Can't help cringing when I read the ST (4 March 2008) reporting the Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng maintaining that it is not police policy to offer rewards for information leading to the capture of criminals.
One reasoning I read was it could even be counter-productive as people with information might withhold it in anticipation of the reward being increased.
Now, I'm not advocating for influencing the public to be mercenary - but I am realistic enough to accept that offering such inducements if it would increase the chances of recapturing Mas Selamat.
To begin with, if it was deemed worth the resources deployed in mobilising the police and military to hunt him over the past week, it must surely be worth offering the reward.
The next consideration is that unfortunately, many people in Singapore are just indifferent, as evidenced by the lack of consideration in their public behaviour.
Last but not least, if it was deemed material to pay ministers well to retain them, what's the difference with paying public informants for information that is supposed to be vital.
If Singapore is a sufficiently altruistic society, we won't see smokers flouting non-smoking rules at coffeeshops nor litterbugs.
Unfortunately, Singapore is far from being a sufficiently altruistic society. :/
ReplyDeleteThere are more chances if you have big rewards but I don't know whether it can work with $1,000 esp this is not an ordinary prisoner.
ReplyDeleteOffering a reward may have the effect of making folks expect one with regards to providing information to the police in the future.
ReplyDeleteThis is a matter of civic-mindedness and doing things which benefit all of us as a society. A better comparison would be I shouldn't pay you to stop littering or smoke where you ought not to.
We don't think twice in offering strangers a helping hand. Giving a call to the police should be along those lines.
I can give more real-life examples where such methods are in the long run not a good idea. In the short run however, you are right, this will encourage people to come forward with information.
These are those spur of the moment things that any responsible citizen should do. It is not a long-term event that will have huge effect on your future life-path. Comparing this to ministerial pay is not fair at all, its not about the amount of money spent, but who you spent it on, how and why and it's effect.
Though it's duty of a citizen to report but still not many are willing to do it ( perhaps they have their very own reasons ) . In reality, money always works.
ReplyDeleteIt's matter of time he can be found or cannot be found, so if we are to calcuate the cost of labour and time for this full operation, it's still worth if he can be betrayed by somebody.
karakhoja makes a good point. The reward isn't just for the common ordinary folk who might spot the fugitive and need the $$$ to make that phone call to the police. Perhaps, it can be seen as an incentive (provided it is large enough) for someone close to the fugitive to betray and turn him in. But then, that really doesn't take away the issue of raising expectations on rewards for future incidences. hehe. Maybe a tiered reward scheme, more money for closeness of relationship to fugitive. hahaha
ReplyDeletei think we all remember a recent case of an autism teenage kid who got lost when he was out with his mother.
ReplyDeleteThe mother eventually called a radio station for help. Within hours after the broadcast, more than 400 listeners responded the call, and the kid was found. With no reward or incentives promised. I was really touched and would like to see this more in our very own people.
I think the escapee's case is very different from the lost autistic boy who was in immediate distress.
ReplyDeleteOne point must be noted that to induce a confidante of Mas Selamat to betray him, the reward must be great enough that the betrayer can use it to avoid reprisals.
The $1,000 might be a good start, usually people attracted to money are very greedy so probably we can wait to see who will make the first call. Money talks so the chances are greater than just using so many manpower to search for one person.
ReplyDeleteSo in this case, the govt is the one in distress.
ReplyDeleteOnce started, this reward thing will set as a precedent. There is a risk that people will not report if there is another wanted man of any kind in future, hoping for another reward.
Well, S$1K is a lot of money in Rupiah.
I think one reason the government is not giving any reward is precisely because they don't want to create such an expectation for reward in return for information for this or any future cases (eg. turning in of suspects, not just fugitives) It's better not to even set a precedent for it.
ReplyDeleteThere is also not a need for it in my opinion, because this is more of a social rather than moral issue:-
Singapore is more socially aware especially with regards to terrorism. Think about the images they keep bombarding us when we're waiting for the MRT. People are more willing to turn in information especially when lives, especially their own, may be at stake.
Besides, in lieu of a reward, the government has let it be known that it is an offence to harbour and help a criminal. So, it's more of a stick than carrot policy that the government is continually adhering to.
Where is Mas Selamat?
ReplyDeleteMar 05, 2008
Where is Mas Selamat bin Kastari, rumoured head of the Jemaah Islamiah in Singapore?
How did he escape from security at the Whitley Detention Centre?
These are the questions on everyone's lips, and Radio 91.3 DJs Petrina and Joe share some 'intelligence' from their information sources.
--AsiaOne Exclusive
http://multimedia.asiaone.com/Multimedia/Story/A1Multimedia20080305-2837.html