Singapore Judicial system is one that is disapproved of by lots of other countries. The main reason is because Singapore has caning and death sentences.

Singapore judicial system operates in the form of deterrence. By having severe punishment and sentences, it deters people from committing crime. This idea is similar to fining the Singapore citizens for littering. If a person wanted to commit theft, rape or even murder, they have to think twice about it and they might consider not to execute the act because of the punishment. If the punishment was just a fine or sentence to jail for a short period of time, the person might not even think twice about it and thus, the crime rates in Singapore will increase significantly as evident from the high crime rate in other countries.

Other countries disapproved of both the caning and death sentence is because they operate in the form of human rights. They feel that by sentencing them to death, it is a violation of human rights. Singapore will thus, appear in a bad light globally as people will see Singapore as a barbarian society.

My teacher told me once that she had gone to Canada once to study or take up a particular coarse whereby the instructor there shouted really loud, “YOU ARE A BARBARIAN BECAUSE YOU COUNTRY HAVE THE DEATH SENTENCE!” This is one of the evidence that shows that other people from other countries have bad impression of Singaporeans.

Furthermore, some other countries have a jury during the trial and the definition of a jury is a group of people who have been chosen to listen to all the facts in a trial in a law court and to decide whether a person is guilty or not guilty, according to the Cambridge Online Dictionary. They will carry out a voting process and majority wins, deciding whether a person is guilty or not depending on the situation. However, Singapore only has a judge who will determine whether the person is guilty or not and also decide on the sentence. Some have argued that the Singapore way of only having a judge might not be fair as it is only based on a person’s point of view. By having a jury, it will be fairer as it will consist of more than one person and will encompass different perspective of each individual in the jury.

I feel that Singapore having a judge to determine the sentence is alright as I am pretty sure the judge would be more knowledgeable in the law and would give a better and fairer sentence. The jury system is not really a bad idea as it takes account of the point of view of normal citizens. However, the citizens might not be qualified or knowledgeable in the field of law and might not give a fair outcome.

Lastly, Singapore’s judicial system is that a person is guilty unless proven not, while the American’s judicial system is that a person is not guilty unless proven to be. These two are very different as the person will forever be under custody in Singapore unless there is substantial evidence to prove that he is not while a person will not be in custody and will only be in custody if they are guilty.

In conclusion, I do not really disapprove or disagree in Singapore’s judicial system but I can only say that there is still room for improvement.