Little India riot



Singapore Infopedia

A riot that lasted about two hours erupted in Little India on Sunday, 8 December 2013, following a fatal traffic accident that had occurred along Race Course Road.1 Some 300 rioters took part in the unrest, which was the worst case of public violence in Singapore in over four decades.2 About 240 officers from the Singapore Police Force (SPF) as well as 56 from the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) were deployed to the scene.3 The riot left 54 responding officers and eight civilians injured, while 29 vehicles were damaged, five of which were burnt.4 As a result of the incident, measures such as increased police presence and alcohol restrictions have been implemented in Little India to prevent a repeat of such unrest.5

Background
Sunday is the most common weekly day off for South Asian transient foreign workers in Singapore, majority of whom work in the construction industry. Tens of thousands of these workers – most of whom hail from the state of Tamil Nadu, India – visit Little India on Sunday evenings to shop, run errands and socialise with friends.6

Besides public transport, private bus services are available on Sundays from the foreign workers’ dormitories to Little India under an initiative led by the Land Transport Authority. There are two boarding locations in Little India for the private buses. The one on Tekka Lane is overseen by the Singapore School Transport Association (SSTA), and the other along Hampshire Road by the Singapore School and Private Hire Bus Owners’ Association. Before the riot occurred, the private buses ferried about 23,000 workers to Little India every Sunday.7

The traffic accident
The accident that sparked the riot occurred at 9.21 pm on 8 December 2013. It killed Sakthivel Kumaravelu, a 33-year-old construction worker from Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.8

Before the traffic accident happened, Kumaravelu had boarded a private bus on Tekka Lane to return to his dormitory in Jalan Papan. However, some workers then complained to timekeeper Wong Geck Woon – who at the time was working for the SSTA and in charge of keeping track of bus arrival and departure times – that Kumaravelu was drunk and had jumped the queue for boarding the bus.9 It was the SSTA’s policy not to ferry intoxicated passengers. At this point, Kumaravelu was said to be walking unsteadily and had dropped his bermuda shorts to his knees. Wong told him to disembark, which he eventually complied.10

Shortly thereafter, Kumaravelu started chasing after the same private bus as it was moving off from the boarding location.11 He caught up with the bus when it stopped briefly before making a left turn onto Race Course Road. As the bus began to make the turn, Kumaravelu – who was on the left side of the bus – stretched out his right hand and placed it on the moving bus. He then lost his balance and fell face-down into the path of the bus’s left front wheel. He was run over and died instantly.12

On 11 February 2014, Lee Kim Huat, the 55-year-old driver of the private bus involved in the accident, was cleared of all charges as evidence established that he was not at fault.13 Kumaravelu was in Lee’s blind spot during the crucial seconds just before the accident, and the court ruled that Lee could not have known that Kumaravelu had run after the bus or would fall into its path.14 In the inquiry that followed, Kumaravelu’s fall was viewed to have been likely caused by intoxication – his blood alcohol level was nearly three times the threshold for motorists at the time of his death; the wet road surface and the instability contributed by the items he was holding, such as a long umbrella, were also said to have been possible factors that led to his loss of balance.15

The riot
Attacks on the bus, the driver and timekeeper
Within minutes of the accident, a crowd of foreign workers had formed and was thickening around the bus. Some started to hit the bus with their hands and shopping bags. Others were grabbing Lee – who had disembarked from the bus – by his arm and shirt, and threatening him. Wong also met with threatening gestures when she arrived at the scene of the incident.16

One of the foreign workers in the crowd shielded Lee and Wong from the crowd and ushered them onto the bus for safety, positioning his body at the bus entrance so as to protect them from the shoving crowd. As the horde continued their intimidation, Lee and Wong shut the bus door. Soon after, the crowd began hurling a variety of objects – including umbrellas, bottles and items from the street such as metal drain covers and garbage bins – at the bus, shattering the windscreen and windows. With the windows broken, projectiles flew into the bus. The crowd was estimated to be about 100-strong at this point. Lee then hid in a garbage bin that had been flung into the bus, while Wong took refuge in a cavity near the driver’s seat. Thereafter, Wong was assaulted on the head by one of two workers who managed to climb into the bus demanding to know where Lee was. The workers left the bus when they were unable to find Lee.17

Extrication and rescue
Kumaravelu’s body was extricated from beneath the bus by SCDF officers at 9.54 pm.18 At this point the crowd at the scene was said to have swelled to approximately 400.19 While working to free the trapped body, the officers were hit by projectiles thrown by the rioters.20

The SCDF and SPF officers then proceeded to rescue Lee and Wong from the rioters. Lee and Wong emerged from the bus at approximately 10.08 pm, with SCDF officers forming a protective circle around them, and SPF officers armed with shields in turn formed a semi-circle around the SCDF officers. As the party pushed their way through the crowd towards an ambulance, projectiles were aimed at the shield party.21

Destruction of emergency vehicles
After Lee and Wong were evacuated, there was a brief lull as the crowd began to thin out.22

However, some rioters began pelting projectiles at the ambulances and police vehicles, following which the mob expanded. These rioters broke concrete slabs from the sidewalks into pieces and hurled them at the emergency vehicles. Eventually, some rioters overturned six vehicles and set four of them on fire. An additional vehicle also sustained fire damage from a burning vehicle adjacent to it.23

By 10:25 pm, there were 159 police officers at the scene. Most of the violence and destruction, particularly to the emergency vehicles, took place from approximately 10.15 pm to 10.45 pm. During this period, the SPF officers faced severe communications problems. They could not clearly speak into or listen to their radio sets above the noise of the crowd, and their radio sets were jammed because too many messages were being sent over the same frequencies. Without the ability to communicate, the SPF officers decided against directly engaging the rioters. They held positions to keep the riot from spreading and did not make arrests while awaiting the arrival of the Special Operations Command (SOC), a specialist SPF squad trained in riot control.24

End of riot
At 10.42 pm, the first troop of 29 SOC officers arrived at the scene, followed by other SOC officers within the next few minutes.25 As a result of poor traffic conditions and a delay in deployment, it took in total 50 minutes for the SOC to arrive at the scene from the time of notification. By that time, the number of rioters had declined.26

When the SOC troops arrived, pre-recorded warnings ordering the rioters to disperse were played from their tactical vehicles in all four official languages. The SOC received approval for the SOC troops to use hand-held tear-gas sprays on rioters, but these were not used. As the SOC troops advanced to disperse the crowds, some rioters continued to fling projectiles at them. The rioters were eventually pushed and broken into small groups among buildings and back lanes. Plainclothes police officers then proceeded to the back lanes to arrest straggling rioters. The riot ended at 11.25 pm when the last group of rioters was dispersed by the SOC troops.27

Aftermath
The riot left 54 responding officers and eight civilians injured, while 29 vehicles were damaged, five of which were burnt.28

After the riot ended, high-visibility patrols were deployed to prevent rioters from regrouping.29 Race Course Road, the main scene of the riot, was reopened to traffic at 6.45 am the following morning, after investigations at the scene and clean-up operations were completed.30


Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong issued a press statement the next day, describing it as a “very serious” incident and called for calm. He also announced that he had ordered a committee of inquiry (COI) to look into the factors that led to the incident, the management of the incident and to review measures for managing areas where foreign workers congregate.31

Committee of inquiry
On 13 December 2013, a four-member COI led by former Supreme Court judge G. Pannir Selvam was appointed by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs Teo Chee Hean.32 The other three members of the committee were John De Payva, former president of the Singapore National Trades Union Congress, Tee Tua Ba, former commissioner of the SPF, and Andrew Chua Thiam Chwee, managing director of SME Care Pte Ltd and chairman of the West Coast Citizens’ Consultative Committee.33

As part of the COI’s investigation process, a public hearing lasting 24 days was held from 19 February to 26 March 2014, during which oral evidence was obtained from witnesses including Lee, Wong, SPF and SCDF officers, foreign workers, business owners, non-governmental organisations and residents in Little India.34

In the COI’s report submitted on 27 June 2014, three factors were identified to have contributed to the escalation of the Little India riot, while the primary trigger was identified to be the accident. The first factor was misperceptions. On the night of the incident, the rioters had probably held Lee and Wong responsible for Kumaravelu’s death, and were further aggravated upon seeing the responding officers protecting instead of arresting them for the accident.35

The second contributing cause identified by the COI pertains to the culture and psychology of the crowd. It was postulated that some foreign workers in the crowd wanted street justice for the deceased and thus enacted on the sentiment, as they felt that the death of their compatriot was caused by the driver. In addition, a witness testified that the working class from Tamil Nadu tend towards a rebellion streak against law enforcers – this was also deemed by the COI to have been a possible driving force in the unfolding of events.36

Finally, the COI felt that while alcohol was not a direct cause of the riot, it was a major contributing factor to the nature and escalation of the unrest.37

The media and some non-governmental organisations pointed to foreign workers’ dismal living and working conditions as the underlying cause of the riot. The COI, however, did not think dissatisfaction over employment and living conditions had caused the mayhem and damage.38

The COI also presented eight recommendations that mainly focused on better management of congregation areas, as well as improvements to operational procedures and effectiveness of responding officers in such situations.39 All eight recommendations were accepted by the government.40

Post-riot measures
Since the riot, a series of measures – including those in the COI’s recommendations – have been implemented, or are in the pipeline, to prevent similar incidents from occurring in future.41

Restrictions on alcohol sale and consumption
A two-day ban on alcohol sale in Little India was imposed for the weekend following the riot.42 While the ban was eased thereafter, restrictions in the area on alcohol sale, as well as alcohol consumption at public places, continue to be enforced.43 Under the Liquor Control (Supply and Consumption) Bill passed on 30 January 2015, Little India is designated as a Liquor Control Zone together with Geylang; both areas face stricter liquor sale and consumption controls compared with other parts of Singapore when the laws take effect on 1 April 2015.44

Private bus services
Private bus services to Little India were suspended for a week after the riot, but resumed, albeit at half its usual capacity, on 22 December 2013 with the last departure from Little India brought forward from 11 pm to 9 pm.45 Barricades were placed at the pick-up points to keep the workers in line before boarding.46 In 2014, a new purpose-built bus terminal was completed at Tekka Lane, with a second one at Hampshire Road to be completed in 2015.47

Other measures
Within Little India, more street lamps and surveillance cameras have been installed, and there is greater police presence on weekends.48 Outside of Little India, the number of recreation centres for foreign workers will be increased to provide more venues for them to spend their free time.49 The SPF has also taken steps to improve communications, reduce response time and further enhance their effectiveness in emergency situations, including a reduction in the layers of approval for activating the SOC.50

Action against the rioters
A total of 25 people were arrested at the scene on the night of the riot, with more arrests subsequently made.51

Eventually, 25 people were charged, including instigators and those who were actively engaged in acts of violence. A group of 57 were deported and would not be allowed to return to Singapore. This group had knowingly joined or continued to participate in the riot, despite being ordered by the police to disperse. Finally, 213 foreign workers whose involvement were assessed to be passive and incidental were issued warnings and briefed on Singapore’s laws and zero-tolerance policy on rioting.52

Chronology of events
The chronology of events on 8 December 2013 is as follows:53

9.21 pm: Sakthivel Kumaravelu is run over by a private bus.
9.23 pm: First report on the accident received by SPF via a “999” call.
9.25 pm: SCDF alerted.
9.31 pm: First SCDF ambulance arrives at the scene.
9.37 pm: First two police officers arrive at the scene; the bus is surrounded by a crowd of about 100 people.
9.39 pm: SCDF Red Rhino fire engine arrives at the scene.
9.45 pm: SPF requests for assistance from SOC to handle the riot; the crowd has expanded to about 400 people.
9.54 pm: Kumaravelu’s body is extricated from beneath the bus by SCDF officers; more police officers have arrived.
10.03 pm: Request to activate SOC approved.
10.04 pm: First SOC police tactical troop, PTT KA, activated.
10.08 pm: Bus driver Lee Kim Huat and timekeeper Wong Geck Woon emerge from the private bus under the protection of SCDF and SPF officers.
10.15 pm: Second SOC police tactical troop, PTT KG, activated.
10.42 pm: PTT KA arrives at the scene.
10.48 pm: PTT KG arrives at the scene.
11.25 pm: Dispersal of rioters and end of riot.



Author
Cheryl Sim



References
1. Lim Yan Liang, et al., “The New Face of Little India,” Straits Times, 2 February 2014, 12–13. (From Newspaper); “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013.” Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, 27 June 2014, 5.
2. Lim Yan Liang and Walter Sim, “The Night That Changed Singapore,” Straits Times, 6 December 2014, 2; Hoe Pei Shan, “Little India Riot: First Man Sentenced Gets 15 Weeks’ Jail,” Straits Times, 11 February 2014, 1 (From NewspaperSG); Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 6.
3. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 37.
4. Lim and Sim, “Night That Changed Singapore”; Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 37.
5. Walter Sim, “The COI Checklist: What’s Being Done,” Straits Times, 6 December 2014, 2. (From NewspaperSG)
6. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 6, 17; Lim and Sim, “Night That Changed Singapore.”
7. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 17; Lim, “New Face of Little India.”
8. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 5, 18, 20; “Night of the Riot,” Straits Times, 6 December 2014, 4–5. (From NewspaperSG)
9. “Night of the Riot”; Walter Sim, “Little India Riot: Bus Driver Will Not Face Charges,” Straits Times, 12 February 2014, 2–3; Francis Chan, “Committee of Inquiry to Probe Little India Riot,” Straits Times, 10 December 2013, 1; Yeo Sam Jo, “The Bus Timekeeper: ‘I’m still Scared of the Place…’,” Straits Times, 6 December 2014, 3. (From NewspaperSG)
10. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 19; “Night of the Riot.”
11. “Night of the Riot.
12. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “
Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 19–20.
13. Sim, “Little India Riot: Bus Driver Will Not Face Charges”; Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 38.
14. Walter Sim, “The Driver: Hard for Him to See Worker, Straits Times, 20 February 2014, 6–7; Sim, “Bus Driver Will Not Face Charges.”
15. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 20.
16. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 20–21.
17. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 21, 28.
18. “Night of the Riot.”
19. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 29.
20. Walter Sim, Lim Yan Liang and Lee Jian Xuan, “Worker Was Drunk When He Got On Bus: Witnesses,” 10 December 2013, 6–7. (From NewspaperSG)
21. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 5, 26.
22. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 5, 53.
23. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 5, 6, 53.
24. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 5, 7, 32, 54.
25. Rachel Chang, “Why the One-Hour Reaction Time to Little India Riot,” Straits Times, 6 December 2014, 3. (From NewspaperSG); “Night of the Riot.”
26. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 56.27. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 35–36; “Night of the Riot.”
28. Lim and Sim, “Night That Changed Singapore,” Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 37.
29. “Night of the Riot.”
30. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 15, 37; “Night of the Riot.”
31. Prime Minister’s Office, “Press Statement by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on Little India Riot,” press release, 9 December 2013; Chan, “Committee of Inquiry to Probe Little India Riot.”
32. Royston Sim and Lim Yan Liang, “Ex-judge to Head Riot Inquiry; Findings within Six Months,” Straits Times, 14 December 2013, 1. (From NewspaperSG); Ministry of Home Affairs, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India riot on 8 December 2013,” press release, 30 June 2014.
33. Ministry of Home Affairs, “Appointment of a Committee of Inquiry into Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” press release, 13 December 2013.
34. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 12–13.
35. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 38.
36. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 39–41.
37. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 38, 40–42.
38. Radha Basu, “Give Foreign Workers a Fair Deal,” Straits Times, 6 July 2014, 38 (From NewspaperSG); Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 11, 45.
39. “Looking Ahead, a Year After the Riot,” Straits Times, 13 December 2014, 42. (From NewspaperSG); Sim, “COI Checklist.”
40. Nur Asyiqin Mohamad Salleh, “MHA to Beef Up Police Anti-Riot Force,” Straits Times, 8 July 2014, 1. (From NewspaperSG)
41. Sim, “COI Checklist.”
42. Lim Yan Liang, “2-Day Ban on Alcohol Sale in Little India,” Straits Times, 12 December 2012, 1. (From NewspaperSG)
43. Feng Zengkun, “Little India Alcohol Curbs Eased, Steps To Control Crowds,” Straits Times, 19 December 2013, 1; Ho Pei Shan, Nur Asyiqin Mohamad Salleh  and Walter Sim, “Beyond the Riot: 5 Questions,” Straits Times, 12 July 2014, 2–3. (From NewspaperSG)
44. Lim Yi Han, “New Alcohol Laws Aimed at Those Who Cause Trouble,” Straits Times, 31 January 2015, 1. (From NewspaperSG)
45. Royston Sim and Pearl Lee, “Workers Return to More Order in Little India,” Straits Times, 23 December 2013, 1; Janice Heng, “Workers Stayed in Approved Dorms,” Straits Times, 28 December 2013, 2. (From NewspaperSG)
46. Lim, “New Face of Little India.”
47. Lim and Sim, “Night That Changed Singapore
48. Sim, “COI Checklist.”
49. Toh Yong Chuan, “Foreign Workers to Get Four More Recreation Centres,” Straits Times, 5 May 2014, 1. (From NewspaperSG)
50. Sim, “COI Checklist.”
51. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 57.
52. Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 57; Lee, P. (2013, December 23). Pearl Lee, “200 Foreign Workers Get Police Advisories,” Straits Times, 23 December 2013, 6; “Little India Riot Breaks Out,” Straits Times, 27 December 2013, 25. (From NewspaperSG)
53. “Night of the Riot”; Ministry of Home Affairs. Committee of Inquiry, “Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Little India Riot on 8 December 2013,” 22, 26.



Further resource
Zakaria Zainal and Prabhu Silvam, R!ot recollections (Singapore: Ethos Books, 2014). (Call no. RSING 363.323095957 ZAK)



The information in this article is valid as at 16 February 2015 and correct as far as we are able to ascertain from our sources. It is not intended to be an exhaustive or complete history of the subject. Please contact the Library for further reading materials on the topic.


Rights Statement

The information on this page and any images that appear here may be used for private research and study purposes only. They may not be copied, altered or amended in any way without first gaining the permission of the copyright holder.

More to Explore

Collapse of Barings

ARTICLE

Founded in 1762, Barings was the oldest merchant bank in Britain before its collapse in 1995. The 233-year-old bank was brought down single-handedly by its employee, Nicholas William Leeson, better known as Nick Leeson, a derivatives trader. After landing the bank with a debt of S$1.4 billion – largely through...

People's Action Party: Post-independence years

ARTICLE

Established on 21 November 1954, the People’s Action Party (PAP) has been the ruling political party in Singapore since the city-state became an independent nation in 1965. During the early years of independence, national survival and nation-building were the foremost concerns of the PAP government. At the time, Singapore was...

Inter-Religious Organisation, Singapore

ARTICLE

The Inter-Religious Organisation, Singapore (IRO), originally known as the Inter-Religious Organisation of Singapore and Johor Bahru, was founded on 18 March 1949 to promote friendship and cooperation among members of different religions. It originally represented six religions: Hinduism, Judaism, Buddhism, Christianity, Islam and Sikhism. Over the years, it expanded to...

Marxist conspiracy

ARTICLE

In May 1987, the Ministry of Home Affairs arrested 16 people under the Internal Security Act (ISA) for their involvement in a “Marxist conspiracy”. They were detained without trial for between one month and three years. Tan Wah Piow, a former University of Singapore Students’ Union president residing in the...

Singapore Democratic Party

ARTICLE

The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) is a political party founded by Chiam See Tong in 1980. The party is currently led by chairman Paul Tambyah and secretary-general Chee Soon Juan....

Teo Soon Kim

ARTICLE

Teo Soon Kim (b. 23 June 1904, Singapore–d. 23 April 1978), also known as Teow Soon Kim and later Lo-Teo Soon Kim, was the first local woman admitted to the bar of the Straits Settlements and the first woman barrister in Hong Kong when she was admitted to the Hong...

Clean Air Act of 1971

ARTICLE

The Clean Air Act was passed by parliament on 2 December 1971. It was Singapore’s earliest attempt to control industrial pollution just as the country was industrialising rapidly. As early as 1967, the pace of industrialisation in Singapore had prompted the World Health Organisation (WHO) to highlight the likely increase...

Former Kallang Airport building

ARTICLE

The former Kallang Airport building is an architectural landmark located at 9 Stadium Link along Nicoll Highway. Kallang Airport, Singapore's first purpose-built civil airport, was opened on 12 June 1937 in the Kallang Basin area. The airport ceased operations following the opening of Paya Lebar Airport in 1955. However, the...

Haze pollution

ARTICLE

Haze is an air-borne mixture of pollutants that includes soot particles, carbon dioxide and other toxic gases. Haze pollution affects several Southeast Asian countries on a regular basis, notably Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei, and to a lesser extent Thailand, Vietnam and the Philippines. The condition is largely caused by...

Environmental Public Health Act

ARTICLE

The Environmental Public Health Act became law on 2 January 1969. The act was aimed at setting up a standard code to govern health-related matters in public cleansing services, markets, hawkers, food establishments and the general environment. It also integrated the functions of the Public Health Division. The act replaced...