Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
Singapore – Last year, Charlotte received him a call from someone who claims to be an employee at the Singaporean Cybersecurity Agency.
The caller told Goh that her number was linked to a fraud of Malaysians and directed her to the “Malaysian Interpol” to submit a report.
As a sales professional who often lists his number in public spaces, Goch, who asked to use a nickname, finds the story plausible.
For two hours, he shared personal information such as her name and identification number, although he hesitated to disclose her exact information about the bank.
“I wasn't sure if it was a fraud – it sounded so true – but I was also afraid it could be so,” she told Al Jazeera.
When she was asked to shoot her official identity card, Goch realized that she was deceived and closed. Fortunately, the 58 -year -old Goch managed to quickly change his passwords and transfer funds to his daughter's account before some money could be stolen.
Others in her circle of friends were not so lucky.
“Some friends have lost thousands,” she said.
Singapore, one of the most wealthy and internet-healthy countries in the world, has become a major goal for global scammers.
In the edition of 2023, of the annual report of the Global Anti-Issue Alliance, Singapore had the highest average loss of victims of all surveyed countries, at $ 4,031.
In the first half of 2024, fraud reports reached a record height of $ 26,587, with losses exceeding $ 284 million.
To fight this, the government has become unprecedented measures.
Earlier this month, Singapore's parliament adopted legislation on the first of its kind legislation, giving the authorities to freeze the bank accounts of suspect victims of fraud.
According to the Bill on Protection of the Fraud Bill, designated employees may order banks to block a person's transactions if they have reason to believe that they intend to transfer funds, withdraw money or use credit facilities to take advantage of a fraudster S
The affected are still reserves access to everyday life costs.
Singapore police claim that convincing victims of being deceived is a constant challenge.
Despite numerous anti-SCAM initiatives, education efforts and the introduction of functions such as murder switches, 86 percent of all reported fraud in the urban state between January and September 2024 includes the wishing transfer.
The general tactics used by fraudsters include the presentation of civil servants and creating an illusion of a romantic relationship.
“This bill allows the police to act decisively and to close a gap in our arsenal against fraudsters,” Sun Xueling told Parliament.
Although the law is welcomed by its supporters as a critical instrument in combating growing fraud, it is also discussed a debate about the Singaporean Government's famous trend to interfere with private issues, a model of government is sometimes described as “benevolent paternalism”.
Critics regard the law as a continuation of the paternalistic government embodied by the founding leader of Singapore, the late Lee Quan TisWho once declares that he is “proud” that the city-state is known as a nanny country and claims, do how you spit.
In his speech in parliament, before passing the Jamus Lim bill, a small opposition party to the workers, expressed concern about the obsessive nature of the law, suggesting that people can give up their defense or identify reliable family members instead of administrators instead of administrators This accounts.
“One can be inconveniently specifically with how the bill provides the law enforcement of the law enforcement agencies to intervene and limit what is ultimately a private transaction,” Lim said.
Bertha Hanson, a former editor of Straits Times newspaper, said the legislation is only the last example of the government to intervene in “so many parts of our lives.”
“Can we be adults and not continue to run to the state for protection?” Hanson said in a Facebook post. “Because we really need to think much further and ask who will protect the individual from the state. Or whether we can always be sure that the right hands are in the lead. “
The discussion is coming as the government is deploying scope measures to improve public security, including plans to double the number of police cameras up to over 200,000 by the mid-2030s and legal amendments to the police with new powers to detention of persons with conditions of mental health that are considered to be a risk of safety.
Other recent laws, such as the protection against online lies and the Law on Manipulation and the Law on Manipulation and the Law on Foreign Interventions (Counteracts), reflect efforts to deal with misinformation and external influence.
Although they are presented as measures to protect national security and social stability, they also grant the authorities wide discretionary powers.
Walter Terira, Assistant Professor of Economics at Singapore University of Social Sciences (SUSS), said government legislation for the fight against SCAM reflects the steep economic and social costs of fraud in the urban state.
Teri noted that many retirees choose to manage significant sums of money outside the mandatory Singapore savings scheme used to finance pension, health and housing needs, putting them “at risk of losing all this.”
“Unfortunately, the right to do what you want with your funds may need to be restricted if your decisions ultimately make you dependent on society or encourage more criminal activity,” Treiri told Al Jazeera.
Eugene Tan, Assistant Professor at the University of Singapore University (SMU), said increasing fraud losses have caused a “preventive approach” focused on preventing fraud before appearing.
“If it is not urgent and stable, then we are not far from an inappropriate disaster,” Tang told Al Jazeera.
“The government is alive up to social costs and will be rejected in its obligations not to cope with the upcoming crisis.”
Trust in the Government
Proponents of the law claim that it is strictly defined in its scope. The legislation states that restriction orders will only be issued as a last resort if all other efforts to persuade the individual have failed.
Persons also have the right to appeal orders to limit restriction, which initially last 30 days and can be extended to five times.
While the law may seem intrusive to outsiders, the Singaporeans are widely expected to take an active role in the supervision of the well -being and well -being of the public, said Tang Ern Ser, Assistant Professor of Sociology at the National University of Singapore (NUS).
“In a sense, the Singaporeans want” parental support “, but not the aspect of the” control “of paternalism,” Tang told Al Jazeera, describing the expectation of the society for “election, more form of paternalism.”
What distinguishes Singapore is the great trust of the public in the government, Tan said, citing research such as the Asian barometer and the worldwide study of values.
Tan pointed out that Singaporeans accepted widely accepted home stay orders, mandatory masks and tracking of contact during the Covid-19 pandemic, which is not “politicized to any significant degree”.
JIP HON Weg, a member of the ruling People's Party for action, said the extended police powers were a needed response to the growing problem with fraud.
“This ability to act is quickly changing the game for victims that are repeatedly targeted as it prevents more financial losses at critical moments,” JIP told Al Jazeera, sharing the case with an adult in his electoral area, which has lost Life savings as a cheater posing as a government official.
“Temporary limitation of account access is a drastic step, but one that can save people from financial destruction. However, such measures must be exercised carefully in order to avoid undermining public confidence. “
YIP said that “the intrusiveness of the law – temporarily limits access to accounts – requires a delicate balance” between the protection of the personal agency and the stable implementation.
Although the law is suitable for the political context of Singapore, such measures may not be as easily adopted in the global context, some analysts say.
“The parties will have to decide what will work for them and whether there is an entrance to the legislative regime to deal with fraud,” said the tang of SMA, which suggests that there is a limit on how much condition can intervene and that “political costs of Such measures cannot be neglected. “
The law has already attracted negative online chatty and is worth the government political capital, SUS said, adding that “it has created a conversation point that can be used against them in the upcoming elections.”
The general elections in Singapore, which should be held until November, come against the backdrop of increasing dissatisfaction with the accessibility of housing, increasing costs of living, inequality in income, increase in polarization and perceived restrictions on disagreement in civil society.
NUS's tang said it is unlikely that the SCAM Act to set a global precedent in the era of increasing distrust of politicians and the government.
“In general, my opinion is that a high degree of trust in the government/institutions, social cohesion and consensus is needed when intervention is intended to limit or limit to a good, legitimate reason, but with the fact that society becomes more destroyed and Polarized, and entering the era after the truth, “fair and fake, and the foul is fair,” Tan said, quoting Macbeth.
