Iswaran placed in single-man cell to protect him from those who might harm him, say legal experts

SINGAPORE: Former transport minister S Iswaran was placed in a single-man cell in prison to protect him from those who might want to harm him due to his previous positions as minister, legal experts told CNA. 
Iswaran, 62, began serving his sentence on Monday (Oct 7) after announcing that he will not appeal his 12-month jail term, handed down by the High Court last Thursday. 
Iswaran had earlier pleaded guilty to five charges, comprising four of accepting valuable items as a public servant, and one of obstructing justice. 
In response to CNA’s queries, the Singapore Prison Service (SPS) had said that Iswaran had been housed in a single-man cell due to “higher safety and security risk” if he were to be housed with other inmates. The authority did not elaborate on what these risks might be. 
Lawyers not linked to the case told CNA that Iswaran would be at higher risk of harm due to his status as a former politician and minister.
“There may be inmates who may be motivated to cause him harm or fear of harm because they are not happy with him, be it for what he stood for when he held office or for the fact that they feel outraged that a person of his position committed such offences,” Mr Sanjiv Vaswani, managing director of Vaswani Law Chambers. 
Concurring, veteran lawyer Ramesh Tiwary, who has an eponymous law firm, said that the authorities would not want to house Iswaran with inmates who might harass him.
He disagreed with the possibility that Iswaran might leak state secrets during his period of incarceration. 
“The way I see it: There are people serving imprisonment or (who are) remanded who may not be very happy with the establishment, with the system, and who may try to pick on him,” said Mr Tiwary. 
“You can’t keep your eyes on somebody 24 hours. I think to be on the safe side, they are just segregating him at this moment.”
The lawyer added that segregating an inmate was not uncommon, especially if there was a threat to the person’s safety. 
He gave the example of a prison officer who commits a crime and is jailed. 
“You may have people in prison who are very unhappy with you,” said Mr Tiwary, adding that SPS would then have to take precautions. 
Other prisoners could be placed in single-man cells to prevent the spread of disease, like during the COVID-19 pandemic, or simply because that was the only cell available, he said. 
“It is not an uncommon thing. I’ve known many of my clients to be in single-man cell sometimes, for a period of time. And they might move (Iswaran) after a while, you never know.”
Mr Vaswani said that while prison conditions are austere, they are not meant to be a “torture”. 
“Prisoners are treated humanely. Where there is a known potential risk to their safety, it only makes sense for them to be segregated,” he said. 
Lawyers said that Iswaran’s time in jail could be affected by two things: remission and home detention, both of which would result in him serving a shorter time in jail if granted. 
Under the Prisons Act, the Commissioner of Prisons must make a remission order in respect of a prisoner after the prisoner has served two-thirds of his sentence or 14 days of the same, whichever is later, said head of criminal litigation at IRB Law Azri Imran Tan. 
Offenders serving a life imprisonment, or a jail term of 14 days or less, are not eligible for remission.
According to the SPS website, most inmates will be released after they serve two-thirds of their sentence – if they had displayed good conduct and behaviour while incarcerated.
When released, these offenders will be issued with a conditional remission order that will be valid until the end of their sentence. Offenders must not re-offend during this remission period. 
“Based on a sentence of 12 months’ imprisonment, Iswaran’s earliest date of release would be estimated to be eight months, based on the two-third computation,” said Mr Tan. 
This could mean that he is released on remission from Jun 6, factoring the day of surrender as one day of the jail term, said Mr Tiwary. 
Mr Vaswani added that in calculating the two-third period, the Commissioner of Prisons will disregard periods served in a punishment cell, or where an inmate was housed in a hospital due to his own fault or malingering. 
“The president can also order the commissioner not to issue a remission order, or to delay it, if the prisoner has committed an offence whilst serving sentence,” he added. 
An inmate may also be placed on the Home Detention Scheme towards the end of their sentence with the aim of “reintegrating (them) into society”, said Mr Tan. 
This essentially means that an offender will be on house arrest, where an offender is confined to his home with strict curfews, according to Singapore Legal Advice.
Under the Prisons Act, the Commissioner of Prisons may order an eligible person to be released on home detention for a period not exceeding 12 months.
To be eligible, an offender’s total sentence must be at least four weeks, and the offender must have served at least 14 days of that sentence, along with other conditions, said Mr Vaswani.
Certain offences exclude offenders from the scheme, including drug trafficking, rioting, causing grievous hurt, and outrage of modesty, among others. 
Mr Vaswani noted that Iswaran’s offences are not on the list.
“Home detention is ultimately at the discretion of the Commissioner of Prisons. Based on the information that is publicly available at this time, there do not appear to be any bars to (Iswaran) being placed on (the scheme),” he added. 
Mr Tiwary said the authorities would also consider whether the offender has family support and their chances of reforming. From his understanding, Iswaran could serve the whole or part of four months of his sentence in home detention. 
“I will suspect that he is very eligible for home detention,” said the lawyer. 
IRB Law’s Mr Tan agreed. “From a quick perusal, it does not appear there are conditions which are met which would mean Iswaran is automatically disqualified from being considered for home detention,” he said. 
“Whether Iswaran is released on home detention or not would be a call taken by the Commissioner based on all the circumstances, including policy considerations.
“As an example, the City Harvest leaders convicted of criminal breach of trust were noted to have not qualified for home detention pursuant to policy reasons. Other considerations that may be considered include the prisoner’s progress and response to rehabilitation, family support and risk of recidivism.”