My Opinion on the Key Concept of John Stuart Mill's Harm Principle.

John Stuart Mill’s Harm Principle

John Stuart Mill’s Harm Principle was stated in his book “On Liberty”. John argues “that the sole purpose of law should be to stop people from harming others. Conversely, Mill concludes that government should not forcibly prevent people from engaging in victimless crimes such as gambling, drug usage, and prostitution”.
An extract of what essay is as shown:

“…is to assert one very simple principle, as entitled to govern absolutely the dealings of society with the individual in the way of compulsion and control, whether the means used be physical force in the form of legal penalties, or the moral coercion of public opinion. That principle is, that the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinion of others, to do so would be wise, or even right... The only part of the conduct of anyone, for which he is amenable to society, is that which concerns others. In the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign.”

Generally governance in any government is based on that principle, where policy makers will have to look at the outcome of developing or enforcing a particular law to be cleared by their respective parliaments or senates.
In Singapore, we have seen such policies being promulgated over the years. For example when the country was hit by the deadly SARS virus in Apr 2003. We have always had the law against spitting which is a common natural habit for many. Spitting in public places created uproar in Singapore on the onset of SARS when people were penalized for spitting in public places because of the possibility of the SARS virus being transmitted by the sputum of the individual. Singaporeans started to take notice of such violations and were voluntarily reporting people who violated that law, all for the sake of the general public. People started to be aware of the consequences. However after 5 years, that eagerness that was present in 2003 has dwindled as I have seen many Singaporeans spitting and getting away with it.
The same could be said about smoking where there is ban in smoking in public places. This was due to the findings that passive smoking has also caused lung cancer in people who do not smoke. A classic case where a law is instituted to stop people from harming other people.
Despotism is legitimate mode of government in dealing with barbarians. Such as the internal security act that hunts people down who are involved trans- territorial terrorism activities e.g. like the JIs or the Al Qaeda groups.
It is also important to note from John Mills that a person may cause evil to others not only by his actions but by his inactions too. This is where a person is held accountable for any injury that is caused by his inaction. This was clearly evident in the drowning of the NS solder in Pulau Tekong Military camp during a water dunking training, where the inaction(s) of the supervisor for the exercise was also held accountable for the death of the soldier, even though he was not the instructor actually conducting the training. Thus to make someone answerable for doing evil to others is the rule but to make him answerable for not preventing the evil is comparatively specking the exception but not totally ruled out in the court of law.

However the statement in John Mills exercise also emphasizes that personal liberty needs to be respected .This falls under the following category: a. Liberty of conscience (thoughts and feelings), b. Liberty of tastes and pursuits, and c. Liberty of combination of individuals.
I support the “Harm principle” that John Mills had stated for each of us must pursue our won good in our own way as long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs and or impede their efforts in doing so. Each of us are our own guardian, in how we look after ourselves in both physically, mentally and spiritually. Mankind has reached a point where whether as rulers or as citizens we tend to impose or inclinations and opinions as a rule of conduct on others and this is generally due to the desire to have power over others. As I see it this greed for power is not declining and the only way to move our society is to have inculcate a strong moral obligation against such mischief where we must not harm other people. This is the epitome social excellence that we must strive for.