If you were in Sentosa in June, you would have noticed the ugly stain of black blanketing the blue-green waters at the beach.
Instead of the usual sea breeze with a pleasant hint of salt, a nauseating stench of oil filled the air. The waters, typically inviting, were greasy and black.
The cause: A damaged bunker vessel that leaked 400 tonnes of low-sulphur fuel that affected not only Sentosa, but East Coast Park, Labrador Nature Reserve, and the Southern Islands.
The ongoing cleanup has already seen the removal of some 550 tonnes of oil-soaked sand and debris, with port authorities directing affected parties to make claims against the vessel owner.
This is not the first time the Republic has suffered an oil spill. Notably, in 1989, oil leaking from a damaged chemical tanker in Malaysian waters washed into Singapore waters.
This resulted in a legal battle between the Port of Singapore Authority and the tanker’s owner over how far the latter was responsible for $1.3 million in pollution cleanup costs.
The Port of Singapore Authority won the case, as the court ruled that the tanker’s owners were not entitled to limit their liability to pay for costs.
Citing this example, Justice Philip Jeyaretnam, Judge of the High Court and president of the Singapore International Commercial Court, said that the “environmental rule of law” in Singapore operates by the “consistent and logical application of laws meant to safeguard the environment, with a clear appreciation of the environmental purpose behind them”.
He was speaking at the sixth instalment of the Singapore Courts’ (SG Courts) engagement series, “Conversations with the Community”, on July 26 at the National University of Singapore (NUS).
In his opening address titled “Advancing the Environmental Rule of Law – Roles and Responsibilities of the Community”, Justice Jeyaretnam pointed to Singapore’s vision of being a “Biophilic City in a Garden”, highlighting a mindset shift that has influenced SG Courts’ approach to environmental law and climate change litigation.
“We are responsible for the environmental welfare of future generations, and for other creatures, and the earth generally,” he said. “Singapore’s climate policy flows from a developing global consensus concerning the environment, namely that mankind is not its master, but its steward.”
How do the courts help safeguard the environment? Watch the sixth session of “Conversations with the Community” below to find out.
Despite this, tackling environmental issues – such as how to reduce carbon emissions – requires balancing stakeholder needs and competing priorities. For example, should an area prioritise animal conservation or clean energy generation?
Deciding these societal trade-offs is not a “natural” role for the courts, and is best left to policymakers, Justice Jeyaretnam said.
Singapore, he observed, only signs international treaties when it is ready to implement laws to fulfil its commitments (see below). The courts can then assist with enforcement of these rules.
SG Courts protect the environment by upholding laws that encourage conservation, corporate responsibility, and a circular economy.
Conservation
Corporate responsibility
Circular economy
Speaking at a presentation and panel discussion during the event, NUS emeritus professor Lye Lin Heng added that environmental legislation goes hand-in-hand with good governance: “There’s no magic in passing a law. It has to be implemented together with building environmental infrastructure… all this requires money and good planning.”
For one, Singapore’s commitment under the Paris Agreement to reach net-zero emissions by 2050 will require a mix of policies and instruments to achieve, said NUS associate professor and director of the Asia-Pacific Centre for Environmental Law Jolene Lin.
The Paris Agreement is an international treaty that aims to limit global warming to 1.5 deg C above pre-industrial levels. Net zero is achieved when the amount of man-made greenhouse gases produced equals the amount removed from the atmosphere.
To meet its net-zero obligations, the Republic is looking at consuming less and recycling more under the Singapore Green Plan 2030, which charts the path towards a more sustainable future.
Its efforts include a five-cent charge for plastic bags at supermarkets, an upcoming 10-cent deposit on bottled and canned drinks, and exploring potential improvements to blue recycling bins in Housing Board estates, said Mr Koh Min Ee, divisional director of the environmental policy division at the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment.
To ensure the nation is on track, the Government is applying supercomputing to better forecast rainfall, temperature and sea levels, added Ms Michelle Chng, who is head of the climate science research programme office under the Centre for Climate Research Singapore.
This offers more rigorous climate attribution science, which helps to measure our impact on the environment with greater accuracy.
Justice Jeyaretnam also emphasised that environmental policy requires tough trade-offs, and it is the legislative (the Parliament) and executive (Cabinet ministers and office-holders, led by the Prime Minister) branches of government that lead and formulate such policy.
In all, cultivating the city-state’s integration with green spaces will require “difficult adjustments in behaviour in order to accommodate wild animals”, Justice Jeyaretnam said.
“In this highly urbanised environment, it is tempting to think that our interactions with nature should be regulated and controlled in our favour to serve a densely concentrated human population,” he added.
“Collectively, however, our society has chosen a different path… we are stewards, not mere exploiters. We must pass to our children and grandchildren a world and an environment that is once more on the mend.”
Register your interest for the final session of “Conversations with the Community” by emailing conversations@judiciary.gov.sg. Visit www.judiciary.gov.sg for more details.
In partnership with SG Courts