I’m sure by now most of you have read about the alleged dog abuse case at Pasir Ris Camp. Mindef released a statement saying that they have completed the investigation and found no evidence of dog abuse.
Some people asked why did Mindef punish the whistle blower but not the officer.
The NSF was punished for unauthorized video recording and unauthorized disclosure of information to 3rd party. What he should have done is report the matter to his commanding officer. If the commanding officer don’t take action, then report to the next person up the chain of command until action is being taken. He should not have send the video to an external party. I believe unauthorized video recording in camp carry a heavy sentence. However, the NSF was given 21 days of suspension of leave. I think Mindef gave him a lighter sentence since he did it to save the dog.
As for the officer, Mindef and AVA conducted an investigation and found no evidence of dog abuse. That’s why the officer wasn’t punished. Because there wasn’t any abuse. If the NSF’s father have any evidence of dog abuse in the camp, he should contact Mindef directly and request that they re-investigate the case. We keep hearing from Animal Lovers League saying that there is dog abuse. My question is, where? Are they able to provide any photo evidence of dog abuse or any medical checkup from vet?
Mindef however showed us a photo of someone bitten by the dogs in camp. If you scroll through the tons of comments on Singapore Army Facebook page, you will also see some comments from Paris Ris camp personnel saying that they were almost attacked by the dogs.
So we have evidence of dogs attacking human but no evidence of dog abuse.
A lot of people were saying that the way they tie the dog in the toilet is cruel. Personally, I think they could have restrain the dog in a better manner. But bear in mind that these are soldiers, not train animals rescuers. They do not have the proper equipment to catch and confine a stray dog until AVA arrives. Thus they use whatever tools they have in camp to do the job. I believe they tried their best and without ill intent. They could have done better but I wouldn’t call it dog abuse. After all, AVA did perform a medical checkup on the dog and found no signs of abuse.
Some people said that Mindef and AVA are trying to cover up. My question to those people is, Why? Why would Mindef want to cover up for an officer when the whole incident has gone so public? And why would AVA agree to cover up together with Mindef? What is so special about this officer that Mindef and AVA are willing to risk their public image to protect him?
There are several reported cases of dogs attacking people in the camp. If the officer didn’t take any action and someone get seriously injured by the dogs, Mindef gets the blame. I agree that the way they catch and confine the dog could have been done better. But keep in mind that they are not trained to do so and there is no evidence that they did it with ill intent. All they wanted to do is to protect their men from being attack by the dogs again.
And until now, nobody, not even Animal Lovers League, is able to provide concrete evidence of dog abuse at Pasir Ris Camp.