Penal Code under­gone a major review was in 1984. Archaic or irrel­e­vant pro­vi­sions were repealed. S 493 might not apply now in mod­ern Sin­ga­pore. Mr Miyagi, maybe you might wanna write to your MP so that he can write to his supe­rior and then he will in turn write to the AGC to high­light this irrel­e­vant pro­vi­sion? Oth­er­wise, you can always write to the AGC yourself.

  • http://www.forumics.com snow­cookie

    A large part of the Penal Code was based on the Indian Penal Code. The last time the Penal Code under­gone a major review was in 1984. Archaic or irrel­e­vant pro­vi­sions were repealed. S 493 might not apply now in mod­ern Sin­ga­pore. Mr Miyagi, maybe you might wanna write to your MP so that he can write to his supe­rior and then he will in turn write to the AGC to high­light this irrel­e­vant pro­vi­sion? Oth­er­wise, you can always write to the AGC yourself.

← Older Comments
Set your Twitter account name in your settings to use the TwitterBar Section.

Switch to our mobile site