Speech by Mr K Shanmugam, Minister for Law, at the Open Meeting of Ministers of Justice, St. Petersburg International Legal Forum

10 Apr 2020 Posted in [Speeches]

1. Thank you for the opportunity to take part once again after the earlier Plenary Session.

2. As pointed out, Asia Pacific felt the impact of this virus first. We had China, and then South Korea, Japan, Singapore – because of the frequency of travel interactions – then slowly the rest of East Asia too.

3. Because we are a relatively small city, we have our own challenges. An international city, with people moving in and out. Lots of foreign residents staying in Singapore, lots of tourists – more than 20 million tourists in a year. Tremendous challenges in trying to deal with this issue.

4. At the same time, we did not want to go into an immediate lockdown. We assessed that the way the virus would impact on the population would have a certain curve. We did not want the curve to go up, but too early a lockdown would also severely impact the economy and people’s lives.

5. We therefore started out with a series of steps. Businesses were allowed to continue, eating houses and bars remained open. Various directives and advisories to different groups, different levels of medical advice, but at all times looking carefully at the numbers, and making sure that our healthcare capabilities were not overwhelmed by the number of people who were infected and that our ICU capacity was well ahead.

6. We expected that the peak would come sometime in April and May. We have been faced with a rising number of infections in the last week, so we went for what we call a major “circuit breaker”, as of 7 April, where pretty much all offices have been closed, all businesses have been closed and all restaurants are only allowed to serve takeaway food. People have to stay at home. Only essential services are allowed – health care workers, utilities, some parts of the government.

7. So that is how we have been coping. Some of the other countries have their experiences as well. And the law had to be used. We have passed various, different regulations. Some through Parliament, some through ministerial directives under existing legislation. They deal with a variety of issues such as healthcare and social issues.

8. I spoke in an earlier panel about legislation that we have passed on the economic side. It has been a hard stop. And as a result of our hard stop, which no one could have predicted – no one could have predicted this virus and its implications – business has just come to a complete standstill. In this situation, it would not really be fair to look at each contractual provision and insist on every single contractual right. Some of the weaker parties and small and medium enterprises need to be helped. The law would normally call this a force majeure. So, we put into law something like a force majeure, for six months. A legal circuit breaker.

9. People are given time to look at their obligations. Certain types of contracts like tenancy contracts – they cannot go on performing right now, nor should they be required to pay rent if they are unable to at this point in time. They should be given some time.

10. Governments around the world have had to intervene on health care issues and social issues. For example, locking down, requiring people to stay at home, making sure medical supplies are not disrupted, dealing with the economic disruption, dealing with the hearings in courts.

11. I think one key lesson is that every state has had to be agile and competent, and has had to be strong, clear-sighted and farsighted enough to draft legislation to put into place, even as they are firefighting on the existing healthcare front.

12. From an international perspective, I would also like to share a thought. When the virus started out in China and some other places, it looked to be far away from Europe and other places in the world. When China took a series of what were seen as very tough measures, and some of the other countries too, there was a tendency to describe them as authoritarian. As measures that can only be done in some countries and not in places with a different political system. But now, we see similar measures being imposed in various countries, including what you would call the liberal democracies – Italy and various European countries.

13. I think we have to try and look at it as a common humanity – One World. We are probably going to face pandemics more frequently, and they are going to go around the world fairly quickly because of the connectivity.

14. We need a common vocabulary, not looking down on each other, but trying to understand that certain measures are necessary. For example, the measures that were taken in China were suitable for China. They are also suitable for some of the other countries. What works is distancing people, making sure they do not congregate.

15. Rather than seeking political advantage in the international arena, or attaching political labels, I think it is useful to look at what works, what doesn’t work. Look at the best practices in Europe, the US, China, Japan, and try and come up with something that we all think works as a template for the future. A common vocabulary both in science and in the social side of things.

16. There are many things that Europe is doing that I think we can learn from. Likewise, the way America has dealt with the shortage of medical supplies by ramping up, is something that we always thought America had the capability to do. It is useful to learn from that and see how we can all benefit from a common approach.

17. I left the earlier panel with a number of questions. Because this is a different panel, I would like to share the same questions.

18. The way this pandemic has developed has really changed the way business is done – people work from home, in a less structured manner. What does it mean for business? What does it mean for our responses in future? And when we do encounter pandemics in the future, what are we going to do as a world to prepare for that, in terms of legal systems? How are we going to get a more united response across the globe? Does international law have to come in? How do we make sure medical essentials are given out so countries have access to them, particularly the countries which do not have advanced medical healthcare systems? How do we make sure they also have access to medical expertise and scientific knowledge?

19. I think a lot of questions have been raised, and a forum like this will help in answering them, or at least in raising them and getting people to think about them. And then, hopefully, we try and get some answers.

20. Thank you Chairman.

Last updated on 10 Apr 2020