Pular para o conteúdo
Menu
Mix Vale

Strict law in Singapore has banned the manufacture and sale of chewing gum for over 30 years

Carolina Costa
Por 4 min de leitura
Compartilhe
chicletes - RyanJLane/Istock.com
Foto: chicletes - RyanJLane/Istock.com

Singapore has had a peculiar law prohibiting the manufacture and sale of chewing gum for more than three decades, with strict controls in place since 1992. The measure, officially introduced on January 1, 1992, aims to combat the inappropriate disposal of chewing gum, which caused significant problems in the Asian country’s urban infrastructure. For residents and visitors to Singapore, it is essential to understand that chewing gum is not illegal in itself, but rather its sale and disposal in public places is.

Discarding gum in public places can generate significant fines, reinforcing the country’s reputation for its strict cleanliness standards and civic behavior. Although the rule is strict, there are some exceptions for certain varieties intended for dental and therapeutic purposes.

The beginning of prohibition and urban challenges

The idea of ​​banning chewing gum came about in 1983, when the then Prime Minister of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, received a proposal to deal with the waste problem. Remains of gum were found in places such as mailboxes, locks, elevators, stairs, sidewalks and bus seats, generating high cleaning and maintenance costs for the city.

Initially, Lee Kuan Yew considered the total ban to be an excessive measure for the time. However, the persistence of the problem and the impact on public infrastructure has led to a reassessment of the need for stricter legislation to control chewing gum.

Subway incident accelerated legislation

The gum issue gained urgency after the inauguration of the Mass Rapid Metro (MRT) system in 1987. Authorities began recording cases of gum being stuck to train door sensors, causing service disruptions and hampering the operation of essential public transport.

This critical issue has led authorities to re-evaluate the need for stricter action. Interference with a vital transport system demonstrated the practical impact and extent of the problems caused by inappropriate disposal of chewing gum in the city.

The implementation of the law in 1992 and its repercussions

It was in January 1992 that Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong implemented a ban on the sale of chewing gum. The decision sparked discussion and controversy, attracting the attention of international journalists who frequently highlighted Singapore’s strict rules of conduct.

Lee Kuan Yew defended the need to maintain certain rules to preserve order in the country. In a well-known statement, when asked whether gum stuck to the asphalt could be creativity, he replied that “sticking gum to subway doors to stop them from opening, I don’t call that creativity. I call it mischief.”

Understand the exceptions and myths about gum in Singapore

A common belief is that chewing gum in Singapore is illegal, which is a misconception. The legislation focuses mainly on prohibiting the import, manufacture and sale of the product. For personal use, small quantities may be brought into the country; however, disposal in public places may result in fines.

Since 2004, there have been exceptions for gum for dental or therapeutic purposes, which can be purchased through authorized professionals. These exceptions demonstrate that the ban is not absolute, but aims to control the environmental and infrastructural impact of chewing gum.

The effects of prohibition and the reputation of ‘city of fines’

Following the ban, authorities saw a notable decrease in gum residue in public spaces. Problems such as subway doors blocking, caused by gum, were also significantly reduced, contributing to the efficiency of services.

The legislation contributed to Singapore’s image as a country with high standards of cleanliness and civic behavior. Law professor Eugene Tan comments that the inhabitants themselves refer to Singapore, ironically, as the “city of fines”, due to the large number of sanctions for various behaviors. The intention of the law is not to prevent the act of chewing, but to control trade and prevent improper disposal from becoming a public problem again.

Carolina Costa é colaboradora da redação do Mix Vale, portal de notícias com cobertura de Brasil e mundo. Produz conteúdo nas editorias de economia e benefícios, com foco em informação de serviço para o leitor brasileiro. Escreve para o portal desde 2019. Formação: Administração

Notícias relacionadas

Mais lidas

  1. Caixa Econômica Federal

    Dinheiro público: Nova marca da Caixa Econômica Federal consome mais de R$ 3 milhões em projeto que altera letras do logotipo

  2. Detran

    Volta do seguro DPVAT em 2027 não foi anunciada pelo governo federal e boato usa gravação antiga

  3. Detran

    Entenda o Free flow: qual o prazo para pagar sem multa? Como consultar as tarifas? Veja perguntas e respostas em 2026

  4. Economia

    Veterans Day 2026 nos Estados Unidos: veja o que abre e fecha no feriado federal desta quarta-feira

  5. Destaques

    Stacy Keach morre aos 85 anos na Polônia vitimado por insuficiência cardíaca após carreira marcante

  6. Concurso Público

    Concurso Prefeitura de Luzerna SC abre vagas com salários de até R$ 14.004,00 no Meio-Oeste

  7. Economia

    10 dicas para o 11.11 orientam compras e protegem contra golpes no comércio eletrônico nesta quarta-feira

  8. Destaques

    Cupons de desconto no 11.11 liberam abatimentos de até R$ 580 no comércio eletrônico nesta quarta-feira

  9. Economia

    11.11 no Brasil antecede a Black Friday de 27 de novembro com descontos em mais de metade dos produtos monitorados

  10. Dicas de Saúde

    Saiba quantas horas de sono por dia são ideais para cada idade: OMS e CDC fixam metas de descanso de bebês a idosos

Sua privacidade

O Mix Vale usa cookies para medir audiência e exibir anúncios que sustentam a redação. Você escolhe. Política de privacidade.