Reconsider age exemption for judicial caning: Forum
Source: Straits Times
Article Date: 03 Aug 2026
According to the law, men over 50 are exempt from caning, with courts permitted to impose up to 12 months’ additional imprisonment instead. This rule, inherited from colonial legislation when life expectancy was about 50, has not kept pace with modern realities, says the writer.
The case of Koh Lee Hwa, who escaped judicial caning after turning 50 despite having been sentenced to 13 strokes of the cane for rape and other sexual offences, has exposed a troubling gap in Singapore’s sentencing framework.
In another case, a man in his early 50s was jailed for raping a 71-year-old woman with dementia.
Both offenders were only marginally above 50, neither frail nor incapacitated, yet automatically shielded from a punishment prescribed for such crimes. Exempting such offenders reduces the deterrent effect of sentencing and leaves victims with the sense that justice is incomplete.
According to the law, men over 50 are exempt from caning, with courts permitted to impose up to 12 months’ additional imprisonment instead. This rule, inherited from colonial legislation when life expectancy was about 50, has not kept pace with modern realities.
Today, Singaporeans live well into their 80s, and many remain healthy and active beyond their 60s. If society no longer regards men in their 50s as old or frail, should the justice system continue to do so?
The concern is not new. In 2022, then President Halimah Yacob urged a review of the exemption after a spate of sexual offences by older perpetrators, asking whether offenders should escape caning simply because they had crossed an age threshold.
This is not a call for caning of all offenders above 50 but to reconsider whether a blanket exemption remains justified.
A more graduated framework could be explored: Medically fit offenders in their early 50s who commit serious sexual offences might remain eligible for caning, while higher age bands could incorporate safeguards or apply only to repeat offenders. Such an approach would better reflect contemporary realities, preserve deterrence and strengthen confidence in sentencing.
The recent cases involving offenders who have only just crossed the age threshold underscore the need for Parliament to revisit this law and ensure sentencing remains both fair and credible.
Vikki Chan
Source: The Straits Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction.
543