Singabloodypore

Singabloodypore.rsfblog.org

2007-06-01T19:37:00.000+08:00

You are about to be redirected to the site hosted with Reporters Without Borders. This blogspot address will no longer be updated from today 1st June 2007.

If you are not automatically redirected in 5 seconds please click here.

Singapore Activists Face Police Harrassment & Intimidation

2007-05-31T23:28:00.000+08:00

Message of defiance from Singapore activists

Resolute in the face of police intimidation
30 May 07

Several activists have been called up for questioning by the police for standing up for their rights of freedom of speech and peaceful assembly last year.

Fifteen local democracy advocates attended police investigations in the past several weeks to answer questions on their participation in two events: the World Bank-IMF meeting in September and on International Human Rights Day in December.

Despite the harassment, however, these human rights defenders remain defiant. In a signed statement as well as video-taped messages, the advocates reiterated their commitment to establishing their political and civil rights of Singaporeans.

The police have made outrageous allegations that the advocates have committed offences such as "counseling disobedience to the law", "holding an assembly and procession without a permit", and even "incitement to violence".

In Sep 06, seven activists took part in a protest at Hong Lim Park during the World Bank-IMF meeting, calling for freedom of speech in Singapore. They were stopped by the police which turned the event into a 72-hour standoff.

On 10 Dec 06, several advocates conducted a Freedom Walk down Orchard Road to mark International Human Rights Day.

This is the first time that a group of Singaporeans have courageously stood up for their rights and they remain resolute in the face of police intimidation. They responded with dignity by going to the police stations to face the investigators.

They even called on fellow Singaporeans to step forward and join them in their fight against the despotic PAP Government (see video). They also made appeals to the international community to pay attention to the continued repression in Singapore.

The group's action will shine the spotlight on the PAP which is running out of ideas on how to improve Singapore and resorting to desperate measures to silence a population which is becoming more assertive.

The latest police action signals a regime increasingly at odds with the people it rules and it is a clear indication of a Government that is insecure and lacking in confidence.

One of the activists, Mr Jeffrey George, who is a staunch advocate of democratic values and practices, said: "Singaporeans must not be cowed by this bullying. We must show that our right to democracy and freedom is inalienable, it cannot be taken away from us."

Mr John Tan, another democracy advocate, added: "I challenge the Government to live up to the pledge our children recite in school everyday, that is, to build a democratic society, based on justice and equality."

Mr Tan questioned how could Singaporeans feel proud when citizens "are hauled up for being patriotic?"

"How can we feel at home when we do not have basic human rights such as the freedom of speech and expression?" he asked. "The freedom of speech and the freedom to assemble are fundamental to the very definition of democracy. They are the elements that either make us a free people or a nation of slaves."

Express your support for these courageous citizens who have found their voice and are standing up to the PAP. Write them a message of solidarity and encouragement (speakup@singaporedemocrat.org).

It is our duty to speak up, 30 May 07

We, the undersigned, are being questioned by the police for taking part in political activities on 16 September 2006 and 10 December 2006.

We are Singaporeans exercising our sacred rights and speaking up for the rights of our fellow citizens.

We object to being harassed by the Singapore Government and reiterated our stand that as citizens its is our duty and responsibility to speak up and hold our Government accountable. These rights are enshrined in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

We oppose the repressive measures of the ruling Peoples’ Action Party which continues to use laws to prosecute citizens for exercising our freedoms of speech and assembly.

We call on democracy defenders to denounce the anti-democratic stance of the Singapore Government and to support the cause of democracy in Singapore.

Signed,

Gandhi Ambalam
Chee Siok Chin (Ms)
Chee Soon Juan
Chong Kaixiong
Jeffrey George
Johnny Hoe
Isrizal
Kirat Kaur (Ms)
Monica Kumar (Ms)
Priveen Suraj
Gerald Sng
John Tan
Charles Tan
Tan Cheng Poh
Teoh Tian Jing
Yap Keng Ho
Francis Yong

to comment

Singapore - Legal Letter from Grand Seasons International

2007-05-30T23:35:00.000+08:00

It appears that Tomorrow.sg has received a Legal Letter from Grand Seasons International Lawyers(referring to this entry?).

October 23, 2006
timeshare scam
Gecko said:

I have removed the original content at the request of Gecko.

Link

Submitted by gecko on October 23//10:46am and published by cowboycaleb, shianux :: add new comment | 3833 reads | trackback

Threats of legal action should never be used to quash legitimate and valid criticism on the internet and as well as that they simply draw attention to an issue that would have drifted off into the ether to have been forgotten about. The first point of contact should not be to threaten legal action.

The letter states....

Our Ref: JSG/1311/07
Date: 23 May 2007

Editor
Tomorrow.sg
Registrar: Vooju Pte Ltd
Registrant: James Seng
[Address]

Dear Sir

GRAND SEASONS INTERNATIONAL - TIMESHARE SCAM COMPANY

We act for M/s Grand Seasons International Pte Ltd.

Our clients instruct that a blog has been published in your Bulletin of Singapore Bloggers at the following url address: http://tomorrow.sg/archives/2006/10/23/grand_seasons_international_ti.html with the heading in bold "Grand Season International-TimeShare Scam Company".

We are instructed that the above words are defamatory of our clients and our client's reputation and goodwill has been disparaged and seriously damage. It is common knowledge that the Internet has millions of users who have free and open access to the words complained of.

In the premises our clients instruct that unless the above offending words are removed from the above url address and from the bulletin board within the next 5 days from the date hereof our clients shall have no alternative but to proceed as they deem fit in the matter.

Our clients also seek your co-operation to disclose the name and address of "GECKO" who has posted comment on 23/10/06 regarding our clients in the captioned matter as our clients intend to pursue their legal rights against the writer.

Yours faithfully,

Jagjit Singh Gill

cc clients

And the offending article which will of course now receive far more attention than it ever would have is available below...

read more...

Voices of Freedom

2007-05-30T22:25:00.000+08:00

The following article is posted here for my own records as it does refer to an issue that has from time-to-time been mentioned in passing in the Singapore Blogosphere - namely that it tends to be dominated by the usual suspects, middle-class, educated, males and there does seem to be a lot of 'journalists', lawyers, postgraduate students, undergraduate students, and IT experts dominating the sg blogosphere. So where is the marginalised Singaporean?

Blogs and podcasts enable a powerful and authentic voice for marginalised communities sidelined by mainstream media

Nathalie McDermott
Wednesday May 30, 2007
The Guardian

Prisoners cannot podcast because they do not have access to the internet, but if they could the material would be fascinating. It would be authentic, raw and compelling without being sensational. Instead of the stock answers we hear from prisoners in television soundbites, you might hear "Jamie" own up to the fact that he has never told his kids he is inside because he is so ashamed, and that they think he is at work. Or about how "Bruno" only gets a buzz from crime and feels "the butterflies when I'm on a bit of work", and has never held down any other job. You'd hear prisoners talking to each other, intimately and frankly, from a shared position of trust and common knowledge.

I worked in a prison for three years, training offenders to run a talk radio station, and the thing that struck me most was how much better the content was than anything I have ever heard - or produced when I was a journalist - on mainstream media about prison issues.

People would come to visit the station, listen to the programmes and chat to the prisoners. Without fail, whatever their views on the criminal justice system, they would invariably leave with an entirely different perception of serving offenders and how we as a society deal with crime.

Thrilling tool

This is the power of simple conversation. Citizen journalism - real people speaking to real people through podcasts and blogs - means that we can have those conversations online, and this is what makes it such a thrilling tool for positive social change.

There is a lot of debate in the media about the term "citizen journalism". Many conventional journalists prefer "user-generated content" or "social media" to set it apart from what they have been trained for years to do, which is fair enough I suppose, since the two are distinct. Citizen journalism is content - text, photos, audio and video - that is generated by the public and sometimes, but rarely, makes its way into a mainstream newspaper or broadcast bulletin. It is mostly found in blogs or on networking sites such as MySpace. The main difference between the two mediums is that citizen journalism cuts out the middle man, and the story is told from a position of first-hand knowledge and partiality.

The reason that this can be more engaging is that someone at the centre of an issue can get more out of their interviewees because of the trust that comes from shared experience, background or culture. So while there will always be a need for trained journalists to sift through and select information for cogent analysis, when it comes to really getting to the bottom of an issue, it makes sense to go to the source and hear the people who are directly involved - unedited and without time constraints or word limits.

So how can positive social change be achieved through an abundance of disorganised chat on the internet? I run an organisation that trains marginalised groups and voluntary and public sector organisations to podcast, allowing them inexpensively to produce audio or video from their perspective. They can do and say what they like, as long as it is legal. Campaigners and charity workers do not have to wait for the media to take an interest in their issue - they can produce material themselves that will be of interest to their target audience, as opposed to mainstream media, which must appeal to a much wider audience.

However, most of my time has shifted towards working with marginalised groups because there is something that worries me about the digital revolution. When I surf through blogs, podcasts and content sharing sites such as YouTube and MySpace (examples of internet technology known as web 2.0), it is the same familiar demographic that is generating the content. For example, Al Gore's citizen journalism channel, Current TV, launched recently in the UK and Ireland. My concern is that, powerful as some of the content is on Current TV and sites like it, the people producing it are, on the whole, privileged, confident and articulate members of society who already have a voice and are more accurately represented in newspapers and broadcast media to begin with.

to read more...

Singapore - Straits Times Decreasing Traffic

2007-05-29T23:07:00.000+08:00

Found On Singapore Election
When The Straits Times started charging for access all those years ago it was the wrong move. Why pay to access the reporting of a mass media outlet that is ranked either 147th or 154th in the world depending on your ranking source. The paper is losing revenue as are so many other newspapers around the world. The 20 - 30 generation are going online to get news that matters to them. Not news filtered by a process of 'self-censorship' or by a regime that demands control over all that is written.

Simply no longer charging visitors to view your advertisements and state-controlled press releases is not going to turn the fortunes of the ST around over night. Trying to isolate yourself from the global market of media and cultural production by charging your readers and hoping that they show loyalty to you was mis-guided. But until the Straits Times journalists are able to compete on the global playing-field without the dead-weight of self-censorship and state control - all the technology in the world will not alter the image of the Straits Times as a state owned and controlled propaganda outlet.

FROM Tuesday, visitors to The Straits Times' (ST) website will not have to pay to read the latest breaking news from Singapore and the world.

They can also post their views - in real time - on the reports they read.

One other major change: The site will drop its 12-year-old name, The Straits Times Interactive, or STI, and go with the cleaner 'straitstimes.com'.

Since becoming a subscription site in 2005, it has been offering only a small buffet of material for free:

1. ST's online forum letters;
2. Multimedia features, such as video news reports and podcasts;
3. A restricted selection of 20 reports from the print edition.

All other content, including breaking news and material picked up from the print edition of the newspaper itself, has been available only to subscribers in the past two years.

Explaining the move to open up more free-access content, ST editor Han Fook Kwang said: 'There's a great deal more we can do in the website to leverage on the award-winning talent in The Straits Times newsroom of writers, photographers, artists and designers. I think we've a good product and we want to make it available to more people in cyberspace, and to use the technology available on the web to make it an even better product.'
Here is the real reason ....

to comment

Singapore - Capitalism without democracy is exploitation

2007-05-28T21:26:00.001+08:00

Capitalism without democracy is exploitation – excerpts from A Nation Cheated
28 May 07

THE only difference between communism and capitalism, it has been said, is that the communists have admitted that they were wrong.

Such an observation, undoubtedly made with tongue firmly in cheek, is nevertheless a serious indictment of the economic system that has enveloped this planet.

The widening disparity between the world's rich and poor continues to ask questions about the way humanity conducts itself. Poverty brutalises and dehumanises the victims it claims. It is an evil that tears at the very heart of civilisation.

Giving succour to us is the knowledge that people are not defenceless when it comes to combating poverty. The weapon of choice is, of course, democracy. For without it, capitalism becomes nothing more than exploitation in disguise.

And yet, in Singapore the situation is such that while the ruling Peoples’ Action Party (PAP) remains alive to the capitalist world, it ensures that democracy is kept dead and buried. Such an arrangement renders the working poor voiceless and powerless, opening them up to abuse and exploitation.

A Nation Cheated addresses the fallacy that Singapore has a well-run, free-market economy system put in place by the PAP that continues to benefit the island’s inhabitants.

In fact, this report clearly demonstrates that there is nothing free or market-oriented about Singapore’s economy. Worse, developmental trends over the last 10 years show how Singaporeans have been economically displaced and socially dislocated as a result of PAP policies.

It documents the subjugation of the labour movement by the Singapore Government during the nation's formative years which has continued into the present. The official argument is that strong trade unions are inimical to foreign investment.

After nearly half-a-century of uninterrupted authoritarian rule, however, the results are abysmal. Singapore's economy seems unable to graduate into something more than a service station for multinational companies. The resultant effect has been the emergence of a significant layer of underclass.

The report also demonstrates that this system is actively maintained by an autocratic government whose political philosophy and practice is predicated on Lee Kuan Yew's idea that state resources should be concentrated on the top 5 percent of the pop-ulation "who are more than ordinarily endowed physically and mentally."

Most importantly, this essay presents a clear alternative to the course taken by the PAP who has bludgeoned into the minds of the populace that there isn't, and can never be, one.

It was first published in 2002 under the title First World...For Whom? Much has happened since and this updated version will bring readers up to speed about Singapore's political-economy, poverty, and labour.

Many have bought the e-copy of A Nation Cheated written by Dr Chee Soon Juan. If you haven't done so, order a copy today and support the democracy campaign in Singapore!

Option1: You can place your order through Paypal, either through your own Paypal account or directly with your credit card if you don't have a Paypal account. Click on the 'Buy Now' button below.

Option 2: If you don't want to use either of the above options, please write to speakup@singaporedemocrat.org.

to comment

Singapore - Avoidance of Double Taxation

2007-05-28T18:44:00.000+08:00

for Myanmar Citizens living and working in Singapore

To remove unfair and unjust double taxation practice that Myanmar citizens living and working in Singapore are facing despite the fact that there is a Comprehensive Avoidance of Double Taxation Agreement (DTA) signed between Singapore and Myanmar.

Contact
Naing Moe Aung
Mobile: (+65) 9871 0563
Fax: (+65) 6491 5522
Email: naing {at} projectdecision.com

Please download the template, print it out and start collecting the signatures from those around you and return it to the address below by 01 July 2007.
Naing Moe Aung
Block 74, Bedok North Road
#08-108
Singapore 460074

Ka Daung Nyin Thar wants the Myanmarese workers in Singapore to be united and participate in the campaign which would compel Singapore PM to discuss with Myanmar government to respect the agreement.

First spotted on Global Voices Online
Further details are available here.

to comment

REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE - Amnesty International Annual Report 2007

2007-05-24T23:42:00.000+08:00

Amnesty International Report 2007 Overview Video

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
Annual Report 2007

REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE

Head of state: S R Nathan
Head of government: Lee Hsien Loong
Death penalty: retentionist
International Criminal Court: not ratified

Freedom of expression and assembly came under increasingly close controls. Men arrested in previous years were held without charge or trial under the Internal Security Act amid fears that they were at risk of ill-treatment. Death sentences were imposed and at least five people were executed. Criminal offenders were sentenced to caning.

Background
The People's Action Party (PAP), which has dominated political life and wider society for nearly half a century, was re-elected for a five-year term in May. The party's stated commitment to building a more open society did not materialize.

Restrictions on free expression and assembly
Civil defamation suits and criminal charges were used or threatened against government critics, human rights activists, Falun Gong practitioners and foreign news media. Tighter restrictions on several major foreign publications were announced in August, enabling the authorities to take punitive measures more easily.

• Dr Chee Soon Juan, leader of the opposition Singapore Democratic Party, was declared bankrupt in February when he was unable to pay damages of 500,000 Singapore dollars (approximately US$306,000) to two PAP leaders when a 2001 defamation suit ended. As a bankrupt, he was barred from seeking election. He was imprisoned for eight days in March for contempt of court after saying publicly that the judiciary lacked independence. In November he was sentenced to a prison term of five weeks for speaking in public without a permit. On his release he faced further criminal charges for speaking in public without a permit and attempting to leave the country without permission. In August the publisher and the editor of the Far Eastern Economic Review were sued for defamation in connection with a favourable article about him.

• J B Jeyaretnam, former leader of the opposition Workers' Party, unsuccessfully appealed against the bankruptcy imposed on him in 2001 after a series of politically motivated defamation suits. He remained unable to stand for re-election.

• Writer Lee Kin Mun was suspended by the state-owned newspaper Today following publication of a critical article on Singapore's living costs.

• Two Falun Gong practitioners were convicted of holding an illegal protest outside the Chinese Embassy and sentenced in November to prison terms of 15 days and 10 days respectively. Nine practitioners were charged with illegally assembling to distribute leaflets. Jaya Gibson, a British journalist and Falun Gong practitioner, was denied entry to Singapore.

• The government restricted both domestic and foreign activism relating to a meeting in Singapore of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund in September, provoking worldwide criticism, including from both institutions.

Detention without charge or trial
At least 34 men remained in detention without charge or trial under the Internal Security Act. The authorities claimed the men were involved in militant Islamist groups and posed a security threat to Singapore. Seven detainees were reportedly released after co-operating with the authorities and responding well to "rehabilitation". In February, Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng was reported as saying that the treatment of such detainees was not a "tea party" but denied they had been tortured.

Conscientious objectors
At least eight conscientious objectors were imprisoned, and 12 others continued to serve their sentences during 2006. All were members of the banned Jehovah's Witnesses religious group. There were no moves towards offering an alternative to military service.

Death penalty and corporal punishment
At least five people were executed, two in June following conviction for drug trafficking, the others in November after being convicted of murder. Death sentences were handed down to at least five people.

The presence of foreign prisoners on death row raised the international profile of Singapore's high rate of executions. The UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions expressed concern about executions in Singapore and called for an end to death sentences for drug-related offences, arguing that the mandatory death sentence is a violation of international legal standards. In January the Singapore Law Society said it intended to carry out "an open-minded review of the legal issues" related to the death penalty.

People continued to be sentenced to caning throughout the year, including a 16-year-old boy convicted of theft and judged unsuitable for reformative training.

Asia Video
Watch Amnesty International's Secretary General talk about the positives and negatives in Asia over the past year and give her message to the region.

to comment

Yet Another Hanging - Singapore to hang ‘One Eyed Dragon’ for nightclub murder

2007-05-24T21:14:00.000+08:00

The Death Penalty in action again. Can't imagine this case resulting in mass protest against it.

End the Death Penalty Now!

Web posted at: 5/23/2007 8:30:19
Source ::: AFP

Tan Chor Jin, nicknamed “One Eyed Dragon”, arriving at the magistrate’s court in Singapore for his trial last February. He was sentenced to death, yesterday, for killing a nightclub owner in a rare gangland-style shooting in Singapore. (AFP)

SINGAPORE • A man nicknamed “One Eyed Dragon” was sentenced yesterday to hang for killing a nightclub owner in a rare Singapore shooting which the judge likened to an assassination.

Tan Chor Jin, 39, appeared calm and smiled occasionally while the verdict was read.

He was convicted for the murder in February last year of Lim Hock Soon in a case that shocked Singapore, one of Asia’s safest cities.

High Court Judge Tay Yong Kwang said the killing had “the hallmarks of an assured and accomplished assassin.”

Court documents showed Tan, who earned his nickname for being blind in one eye, entered Lim’s flat on February 15 last year.

He tied up Lim’s wife, 13-year-old daughter and domestic helper, looted the family’s valuables and then fired a series of shots into the victim’s face and body.

He fled to Malaysia but was arrested and extradited 10 days later.

Tan represented himself without a lawyer at the trial. After the sentence was handed down, Tan’s only response was to ask the judge for permission to smoke in prison while awaiting his fate.

“They don’t understand what are human rights in the prison, nor allow us to smoke,” Tan said.

read more...

University of New South Wales (Asia) in Singapore shuts down

2007-05-24T18:13:00.000+08:00

There is an issue circulating in the forums that the initial report from Channel News Asia has been altered and the time of release manipulated in the second report of the pull out of UNSW. Copied below is allegedly the first report and highlights the fact that a "quarter of a billion dollars" has already been spent - spent by whom?

The Economic Development Board?

But according to current reports [By Derrick A Paulo, TODAY | Posted: 24 May 2007 1005 hrs]"EDB assistant managing director Aw Kah Peng called the UNSW’s decision a “setback” and said: “In the end, decisions have to be made on what we both feel are our long-term interests.” She did not want to reveal how much EDB had invested so far in the project. "

When you google the story we get two links - one from Pearl Forss and one from Ashraf Safdar, but both link to articles written by Pearl Forss.

Students shocked by UNSW Singapore campus closure
Channel News Asia, Singapore - 18 hours ago
By Pearl Forss, Channel NewsAsia | Posted: 23 May 2007 2311 hrs.SINGAPORE: The decision to shut down the University of New South Wales (UNSW) Singapore ...

University of New South Wales (Asia) in Singapore shuts down
Channel News Asia, Singapore - 23 May 2007
By Ashraf Safdar, Channel NewsAsia | Posted: 23 May 2007 1715 hrs. But less than six months since classes started, the University of New South Wales (Asia) ...

However there are earlier versions.

UNSW (Asia) Changi campus

So the story copied here is allegedly the first reaction that CNA had on the issue. Whether or not Ashraf Safdar reported the figure of 'a quarter of a billion' in error is one possible reason for the story being pulled or possibly they are trying to suppress the fact that 'a quarter of a billion' was spent by the EDB.

SINGAPORE: It was supposed to be Singapore's first comprehensive foreign university.

But less than six months since classes started, the University of New South Wales (Asia) in Singapore has decided to shut its doors.

According to preliminary reports, this is because of low student enrolment.

The university had projected to get 800 students by August but it is not clear how many there are to date.

The closure comes despite the fact that an estimated quarter of a billion dollars had been spent on the school's new campus in Changi.

To ease the transition, students who are currently enrolled at UNSW Asia will be offered a place in an equivalent programme at UNSW Sydney. - CNA/ir

Singapore - You won't believe what happened in court yesterday

2007-05-23T16:57:00.000+08:00

Or maybe you will...

From the Singapore Democratic Party

22 May 07

In the lawsuit that Mr Lee Kuan Yew and his prime minister son, Mr Lee Hsien Loong, took against the SDP and its leaders, the Lees had applied for summary judgement, or Order 14 in legal parlance, for the case to be awarded to them without it going to trial.

The lawsuit was over an article the SDP had published in The New Democrat, the SDP's flagship publication, describing how the NKF scandal was bred in a system built by the PAP where transparency and accountability were alien features.

During the Order 14 hearing in September last year defence counsel, Mr M Ravi, had taken ill and could not come to court.

The Lees' lawyer, Mr Davinder Singh, then accused Mr Ravi and the defendants of being "devious" and that the lawyer's absence was "nothing more than another attempt to delay the Order 14 applications."

A medical certificate later proved that Mr Ravi was unfit to attend court.

During the hearing, Dr Chee Soon Juan had asked Judge Ang for a one- or two-week adjournment for Mr Ravi to recover or, if the the Judge refused, for time to look for another lawyer.

On both counts, Ms Ang refused, siding with Mr Singh. She ordered the summary judgment hearing to proceed with the defendants being unrepresented.

And so Judge Ang and Mr Singh sat cloistered in her chambers where she heard only the plaintiffs' arguments and proceeded to award the case to the Lees.

Subsequently the Court's Minute Sheet recorded what transpired between Ms Ang and Mr Singh. At one point, the Judge remarked that Dr Chee was "hedging his bets" to which Mr Singh responding, "Absolutely!"

On reading this, Dr Chee took out a Summons application to ask the Court for an extension of time to appeal Judge Ang's decision as her actions and remarks were highly prejudicial to the defence's case.

Things then got rather interesting. The Courts set the hearing for Dr Chee's application for yesterday, 21 May 07. When Dr Chee arrived Mr Davinder Singh was already present.

And who was the judge? BINGO! Ms Belinda Ang!

"It is utterly amazing that you are presiding over this application which is about you," Dr Chee pointed out the obvious.

As it turned out Judge Ang referred the matter to the Court of Appeal.

The burning question is why was another judge not assigned to hear the application? Isn't it amazing that out of 12 High Court Judges, Ms Ang was assigned to preside over a matter in which she was the very subject of the controversy?

Hasn't the Singapore Courts heard of the saying that "Justice must not only be done, but manifestly seen to be done"?

to comment

Singapore Blogosphere and Political Participation

2007-05-22T23:04:00.000+08:00

I recently attended a Postgraduate Conference for the presentation of PhD research on the intersection of power and communication technologies organised by the Institute of Communications Studies (ICS) at the University of Leeds. I presented a paper titled -

The Singapore Blogosphere and Political Participation: An Ethnographic Approach.

Abstract
This paper questions whether or not blogs can help create participatory forms of democracy in non-democratic societies which have suppressed political participation among their citizens. Drawing on an event in July 2006 within a group of websites related to Singapore, this paper asks to what extent do bloggers in Singapore use their blogs for purposes related to politics, and investigates whether the blogosphere facilitates political participation among Singaporean bloggers. The internet has been heralded as a force for democratisation in the world (Pitrodi 1993) and also simply another means of disseminating propaganda, fear and intimidation in Singapore (Rodan 1997). Such predictions of how technology will affect upon futures is not new. This paper accepts Hine's (2000) position that there is a need for an ethnographic approach to question the assumptions inherent in these predictions of an increased public sphere and at the same time a loss of privacy associated with the technology. Singapore while being regarded by the Chinese Communist State and possibly the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) “as a laboratory for one possible future for the twenty-first century”, (Castells 1998) is regarded as a semi-democratic regime (Brooker 2000). A regime which allows elections but has limits on political and civil liberties and restricts competition between political parties (Brooker 2000). An ethnography of the Singapore blogosphere might help in analysing how the internet is constructed and shaped by social actors in order to overcome the technological focus and the domination of research that focuses on the United States of America. This paper argues that a sustained participant observation within the Singapore blogosphere could illustrate the position that the internet both creates public space to facilitate political participation and also helps to legitimise the semi-democratic nature of the Singapore regime.

The complete paper is available here in pdf format.

to comment

Amnesty International - Singapore Update

2007-05-21T20:20:00.000+08:00

Received via email from Margaret John

To: Singapore/Malaysia Network
Date: May 20, 2007
Friends,

The following notes on Singapore and Malaysia are reported developments over the past few months, covering both Amnesty International (AI) concerns and the framework in which we work. The information is from normally reliable sources but has not always been validated by AI. Further information or corrections are welcome. Amnesty International's website is www.amnesty.org. The website of AI's regional office in Hong Kong is www.asiapacific.amnesty.org. AI Australia's regional death penalty information is at http://asiadeathpenalty.blogspot.com

Main points can be found in Berita, the journal of North American Malaysia/Singapore/Brunei scholars available from rprovenc@juno.com

Singapore
As the longstanding opposition critic and human rights defender J B Jeyaretnam is at last freed from bankruptcy and he plans to resume full campaigning, the international spotlight is again highlighting the government's tight restrictions on freedom of expression and is raising the bar on international concern. At the same time, challenges within Singapore to the political status quo are slowly increasing not only by prominent opposition activists and human rights defenders such as Dr Chee Soon Juan but also -- unusually -- from critics of recent high salary increases for the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

Margaret John
Coordinator for Singapore and Malaysia

1. International spotlight:
Foreign parliamentarians gagged;
International Bar Association meeting in Singapore -- human rights focus urged;
Chee Siok Chin in Italy;
Far Eastern Economic Review faces defamation suit -- and is honoured;
Australian University strongly criticised for doctorate for Lee Kuan Yew;
US Department of State assesses Singapore's human rights record 2006.

2. Human rights campaigners/government critics:
J B Jeyaretnam freed from bankruptcy -- and not silenced;
Dr Chee Soon Juan -- more challenges and also not silenced;
Francis Seow -- Beyond Suspicion? preface available;

3. Concerns continue:
Another death sentence;
Torture/ill-treatment -- ten strokes of cane;
Suspected terrorists still held;
Falun Gong persecuted;
Freedom of expression restricted but also rights exercised --
on Cabinet salary hikes;
on Said Zahari documentary;
on media (further controls?); on gender rights.

Read more...

Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam - On Bended Knees? Never

2007-05-21T18:57:00.000+08:00

These words should be familiar to Singapore readers as it has been repeated often enough. But if not, this is a good time to take note of the late Devan Nair's observations on JB Jeyaretnam's strength of character. Lee Kuan Yew's comments on JB Jeyaretnam were made after the latter's significant Workers' Party Anson win in 1981.

"Immediately, however, Kuan Yew's attention was concentrated on how he would deal with J.B Jeyaretnam in parliament. I was quite alarmed at some of the things he told me at that lunch. "Look," he said, "Jeyaretnam cant win the infighting. I'll tell you why. WE are in charge. Every government ministry and department is under our control. And in the infighting, he will go down for the count every time." And I will never forget his last words. "I will make him crawl on his bended knees, and beg for mercy."

Jeyaretnam was made of sterner stuff. To his eternal credit he never did crawl on bended knees, or ever begged for mercy. And it is to Lee Kuan Yew's eternal shame that Jeyaretnam will leave the political scene with his head held high, enjoying a martyrdom conferred on him by Lee. Lest I be misunderstood, let me state that Jeya more than deserves the crown of the martyr for his indomitable courage and dignity in the face of the vilest persecution."

Posted by Eng Chuan Lee

to comment

JBJ forms new party to reform Singapore

2007-05-21T00:52:00.001+08:00

JBJ forms new party to reform Singapore - 1

JBJ forms new party to reform Singapore - 2

to comment

Singapore opposition veteran to form new party

2007-05-21T00:49:00.000+08:00

Sun May 20, 2007 3:02 PM IST

By Sebastian Tong

SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Singapore's veteran opposition politician J.B. Jeyaretnam said on Sunday he plans to form a new political party to push for reform of the city-state's authoritarian political system.

Jeyaretnam, who led the opposition Workers' Party until 2001, was discharged from bankruptcy earlier this month after paying off damages in defamation suits brought by government leaders.

He was declared bankrupt in 2001 after failing to pay S$265,000 ($173,900) in defamation damages to plaintiffs that included then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong and then Foreign Affairs Minister S. Jayakumar.

Jeyaretnam told a press briefing that he and a handful of supporters had begun work to register the new party and would try to attract support from Singaporeans eager for political reform.

"(This is) a party which will have as its main objective a complete and thorough change in the way this country is run -- no tinkering," Jeyaretnam, 81, said.

"Reform will be the main plank -- reform the system of government, all sectors of society," he said, adding that the group could be named 'The Reform Party'.

Jeyaretnam, who had to have reporters' questions repeated to him because of his poor hearing, said the new party would seek to contest in the next general poll, scheduled in 2011.

"I don't see why not -- unless the government moves against me again. I would like to be there," he said.

Jeyaretnam was the first opposition politician to win a seat in parliament in 1981. An acerbic critic and fiery speaker, he has long been a thorn in the side of the People's Action Party (PAP), which has ruled uninterrupted since Singapore separated from Malaysia in 1965 and dominates the country's parliament.

The PAP, which has never lost more than four seats in any poll since 1965, won 82 out of the 84 seats in the last general election in May 2006. As in several previous elections, many of the wards were walkovers for the PAP because Singapore's tiny opposition parties did not manage to field candidates.

PAP leaders have brought defamation lawsuits against Jeyaretnam and several other opposition figures. After losing numerous libel lawsuits, Jeyaretnam was bankrupted, which prevented him from running for election and from practising as a lawyer.

Rights groups such as Amnesty International say the lawsuits are designed to stifle dissent, but PAP leaders say they are necessary to safeguard their reputation.

to comment

Singapore Filtering Internet

2007-05-19T19:28:00.000+08:00

The following report has been compiled by the Open Net Initiative. ONI is a collaborative partnership of four leading academic institutions: the Citizen Lab at the Munk Centre for International Studies, University of Toronto, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School, the Advanced Network Research Group at the Cambridge Security Programme, University of Cambridge, and the Oxford Internet Institute, Oxford University. All these Universities will of course be ignored by those employed in the Singapore media or simply dismissed as a bunch of ang moh interferring in Singapore who have highly questionable methodologies that for some particular reason do not apply to the 'unique; situation that Singapore is'. Unique - just like Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Burma/Myanmar, China, Ethiopia, India, Iran, Jordan, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Sudan, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, UAE, Uzbekistan, Vietnam and Yemen.

Rather than seeing it for what it is. A state that censors and filters the net.

Singapore

The government of the Republic of Singapore engages in minimal Internet filtering, blocking only a small set of pornographic Web sites as a symbol of disapproval of their contents. However, the state employs a combination of licensing controls and legal pressures to regulate Internet access and to limit the presence of objectionable content and conduct online.

Background
Singapore’s government uses restrictive laws, political ties to the judiciary, and ownership and intimidation of the media to suppress dissenting opinion and opposition to the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP). Provisions of the Internal Security Act (ISA), the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act (CLA), the Undesirable Publications Act (UPA), and other statutes prohibit the production and possession of “subversive” materials and permit the detention of suspected offenders without judicial review.1 Citizens, including Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) leader Chee Soon Juan, have been arrested for speaking publicly without a permit,2 and foreign activists from civil society organizations have been detained, interrogated, and deported.3 Government plaintiffs have been able to levy civil liability and heavy damages through defamation suits against independent and critical voices, including those of opposition politicians and of regional publications with domestic circulation.4 Moreover, virtually all domestic newspapers and television and radio stations are owned by corporations with economic ties to the government; hence they adhere closely to the PAP line when reporting on sensitive issues.5 Taken together, these economic and legal controls contribute to a climate of pervasive self-censorship of political commentary. These mechanisms of control and influence allow the Singapore government to cripple basic freedoms of expression and assembly under the guise of protecting public security and preserving order.

Internet in Singapore
In 2005, the number of Internet users in Singapore reached 2.42 million, or 67.2 percent of the population,6 giving the country one of the highest Internet penetration rates in the world. Home access is commonplace, with residential dialup and broadband subscriptions totaling more than 2.1 million.7 Over 70 percent of businesses use the Internet,8 and public access is widespread and expanding. In December 2006, a three-year national wireless service was launched, providing laptop users with free Wi-Fi Internet access in high-traffic areas across the island.9 Terminals in cybercafés and libraries supply the public with additional connectivity.

Three main Internet Access Service Providers (IASPs)—SingNet, StarHub, and Pacific Internet—serve as the “gateways” to the Web, providing access to Internet service resellers (ISRs) for sale to the public.10 Though all three IASPs are public corporations, Temasek Holdings (the government’s holding company) remains the majority shareholder in SingNet and StarHub.11

Legal and regulatory frameworks
Singapore’s Media Development Authority (MDA) claims to have instituted a “light-touch” regulatory framework for the Internet, promoting responsible use while giving industry players “maximum flexibility.”12 In addition to promoting self-regulation and public education, the MDA maintains license and registration requirements that subject Internet content and service providers to penalties for noncompliance with restrictions on prohibited material. The MDA is charged with ensuring that “nothing is included in the content of any media service which is against public interest or order, or national harmony, or which offends good taste or decency.”13 The core of this framework is a class license scheme stipulated by national statute (the Broadcasting Act)14 and by industry policies and regulations issued by the MDA.

Under the class license scheme, all Internet service providers (ISPs) and those Internet content providers (ICPs) determined to be political parties or persons “engaged in the propagation, promotion or discussion of political or religious issues relating to Singapore” must register with the MDA.15 As licensees, ISPs and ICPs are also bound by the MDA’s Internet Code of Practice. The Code defines “prohibited material” broadly, specifying only a few standards for sexual, violent, and intolerant content.16 Where filtering is not mandated at the ISP level, the Code requires that ICPs deny access to material if so directed by the MDA. Licensees that fail to comply with the Code may face sanctions, including fines or license suspensions or terminations, as authorized under the Broadcasting Act. In 2005, one Web site titled “Meet Gay Singapore Friends” was reportedly fined USD5,000 by the MDA for being in violation of the Code.17

Threats of civil and criminal liability under other laws further deter Internet users from posting comments or content relating to sensitive issues. In May 2005 the state-funded agency A*STAR accused Jiahao Chen, a Singaporean doctoral student in the United States, of posting “untrue and serious accusations against A*STAR, its officers and other parties,” and threatened Chen with “legal consequences unless the objectionable statements were removed and an acceptable apology published.”18 Chen complied with A*STAR’s demands and replaced the posts with an apology, thereby avoiding a potential defamation suit.19 The high-profile case prompted caution20 in the Singapore blogosphere and discussion21 on how to avoid suit under the nation’s defamation laws.22

In October 2005 two men were jailed under the Sedition Act23 for the first time in nearly forty years. One received a one-month sentence and the other a nominal one-day sentence and USD5,000 fine for posting racist remarks denigrating Muslims and Malays.24 In January 2006, a twenty-one-year-old was also charged with violating the Sedition Act after he posted four cartoons of Jesus on his blog. The charges were eventually dropped, but not before Singaporean authorities had confiscated the individual’s computer and removed the cartoons from his blog.25

In November 2006 SDP activist Yap Keng Ho was sentenced to ten days in jail after he refused to pay a fine for speaking at an illegal SDP rally, held in April 2006. Yap had posted a video of the speech on his blog and was ordered to remove it by a judge.26

The above incidents appeared to presage further repressive legislation and policies against Singaporean Internet users. In 2007 the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) is expected to table before parliament a slate of amendments to the Penal Code. The proposed amendments expand the scope of nineteen offenses to cover acts perpetrated via electronic media, including “uttering words with deliberate intent to wound the religious feelings of any person” (section 298); defamation (section 499); and making “statements conducing to public mischief” (section 505).27 Section 298 is being modified further to cover “the wounding of racial feelings,” so that offenders may be prosecuted under the Sedition Act or the Penal Code.28 The MHA amendments also introduce nineteen new offenses, including abetting “an offense which is committed in Singapore, even if any or all of the acts of abetment were done outside Singapore,” as via Internet or mobile phone (section 108B).29

ONI testing results
ONI conducted testing on Singapore’s two major IASPs, SingNet and StarHub, and on a third ISP, SysTech. A common perception of the Singaporean Internet community points to the existence of a list of 100 banned Web sites purportedly maintained by the Media Development Authority (MDA). ONI found that only seven Web sites tested, all relating to pornography, were blocked, including sex.com, playboy.com, and penthouse.com. The blocking of only these high-profile sites suggests that filtering is indeed mandated for symbolic, rather than preventative, purposes. Moreover, the seven sites blocked on SingNet and StarHub were all accessible on SysTech.

to comment

Singapore, One-Party City State.

2007-05-15T17:28:00.000+08:00

Segment 1: Singapore, one-party city state.

A video from New Tang Dynasty Television
Singapore, the smallest nation in Southeast Asia, has an international reputation for being one of the most business-friendly countries. In terms of GDP per capita, Singapore is the 22nd wealthiest country in the world. It has a foreign reserve of 120 billion US dollars. The Constitution of the Republic of Singapore has established the political system as a representative democracy. Yet, the People's Action Party has won every election since self-governance began in 1959. Foreign political analysts and several opposition parties have argued that Singapore is essentially a one-party state. The Economist Intelligence Unit lists Singapore as a country with a "hybrid" system with democratic and authoritarian elements. Freedom House ranks the country as "partly free".

Guest: Chee Siok Chin, executive member of the Singapore Democratic Party..

to watch the video click one of the links below:
Online Download

Followed by Segment 2: America's coming war with China.

to comment

Singapore - The NS Song

2007-05-14T22:43:00.000+08:00

Came upon the following musical video from www.happeepill.com and it was written by The Evil Bunny I believe.

The NS Song

Place the NS Song on your handphones!
Click here to download 3GP format!

to comment

Singapore: The State and Culture of Excess

2007-05-14T20:49:00.000+08:00

Singapore: The State and Culture of Excess

by Yao, Souchou

About This Book
Taking ideas and frameworks from philosophy, psychology, political science, cultural studies and anthropology, this book tells the larger 'truth' about the Singapore state. This book argues that this strong hegemonic state achieves effective rule not just from repressive policies but also through a combination of efficient government, good standard of living, tough official measures and popular compliance. Souchou Yao looks at the reasons behind the hegemonic ruling, examining key events such as the caning of American teenager Michael Fay, the judicial ruling on fellatio and unnatural sex, and Singapore's 'war on terror' to show the ways in which the State manages these events to ensure the continuance of its power and ideological ethos. Key subject discussed include: leftist radicalism and communist insurgency; nation-building as trauma; Western 'yellow culture' and Asian Values; judicial caning and the meaning of pain; the law and oral sex; food and the art of lying; cinema as catharsis; Singapore after September 11. Sidelights are also offered on the roles played by the Lee Kuan Yew family and several other major personalities.

to comment

SINGAPORE: J B Jeyaretnam freed from bankruptcy

2007-05-12T17:55:00.000+08:00

A press release from Amnesty International received via email.

"it's a heavy price I have paid"

J B Jeyaretnam, long regarded as Singapore's veteran opposition leader and human rights campaigner, is finally freed from bankruptcy. He is therefore eligible to resume his profession as a lawyer, travel abroad without permission, and contest the next election in Singapore, due in 2011.

After making payments of S$233,255 (roughly equivalent to the Canadian dollar) to the Official Assignee, he was given a discharge from bankruptcy. He had been declared bankrupt in 2001 after failing to pay more than S$600,000 in damages to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, former prime ministers Lee Kuan Yew and Goh Chok Tong, and others. He had been found guilty of defamation at a 1997 election rally when he referred publicly to the filing by Workers' Party candidate Tang Liang Hong of a police report critical of ruling party leaders. He estimates he has paid out close to S$2 million in damages and court costs over the years. Bankrupts in Singapore are barred from seeking parliamentary seats. J B Jeyaretnam also lost his right to practise as a lawyer. He will now apply for the restoration of his licence to practise law.

J B Jeyaretnam, former judge and member of parliament, now in his eighties, has long been known internationally as a voice for freedom, justice and fundamental human rights in Singapore. As a result, he has faced numerous defamation and other charges, been imprisoned, made bankrupt, and excluded from Parliament and his profession.

Amnesty International (AI) has called on the Singapore government to stop using restrictive laws and defamation suits to muzzle critics and opposition party members such as J B Jeyaretnam. AI and numerous organizations have over the years sent representatives to Singapore as trial observers and have issued critical reports and statements. Amongst that group are Canadian judge Paul Bentley and Lawyers' Rights Watch Canada. AI remains concerned about the continuing use of restrictive laws and civil defamation suits to penalise and silence peaceful critics of the government. Laws allowing the authorities to impose restrictions on freedom of expression and assembly which violate international standards, combined with a pattern of politically motivated defamation suits, have served to maintain a climate of political intimidation and self-censorship in Singapore. This climate continues to stifle freedom of expression, deters the expression of views alternative to those of the ruling People's Action Party, and dissuades many Singaporeans from exercising their right to take part in public affairs. Such restrictions belie the government's repeated claims that it is building an "open society".

Further information: Margaret John, Coordinator for Singapore and Malaysia, Amnesty International Canada Malaysiasingaporecoordinator@amnesty.ca

to comment

Zoo in tropical Singapore says it will keep polar bear despite animal rights concerns

2007-05-12T17:54:00.000+08:00

You don't need to be an animal rights activist to be angry at how the Singapore Zoo can be so "blatantly uncaring". To paraphrase what they said, "Let's wait for the mother polar bear to die before we embark on any further action". Why does the Zoo need to wait until the mother polar bear die before they would move the young? WHy can't they improve conditions now? What would be the psychological impact of the mother's death to the young? This is despite The Animal Concerns Research and Education Society, or Acres, reiterating that the bears' enclosure do not meet international standards.

Is this the kind of message/values we want to impart our young when they visit the Zoo? Forget the welfare of the animals as long as we can gawk on them from the other side of the glass window. The pathetic rhetoric that long life span equals faring well? What kind of twisted logic is that? Long life does not equal to good or even acceptable benchmark of living. Other incisive questions could be ask"how often does the polar bears fall sick?" and or "if they display any further signs of discomfort?"

You can read a published letter to Straits Times from Animal Concerns Research and Education Society (Acres) on this issue.

In the published letter on May 7, Acres stated that,

"The current polar-bear enclosure (of the Singapore Zoo)fails to meet the minimum standards laid out in the Polar Bear Protection Act, which was made law by the Government of Manitoba, Canada, in 2003... Indeed, if Singapore Zoo today wanted to acquire polar bears from Manitoba, the government, by law, could not allow it."

===

May 4
By DERRICK HO
Associated Press Writer

SINGAPORE (AP) -- The Singapore Zoo said Friday it will keep its male polar bear - reportedly the only polar bear to be born in the tropics - in a reversal of its earlier decision to move it to a temperate country, while animal rights activists urged the zoo to improve conditions in the bear's enclosure.

The zoo's parent company, Wildlife Reserves Singapore, said its animal welfare and ethics committee had recommended that Inuka, the 17-year-old bear, remain at the Southeast Asian zoo because of the risks involved in moving it.

"The transport of a full grown polar bear to an institution in a temperate country will be a stressful situation and carries its own share of risks, most extreme being that Inuka may die during transportation or during the introduction process in the new facility," the company said in a statement.

The zoo had said last year that Inuka would be moved to a country with a temperate climate after his mother dies, following a Singapore animal rights group's complaints that the bears were showing signs of distress.

Polar bears normally spend most of their lives on sea ice. In Singapore, Inuka and his 30-year-old mother, Sheba, are kept in an open and partly shaded enclosure that is cooled by misting fans and includes a pool. The bears can also use an off-exhibit air-conditioned den.

The Animal Concerns Research and Education Society, or Acres, said Friday it was surprised by the zoo's decision. It urged the zoo to improve conditions in the bears' enclosure, which it says fails to meet international standards.

"If you go to the zoo today, he is still pacing, which is a very clear sign he is not doing well in this environment," Acres Executive Director Louis Ng said, referring to Inuka.

The group says the enclosure is too small and should not expose the bears to Singapore's yearlong tropical heat.

The zoo says Sheba originally came from a German zoo, and Inuka is the only polar bear to be born in the tropics. Their long life spans, it says, are proof that they are faring well at the zoo. However, it says it will reassess the situation when Sheba dies.

© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.

posted by Charles Tan

to comment

Help for the poor: So close, yet so far

2007-05-12T17:52:00.000+08:00

Spotted on a mailing list, I thought I should reproduce this to illustrate how the current minimal "public aid schemes" available is not easy when it comes to applying for them. Even with the available aid schemes, how many of them, if applied, are given out in time? Some of the individual stories reveal only tip of the iceberg of how the poor is faring in Singapore. All those bracketed and in italics are my own inserted comments I have also highlighted certain sections by bolding them.

===

Available online on Asiaone.com website as a free story

May 7, 2007
Help for the poor: So close, yet so far
By Vivi Zainol, For The Straits Times

WHY do needy Singaporeans continue to fall through the cracks despite the Government's array of public aid schemes?

To tackle this question, 18 of my students at Ngee Ann Polytechnic interviewed more than 30 low-income households for a vacation module. They found the biggest bar-riers to be education and language.

Many are illiterate. With little knowledge or understanding of schemes to help them, it's not surprising that some say they know the Government is helping them, but they feel it is not doing enough.

Some would rather get an extra job than ask for help. Others struggle to make themselves understood and say they do not have the time, money or energy to make return trips to their MP or Community Development Councils (CDCs) to ask for more help.

For those who did bother, a common complaint heard by students was that the CDC officers are rude.

Several years ago, as a Straits Times community reporter, I had heard the same comment when I asked a woman with three children, and whose husband was in jail for a drug offence, why she did not ask for help. Describing how her experience with CDCs turned her off, she said a CDC officer had sarcastically asked her: 'Didn't your husband leave you any money?'

'If he had, why would I be asking for help?' said the troubled woman, who had contemplated suicide.

One group of Ngee Ann students decided to observe CDC officers in action after receiving the feedback. At one CDC, officers were unfailingly polite (Only one CDC? what about other CDCs? Perhaps they were not as rude because of the presence of students?) - it was the low-income group which was being demanding and uncooperative. However, all the CDC officers were Chinese - help- seekers speaking Malay and Indian had to struggle to make themselves understood.

At another CDC, student Nurlina Fatima Shafrin, 18, recalled how a CDC officer was heard commenting loudly to another officer nearby on how 'irritating' the people who had come to ask for help were, even when the latter, who were filling up forms, could hear them.

What is interesting to note is that interviews by students uncovered a perception among low-income earners that the higher-educated tend to look down on them and are arrogant. Formally attired CDC officers also unintentionally give the impression that they are less approachable.

Not all CDC officers are trained social workers - there are not enough social workers to go around in Singapore.

Also, some members of the low-income group can be downright prickly, believing they have a right to receive handouts from the state.

But surely everybody deserves good customer service regardless of income group? The poor have their pride too.

Could CDCs perhaps train their staff to understand the sensitivities and psyche of the lower-income group? Steps could also be taken to ensure that staff on duty speak different languages and dialects. Members from the low-income group could even be employed to help.

It's good news indeed to hear that the Government has raised public assistance spending from $96 million to $140 million, and ComCare funding from $43 million to $67 million. (What is the duration for that allocated amount spent? What is the percentage of the assistance that goes to actual assistance? How much of it is dispatched to those who need it, and in time? How much of the public assistance would be offset by the increase in GST?)With that much money allocated to the needy (It appears to be a lot of money but is it enough?)it makes sense to ensure these funds reach the ones who need immediate assistance.

Take Mr Ramasamy Ratran, a 52-year-old Indian man, who was a pitiful sight when my students and I chanced upon him. He was lying on the dusty floor in his rented two-room flat, having been discharged from hospital just two weeks earlier.

Fortunately, a former female neighbour and a male friend had taken it upon themselves to look after Mr Ramasamy, who is epileptic and living on his own. Medical social workers had settled his hospital bills, but he was getting no financial help while he was recuperating and unable to work.

'Can you please help him? He needs help. When I first came two weeks ago, there was no electricity. His flat was in total darkness,' pleaded the former neighbour, who had helped to top up his prepaid utilities smart key to get the electricity back on.

Mr Ramasamy was not the only one my students and I found in need of assistance. When barber Yahya Pinghani, 39, was hospitalised for a kidney problem, he could not work and had no daily income for weeks. His children skipped school that week because there was no money for the bus fare.

Mr Pinghani's wife Murni, 41, complained how, after three weeks, her single friend who had applied for help with her at a CDC had already received assistance while she and her family were still waiting. She revealed that her family owed a whopping $4,000 in utilities bills.

CDCs do give $200 once-off emergency assistance, after which the needy wait six to eight weeks for CDCs to respond. (Six to Eight weeks? Is that how efficient our civil service is?)So what do they do when help is a long time coming? Many see their MPs, getting a $50 cheque for their trouble, or resort to collecting food from voluntary welfare organisations. How many know that they can get immediate assistance from your Citizens Consultative Committee? I did not either, for that matter, till I asked around. (The question in my mind is, how can the CCC help? How immediate can they help and how much. Unfortunately, the writer does not probe enough.)

Perhaps it is time that bulletin boards in HDB flats were put to better use. They could advertise where the poor can get help and give details of the schemes. Many low-income earners are illiterate, but the ones who are not will surely help to spread the word around.

It could also be made mandatory for medical social workers in hospitals to inform social workers or CDCs when a person who is from the low-income group is discharged so they will give him temporary financial assistance during his recovery period.

Last year, the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports (MCYS) set up a community care network for the elderly in Ang Mo Kio. Under this scheme, grassroots leaders are trained by family service centres to identify needy households.(Let's hope the grassroots leaders are not as rude as the CDC officers.)

Perhaps if this outreach scheme is formally extended to include all needy Singaporeans, not just the elderly, it could be used to ensure no one falls through the cracks and to explain the help schemes available to the needy.

MCYS minister Vivian Balakrishnan recently called on Singaporeans to be eyes and ears on the ground, saying 'we need the whole of society' and not 'an army of bureaucratic civil servants', when he outlined $140 million worth of initiatives for the low-income group.

The findings of the 18 Ngee Ann polytechnic students who ventured out of their classroom may not be conclusive, but simple observations like theirs should not be belittled. Like any jigsaw puzzle enthusiast will tell you, even one small piece makes a difference.

The writer is a lecturer at the School of Interdisciplinary Studies at Ngee Ann Polytechnic.

posted by Charles Tan,

to comment

Singapore's media ranked 154th

2007-05-08T19:06:00.000+08:00

In advance of World Press Freedom Day, on May 3rd, Freedom House has released several critical tools to highlight data from its annual survey of global press freedom, and to help explain the newest findings in their historical context. The current edition of the survey, Freedom of the Press 2007, points to improvements in several countries such as Italy, Nepal, Colombia, and Haiti; however, it shows mixed trends in Africa, as well as a continuation of a longer-term pattern of decline in press freedom in Asia, Latin America, and the former Soviet Union.

Freedom House
04 May 07 http://freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=362

Singapore
Status: Not Free
Legal Environment: 24
Political Environment: 24
Economic Environment: 21
Total Score: 69

Media freedom in Singapore is constrained to such a degree that the vast majority of journalists practice self-censorship rather than risk being charged with defamation or breaking the country’s criminal laws on permissible speech.

The Singapore constitution guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression in Article 14, but it also permits restrictions on these rights. Media freedom in Singapore is constrained by the Newspapers and Printing Presses Act, the Defamation Act, and the Internal Security Act, all of which allow authorities to restrict the circulation of news deemed to incite violence, arouse racial or religious tensions, interfere in domestic politics, or threaten public order, national interest or national security.

The government proposed a series of amendments to the Penal Code in 2006 that would cover offenses committed via electronic media. The draft amendments would not only provide jail terms or fines for defamation, “statements that would cause public mischief,” and the “wounding” of racial or religious feeling, they would also make it a crime for anyone outside the country to abet an offense committed inside the country, thereby allowing the authorities to prosecute internet users living abroad. Singaporean students studying overseas are the presumed targets of this amendment.

The Singapore government is quick to sue critics under harsh criminal defamation laws. In May 2006, for example, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his father, First Minister Kee Kuan Yew, filed criminal charges against the publishers of opposition newspaper The New Democrat, which is published several times a year by a committee of the Singapore Democratic Party.

The lawsuit started with an unsigned story that described as “secretive and non-accountable” the ruling party’s handling of a corruption scandal at the National Kidney Foundation.

Foreign media in Singapore are also subject to restrictive laws. In August, after the Far Eastern Economic Review published an interview with opposition party leader Chee Soon Juan, FEER and four other foreign publications were advised that they needed to post bonds and appoint legal representatives in order to continue to operate in Singapore. When FEER did not comply, its circulation permit was revoked, thereby effectively banning the publication. Meanwhile, on September 14, the Prime Minister and his father filed defamation suits against FEER over the article.

Nearly all print and broadcast media outlets, internet service providers, and cable television services are either owned or controlled by the state, or by companies with close ties to the ruling party. Annual licensing requirements for all media outlets, including political and religious web sites, have been used to inhibit criticism of the government.

Approximately two thirds of the population had access to the internet in 2006. Nonetheless, the government restricts internet access and Singapore has zero-tolerance for bloggers who challenge the government in any way. Prior to the May 6 Parliamentary elections, the Communications and Arts Minister warned bloggers and website managers that they do not have the right to back a particular candidate’s program or to express opinions on political issues. These same rules were applied to other new media, including podcasting and videocasting.

On April 26, the opposition Singapore Democratic Party was ordered to withdraw a podcast from its website. In June, popular blogger Lee Kin Mun (aka “Mr Brown”) was informed by state-owned Today newspaper that his weekly column, which had satirized the high cost of living, would be suspended. On November 6, a judge ordered Yap Keng Ho, a member of the opposition, to remove from his blog a video of himself speaking in public during the general elections.

Source
150
Cote d'Ivoire 68 NF
Malaysia 68 NF
Maldives 68 NF
United Arab Emirates 68 NF
154
Afghanistan 69 NF
Djibouti 69 NF
Gabon 69 NF
Singapore 69 NF
158 Iraq 70 NF
159 Bahrain 71 NF
Oman 71 NF
161 Chad 74 NF
Togo 74 NF
Venezuela 74 NF

to comment

Singapore - Lee Kuan Yew

2007-05-08T18:34:00.000+08:00

Lee Kuan Yew

Contains strong language and is posted here as a result of an email request.

to comment

Facts & Figures on The New Immigrants from The Sunday Times

2007-05-08T18:33:00.000+08:00

Facts & Figures from The Sunday Times, May 6, 2007:

===

Figures for Applications Granted:

2002: Citizenship - 7,600; PRs: 39,500
2003: Citizenship - 6,800; PRs: 32,000
2004: Citizenship - 7,600; PRs: 36,900
2005: Citizenship - 12,900; PRs: 52,300
2006: Citizenship - 13,200; PRs: 57,300

Source: Immigration & Checkpoints Authority

===

Singapore's Population:

1970: 2.07 million with 2.01 million residents (citizens and PRs) and 61,000 foreigners
1980: 2.41 million with 2.28 million residents and 131,000 foreigners
1990: 3.05 million with 2.74 million residents and 311,000 foreigners
2000: 4.03 million with 3.27 million residents and 754,500 foreigners
2006: 4.48 million with 3.6 million residents and 875,00 foreigners

Source: Singapore Department of Statistics

===

Estimated breakdown of Major foreign nationalities in Singapore:

Chinese - 200,000
Indonesian - 150,000
Filipino - 120,000
Indian - 90,000
Bangladeshi - 60,000
Thai - 45,000
Japanese - 26,000
Sri Lankan - 20,000
British - 17,000
American - 15,000
South Korean - 15,000
Australian - 15,000
Myanmarese - 10,000
German - 5,000
French - 4,000

Source: Embassies & High Commissions

===

Between 1990 and 2006, there is an increase of 860,000 citizens and PRs. Of how many are originally born in Singapore? Between 2002 and 2006, applications granted to PR and citizenships is 266,100. Of course the problem of simply adding the citizenship and PRs over the past few years could be erroneous as there may be overlaps- people who applied for PR may go on to apply citizenships.

Questions persist:

1. Is Singapore "bringing in" too many new immigrants?;
2. Can we solve brain drain and birth stagnation problems by "bringing in" foreigners?;
3. What about the newly created jobs? How many of them goes to Singaporeans?
4. How much of the created wealth in the economy goes back to further building the economy of Singapore? How much of it translates into social policies that benefit the Singapore society?

to comment

Bush is right to be firm on Iraq?

2007-05-08T18:32:00.000+08:00

The Sunday Times front page top news screams, "Bush is right to be firm on Iraq: PM Lee"

Not exactly music to the ears considering that George Bush's Newsweek rating poll has hit an all time low of 28 percent, one percentage point lower than his father.

Almost 62 per cent of Americans disapprove of Bush's Iraq war, with only 30 per cent believing that his actions show he is "willing to take political risks" to do what is right, according to the news magazine. Bush scores a rating similar to Jimmy Carter, in 1979, after the Iran hostage crisis.

Should our government endorse what Bush has said or done when Americans have appeared to think otherwise?
What about Singaporean's attitudes towards Bush and the Iraqi invasion in 2003? Would our government's close links to the administration's stance towards the Iraqi war make us a more likely target of terrorist attack?

posted by Charles Tan

to comment

State of the Singapore Blogosphere, May 2007

2007-05-03T18:16:00.000+08:00

I think my original rant was that there had yet to be a 'golden age' of the Sg blogosphere, not that there used to be. As for the infants now winning I agree, however I see it in a different light, it is those who argue for 'objectivity, fairness, unbiased and personal accounts' of their lives that are winning. In a regime that prides itself in de-politicisation of the polity then yes there has been a shift towards non-political narratives. But surely this is an acceptance of the Singaporean hegemony, so while the political blogs and aggregator blogs continue to be busy building resistance identities rather than project identities, the Singapore blogosphere is nothing other than a bunch of predominantly middle-class, university educated males constructing a space for self-referential echo chambers - myself included.

By Elia Diodati
Authoritarian, yes. But transparent nonetheless. - Kitana, b.Itter s.Weet sym.Phony, The Final Post, April 17 2007.

Back on April Fools’ Day, I wrote about how the Singapore blogosphere is losing its vitality; now akikonomu, the former high priestess of Ise, has already written its epitaph, an ode to rampaging infants. Even back when I started blogging, there were whispers that things weren’t as good as they used to me. Soci, then Steven McDermott, famously ranted long and hard about the “infantile sub-intelligentsia nonsense” permeating the ether.

But now the infants are winning. The great practitioners of online political discourse have declined into moribund obscurity, or sought out other, more rewarding, pursuits. Singabloodypore itself has degenerated into a post-and-boast groupblog. The old Singapore Angle is busy with his second child (congratulations!), while the new Singapore Angle is trapped in its self-pleasing, obsessive groupthink over academic rigor as applied to things that really don’t deserve such standards. Molly Meek’s feline invective somehow seems less vituperative of current affairs and has taken on the tone of self-indugent mockery, in exasperation over her1 inability to satirize the absurd truth. Even Mr Wang has tired of his self-effusing posts on how stupid the Singapore government can be at times, and has made a subtle shift toward “a new thematic focus” as announced on March 30. And in the past six months there has been a noticeable string of prominent self-imposed rigors mortis: Yuen Chung Kwong (December 1), Gayle Goh (January 28), Kitana (April 13), Zyberzitizen (April 18), and now sieteocho (May 1). Vox Leo, by my measure, has joined the ranks of the officially moribund, having last posted on August 22 2006. En & Hou (of Students’ Sketchpad fame) have yet to make good on their promise to “see you after the ‘A’ levels“. And Kway Teow Man’s personal blog seems to have been abandoned since sometime in March.

Unlike the L’Enfant that built the great architectural masterpieces of Washington DC’s National Mall, the infants now overrunning the Singapore blogosphere are killing it through apathetic karma. Sure, it’s not like the infants are engaging in wanton destruction, but on the rare occasions they leave their self-enraptured bubble of photos, linkwhoring ^o^~~~ posts to various offline friends and their pink Comic Sans CSS stylesheets, they tend to form the incessant, one-dimensional chorus of “cannot lah!”

to continue reading

to comment

Singapore - The Fake Times

2007-05-02T21:47:00.000+08:00

Found the following on sammyboy's forum and it seems to be coming from 'I love my EXTRAORDINARY government'. Contains some bad language, but since when has that stopped you clicking on a link. It also seems to have something to do with the video compilation found on youtube. Looks damn good, and maybe someone should start printing it out and handing it out.

Singapore extraordinary government

May Day Walk Montage

2007-05-02T21:25:00.000+08:00

to comment

Singapore - May Day Event @ Hong Lim Park

2007-05-02T01:04:00.000+08:00

These are some of the pics taken at the event. Basically, Dr Chee addressed the crowd emphasizing the need for Singaporeans to understand that the current economic situation is unsustainable; and hope that the supporters would take the initiative and be more forthcoming to support the Opposition.

to comment

Singapore - A Nation Cheated

2007-05-01T20:03:00.000+08:00

A Report on Poverty and Labour in Singapore 2007

Without the PAP, Lee Kuan Yew swears, our women folk would end up as domestic help in distant lands. So be thankful. In fact, be more than thankful. Be worshipful that we have national leaders who have brought us riches – and continue to do so.

Bunkum, many of you say. We may be grateful but we don’t have to be talked down to in such a manner even if it is by the Minister Mentor.

Maybe the MM was too blunt, the PAP admits, but at least the citizens are grateful, at least they should be, for all that the party has done for Singapore.

Bunkum, A Nation Cheated says. This latest SDP report written by Dr Chee Soon Juan punctures the propaganda that Singapore is well-served by the PAP.

Available in electronic format, this 72-page Report on poverty and labour in Singapore traces developments over the last 10 years since the Asian crisis in 1997, and provides evidence – hard, irrefutable evidence – that Singapore is ailing from failed PAP policies.

Unlike other emerging markets Singapore does not have an entrepreneurial class that can compete globally, continuing instead to rely on MNCs and inept GLCs. The emergence of a permanent underclass is a result of such an economic arrangement.

Experts, and there have been many of them, have repeatedly warned that without urgent reforms of the political and economic systems, Singapore's economic situation will continue to deteriorate.

To be absolutely sure, the unprecedented level of poverty seen in this country is not the unintended by-product of globalization, as the PAP would have us believe. It is a creation from Lee’s eugenicist views:

"Free education and subsidised housing lead to a situation where the less economically productive people in the community are reproducing themselves at rates higher than the rest. This will increase the total population of less productive people. We must... take the first tentative steps towards correcting a trend which can leave our society with a large number of the physically, intellectually and culturally anaemic."

One of his faithful ministers, the late S Rajaratnam, darkly promised: "We want to teach people the government is not a rich uncle. You get what you pay for. We are moving in the direction of making people pay for everything."

Such attitude has produced a society with individuals like TT Durai with his avarice, Mrs Goh Chok Tong with her "peanuts" comment, Wee Shu Min with her repugnant diatribe against Derek Wee (and her father’s defence of her comments), and Lee Hsien Loong with his petulance that he and his ministers should not be expected to make "unnecessary financial sacrifices."

A Nation Cheated pieces together an unmistakable picture of PAP's failure. It tells the real story of how our enormous reserves have been accumulated through forced savings under the CPF scheme as well as through the sale of HDB flats. The slew of taxes and fees designed to maximise the extraction of funds from the people is another avenue.

More recently, however, economic growth has been sustained from illicit money laundered from foreigners. The explosive influx of migrants has also contributed much to the fattening of state coffers.

The question is: Is this kind of growth sustainable and how much damage is it inflicting on our society?

Perhaps the ultimate indicator of the failure of the PAP is that in the half-a-century of uninterrupted rule, it has failed to create a nation where Singaporeans are proud to be identified with. A 2007 survey of young Singaporeans revealed that more than half wanted to emigrate. A shocking 37 percent said they were not patriotic to this country.

For Singaporeans, this Report is a must read. It informs, it rebukes, it persuades. It is a call for us to awake from our fearful slumber.

For the foreign observer, it is an opportunity to be disabused of the notion that the Singapore Way is a model.

The sin is not in being ignorant, but in choosing to remain so.

So click on 'Buy Now' button below and buy a copy of A Nation Cheated today!
Proceeds from the sales of this report will go towards promoting democracy in Singapore.

Option 1: You can place your order through Paypal, either through your own Paypal account or directly with your credit card if you don't have a Paypal account. (If you are not using Paypal account, please send us an e-mail separately to inform us of your purchase. The report will then be emailed to you.)

Option 2: If you don't have a credit card but still wish to purchase a copy, please email speakup@singaporedemocrat.org.

to comment

Singapore opposition leader walks around island in support of underpaid workers

2007-05-01T18:08:00.000+08:00

From The International Herald Tribune

SDP Walkers met supporters at Speakers' Corner

SINGAPORE: A Singapore opposition leader and his sister completed a 55-hour walk around their tiny island-nation on Tuesday in a bid to raise awareness of poverty and underpaid workers in Singapore.

About 30 supporters applauded when the two, dressed in shorts and T-shirts reading "Walking For Our Workers," strode into Hong Lim Park near the city center, from where they had set off on their island tour early Sunday.

The May Day walk came in the wake of recent public debate over hefty salary increases planned for government ministers.

Chee Soon Juan, head of the Singapore Democratic Party and his sister, Chee Siok Chin, walked approximately 150 kilometers (90 miles) to the west, north and east of the island, sometimes in pouring rain, taking rest and meal breaks with supporters along the way.

Singapore does not usually allow political gatherings of more than four people.

On their arrival at the park just after noon Tuesday, the brother limped slightly from a sore knee; his sister pulled off her shoes to reveal blisters on her toes.

But the two were smiling as they proudly carried an SDP flag between them and shook the hands of supporters. The SDP leader gave a brief speech about the inequality of salaries in Singapore.

The siblings have long sought to bring attention to poverty in this wealthy business hub.

"Increase Pay For Workers, Not Ministers," read the front of Chee Soon Juan's T-shirt. His sister's said: "Salaries: PM $10,000/day. Workers $30/day."

The government salary increases have caused public grumbling among Singaporeans, many of whom feel ministers and civil servants are already overpaid.

The adjustments would mean Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's annual salary would rise by the end of the year to S$3.1 million (US$2.05 million; €1.53 million) — about five times higher than that of U.S. President George W. Bush.

Lee earned S$2.5 million (US$1.65 million; €1.23 million) last year, according to parliamentary documents. Lee later said he would donate his raise to charity.

The ruling People's Action Party defends the high incomes by saying ministers and civil servants must be paid enough to attract the best talent, and to help prevent corruption.

to comment

The May Day Walk

2007-05-01T18:07:00.000+08:00

How tragic and apt. "May Day", also as in a distress call to Singaporeans, "mayday". The plea to Singaporeans about the power of courage and daring to change. Pro-democracy activists Chee Soon Juan and his sister are making tremendous effort to remind apathetic Singaporeans that the PAP are not the altruistic selfless politicians they are trying to show themselves out to be. This is not the first time the Chees have demonstrated their resolve. Remember the September walk last year that displayed the government's "finesse" and "tolerance" of peaceful non-obstructive small scale marches?

This time, Singapore's democracy activists appear unmolested along the way. We shall what happens tomorrow when the walk ends. For those who wish to support the Chee siblings on the ground, contact Uncle Yap at his number. More updates can also be found at Uncle Yap's blog.

Posted by Eng Chuan Lee. to comment

Singapore - Labour Day Message 2007

2007-04-30T18:46:00.000+08:00

Press Release - Labour Day Message 2007
Mon, Apr 30, 2007
The National Solidarity Party (NSP) stands in solidarity with the workers in Singapore. We are strongly of the view that each and every Singapore workers has contributed tremendously and significantly to the building of this nation. We lament however the lack of sincere treatment by the PAP government towards the hands which toiled to keep Singapore afloat.

The clearest testimony of that affront is illustrated in the PAP government’s unabashed claim that the nation owes its billions in GDP to the “extraordinary” leadership of the PAP, and as such the PAP must necessarily be compensated with “extraordinary” escalating wages. While the GDP of Singapore has grown over the years, the salaries of many Singapore workers have proportionately stagnated, seen tokenish improvement, or sadly even regressed.

Singapore workers have been mercilessly pounded by salvoes of undignified government measures such as non-negotiable hikes in GST, property tax, utility charges, public transport fares, postage cost, medical fees, education costs, and even PAP town councils fees. The PAP government does not pause for an empathising moment from inflicting punishing measures on the workers.

We are painfully concerned that many workers are now unable to accumulate sufficient savings to contemplate a decent retirement at old age, or to meet their medical expenditures. We are equally disturbed that the PAP’s more liberal policy on foreign workers has seen a collapse in salary floor for the lower-income workers. This trend is now rapidly infecting the middle-income workers caught in a hard squeeze of facing cheaper foreign competition and higher cost of living while receiving lesser state subsidies.

It is all the more deplorable that the PAP government now decides to prescribe the “bitter medicine” of urging workers to “work for as long as he can”, and to completely forgo the concept of retirement. It is also painful to see workers, especially those who have lost their jobs through the sordid government policies, literally begging for an increase in state assistance, only to be seen as a liability by the PAP government who wastes no time dismissing the pleas as one stemming from a “crutch mentality”.

The NSP is disappointed that Singapore workers are unable to enjoy the fruit of their 40-years of labour, needing to practically ‘work to their graves’. And to aggravate matters, the workers’ unions in Singapore have evolved from one amplifying the muffled cries of concerns of the workers, to one serving as a mere communication-bridge to disseminate and persuade workers to accept debatable government labour policies.

Nevertheless, the NSP is optimistic that Singapore workers will be steadfast in their quest to seek a fairer alternative for themselves and their future generations. We are hopeful that the Singapore workers will one day regain the sense of respectability and purpose that is enshrined in the original spirit of Labour Day.

We wish all Singapore workers peace and hope.

Central Executive Council
National Solidarity Party

to comment

Singapore - May Day Rally: A personal appeal from John Tan

2007-04-30T17:23:00.001+08:00

30 Apr 07

As I am writing this, Dr. Chee and Ms. Chee are probably walking along the streets of Hougang or Eunos. On May Day, they will be arriving at the Speaker's Corner at about noon to address gatherers.

Our purpose for this event is to commemorate May Day by highlighting the plight of the workers in Singapore in juxtaposition to the incredulous pay raise the already rich ministers are giving themselves.

Some of you might have wondered what a walk such this can accomplish. After all, many had spoken and blogged on the issue, whereupon the ruling elites, in their usual manner, had chosen to turn a deaf ear to the citizens and bulldozed their self-serving policy through.

It is true that a two-person walk would not add much voice to what had already been said. But a 500-person walk would. The ruling party knows the power of a people united. That is why they use undemocratic laws to curb peaceful assembly.

MAY DAY WALK

Fortunately for us, there is yet no restriction to the number of people who can assemble at the Speaker's Corner. Therefore, I urge all of you, who want to make your voice heard, to be at Hong Lim Park before noon this Tuesday (May Day). There is more than enough space there for 500 people. Make full use of the last remnant of your democratic rights before the day comes when even that might be taken away.

You must have heard this humorous story about four people named Everybody, Somebody, Anybody, and Nobody. There was an important job to be done and Everybody was sure that Somebody would do it. Anybody could have done it, but instead Nobody did it. Somebody got angry about this, because it was Everybody's job. When Everybody thought Anybody could do it, Nobody realized that Everybody wouldn't do it. It ended up that Everybody blamed Somebody when Nobody did what Anybody could have done.

The joke might be old and moldy, but its relevance is timeless. If Everybody only wants to stay home and wait for Somebody to put up streaming video clips of the event, guess who will be there at the event? No prize for guessing that trusty Nobody will show up. So, if you are Anybody, I urge you to be there.

Let us shout to force the attention of our uncaring government. Let us rattle their beds in which they slumber while we, the Singapore Workers, slog our lives away.

See you there,
John Tan

to comment

Singapore - Island sits in an ocean of economic turbulence

2007-04-30T17:15:00.000+08:00

Recommended by an anonymous emailer who I would like to thank for drawing my attention to the article. It is from the Sydney Morning Herald on the April 30, 2007.

Eric Ellis looks for explanations for Singapore's booming property market.

SINGAPORE'S property market is roaring. And why I know that is because the lease on our apartment will soon expire and our landlady wants 70 per cent more rent than she did in 2004.

No matter that the place leaks like a Canberra cabinet and that its 1970s-wired electricity trips at least once a week: these are details too far for our poco-curante proprietrix. But she has noticed that a private banker from Tokyo has signed, sight unseen, for a same-sized unimproved flat downstairs at 150 per cent more than the vacating lessee paid, and she reckons we are getting a bargain for $6000 a month.

It's all very puzzling as there's no textbook rationale to the sudden real estate boom here. The economy's growing at an unremarkable-for-Asia 6 per cent, much the same as it has for years, save the difficult "Asian Contagion" period of the late 1990s. There's no more government pump-priming than usual, none of the official withholding of land to get prices artificially moving that's much loved in Singapore's rival for city-state hothouse, Hong Kong. And though wealthy enough, with just 4.5 million people Singapore is still 2.4 billion consumers short of being "Chindia", Asia's neologism du jour.

From Sotheby's to shares, Singapore has no shortage of places to park cash. But new luxury apartment blocks are sprouting among the frangipani, touting all manner of metropolitan arcadia - infinity pools, gyms, private clubs. They sport funky names such as Trillium and Botanika, fashioned on hoardings in designer fonts usually seen in Wallpaper magazine. My favourite promises that the elysian towers rising behind it will be "Home to 46 of the Most Luminous Families" - which will presumably take care of electricity bills, also on the rise.

The reasons why it's suddenly salad days for Singapore developers seem to reside in neighbouring Indonesia, a country rated by the graft watchdog Transparency International at 130th of the 163 nations it tracks in its annual corruption survey. TI's first place, ie, the world's least corrupt place, is occupied by Finland, Iceland and New Zealand. Australia ranks joint ninth with The Netherlands.

Read more

Censorship: What's the way forward? and Zahari's 17 Years

2007-04-27T19:08:00.001+08:00

Refers to Zahari's 17 Years which is available on google video. It has so far been viewed 7691 times and downloaded 634 times. So there are a lot of people out there, potentially in Singapore with this video on their hard drives and ipods passing it around.

From CNA

SINGAPORE: The decision by the Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts — and its use, for the first time, of the Minister's discretionary powers — to ban a film based on the arrest and detention of a former journalist and politician throws up a number of questions.

Why ban the film, Zahari's 17 Years, when it was passed with a PG rating not once but twice last year, to be screened at the Singapore International Film Festival and the Substation's Asian Film Symposium?

Neither organiser screened the film and it was reported that the Media Development Authority had told the Substation that the film may include defamatory content.

Why ban the film when the memoirs of Mr Said Zahari, a former editor of the Malay language newspaper Utusan Melayu and president of Parti Rakyat Singapura, are available in bookshops here?

As the 77-year-old told AFP: "What I said in the movie I have already said in my book, and much, much more."

Why create unnecessary curiosity and drive people online to watch the film, which has already found its way on to the Internet?

In today's wired world, it is more likely than not, the ban will be ineffective and counter-productive. Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said as much recently: Censorship in the Internet age "makes no sense".

Indeed, a movie has a wider and more evocative reach than a book, since voice, motion, drama and images do tend to have a bigger impact on shaping the minds of audiences — which is why different rules must apply to different media, especially on issues that could get the viewers worked up.

I saw the film before the ban. It gave an account of Mr Said's arrest and detention days — including his recollection of taking Chinese lessons from a fellow detainee. He said he was not a foreign agent, nor a communist sympathiser. He also spoke critically about Mr Lee, when asked for his take on why he was detained.

Mica said that the film gives a "distorted and misleading" portrayal of Mr Said's arrest and detention and "could undermine public confidence in the Government". The film, it added, was "an attempt (by Mr Said) to "exculpate himself from his past involvement in communist front activities against the interests of Singapore".

Most Singaporeans recognise a good government — and a flat lie for that matter — when they see one. If the authorities were worried about whether the audience would be discerning enough to separate the wheat from the chaff, they could have given the film a higher classification rating.

If the intention was to send an unequivocal message, there are better ways to do so, including a rebuttal of the false accusations.

The Government has every right to take a stand against what it feels is a distorted account. If it felt that an open rebuttal would raise the film's profile unnecessarily — which it has inadvertently already done with the ban — the authorities could impose, as a condition for screening, a "government advisory" at the start or end of the film, to refute any misleading statements.

Actually, this was a great opportunity for the Government to engage Singaporeans on an important part of the country's history.

The tumultuous period from the '50s right through the '70s, with its backdrop of riots and demonstrations, can arguably be described as the defining period of nationhood.

These events, which were openly documented by newspapers, shaped the Republic's relatively short but no less rich history.

Yet, our school children do not get a good grasp of these events from our history textbooks — the same sources that described the '50s Hock Lee bus riots as having been primarily fuelled by dissatisfaction with long work hours and low pay.

Some researchers and historians have offered other possible reasons for the riots, such as anti-colonial sentiments and instigation by pro-communist quarters.

It is not that these accounts are not available here. One can go to the Internet, visit libraries and bookshops, attend forums — like the one held last year by former political detainees Messrs Tan Jing Quee and Michael Fernandez — or even get second-hand accounts from their parents or grandparents, to piece together this important chapter of the Singapore story.

Censorship is a double-edged sword, especially in today's YouTube world, where privacy is constantly under threat.

Allow anything and everything and you are likely to have an uncontrollable situation on your hands. Cut and censor and you will have a population hungry for the forbidden fruit.

So, how do we move forward?

Engage Singaporeans, let contrarian views find their voice and challenge the views of those who have different accounts.

The Government took a rare and bold move to debate ministerial salaries openly in Parliament, although it was not duty-bound to do so. Singaporeans wrote in to newspapers to give their views, not all of them agreeing with the Government.

Censorship deserves a similar airing. I can't think of a better way forward. - TODAY/fa

to comment

SAFE responds to MM Lee's comments on homosexuality

2007-04-27T18:28:00.000+08:00

Below is a SAFE press release in response to Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew's comments on homosexuality and the Penal Code, as reported in a recent Reuters article.

...

PRESS RELEASE
27 April 2007

SAFE is a group of family and friends who affirm and support gay and transgendered people as persons with equal rights to respect, dignity, acceptance and empowerment in society.

We are writing to express our appreciation and thanks to MM Lee for his recent comments at the dialogue with Young PAP and the interview with Reuters.

We appreciate the two cogent points he made,
1. That homosexuals are born with this propensity and not by choice. It is a genetic variation, not an aberration.
2. That the existing criminal law against homosexual acts in the Penal Code is outmoded.

We at SAFE fully agree with and support these points and are hopeful that the law that criminalises homosexual acts will be abolished in the proposed amendments to the Penal Code. We see this as a logical and responsible next step.

As with all complex human traits and behaviours such as intelligence, homosexuality is probably a result of many factors. Rather than arguing about whether particular genes can be found for these traits and behaviours, we should continue to accept our fellow Singaporean citizens and residents who deserve the same rights to respect, dignity, acceptance and empowerment as everyone else, and to be treated equally under the law.

We cannot agree with a law that proclaims our sons, grandsons, brothers, nephews, uncles, relatives and friends are criminals for a propensity that is not of their volition, is innocuous and part of their private lives. For far too long our gay loved ones from a young age, have suffered deep internalized oppression, often resulting in the disintegration of family, compromised relationships, low self-esteem, stunted maturity and unavoidable deceitfulness.

We therefore support the proposed decriminalisation of oral and anal sex as proposed by the Ministry of Home Affairs this past November, and ask that it apply equally to all consenting adults.

Since the 1970s, the law has been used in Singapore as an educational tool; we implore the Government to use it again for the same purpose. This will be a first step in educating the public on the nature of homosexuality, educating them to become more understanding, respectful and accepting of our human diversity.

The homosexual community is an essential element in the tapestry of peoples that make Singapore such a unique and cosmopolitan community. Homosexual men and women enrich our lives through their participation in business, the professions, the arts, and government. They are our sons and daughters, colleagues, neighbors, and friends.

Legal discrimination against homosexuals is unfortunate, outdated, and regrettable. It tells them that they are less than fully welcome; that their participation in Singapore life is subject to government forbearance. It diminishes the entire Singaporean community by allowing laws to stand that criminalise many of our fellow citizens. While contributing to intolerance it leaves the government and legal authorities open to the charge of being hypocritical for not enforcing a standing law.

As we focus on the richness gay people bring to our lives and our love and support for them, we not only liberate them, we also become a society committed to the Asian values of real family – strong, whole and committed to love against all odds.

...

Read the Reuters article: Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew questions homosexuality ban

to comment

Singapore - May Day Walk for Workers

2007-04-27T17:18:00.000+08:00

Dr Chee Soon Juan and Ms Chee Siok Chin will be walking the above route for the May Day Walk for Workers.

Starting at Hong Lim Park (Speakers' Corner) at 6am on Sunday, 29 Apr 07, the two will proceed westward towards Jurong and then work their way north to Choa Chu Kang and Woodlands before journeying south to Yishun and then Ang Mo Kio.

The walkers expect to reach the Yishun/Ang Mo Kio sector by Sunday evening.

After some rest, they will continue to the eastern part of the island and hit Pasir Ris and Tampines before heading south towards downtown Singapore and, finally, ending back at Hong Lim Park on Tuesday, 1 May, at around noon.

The Walk is intended to focus attention on the plight of workers in Singapore who have been exploited by the PAP, and left voiceless without independent trade unions to represent their rights and interests.

Rest stops and meal breaks will be announced on this website during the walk itself. There will be updates on the progress of the Walk and video messages will be posted to keep Singaporeans informed.

Supporters are encouraged to come by and encourage the Chees in their attempt to cover the distance of 150 km.

So tell your family and friends of this event, and help spread the message that Singaporeans need to become active citizens and assert their rights. On this May Day, people need to know that they need not suffer in silence while the PAP and its ministers grow rich on the back of these workers.

Remember, workers made Singapore rich, not the PAP.

If you want to help make this event successful, contact the Singapore Democrats at speakup@singaporedemocrat.org.

Singapore - Enough of Enigmatic Words, Time for Government to Act

2007-04-26T18:34:00.001+08:00

Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew Questions Gay Sex Law

From People Like Us

According to the Straits Times, Lee was speaking in answer to a question from Young PAP activist Loretta Chen, who had asked where censorship was headed in the next two decades. Young PAP is the youth wing of the People’s Action Party. The event was a gathering of this youth group at the St James Power Station, a trendy night spot, on 21 April 2007.

Especially as these comments were made extemporaneously, their meaning is open to interpretation. There remains considerable uncertainty as to what Lee had in mind when he spoke of taking a “practical, pragmatic approach” and not upsetting anti-gay groups’ “sense of propriety and right and wrong.”

People Like Us has long argued that equality for the GLBT minorities is more than just a matter of being practical. Fundamental rights are at issue. It is detrimental to fundamental conceptions of justice and equality as well as the constitutional development of Singapore not to respect these rights, whether with regard to GLBTs or other minorities.

Nonetheless, if the government thinks that it can sell the idea of decriminalisation – if indeed that was what Lee had at the back of his mind – through reliance on the argument of pragmatism, then so be it. The important thing is for the government to act. For many years now, it’s been one minister after another muttering words that have so far not translated into any meaningful change in policy or legislation. Enough.

to comment

Singapore - SDP leaders to Walk for Workers on May Day

2007-04-26T15:48:00.000+08:00

25 Apr 07

In the lead up to May Day next week, SDP leaders and activists will conduct a series of activities to commemorate International Workers' Day.

One of the main events will be the Walk for Workers in Singapore where Dr Chee Soon Juan and Ms Chee Siok Chin will attempt to walk across the island of Singapore.

Starting from the Speakers' Corner at Hong Lim Park, the two will walk west to Jurong, then head north to Woodlands, proceed to Pasir Ris in the east and then finish back at Hong Lim Park.

The entire journey is expected to take approximately 55 hours with rest and meal breaks. It will cover approximately 150 km. The walkers will begin at 6 am on Sunday, 29 Apr, and finish on May Day, Tuesday, 1 May.

The Chees ran a marathon in 2000 to mark International Human Rights Day. The 26-mile run marked the numbers of years Chia Thye Poh was imprisoned by the PAP. For details of the occasion see http://www.singapore-window.org/sw00/001209sc.htm.

The aim of the walk is to focus attention on the exploitation of Singapore's workers by the Government and recent raising of the GST adding to the financial burden of the working class.

The walk will also be part of the continuing rebuke of the ministers increasing their salaries to unconscionable levels despite the poor getting poorer in this country. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong pays himself $260,000 a month while workers make as little as $400 monthly.

Logistical support is needed for this exercise. Anyone and everyone who wants to help out can contact the Singapore Democrats at speakup@singaporedemocrat.org. Details of the walk will be announced over the next few days.

The second activity will be the launching of an online SDP report on poverty and labour in Singapore which exposes the PAP's inept handling of Singapore's economy.

Democracy activists will also attend a seminar to be held in the next few days where the development of leadership skills for NGO leaders will be discussed.

Finally, SDP leaders will be at Speakers' Corner on May Day (next Tuesday) starting at 12 noon to welcome Dr Chee and Ms Chee on the completion of their walk as well as to speak on the hardships faced by workers in Singapore.

So keep your eyes and ears open for details and join us in our continued endeavour to empower Singaporeans and to restore the rights of our workers.

to comment

Growing Number of Asian Blogs Offers Alternatives to Mainstream Media

2007-04-26T00:38:00.000+08:00

I have posted this article here as it is a position and an argument that is very close to my own.

And the MrBrown affair gets yet another mention.

By Claudia Blume
Hong Kong
25 April 2007

Blume report - Download 717k
Listen to Blume report

Asia's blogging community is growing rapidly, as more people get access to the Internet. In countries with a controlled media environment, blogs promote free speech and offer alternative sources of news and information. But some governments in the region try to limit access to the new media. Claudia Blume reports from VOA's Asia News Center in Hong Kong.

Millions of people in Asia have taken to blogging in recent years, creating personal Web sites that often take the form of an online diary. The word blog derives from Web log. China alone is estimated to have up to 30 million bloggers.

As elsewhere in the world, the region's collection of blogs on the Internet is diverse and amorphous. But in Asia, a survey by the U.S. software company Microsoft estimates that nearly half of those who are online have a blog, compared to just eight percent of U.S. Internet users.

Most people create blogs to share their lives and interests with friends, family and a few strangers. Many use text and photos, but also sound and video. Others blog to exchange information, create networks or express opinions about a wide range of issues.

In this music video, posted on the popular video-sharing Web site YouTube, two young Malaysians say an ironic 'thank you' to Indonesia for being responsible for last year's haze, the pollution that spread from Indonesian forest fires. The bloggers' criticism is an opinion that their governments would not express.

For some people, blogging has become a powerful tool for freedom of expression. Rebecca MacKinnon, an expert on online media at the University of Hong Kong, says a small percentage of people in the region create blogs to tell a wider audience what the mainstream media are not reporting.

"Some of these people who are creating media such as Jeff Ooi in Malaysia, a number of bloggers in China, basically there are people one could cite in any given country around the region, who are developing rather large audiences because they are saying something fresh or more direct than [what] people are getting from their traditional media sources," said MacKinnon.

News of the famous nail house in the Chinese city of Chongqing, where a couple tried to block the destruction of their home earlier this year, was first spread on blogs. When mainstream media were told to remain silent on the case, a Chinese blogger who calls himself Zola traveled to Chongqing and continued to report about it.

Isaac Mao, a well-known Shanghai-based blogger and software architect, says Zola's action was a milestone for Chinese bloggers.

"So it means once the traditional mainstream media, if they fail to work, grassroots media can take over the niche or they can take another role - to report some social events from different angles," said Mao.

In countries with a highly restricted and regulated media environment, such as China, Vietnam, Burma and Singapore, blogs can provide different, independent information and viewpoints. While the quality and trustworthiness of blogs varies greatly, they are becoming popular sources of information in places where the mainstream media lacks credibility.

"People may now welcome this diversity of news but that's precisely because I think one thing to remember is a lot of people are already very skeptical of mainstream media in their own countries, precisely because they are aware that most mainstream media in their countries are [one] either owned by the state or they are highly restricted and therefore are not really free to provide independent and diverse news," said Roby Alampay, the executive director of the Southeast Asian Press Alliance.

Alampay says some blogs are created by professional journalists who post online what they are not allowed to publish in their day-jobs. Last year, for example, a Singaporean journalist whose column in a government-controlled newspaper was suspended after he criticized high living costs in the city-state was able to post the controversial story on his blog.

A number of Asian governments view bloggers as a threat. The Malaysian government has announced plans to set up a unit to monitor and counter what it calls lies and slander being spread on the Internet. Roby Alampay says governments across the region try to block, filter and monitor cyberspace.

"Censorship is becoming an issue all over Southeast Asia and I think it's safe to assume that most countries exercise some form of blocking and censorship or harassment of websites," Alampay added.

In Thailand, the military government recently blocked access to YouTube when an offending video clip of the Thai king appeared on the video-sharing Web site. It also suspended a popular political online chat room in April. In Malaysia, the government-linked New Straits Times newspaper recently filed defamation suits against two well-known bloggers.

Vietnam and China are particularly notorious for censoring the Internet. MacKinnon says that's why it would be impossible for anyone to create an opposition press through blogs there.

"You are not going to see a pro-democracy, anti-communist party-press emerging through the Chinese blogosphere. The Chinese government is able to prevent that from happening," said MacKinnon.

She said it would be over-simplistic to assume that the existence of blogs will suddenly bring about a democratic revolution in countries such as China.

Isaac Mao, for example, describes the cat-and-mouse game involved when bloggers want to outwit technical blocks imposed by government censors.

But MacKinnon says blogs offer the potential to open up the media in ways not possible before the spread of Internet access.

to comment

Singapore air force tanker deployed to IRAQ war

2007-04-25T18:26:00.000+08:00

This is the greatest example of 'newspeak' I have yet to come upon in my 30 plus years of existence.

The WAR and destruction of Iraq and the WAR in Afghanistan are a 'multinational reconstruction effort'.

By S Ramesh, Channel NewsAsia
Singapore's Air Force has deployed another KC-135 tanker aircraft detachment to the Gulf.

The SAF's Chief of Defence Force, Major-General Desmond Kuek was at Changi Air Base on Wednesday morning to send off the team.

The Defence Ministry says this is Singapore's latest contribution to support the multinational reconstruction efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The KC-135 detachment will conduct air-to-air refuelling missions during its three-month deployment.

Since 2003, the SAF has made deployments of Landing Ships Tank, KC-135 tankers and a C-130 aircraft to the Gulf. - CNA/ch

Whatever you do 'don't mention the war'. It might upset our neighbours in the South East Asia region and undermine our attempts to generate closer ties with Iran, if they all realise that we are providing physical support to the US led war.

to comment

Singapore - Government urged to lift ban on film about journalist imprisoned for 17 years

2007-04-24T19:38:00.000+08:00

Reporters Without Borders today called on the Singaporean government to reverse its decision to ban director Martyn See’s documentary “Zahari’s 17 years,” about former journalist and dissident Said Zahari’s 17 years in detention for defending press freedom in Singapore.

“Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s government has used an archaic film law to impose another authoritarian measure violating press freedom,” Reporters Without Borders said. “The ban on See’s film must be lifted. This act of censorship is all the more inappropriate and ridiculous as his films are available on websites such as YouTube and GoogleVideo. We call for the liberalisation of the censorship and internal security laws that deprive Singaporeans of an environment favourable to free speech.”

Since 12 April, anyone suspected of possessing or disseminating a copy of “Zahari’s 17 years” can be sentenced to two yeas in prison and a heavy fine. See was forced to surrender all of his own copies of the documentary to the ministry of information, communication and arts on 11 April.

The film consists of a 49-minute interview with Said, the former editor of the newspaper Utusan Melayu, about the reasons he and several colleagues were arrested under a draconian internal security law in 1963, when the government was headed by the current prime minister’s father. Two years before his arrest, Said led a strike by the staff of Utusan Melayu in protest against the government’s takeover of the newspaper.

In a letter sent to See’s home on 10 April, the information ministry notified him that the documentary was being banned under article 35 (1) of the Film Act because the authorities would “not allow people who had posed a security threat to the country in the past to exploit the use of films to purvey a false and distorted portrayal of their past actions and detention by the government.” The documentary could “undermine public confidence in the government,” the letter added.

The documentary can be viewed at http://singabloodypore.rsfblog.org/archive/2007/04/12/singapore-zahari-s-17-years.html

You can keep up to date with Martyn See's situation by visiting his blog here.

to comment

the mrbrown show: Bak Chor Mee Man 2

2007-04-24T17:57:00.000+08:00

Really just want to spread the word about this podcast from MrBrown of course. Humour can sometimes bring the stupidity of an argument into stark contrast. Of course it's not really about Bak Chor Mee.

Podcast: the mrbrown show 19 April 2007: Bak Chor Mee Man 2 (MP3, file size: 2mb, Time: 00:04:05)

You must pay top dollar for top talent. You must pay top dollar for top talent. Did I mention, you must pay top dollar for top talent?

to comment

No homosexual movie to be shown at Singapore film festival

2007-04-23T18:48:00.000+08:00

From Pravda

Sex scenes showing the homosexual relationships between teacher and his 18-years-old student became the reason to remove movie from a local Singaporean film festival after government censors said sex scenes from the film had to be cut.

Organizers of the Singapore International Film Festival and producers of "Solos" said Monday the film would be withdrawn from public screening in line with the festival's policy of only showing uncensored films.

The festival opened April 18 and runs through April 30. "Solos" was originally scheduled to be screened on Wednesday.

The film received an R21 rating - which restricts it to audiences over age 21 - with three cuts from the Singapore Board of Film Censors, said Florence Ang, the film's producer.

The board said in a statement that the film contained "prolonged and explicit homosexual lovemaking scenes including scenes of oral sex and threesome sex" which had to be removed.

The cuts make up about five minutes of the 77-minute film, Ang said.

read on...

Thailand to weigh new foreign business ownership rules

2007-04-23T18:01:00.000+08:00

By Orathai Sriring (Reuters)

BANGKOK: Thailand's military-appointed legislature will debate this week proposed changes to foreign business ownership rules that are still making foreign firms nervous despite government efforts to soothe their fears.

Business chiefs fear foreign companies will be driven away by the new rules, which emanate from the furor generated by the takeover of Shin Corp., the telecommunications giant founded by the former prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra, by Temasek, the Singapore government investment firm.

At the least, the changes could stifle foreign investment in the export-dependent economy, business executives said.

"While other Asian countries, with less political and economic worries and larger markets, are opening up the doors for foreign investment, Thailand is doing the opposite," said Paul Strunk, head of the German-Thai Chamber of Commerce.

to continue reading and comment

Fiscal finagling in Singapore

2007-04-16T23:41:00.000+08:00

By Shawn W Crispin

BANGKOK - Singapore's economy is booming, with gross domestic product (GDP) on course to expand 7.2% this year after racing ahead 7.9% last year. But the strong economic-growth figures mask a structural weakness in the island state's economic-policy mix, one that threatens its long-term international competitiveness, and one that the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) clearly has no intention of amending.

This week, the PAP-led government rewarded itself with a 60% pay increase, boosting ministers' annual base salaries to about S$1.25 million (US$823,000), the highest pay scale for government officials anywhere in the world. Big budget surpluses provide the financial power behind the PAP's political monopoly, which steers the national economy and maintains a strict system of social controls.

To generate that largesse, the PAP maintains a highly austere fiscal policy, taxing more and spending less than perhaps any other government in Asia. The government contends on its official website that fiscal policy is directed primarily at promoting long-term economic growth rather than cyclical adjustment or redistributing income through "fair" tax policies and "prudent" expenditure programs. It contends an "ethos of fiscal rectitude" extends throughout the public sector to help ensure price stability and confidence in the local currency.

Beyond the official jargon, Singapore's fiscal policy consistently generates outsized surpluses, which come largely at the expense of the island state's private consumers and businesses through a complex web of income and various other hidden taxes. As a percentage of GDP, Singapore's domestic consumption historically ranges between 10% and 20% less than that of Hong Kong, where average per capita salaries are comparable. Anemic consumption coincided with Singapore running a current-account surplus of 28% of GDP last year - far and away the highest such ratio of any advanced economy in the world.

According to independent financial analysts who spoke with Asia Times Online, Singapore's outsized surpluses are habitually hidden away off-budget, often through the use of accounting gimmicks that diverge from internationally accepted norms. They note that government-linked companies and investment corporations buy and sell among themselves at undisclosed transfer prices, obscuring their profit and loss profiles. Nor, they note, does the government publish statistics related to its share of overall national savings.

Read more

Singapore - Akha TV 6 Amue Athu

2007-04-16T22:57:00.000+08:00

We discuss the case of Amue Athu in a Singapore prison going to the Singapore supreme court and other issues.

I have reposted the following article as it is related to the video above. Also takes UNESCO to task and the sending of missionaries to Thailand.

From Akha Heritage Foundation

Ms. Meitinee Wongsa, an Akha woman from Thailand, was trafficked into Singapore. She was sent out of the country without due process and when she returned legally she was arrested. Now her case goes to the Singapore Supreme Court. Activism Works.

Ms. Meitinee Wongsa, an Akha woman from Chiangrai province in Thailand, was trafficked to Singapore under cloudy circumstances. She was quietly sent out of Singapore without due process when she didn't "work out".

Later when she chose to marry a man from Singapore, and set a date for marriage and returned to Singapore, the Immigration of Singapore arrested her and sentenced her to one year in prison for illegal entry.

Her fiance fought for her defense, and it was determined that highly irregular events happened in the handling of her case. How was she sent out of Singapore the first time with no arrest? Who signed what papers? Who was the translator? Why did they make her sign papers which said her real name was not in fact her real name? Why is there no record of her "arrest" with Singapore Immigration?

Now all of this is coming to light, and her case has been admitted by the Singapore Supreme Court.

In a day or two it will be listed on this site:
Supreme Court" under "Criminal Revisions".

This case has been very important to the freedom of Ms. Wongsa who is now in Portdown prison for many months.

It is also important because the Thai Embassy has had to admit she is there and confirm that she is a Thai citizen, which they did not want to do, (first they said her passport is false) and that her Identity card and passport are genuine. In the past Thailand has disowned Akha women trafficked to places like Japan.

You can contact the Singapore Consul in San Francisco to ask them about this case and for the immediate release of Ms. Wongsa. Her prison number is S12369.

Singapore Consul
595 Market Street, Suite 2450
San Francisco, CA 94105, USA
Email: singcg_sfo@sgmfa.gov.sg
Tel: (415) 543-4775
Fax: (415) 543-4788

Singapore citizens who need emergency consular assistance can call: (415) 595-4346
Use the last number, they actually answer the phone.

This case is also important in that it gives lots of light to how the Akha are treated, and the trafficking of Akha women by the Thais. The brothel owner in Hatyai has not been arrested at this time.

NGO's in Thailand have proved nearly totally useless in getting one of "their own" arrested for a crime.

Thank you for supporting Akha Human Rights.

We hope that her case is overturned and that she is released and allowed to marry and stay in Singapore as a FREE Akha woman.

to post a comment

Related Links:
Why Does Singapore Imprison the Victims of Trafficking? 3
Why Does Singapore Imprison the Victims of Trafficking? 2
Why Does Singapore Imprison the Victims of Trafficking? 1

Danish animated film withdrawn from Singapore film festival

2007-04-16T21:55:00.000+08:00

Princess trailer

Apr 16, 2007, 11:17 GMT

Singapore - The Danish animated film Princess has been withdrawn from the Singapore International Film Festival after censors ruled that it denigrated a religious symbol, a cross, organizers said Monday.

The production, the first animated feature from Danish director Anders Morgenthaler, focuses on a missionary priest who seeks to erase his dead sister's past as a porn star. It had been selected to open the prestigious Directors' Fortnight at the Cannes Film Festival last year.

The Board of Film Censors said it contained a scene in which 'a cross is displayed in an objectionable way' in the lower half of the body of a woman in a nun's habit.[00:50 secs. in trailer]

Board guidelines prohibit 'films with content denigrating a religion or a religious symbol.'

Solos, a Singapore production, was also found objectionable. The board said it contained 'prolonged and explicit homosexual lovemaking scenes, including scenes of oral sex and threesome sex.'

It was one of 11 films selected to participate in the competition for the festival's Silver Screen Award for best Asian feature.

Hundreds of films are scheduled to be shown during the festival starting this week. While firms are regularly shown in Singapore with cuts of scenes and language, the festival only shows uncut productions.

Princess

Due to his sister's death, the 32 year old August returns and consequently abandons his profession as a missionary priest. His beloved sister Christina, who went from greatness to decay as the famous porn-star The Princess, is dead after years of drug abuse. She leaves behind her 5-year old daughter Mia, whom August feels obliged to take care of. Weighed down by grief and guilt he decides to revenge the dead of Christina - and takes Mia on a mission to destroy all existing pornographic material featuring The Princess. The mission escalates into a brutal and violent rout, where August is desperately trying to protect the only precious thing in his life, Mia, why he is forced to make a fatal decision. Written by Martin Stoltenborg Christensen

to comment

AFA Youth Outreach Programme

2007-04-15T20:00:00.000+08:00

With this blog post, we are taking the first step on the journey to revolutionising the way we deal with HIV and youth. This is the first post in our efforts to reach out to apathetic youth of today, in moving beyond dry sex education classes.

This internet journal aims to fill the gap that exists, with youths unable to seek information anonymously on matters related to sex and sexuality. We aim to provide a constant flow of information necessary to protect yourself, and thought-provoking articles on this controversial issue.

HIV and youth is a thorny issue today, weighed down by immense political and sociological issues. Much as people would like to pretend it does not happen, it does. Much as people would like to pretend abstinence is the cure for all this, it does not work in practice, and it would be foolish to continue burying our head in the sand and continue pursuing ineffective programs for the sake of political correctness.

AFA Youth Outreach Programme is a bold new initiative, led by Indu and Sarah, to push the boundaries of political correctness and social limits, to find innovative ways to rectify an age-old problem. This internet journal is part of the online component of the multi-pronged approach to making safer sex a lifestyle choice. Our other programs are as follows:

1. Grassroots outreach to at-risk youths through distribution of condoms at youth hang outs

2. Online outreach in forums and internet spaces, and through strategically placed safe-sex adverts

3. Information collection through surveys on teens

4. Talks/workshops conducted at regular intervals to educate teens on safer sex

If you wish to contact us, in relation to participating, volunteering or enquiring about our programs, please send an email to youth.outreach@afa.org.sg. You can also direct your personal questions on sex and sexuality to that address. We will do our best to answer all emails.

Be Aware, Be Safe

to comment

Banned Conference In Singapore

2007-04-14T20:40:00.000+08:00

Part One

Part Two

to comment

Singapore: Packed audience at SDP forum

2007-04-14T19:50:00.000+08:00

From The OnlineCitizen

The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) held a public forum to a packed audience of between 160 to 180 people at the Sheraton Towers hotel on friday.

The Singapore Police and the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) had earlier rejected the SDP’s application for professional visit passes to be given to its overseas speakers to speak at the forum on the grounds of “public interest”. (Channelnewsasia) The authorities had only informed the SDP of the decision the evening before the event, although the application was made 2 weeks prior, according to Ms Chee Siok Chin who was the host of the evening’s conference.

The overseas speakers were from the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE), which included members of the European parliament and the Council of Asian Liberal and Democrats (CALD) which included a Cambodian and a Congresswoman from the Philippines.

The SDP is a member of the CALD.

In her opening address and expressing her “utter disappointment and dismay” at the government’s ban on the foreign speakers from speaking, Ms Chee told the audience, “Clean, affluent, efficient and modern Singapore is probably the only country in the world that professes to be democratic but prohibits international democrats from addressing the Singapore public.”

to continue reading
The link is to the online citizen. It contains more pictures.

A real most see though has to be Expat@Large's take on the evening. Really makes me laugh out loud.
Our Silence Says All That We Need To Say

A forum on the failures of the PAP Leadership

2007-04-14T19:48:00.000+08:00

The Development of Democracy in Asia And Europe
13 April 2007
Sheraton Towers, Opal Ballroom
7pm
Organised by ALDE (Alliance of Liberals and Democrats in Europe) & CALD (Council of Asian Liberals and Democrats)

Aside from the refusal to permit the European Parliamentarians to speak at the forum, which generated bad publicity for the PAP government on an international scale, (as the gag order resulted in the news even on the BBC website); it proceeded without a hitch, as promised by the organisers.

Dr Chee, the Secretary General of SDP, of which the party is a member of CALD, spoke on the failures of the PAP leadership, focusing on the economic front. After flashing out certain quotes by Minister Mentor, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, and relating life stories on how the poor in Singapore survived on miserable amounts of salaries, Dr Chee brought out an array of statistics from various sources to support his validations on the failures of the PAP economic strategies.

They include (but not limited to):

· Monthly wages for low skilled workers decreased by 34% from $746 in 1998 to $492 in 1999. In 1999, 14,700 earned less than $200 per month and 2000 age eligible children did not attend school, as parents were unable to afford their education in 1999.

Inter-country comparisons between Singapore and Hong Kong were also made to reflect the dire situation in the former.

While foreign exchange reserves in Singapore and Hong Kong are impressive, the former at 134.6 US Billion Dollars and the latter at 132, the similarities ended there:

· The public debt ratio as a % of Singapore is 100.6% (9th out of 120 countries) while Hong Kong is only 1% (120th out of 120).
· Singapore's consumption share of GDP is 20% below Hong Kong and its household debt as a % of disposable income is 174%, higher than Britain at 116%, Japan at 100% and US at 90%. Clearly, the average Singapore Household is one of the most indebted in the world.

Quotes from academics about the PAP's economic strategy were more indicting. For example, Dan Fineman, in an article for FEER, said their economic strategies, "... hurt Singapore more than possibly any country on the planet." while Professor Greenway, NUS, commented that it, "... is creating significant inequalities to relative poverty..."

Dr Chee went on to cite more pessimistic statistics on how the nation building efforts of the PAP has resulted in citizen's apathy. He said that survey results revealed that more than 50% of young Singaporeans, between the ages of 15 to 30, indicated that they wanted to migrate to another country with 37% of them claiming that they were not patriotic. 50% of them did not care which country they were a citizen of, as long as they attained wealth. The average outflow per 1000 citizens is 26.11 in Singapore, the second highest in the world, lagging behind only East Timor.

Close to an hour's presentation, the forum managed to pinpoint the deficiencies of the PAP's leadership - that it has not only failed to bring economic prosperity to the majority of the population, but instead increased the relative wealth gap between the haves and the have nots. At the same time, they have brought the nation into spiritual degeneration by inculcating fear, apathy and an obsession with material achievements into its citizens.

On a side note, Singaporean's displeasure with the recent increase in ministerial salaries can be seen by the outpour of letters to the local newspapers and the largely justifying opinion pieces and news reports from other ministers and the nation building press. While the public rage was focused on how Ministerial Salaries should be set, the forum presents the perspective that the PAP government would not want the public to understand. In essence, they have failed to deliver what it has promised.

to comment

Europe MPs 'gagged' by Singapore

2007-04-14T01:07:00.000+08:00

This is going global on a rather large scale. Whatever happened to all those promises of opening up?

Oh yeah they all appeared before the general election.

From the BBC

The MEPs had been invited by an opposition politician

Singapore has been accused of acting like an "authoritarian state" after refusing to allow European Parliament members to speak during a visit.

The seven MEPs, as well as a Cambodian and a Philippines congresswoman, were denied permission to speak at a forum on democracy in Europe and Asia.

One MEP likened the Singaporeans' to repressive regimes such as North Korea.

The Singapore government said foreigners did not have permission to address the event.

The seven MEPs, from the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE), came to Singapore after earlier speaking at a forum in Indonesia.

'Authoritarian state'

"I fear that, in this sense at least, it puts Singapore in a league with North Korea, Myanmar and the People's Republic of China," MEP Graham Watson was quoted as saying by the AFP news agency.

"What has happened today proves that Singapore is an authoritarian state," said Ignasi Guardans, a Spanish MEP.

The MEPs had been invited to speak by the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) led by Chee Soon Juan, opponents of the People's Action Party which has ruled the island state since 1959.

"Singapore's politics are reserved for Singaporeans. As visitors to our country, foreigners should not abuse their privilege by interfering in our domestic politics," Singapore's Ministry of Home Affairs said in a statement.

to comment

Singapore ban on foreign speakers may affect EU ties

2007-04-13T23:14:00.000+08:00

Not a great day for the Peoples Action Party of Singapore. Then again it is Friday the 13th.

Friday 13 April 2007 from jurnalo

European Union lawmakers banned from speaking at a public forum in Singapore warned Friday they intended to take up the issue in the European Parliament.A statement by the EU assembly's Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe, whose members were banned from speaking at the public forum, warned that the "unprecedented situation. throws into question democratic co-operation with Singapore. "

A spokesman for the group told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa the incident raised questions about Singapore's commitment to human rights and democracy.

As such, the liberal group would "consider withholding approval" of a new EU-Singapore cooperation agreement being negotiated by the two sides, the spokesman said.

The European Parliament must ratify all EU pacts with foreign countries. The EU assembly has held up several EU agreements in past years because of human rights concerns.

to continue reading

Gagged Euro MPs slam 'authoritarian' Singapore

2007-04-13T23:01:00.000+08:00

I have highlighted a few of my favourite quotes.

From EUbusiness online site.
13 April 2007, 14:00 CET

(SINGAPORE) - Singapore acted like an "authoritarian state" by gagging members of the European parliament in a move that could hinder efforts to reach a partnership and co-operation agreement, the MEPs said Friday.

The seven MEPs along with a Cambodian and a Congresswoman from the Philippines said Singapore denied them permission to speak Friday night at a forum to discuss the development of democracy in Asia and Europe.

"I fear that, in this sense at least, it puts Singapore in a league with North Korea, Myanmar and the People's Republic of China," Graham Watson, a United Kingdom Member of the European Parliament, told a press conference.

"Now that is not where I believe Singapore is, or where I believe Singapore should be."

Watson, who leads the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE), said they were conducting a parliamentary mission to Singapore and had come from Indonesia where they spoke at a forum without any interference.

"What has happened today proves that Singapore is an authoritarian state," said Ignasi Guardans, a Spanish MEP.

The Cambodian and Philippines delegates represented the Council of Asian Liberal and Democrats (CALD).

The ALDE-CALD delegates were invited to address the forum organised by their sister party, the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) led by Chee Soon Juan, one of a few in Singapore to have spoken out against the People's Action Party (PAP) which has ruled since 1959.

Chee has had numerous battles with local authorities.

Singapore's Ministry of Home Affairs said the SDP applied to police for a licence to hold the public forum, and asked the ICA for professional visit passes "for several foreigners" invited to speak at the event.

"The police and ICA respectively have rejected the SDP's applications for a permit to conduct this public forum and for professional visit passes for the foreign speakers on the ground of public interest," the ministry said in a statement.

"Singapore's politics are reserved for Singaporeans. As visitors to our country, foreigners should not abuse their privilege by interfering in our domestic politics."

On its website, SDP said the forum was to "register your disgust" at pay hikes for Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, cabinet ministers and civil servants.

The pay rises have sparked rare public fury in the conservative city-state.

But the MEPs said they did not come to discuss Singapore's internal affairs.

Watson said Singapore's decision "will not help with the difficult task" of finalising a partnership and cooperation agreement which both sides began discussing about two years ago.

Such agreements provide rules that govern trade, exchange of criminal suspects, return of refugees and other issues while including clauses about respect for human rights, he said.

"The refusal to allow a basic political dialogue on issues of common concern clearly makes it more difficult to negotiate any such agreement," he said.

Ambassador Holger Standertskjold, head of the European Commission's delegation to Singapore, said the EU "regretted" that the MEPs could not speak at a public meeting organised by another legally recognised political party.

The forum was to proceed with speakers from the SDP, while the foreign delegation vowed to remain silent, and would return to Europe Friday night.

"We are not terrorists. We are not dangerous radicals," Watson said.

The Ministry of Home Affairs said Chee's party is free to organise public meetings "provided they do so lawfully."

Since independence in 1965, Singapore has grown from a third-world country to an Asian economic powerhouse.

But critics say this has come at a price, in the form of restrictions on freedom of speech and political activity.

to comment

Danish Politician Threatened With Arrest in Singapore

2007-04-13T22:20:00.000+08:00

[updated]

Yes, I was there at 7pm......the forum want on quite smoothly without the speeches of the foreign democrats.They were not even allowed to respond to questions from the floor. 3 SDP speakers including the chairperson Chee S Chin took the floor.Newcomer John Tan a masters grad from USA spoke first followed by Dr CSJ. The Opal Room was full house with many standing behind....maybe 100+ audience. The forum ended at 9.30pm. Watch www.singaporedemocrat.org for further reports on the forum the PAP Govt tried to kill with a misleading report in the ST today to prevent people from going....What a shame!

From bohchap1

Other are saying that the forum attracted maybe about "50 including 20 or so journalists and SDP members". Via email.

I am trying to get information on how the forum went. Hoping that someone somewhere has recorded the proceedings. So far all I can find is this...

By Gregers Moller

A Danish politician, Anders Samuelson visiting Singapore has been told that if he speaks at a meeting promoting demoracy in Singapore he will be arrested. The same goes for seven other members of the EU parliament who are visiting Indonesia and Singapore this week.

Anders Samuelsen has complained about the restriction placed on him through a press release issued in Danish in Denmark. If this will land him in trouble in Singapore remains to be seen.

"It is indeed proof that the fight for democracy in Singapore is still on, when you can prohibit someone to speak at a public meeting," Samuelsen is quoted by the his party's press release.

Samuelsen and the seven EU parliamentarians are members of the liberal group in the EU parliament (ALDE).

The meeting is with the Council of Asian Liberals and Democrats (CALD).

"I am shocked. This is state control of the worst kind and ought to be a black spot on the democratic conscience of the government. Jeg have along with the other participants objected to the foreign committee of the Singaporean parliament, but the decision stands. Also the EU ambassadors have had no luck in trying to influence the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Singapore," Samuelsen says.

Still Samuelsen and his colleagues have decided to stay in the meeting.

"We have decided to participate anyway, but we have been issued a clear message that we will be arrested if we say something. It is absurd but then again it comes as no surprise when you consider the government of Singapore," he adds.

According to the press release, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Sinagpore issue on Tuesday a statement saying that Singaporean politics were for Singaporeans only to debate and that foreigners who involve themselves in domestic Singaporean affairs are not welcome in Singapore.

Anders Samuelsen may while in Singapore be reached for additional comments on his mobile phone +45 5126 7616

Created 2007-04-13

to comment

Singapore: Forum to go on with local speakers

2007-04-13T17:56:00.000+08:00

From the Social Democratic Party
13 Apr 07

Given that the police have banned the Members of the European Parliament (MEP) from speaking at tonight's forum, the speakers will not address the audience.

However, Dr Chee Soon Juan and other SDP leaders will go ahead with their talk as no permit is required for locals to speak at a public forum.

Therefore, event will go ahead and we call on Singaporeans to attend as the issue of the ministerial salary increase will take centre stage. Dr Chee will show how the PAP's political-economic strategy is harming the future of the nation.

So if you are have been unhappy with the issue of the pay hike, come down to Sheraton Towers Hotel, Scotts Road, at 7 pm at the Opal Ballroom and register your displeasure with the PAP.

This is also a chance for you to interact with the MEPs on an individual basis at the reception who will be present.

In the meantime, the delegation will be meeting with the Deputy Speaker of Parliament, Ms Indranee Rajah, and other PAP MPs, this afternoon and will discuss this matter.

The Ambassador of the European Commission in Singapore has also been alerted to the situation.

It is ironic that today marks the 10th anniversary of the Asia-Europe Foundation (ASEF). Minister S Jayakumar is the guest-of-honor at a reception tonight. ASEF will be notified of the ban on the European speakers. It is understood that the European Parliament in Brussels will also be informed of the developments.

The MEPs will conduct a press conference at 6 pm this evening also at the Sheraton Hotel before the public forum. An official statement will be released from the delegation.

The SDP will issue a separate statement on the matter and reply to the propaganda put out by the Ministry of Home Affairs in its press release this morning.

to comment

Singapore: Zahari's 17 Years

2007-04-12T17:31:00.001+08:00

The complete video that has been banned in Singapore is now available here to view.

And this time I know who uploaded it.

The story has also been covered by More4 News in the UK.
More4 News: Singapore bans "Zahari's 17 Years"

to comment

Singapore - Ministerial & Civil Service Pay

2007-04-11T23:37:00.000+08:00

Received via email

To
Mr. Low Thia Khiang (MP for Hougang)

Dear Sir,

Good governance needs an effective parliament and Judiciary and Singapore has established since her independence till to day. In the modern world, states derive from the concept of "public." They are defined as entities that effectively and rationally fulfill their tasks and govern public affairs.

However, in Middle East, Africa, some part of Asia, South East Asia states are essentially privately owned and controlled by their leaders, whereas public is defined as that which is subject to the influence of the social groups or communities from which those leaders arise.

Political leaders in Middle East, Africa, Some part of Asia & South East Asia are abusing the power and status, thus work to protect the interests of the social groups to which they belong. In so doing these leaders are able to maintain their status and position and remain corrupt & evil.

I was reading an article "Ministerial & Civil Service Pay" and your view it's seems not appropriate to you and you said Singaporean should not give the government a blank cheque to do so.

But my view is that the Singaporean should not wonder why it is been done rather they should consider it as a performance bonus for their civil servants those who generate revenue for them to secure theirs and theirs next generations future to save them from a poverty trap.

You don't have to go so far up-to USA or to Europe to find out why it's important to pay Singapore Civil Servant a reasonable amount and in return how much Singaporeans are benefiting from this payroll.

Bangladesh has 150 Million People with natural resources such as gas, oil, arable land, timber, coal and we don't purchase water from any other country to drink.

If you just study the present political situation in Bangladesh. You will know how important it is to pay the right prices for the good people those who honestly & devotedly bringing the country forward and giving a gift of such unique democratic system to the nation.

We have never paid well to our civil servants & have never practice such system in Bangladesh. So, over the last 35 years, we had some incompetent, dishonest & evils those who created the country is one of the top most corrupt country in the world.

At present, the two former prime ministers and some of their former ruling government members and opposition party's top political leaders, MPs, Ministers has escaped in order to avoid their numerous allegations of corruptions & extortion charges. The rest of them are in jail. They have transferred the government funds of hundreds of millions of dollars to their personal account in overseas.

Do you think we really ever had a good democratic system in Bangladesh?

Do you know why we have failed to provide simple three democratic rights as a human?

In last 35 years, our all former ruling government and their oppositions leaders has failed to ensure to provide

- a simple shelter on the head

- three simple meal a day for their hunger and

- a simple cloth for them to cover their shames

Having plenty of natural resources what have we achieved? I don't need to mentioned about other the modern Telecommunications, Transportation, Health Care, High Standard Education systems which you have to-day in Singapore.

Our all former ruling government literally has looted the countries resources rather than the proper distributions of the wealth for the people.

An opposition party also can contribute to a good democratic system by providing constructive, reasonable & logical feedback or suggestions in order to progress and to value add to what the present ruling government adopted not just the criticism of everything what the government does..

Please take my apology if my words are not right as you desire and probably I don't have any rights to voice my views on this issue as an alien but as a citizen of the Net.

With Best Regards
Jugani

to comment

Singapore bans film about ex-political detainee

2007-04-10T20:27:00.000+08:00

Extract below from Pravda.

Filmmaker Martyn See, who was under investigation last year for a documentary about an opposition leader, said he was surprised by the ban. He said the film, produced at the end of 2005, had been approved twice last year with a PG rating. When it was not shown at the 2006 Singapore International Film Festival, as he expected, See applied for an exhibition license to screen it publicly.

"I don't know what changed. Maybe different people with different views watched it this time," See told The Associated Press. "I based my questions to Said on his first book [Dark clouds at dawn: A political memoir], which is sold in Singapore. So what is in the film is not something the government didn't know."

He said he had been ordered by the censorship board to surrender all copies of the film by Wednesday afternoon.

See said that Said is the only one of those detained in the 1960s under the Internal Security Act who is willing to speak publicly about his experience.

"I wanted to show another side of Singapore's history," See said of his reason for making the film.

Said Zahari's 17 Years Trailer

SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Singapore is banning a film about a former political detainee held for 17 years without trial, the government said.

The film "Zahari's 17 Years" about former journalist Said Zahari -- arrested in 1963 for suspected subversive political activities, including communist sympathies -- will be banned because it is "against public interests," the Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts said on Tuesday.

"The film gives a distorted and misleading portrayal of Said Zahari's arrest and detention under the Internal Security Act," the ministry said in a statement.

"Zahari's 17 Years" is directed by Singapore film director Martyn See, who had several run-ins with the Singapore police last year after he produced a documentary about opposition leader Chee Soon Juan in 2005.

Singapore, frequently criticized by human rights groups for its restrictions on the opposition and media, bans political films that contain "biased references to or comments on any political matter."

The Ministry said "Zahari's 17 Years" was an attempt by Zahari "to exculpate himself from his past involvement in communist united front activities against the interests of Singapore."

"The government will not allow people who had posed a security threat to the country in the past to exploit the use of films to purvey a false and distorted portrayal of their past actions and detention by the government," the ministry said, adding that this may "undermine public confidence in the government."

to comment

Singapore Day - Protest in New York

2007-04-10T20:07:00.000+08:00

Desmond Yen has been in touch with me to help publicise a protest he intends to hold in New York on the 21st of April. I have included extracts from the emails I have received. Desmond asks that if you are in the area and would like to join him in a protest against the ongoing defamation case and banning of the Far Eastern Economic Review in Singapore, then get in touch with him directly via the email provided.

If you wish to gain access to the events you will need to first of all register.

update Thursday 12th April 2007 - the event will now be held in New York City’s Wollman Rink in Central Park on APR 21 ]

Hi - have you heard about Singapore Day in NYC on APR 21? It will be at Bryant Park.

www.singaporeday.sg

I plan to be there and protest Singapore's censuring of the Far Eastern Economic Review, by handing out copies of articles. I hope you will publicise this event and encourage people to come and ask some tough questions to the Singapore government heads that will be there.

freespeechsingapore@gmail.com

I will help to coordinate if anyone else would like to join me. Please note this will be a peaceful, non-violent protest meant to educate people about free press and free expression rights in Singapore.

I want to thank you for the information you post on your site. You are quite courageous to challenge the structures of power in Singapore.

Regards,

Desmond

Relevant Articles:
FEER and Singapore
Reporters Without Borders' 2007 Singapore Annual Report
The Geopolitics of Asian Cyberspace
Feer to appeal against court decision to proceed with suit
FEER fails in attempt to move defamation case out of Singapore
Magazine, prime minister face off in court
The FEER Article that Caused Offence

to comment

Singapore: Chee Soon Juan to debunk Lee Kuan Yew's remarks at Friday's forum

2007-04-10T19:09:00.000+08:00

10 Mar 07 from the Singapore Democratic Party site

Image from My Sketchbook

Dr Chee Soon Juan will speak at the Public Forum to be held on 13 Apr 07, Friday, at the Sheraton Towers Hotel (see below). He will address comments Mr Lee Kuan Yew made in yesterday's Parliament session, defending the pay increase for ministers.

The Minister Mentor said that Singapore's external trade is 3 1/2 times that of our GDP, surpassing that of even Hong Kong. Because of this, he says, the Prime Minister must be paid $3.1 million and the Ministers $1.9 million annually.

On Friday, Dr Chee will debunk this simplistic statistic and show how misplaced Mr Lee's observations are. Dr Chee will present the complete picture of Singapore's economic performance in recent years and show how bleak Singapore's future will be if we continue down the PAP's path.

In other words, not only are the ministers not indispensable as they would have Singaporeans believe, their inability to tear themselves away from groupthink will lead Singapore down the road to ruin.

It is stunningly disingenuous for the PAP to claim that its economic policies are working and, worse, use them to justify the outrageous pay increments for their ministers.

In addition, MM Lee again made some rather unsavoury remarks about certain governments, in particular, those of Denmark, Switzerland, and Finland. Europe also came in for mention.

With the delegation of European Parliamentarians speaking at the Forum, come and hear for yourselves what the speakers have to say, in particular, Mr Anders Samuelsen, who is an MEP from Denmark.

Do the Europeans need to pay their ministers million-dollar salaries in order for them to lead their countries? Is it true that Denmark can fail and yet be saved by other European nations?

What about Luxembourg? A landlocked country with a population of only half-a-million, the GDP income per capita of that nation is the highest in the world! Did Lydie Polfer, former deputy prime minister of Luxembourg, make the PAP argument that she had to be paid $3 million a year? How did the tiny nation in Western Europe prosper without the type of PAP-dictatorial system?

Don't miss this opportunity to see and hear firsthand what politicians from (genuinely) First World countries think and how they practice democratic politics to achieve prosperity for their peoples, not just for themselves.

So pass the word around and encourage your family and friends to come. Admission is free. See you on Friday!

Public Forum
Development of Democracy in Europe and Asia

Date
13 Apr 07, Friday
7:00 pm

Venue
Venue: Sheraton Towers, Scotts Road
Opal Ballroom
(Newton MRT Station)

Admission
Free
Speakers
Dina Abad
Fiona Hall
Ignasi Cambo Guardans
Eugenijus Gentvilas
Lydie Polfer
Graham Watson
Chee Soon Juan

The parliamentary visit is part of the annual meetings held by the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) and Council of Asian Liberal and Democrats (CALD) to discuss the promotion of democracy as well as to foster greater cooperation between parliamentarians and democratic parties in Asia and Europe.

Make a date with the speakers. Come and express your views.
All are welcome.

to comment

A Parody of Democracy

2007-04-09T20:51:00.000+08:00

Saved here for my own records.

Error-strewn, insular and parasitic, political blogs tend not to enhance but poison healthy debate

Oliver Kamm
Monday April 9, 2007
The Guardian

Political blogging has come of age. At least, that was the idea behind the BBC's Newsnight screening of a report by a high-profile blogger who writes under the pseudonym Guido Fawkes. His film argued that blogs provided more acute and independent political analysis than traditional journalism, owing to the absence of an editor, proprietor or regulator. Theatrically insisting on being filmed in darkness to maintain his supposed anonymity, "Fawkes" debated his thesis with Michael White of this newspaper.

It was a catastrophic performance, mainly because the blogger required continual correction on points of fact. He thereby illustrated blogging's central characteristic danger. It is a democratic medium, allowing anyone to participate in political debate without an intermediary, at little or no cost. But it is a direct and not deliberative form of democracy. You need no competence to join in.

To some, that is a virtue. In a recent lecture, the shadow chancellor, George Osborne, pointed to the proliferation of blogs and enthused: "In politics and in the media we've both assumed that we do the talking and the people listen. Now the people are talking back. It's exciting, liberating, challenging and frightening too."

Such is the ideological chaos of modern Conservatism. Osborne invoked the notion of the wisdom of crowds: knowledge emerges in a collaborative process rather than being dictated by experts. But political bloggers are not the required type of crowd. They are, by definition, a self-selecting group of the politically motivated who have time on their hands. In his speech, Osborne commended the work of Conservative-supporting bloggers. The notion that a political party becomes credible by being responsive to its activists is an error that Labour disastrously adopted in the 1980s. Political blogging is a new vehicle for an enduring force: what James Madison, in the Federalist Papers, termed "the mischief of faction".

Blogs are providers not of news but of comment. This would be a good thing if blogs extended the range of available opinion in the public sphere. But they do not; paradoxically, they narrow it. This happens because blogs typically do not add to the available stock of commentary: they are purely parasitic on the stories and opinions that traditional media provide. If, say, Polly Toynbee or Nick Cohen did not exist, a significant part of the blogosphere (a grimly pretentious neologism) would have no purpose and nothing to react to.

The great innovation of web-based commentary is that readers may select minutely the material they are exposed to. The corollary is that they may filter out views they find uncongenial. This is a problem for a healthy democracy, which depends on a forum for competing views.

In its paucity of coverage and predictability of conclusions, the blogosphere provides a parody of democratic deliberation. But it gets worse. Politics, wrote the philosopher Michael Oakeshott, is a conversation, not an argument. The conversation bloggers have with their readers is more like an echo chamber, in which conclusions are pre-specified and targets selected. The outcome is horrifying. The intention of drawing readers into the conversation by means of a facility for adding comments results in an immense volume of abusive material directed - and recorded for posterity - at public figures.

The blogosphere, in short, is a reliable vehicle for the coagulation of opinion and the poisoning of debate. It is a fact of civic life that is changing how politics is conducted - overwhelmingly for the worse, and with no one accountable for the decline.

· Oliver Kamm is the author of Anti-Totalitarianism: the Left-Wing Case for a Neoconservative Foreign Policy. His blog is at oliverkamm.typepad.com

Government plans to force bloggers to register

2007-04-07T19:46:00.000+08:00

Reporters Without Borders alerted me to the ongoing issue north of Singapore's borders. In an article published elsewhere I have even read that the government of Malaysia feels that getting Malaysian bloggers to register is legitimate because Singapore makes bloggers register.

He said: “We might follow some other countries who register bloggers as well. That’s what Singapore is doing as well. It’s much better if we can have a list of active bloggers … We want to know who are the bloggers.” TechWack

Now either he has been in touch with the Singapore authorities and has access to information that we are not yet privy to or he is simply telling a lie. As far as I am aware no blogger in Singapore has been asked to register with the government. Yes the law exists to make those engaged in political activity register during the elections but I am not aware of anyone being asked to do so. Well not since sintercom a number of years ago.

MALAYSIA

Government plans to force bloggers to register

Reporters Without Borders voiced concern today about a statement by the deputy minister of energy, water and communications, Datuk Shaziman Abu Mansor, on 4 April that, in order to prevent the spread of "negative or malicious content," bloggers will soon have to register with the government.

While claiming they do not intend to censor bloggers, they have warned that bloggers are not above the law when they "disturb peace and harmony" in Malaysia.

"This measure could jeopardise online free expression," Reporters Without Borders said. "It could push many bloggers to opt for anonymity or censor themselves out of fear of reprisals. The deputy minister's statement once again demonstrates the government's desire to exercise improper control over the online flow of information inside Malaysia. The obligatory registering of blogs is a measure that so far has only been adopted by countries such as China that violate Internet users' rights."

The political parties and the government control most of the media in Malaysia. The most popular blogs serve as a counter-weight, offering political comment that is often critical of the government. Science and technology minister Kong Cho Ha said on 4 December that he wanted to "create strict laws to control abuses on the Internet" and to dissuade "bloggers from advocating disorder and chaos in society."

On 19 January, Reporters Without Borders took up the cause of two Malaysian bloggers who are the target of libel suits by members of the staff of the New Straits Times, a Malaysian newspaper. Jeff Ooi, who writes one of the country's most popular blogs, Screenshots (http://www.jeffooi.com), has been sued for refusing to take down 13 posts which the newspaper's staffers consider to be defamatory.

Ahiruddin Attan, who produces a blog called Rockybru (http://www.rockybru.blogspot.com/), says he is being sued over a post in which he accused some of the newspaper's journalists of being agents of the Singaporean government.

Read our weekly "blog review" and create your blog with Reporters without borders : www.rsfblog.org

to comment

Singapore's - Thieving Bastards

2007-04-06T20:27:00.000+08:00

Sense of proportion?

Lee Kuan Yew defends salary increase for Ministers
Bernama
05 Apr 07

Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew has defended the impending salary increase for ministers and told its critics to have "a sense of proportion" when debating the issue.

Lee said that for the average family earning S$1,500 or S$3,000 a month, the proposed salary increase might be an astronomical figure.

"But for people in government like me, having to deal with these sums of money which we have accumulated through the sweat of our brow over the last 40 years, you have to pay the market rate," he told the Singapore media covering his visit to Australia published in The Straits Times today.

Otherwise, he said, the top talent in public sector would join the private sector.

"And then you've got an incompetent man and you've lost money, by the billions. So get a sense of proportion".

Singapore cabinet ministers are currently drawing S$1.2 million salary a year but Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said recently that the amount was below the benchmark of S$2.2 million, and should be increased in order for the public sector to attract and retain talent.

Minister Mentor Lee described as "absurd" for Singaporeans to quarrel over the amount the ministers should be paid. "You know, the cure for all this talk is really a good dose of incompetent government," he said.

The total cost to pay ministers and other office holders is now at S$46 million a year, which Lee said, amounted to about 0.13 per cent of the government's total expenditure.

"We are quarreling about whether we should pay them S$46 million or S$36 million, or better still S$26 million. So you save S$20 million and jeopardise an economy of S$210 billion? What are we talking about?" said Lee.

The proposed salary increase has attracted debate among Singaporeans who are against the move.

But Lee told them: "I say you have no sense of proportion; you don't know what life is about. And just think, what would your apartment be worth with a poor government and the economy down?"

Asked on his salary, Lee, said he earned S$2.7 million a year as Minister Mentor.

"A top lawyer, which I could easily have become, today earns S$4 million. And he doesn't have to carry this responsibility. All he's got to do is advise his client. Win or lose, that's the client's loss or gain."

On views that the ministers should be willing to make sacrifices and not to be there for the money, Lee said: "Those are admirable sentiments, but we live in a real world."

The proposed salary increase will be tabled in Parliament on Monday.

to comment

Say NO to Pay Hike for Singapore Ministers

2007-04-05T18:35:00.001+08:00

Source
Sign the Petition

To: Prime Minister of Singapore
We, citizens of Singapore and concerned individuals, STAUNCHLY OPPOSE the proposed drastic increase in the pay of the ministers and other members of the Administrative Service.

The ministers and scholar civil servants are already drawing millions with undisclosed bonuses per person at a time when more than 40% of the households in Singapore cannot even make ends meet and are seeing their real income deteriorate over the last two decades. Even the US President, whose responsibilities *FAR OUTWEIGH* many Singapore governments combined, is but drawing a salary of only USD400k or slightly more than SGD600k(http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa011600a.htm)! Leaders of other developed countries are even less well paid.

In addition, by pegging the Administrative Service's pay to the richest individuals in the country, it only serves to motivate the ministers and their scholar civil servants to serve only the rich. Using the per capita GDP as the benchmark is more equitable as this will ensure that they fulfill their duty towards all Singaporeans. Why should anyone in a risk-free ministerial or scholar civil servant post, especially in a context in which accountability to the people is virtually non-existent, deserves to be paid like a successful risk-taking entrepreneur?

The government claims that without paying the Administrative Service out-of-the-world remnuneration, it will become corrupt and will be unable to retain talents. This is misleading as corruption takes place only when there is no effective checking of the government, such as when the Opposition parties, civil groups and the public media are being manipulated, suppressed and destroyed through despotic means. In addition, their so-called talents are but selected from teenagers coming from rich and connected families based on their academic results, which more often than not, do NOT equate to actual performance in their later life. This can be attested to their numerous disastrous policies, which Singaporeans are currently suffering from. In addition, talents abound in the country, but are prevented from coming forward to serve due to the stifling political climate of one-party, one-family rule. As such money is not the real issue. It is definitely not the solution.

It is therefore obvious that the proposal to give the ministers and scholar civil servants an awesome raise on top of their already obscene pay is completely unjustifiable. The logic of pegging their pay to the richest individuals is glaringly flawed and insulting to our intelligence. It is but meant to satisfy the insatiable greed of vested individuals. We reject it unreservedly. In fact, we demand a big pay *CUT* for them for their dismal 'service' towards the majority of Singaporeans over the last two decades.

N.B. See also

Say NO to 7% GST in Singapore!
http://www.petitiononline.com/GST7/petition.html

Sincerely,

The Undersigned

to comment

Some Asian Governments Want to Control Those Pesky Bloggers

2007-04-05T17:30:00.000+08:00

From Asia Sentinel
Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob
04 April 2007
Will the online gadflies be able to outsmart the authoritarian impulses of their rulers? They have so far.

In a sign that the ubiquitous critics and observers harrying governments and other institutions from behind the relative impunity of their computer screens are starting to bite, Thailand ‘s Information and Communications Technology Ministry on Tuesday ordered its staff to shut down websites deemed to be violating the orders of the junta that seized power in September or insulting the Thai monarch.

The move appears to be directed at growing numbers of anti-coup activists who use Web sites and blogs to snipe at the junta-directed government. One site, for example, is being used to organize a petition drive directed calling on the powerful Privy Council and former premier, Prem Tinsulanonda to be removed from the council. The site, www.saturdayvoice.com, is planning to locate outside the country because of the pressure, according to press reports.

The spokesman for the Council on National Security, the ruling junta, said the campaign against Prem was ''inappropriate''. Since Prem was appointed president of the Privy Council by the King, the spokesman told the Bangkok Post, it was improper to do anything that could be deemed as insulting to the King

Not only in Thailand, but across much of Southeast Asia, the rise of bloggers and independent all-Internet news sites has caught governments in a quandary. What has long been predicted is coming to pass, particularly in Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand, each of which has begun to take action. The ability of bloggers to circumvent press laws and national borders is frustrating for countries that at least putatively consider themselves parliamentary democracies.

Thailand’s leaders in particular seem to be feeling the heat as their government stumbles from crisis to crisis and protesters continue to multiply. Sitthichai Pookaiyaudom, the information minister, said he had been given authority to block websites by the junta.

But other governments are having trouble figuring out the blogosphere as well. Singapore and Malaysia in particular have staked their future on high technology. The Malaysian government is actively promoting Internet access even in remote village areas. So far, Malaysia has refused to censor the Internet although it appears to be trying other methods of limiting access. The governments are thus learning that limiting access to some kinds of information is difficult without limiting access to all of it.

In the meantime, this newfound freedom of speech and expression, which is not available through the subservient local media, is regarded as an avenue to challenge the established system on issues ranging from race relations to economic mismanagement. Although China over the last decade has got most of the publicity in Asia for Internet censorship, having passed scores of regulations attempting to harness free speech on line, but there are these unsettling developments elsewhere:

Thailand’s Deputy Prime Minister Paiboon Wattanasiritham said on March 28 that the Thai government has set up a national committee to place controls on television, film, magazines and websites to ensure a "safe and creative media.” The committee will be tasked with putting tight controls on media content to ensure items that it deems to be inappropriate for young people are not published. While Paiboon said the controls are aimed at Internet pornography, few in Thailand had any illusions that they could and would be used against critics of the government. One Bangkok group told the Hong Kong-based Asian Human Rights Commission that as many as 32,500 websites are being blocked by the police and another 13,500 by the Information and Communications Technology Ministry, with 11% of the blocked sites categorized as "a threat to national security."

In Singapore, long known for its tight grip on the media and low tolerance for dissent, bloggers are now in the cross hairs. The government announced recently that it is reviewing the code that governs competition in the print and broadcast media markets to include new media. As long ago as 2006, the weekly column of popular blogger Lee Kin Mun, alias "Mr Brown", in the daily newspaper Today was axed after he criticized a member of the government. The blogger has received several warnings since. The government also has also gone after news, podcasts or videos on the Web. Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) activist Yap Keng Ho was fined S$2,000 in November 2006 for posting a video of an illegal gathering of his party on his blog. After he refused to pay, he was jailed for 10 days.

to continue reading

Singapore : Development of Democracy in Europe and Asia

2007-04-04T22:11:00.000+08:00

Public Forum
Development of Democracy in Europe and Asia

Date
13 Apr 07, Friday
7:00 pm

Venue
Venue: Sheraton Towers, Scotts Road
Opal Ballroom
(Newton MRT Station)

Admission
Free

Speakers
Dina Abad
Fiona Hall
Ignasi Cambo Guardans
Eugenijus Gentvilas
Lydie Polfer
Saumura Tioulong
Graham Watson
Chee Soon Juan

From the Singapore Democratic Party site
Asian and European parliamentarians to speak at public forum
04 Mar 07

Several parliamentarians from Europe and Asia will visit Singapore next week. The highlight of the visit will be a public forum next Friday, 13 Apr 07.

The delegation is part of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) and Council of Asian Liberal and Democrats (CALD) which hold annual meetings to discuss the promotion of democracy as well as to foster greater cooperation between parliamentarians and democratic parties in Asia and Europe.

The forum will give Singaporeans the chance to interact with an international delegation of legislators. So make sure you keep next Friday evening free and make your way down to the Sheraton Towers. Admission is free. (For details, see below)

Apart from the forum, the delegation is expected to visit officials from the Singapore Government as well as the European Commission in Singapore. The visitors will also meet with Singapore Democrats. The SDP is a member of CALD. Meetings with civil society leaders are also being planned.

The delegation comprises of prominent lawmakers such as:

read more...

Singapore's 'fat cat' ministers to get fatter

2007-04-04T21:22:00.000+08:00

I know there are a lot of articles and commentary out there about the decision to increase the ministers pay but I had to print this one as the title is the best yet. Yet again Alex Au of Yawning Bread manages to put every 'so-called' Singaporean journalist to shame.

It is a detailed and well argued dismissal of the supposed 'reasons' for the ministerial increase in pay.
By Alex Au at Asia Times Online

Singapore's 'fat cat' ministers to get fatter

SINGAPORE - Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong recently recommended an 83% pay increase for all his cabinet ministers, a proposal that would up their current annual pay rate of S$1.2 million (US$784,300) to S$2.2 million.

Singapore already pays its senior ministers better than any other Asian country and most Western ones. For instance, Prime Minister Lee's S$1.94 million is currently three times the US$400,000 US President George W Bush takes home in salary per year. Lee's salary is currently about 1.6 times that of his cabinet ministers.

Lee said on March 22 that ministers' current S$1.2 million salaries represented only 55% of the government's benchmark for standardized politician pay rates. Details of the new salary scales will be announced to Parliament on Monday. It is not yet known whether the government intends to adjust the pay packets to the benchmark in one leap or in a series of steps.

High pay for Singaporean government officials has historically helped curb corruption, which compared with other Asian countries ranks favorably on international graft rankings kept by such organizations as Transparency International. But many here feel that the upward adjustment, which will indirectly benefit Lee's ruling People's Action Party (PAP), which currently dominates Parliament by controlling 82 of 84 seats, is in poor taste at a time that many middle- and lower-class Singaporeans face a declining standard of living.

The benchmark Lee referred to - code name "MR4" - is a comparable measure based on private-sector compensation in six fields: law, banking, accounting, engineering, multinational companies and local manufacturing companies. Cabinet ministers' pay is equivalent to two-thirds of the midpoint between the 24th and 25th top earners in any of these fields.

"For the public service to remain an attractive employer," said Lee in his March 22 speech, "our terms must keep pace with the private sector. That is why our policy is to pay public servants competitive salaries, commensurate with private-sector earnings."

However, one would arguably be hard-pressed to find many Singaporean voters who would agree to the exponential salary increase, judging at least by the steady stream of criticism over the proposal published in Singapore's free-wheeling blogosphere.

"I think the biggest problem with the entire issue is that we have no check and balance. When ministers make the decision to increase their own pay, who approves?" asked Aaron Ng in his weblog known as Hear Ye Hear Ye.

Letters from readers published in the mainstream press have expressed more measured skepticism. "By saying that we need to pay top dollar for top talent we are saying that certain people are indispensable. This may breed complacency," wrote Dr Anne Chong Su Yan on April 3 in the government-linked Straits Times.

Benchmark for controversy
Beginning in 1994, the benchmarking formula was established precisely to avoid such political controversy, by providing a transparent way of moving ministers and top civil servants' salaries in line with market rates. At the time, it was argued that the responsibilities of managing a small country and a civil service that employed hundreds of thousands was roughly equivalent to the responsibility of leading a large business organization.

to continue reading

Singapore: Lee-Fearing Nation

2007-04-04T19:49:00.000+08:00

Spotted on SingaporeRebel.

"Ordinary people do not fear the Internal Security Act as much as they fear that if they voice criticisms against the government they will be punished in ways that can directly affect their livelihoods. Shopkeepers and taxi-drivers worry their licences will be revoked, and businessmen whether big or small, have the same apprehension. Civil servants fear their independent views on public matters will deprive them of promotions or get them transfers to insignificant ministries or the ultimate punishment - loss of employment. The press fears. The police fears. The ISD (Internal Security Department) fears. The army fears. The PAP MPs fear. And the ministers fear...Everyone fears Lee."
- T.S. Selvan, author and former ISD officer

"Between being loved and being feared, I have always believed Machiavelli was right. If nobody is afraid of me, I'm meaningless."
- Lee Kuan Yew, Oct 6, 1997

Singapore : The Ultimate Island : Lee Kuan Yew's Untold Story
Lee's Legacy

Opinions of Lee in the country are many. More often than not they are a curiously alternating vocabulary of praise and criticism. As his talents and gifts are many and unusual, so are some of his defects. They tell on the way people view him when in their different moods. When people are angry, they forget his merits, and when are happy, they ignore his faults. He then becomes the only barrier between man and chaos. He is glorified to a point where it is said that since God has forgotten to endow the country with any natural resources, he redresses the oversight by giving Lee to the country.

Some are genuinely caught in a moral dilemma because as they condemn of some of his shortcomings they cannot easily overlook his outstanding contributions to their material well-being. He has not been a mindless despot like some of the Third World politicians. Some, however thankful they are, still find it hard to morally excuse him for treating his political opponents with an almost neurotic disapproval and condemnation. He is accused of binding everyone to his system while he himself stays out of it. Even the Godless think he plays God. But they do not say whether God is a dictator.

But what is the long and short of it? Where does Lee stand? Curiously, what will Lee himself think of his role as he continues to lead his flock? Will he be chuffed by his admirers' adulations? Will he be stung like Prometheus by the diatribes of his critics? Or does he have his hopes pinned on history's final judgement?

To look back. When the British finally left the island, the migrants invested Lee with the power of sovereignty and they expected this sovereignty to be used in their rights and interests. The migrants did not wish the bossy and holier-than-thou colonial type authority. That phase was over. It was time, the migrants rightly thought, to belong and identify, to participate and be counted. It was in recognition of this right that the Sahib had also returned the island to the people.

Lee took over. Democratic politics immediately became an irredeemable sin; a political perversion. An Easterner by upbringing and a Westerner by education, a Machiavellian by instincts and a Zarathustran by genes, he at once concluded that a state could neither be run on Judeo-Christian virtues nor by any airy-fairy Western liberal exhalations. He sought authority in the way the East and governments of all larger states had been ruled before the British, American and French revolutions. Lee must have also picked up some handy habits from his early partnership with the communists. Communism, which believes that the state is a divine idea, subsumes the complexities of human experience under a rigid collectivist and monolithic order - one single will, one single state, one single party rule. More importantly, the communists' faith in the grave philosophy of the end justifying the means became a lethal weapon in Lee's hands. Not to forget, once in power, the communists do not capitulate; they want to rule forever.

to continue reading or comment

Singapore: Ministerial Salary Hike – Please Don’t Leave Workers Behind

2007-04-04T19:22:00.000+08:00

Surely the local Singapore media should be picking up on this press release.

Press Release - Ministerial Salary Hike – Please Don’t Leave Workers Behind
Tue, Apr 03, 2007

The NSP shares the people’s displeasure over the latest campaign by the PAP government to justify salary hike for the civil servants. The government should not think that the common people would not understand the implication that the hike will invariably translate to even higher salaries for the Ministers. Such an assumption would be highly insulting to the people.

The NSP does not disagree with the fundamental principle that career civil servants should receive just rewards for their useful contributions to the public. However, as officeholders elected by the public, it is wrong for Ministers to demand salaries far higher than the non-elective state employees. Furthermore, it is inadmissible to rigidly peg Ministerial salary benchmarks to the highest earners in the private sector instead of pegging to the Ministers’ measurable performance.

Even without more salary increment, the Ministers are by no means short-changed. Ministers (as well as Parliamentary Secretaries and Speakers of the House) are eligible for pension after 8-years of service in their respective offices. Ministers also continue to draw a ministerial salary even as they are cashing in their pension. And with a salary that would effortlessly qualify them for the small exclusive segment of multi-millionaires of the country for which there are less than 2%, there is little reasons for Ministers to think they are underpaid.

The Minister in the Prime Minister's Office Lim Swee Say recently commented that pay hike for Ministers will benefit workers. Regrettably, he did not clarify that the pay hike will mainly contribute to the widening of the gap between the median wage (the wage below which 50% of the workers are earning) and the average wage, a figure skewed higher by having more high-earners. Moreover, workers have to brave hikes in GST, public transport, electricity, and postal services, while Ministers ‘weather’ a hike in their salary. The NSP believes that the formula for Ministerial salary must factor in the wage disparity between the low and high earners, as well as the structural unemployment rate. We further believe that the formula must be made transparent to the public.

The NSP further questions the logic of Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amy Khor that other countries with low reported salaries for their Ministers would not have a good, clean, and efficient government. We believe the availability of examples like Finland, Sweden, and Switzerland (which the Singapore government had wanted to emulate) exposes the flawed argument that the progress of a country depends on highly-paid Ministers who demand ever more.

Ultimately, we will like to remind the PAP government that the money to fund the salary hike does not descend from the heavens, and will unavoidably result in higher taxes, fees, charges, and levies for the common people, if the country’s reserves are not to be compromised.

In conclusion, the NSP is unconvinced that inflationary salary increment for Ministers is justified. It is morally abhorrent for the PAP government to attempt to misguide the nation into believing that the value of the highest elected public offices of a country is measured principally by the amount of remuneration that is paid to the Ministers. We do not welcome the development where the Singapore government is increasingly opined by the public as ‘political mercenaries’.

We believe that the disquiet from the ordinary citizens warrants the matter to be put to a national referendum. The PAP Ministers should also candidly state to Singapore voters during all future General Elections the price of their service which the nation is expected to pay (if they are elected), so as to accord voters the opportunity to fairly assess their choices.

The NSP respects the frequent proclamation by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong that his government will “leave no one behind”. But with another Ministerial salary hike, almost everyone will be left far behind.

Central Executive Council
National Solidarity Party

to comment

Myanmar leader meets Singapore FM

2007-04-04T18:50:00.000+08:00

Main document from People's Daily Online.

The first secretary of the Myanmar State Peace and Development Council, Lieutenant-General Thein Sein, met with visiting Singapore Foreign Minister George Yeo in the new capital of Nay Pyi Taw Tuesday, the state-run Myanmar Radio and Television reported in a night broadcast.

Both sides did not disclose the details about their meeting.

Burma has offered to be a long-term supplier of sand, granite and other constuction materials to Singapore.

The city-state's foreign ministry says Burma's ruling military junta made the offer to Singapore Foreign Minister George Yeo, who is visiting the country.

Singapore, which lacks natural resources of its own, has been looking for other sources of construction materials after neighbouring Indonesia banned the export of sand.

Indonesian officials have said the ban is necessary to protect the environment, but critics say it is linked to pressure from Jakarta on Singapore over the signing of an extradition treaty. From Radio Australia News

Yeo, who arrived here on Monday on a three-day visit to Myanmar, had met with his Myanmar counterpart U Nyan Win and discussions were held on promotion of the two countries' trade cooperation and matters related to cultural affairs, official sources said earlier.

Yeo's Myanmar trip came two years after Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong visited the country in March 2005, during which Myanmar and Singapore agreed to strengthen their bilateral cooperation in sectors including tourism, airlink, improvement of business environment and increase of foreign investment in Myanmar as well as technical cooperation.

Economic cooperation between Myanmar and Singapore has been developing rapidly since 1995 when cooperation programs for the sectors of tourism, agriculture, livestock and fisheries, maritime transport and human resources development were initiated.

Meanwhile, Singapore has injected over 1.5 billion U.S. dollars into the country since Myanmar opened to foreign investment in late 1988, according to Myanmar official statistics. The investment was mainly put into hotels and tourism at the early stage and later expanded to oil and natural gas exploration.

The Myanmar figures also show that Singapore's bilateral trade with Myanmar amounted to 822.90 million dollars in the fiscal year 2005-06. Of the total, Singapore's exports to Myanmar was valued at 558.65 million dollars, while its imports from Myanmar stood at 264.25 million.

Relevant Articles:
Recent Singapore/Burma issues
ST Censors Singapore-Burma Druglord Connection

to continue reading and comment

SINGAPORE: A*Star tells why it wanted to sue student blogger

2007-04-03T21:15:00.000+08:00

Welcome to the land of 'Newspeak' where the Philip Yeos of society decide what we can and cannot have an opinion on.

One year on and Philip Yeo seems to be determined to clear his name of accusations of bribery etc. Still none of what is stated in the article below undermines the original allegations. There is no evidence being produced simply a white paper issuing their position on the debate. According to Philip Yeo we are now 'allowed' to have an opinion on the GPA, but on all other issues relating to the fallout we are not allowed to have an opinion? They also state that they threatened to sue Acidflask but in no way influenced his decision to close the blog down.

Bribery claims went well beyond fair comment, says outgoing chairman.

Straits Times
Friday, March 30, 2007

The Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*Star) has come out to explain why it had wanted to sue a graduate student who posted comments about the agency in his blog in 2005.

The blogger, Mr Chen Jiahao, a 25-year-old graduate student who went by the moniker AcidFlask at that time, had implied that the agency was corrupt.

Among other things, he alleged that A*Star bribed universities to enrol its scholars, paid professors to accept scholars into their labs and suggested that its scholars enrol in universities with which it had "connections" rather than the more expensive, top-notch ones.

Outgoing A*Star chairman Philip Yeo told The Straits Times that he was telling the whole story now in response to queries from the public in the wake of The Sunday Times' report on their second online spat.

The agency had not disclosed the exact nature of Mr Chen's remarks in the past as this would mean repeating the libel.

But too many people, especially those in the blogosphere, came to mistakenly believe that A*Star was annoyed that Mr Chen was querying the high Grade Point Average (GPA) its scholars must achieve.

They also thought that the agency had forced Mr Chen to shut his blog site, casting the blogger as a victim of bullying.

What upset A*Star, said Mr Yeo, had nothing to do with the GPA issue, which anyone was entitled to have an opinion on.

But Mr Chen's assertions that A*Star indulged in bribery and corruption went well beyond fair comment.

Mr Chen's allegations had damaged the reputation of the agency and its officers and scholars, who were unjustly portrayed as being not good enough to get university places on their own merit.

That was why it threatened to sue the former Public Service Commission scholar who is now pursuing his doctorate at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.

But when A*Star demanded an apology and retraction of the postings made on March 3 in 2005, Mr Chen demurred. When he did so, it was clearly an insincere response, prompting the agency to reiterate its threat to sue.

Singapore foreign minister visits Myanmar

2007-04-03T18:13:00.000+08:00

Way to go George.

I wonder if you will be popping in to say hello to Aung San Suu Kyi who says "Tourism to Burma is helping to prolong the life of one of the most brutal and destructive regimes in the world. Visiting now is tantamount to condoning the regime."

Agence France Presse: Singapore foreign minister visits Myanmar
Mon 2 Apr 2007

Singapore’s foreign minister George Yeo arrived Monday in military-run Myanmar on an official three-day visit, officials said.

“George Yeo came here at the invitation of the Myanmar government. He will stay here for three days,” an official at the Singapore embassy confirmed.

Myanmar’s information ministry said Yeo had arrived in Yangon and will travel Tuesday to the new administrative capital Naypyidaw to meet with senior officials.

Neither the ministry nor the embassy would provide further details on the trip.

Myanmar’s Prime Minister Soe Win has been hospitalised in Singapore for more than two weeks.

The junta insists that he is in good health and is merely there for medical checks, but exiled dissidents believe Soe Win’s health could be fading.

The junta leader, Senior General Than Shwe, also spent nearly two weeks in Singapore for medical checks in January.

Over the last three months, several firms in Singapore have signed contracts to search for natural gas in Myanmar waters.

However opponents to the regime have condemned the deals for throwing a monetary lifeline to the junta by reducing the effect of Western sanctions on the military.

to comment

Akha Woman in Singapore Prison Case Goes to Singapore Supreme Court

2007-04-02T22:48:00.000+08:00

From Akha Heritage Foundation

Ms. Meitinee Wongsa, an Akha woman from Thailand, was trafficked into Singapore. She was sent out of the country without due process and when she returned legally she was arrested. Now her case goes to the Singapore Supreme Court. Activism Works.

Ms. Meitinee Wongsa, an Akha woman from Chiangrai province in Thailand, was trafficked to Singapore under cloudy circumstances. She was quietly sent out of Singapore without due process when she didn't "work out".

Later when she chose to marry a man from Singapore, and set a date for marriage and returned to Singapore, the Immigration of Singapore arrested her and sentenced her to one year in prison for illegal entry.

Her fiance fought for her defense, and it was determined that highly irregular events happened in the handling of her case. How was she sent out of Singapore the first time with no arrest? Who signed what papers? Who was the translator? Why did they make her sign papers which said her real name was not in fact her real name? Why is there no record of her "arrest" with Singapore Immigration?

Now all of this is coming to light, and her case has been admitted by the Singapore Supreme Court.

In a day or two it will be listed on this site:
Supreme Court" under "Criminal Revisions".

This case has been very important to the freedom of Ms. Wongsa who is now in Portdown prison for many months.

It is also important because the Thai Embassy has had to admit she is there and confirm that she is a Thai citizen, which they did not want to do, (first they said her passport is false) and that her Identity card and passport are genuine. In the past Thailand has disowned Akha women trafficked to places like Japan.

You can contact the Singapore Consul in San Francisco to ask them about this case and for the immediate release of Ms. Wongsa. Her prison number is S12369.

Singapore Consul
595 Market Street, Suite 2450
San Francisco, CA 94105, USA
Email: singcg_sfo@sgmfa.gov.sg
Tel: (415) 543-4775
Fax: (415) 543-4788

Singapore citizens who need emergency consular assistance can call: (415) 595-4346
Use the last number, they actually answer the phone.

This case is also important in that it gives lots of light to how the Akha are treated, and the trafficking of Akha women by the Thais. The brothel owner in Hatyai has not been arrested at this time.

NGO's in Thailand have proved nearly totally useless in getting one of "their own" arrested for a crime.

Thank you for supporting Akha Human Rights.

We hope that her case is overturned and that she is released and allowed to marry and stay in Singapore as a FREE Akha woman.

to post a comment

Related Links:
Why Does Singapore Imprison the Victims of Trafficking? 3
Why Does Singapore Imprison the Victims of Trafficking? 2
Why Does Singapore Imprison the Victims of Trafficking? 1

JUSTICE IN SINGAPORE is Janus-faced.

2007-04-02T20:54:00.000+08:00

The preface to Francis Seow's latest book, Beyond Suspicion? The Singapore Judiciary (Southeast Asia Studies Monograph Series) Is included below. Francis Seow is a former Solicitor-General of Singapore, former president of the Singapore Law Society -- and a former prisoner of conscience. He now lives in exile in the USA. He is a prominent human rights defender and critic of Singapore's ruling party and has published extensively on Singapore's human rights record.

The Preface of 'Beyond Suspicion? The Singapore Judiciary'
The Singapore courts - when adjudicating commercial cases between two contending parties where neither the authorities nor the political élite are involved or interested - may be relied upon to administer justice according to the law. In this regard, Singapore judges have an overall reputation for the integrity of their judgments. The enthusiastic reports of international organizations, such as the Geneva-based World Economic Forum or the Hongkong-based Political and Economic Risk Consultancy, have to be read subject to this important rider.

This book, however, is concerned with the other face of justice in Singapore: where these very same judges, sad to say, inpolitically-freighted cases have repeatedly demonstrated a singular facility at bending over backwards to render decisions favourable to the Singapore government and its leaders. Whereupon their judicial contortions have acquired an international notoriety that concerned human rights organizations, such as Amnesty International, the Geneva-based International Commission of Jurists, and latterly the Lawyers' Human Rights Watch Canada, were moved to send their legal representatives to Singapore to observe the trial proceedings herein at first hand. Their observations confirmed what many Singaporeans have known all along: that the political context of such cases invariably influence the judges in their decisions.

And yet, the Singapore judiciary was historically free and independent of the government of the day or any other controlling legal authority, until the ruling People's Action Party - with no viable political opposition to keep it balanced and in check - began insensibly to entrench itself in the body politic of the nation. In that time, Prime Minister Harry Lee Kuan Yew, now nominally senior minister but still the enduring éminence grise of the People's Action Party (PAP) government, systematically gained control over the courts, which he exercises currently through his judicial point man and great friend, Yong Pung How: the chief justice*. In addition, Lee appoints only politically correct lawyers as judges whose loyalty he ensures with princely remunerations - well over and above the comparable market rates for judges worldwide. Corruption often-times simulates many forms and disguises: paying obscenely high salaries and bonuses to judges is one, for they inevitably assume the gratifying form of monthly retainers by the government for loyal services rendered or to be rendered. Given that he who pays the piper calls the tune, it is virtually impossible for judges to do justice by the citizens when the state or its leaders are involved as litigants, as this narrative will amply demonstrate.(* Yong Pung How has since stepped down from the judiciary. The current Chief Justice is the former attorney-general, Chan Sek Keong, appointed in April 2006)

Unlike previous defamation actions, the legal blitzkrieg herein - masterminded by Harry Lee Kuan Yew - was exceptional in the sheer number of PAP plaintiffs who retained in concert disparate law firms of high-priced lawyers and who, against valid objections and normal procedural laws, were allowed by the courts to maintain multiple lawsuits over the same matter against the defendants: lawyer and unsuccessful opposition candidate Tang Liang Hong, his wife, Teo Siew Har, and, ultimately, his defence counsel, J.B. Jeyaretnam, who was also then the secretary general of the opposition Workers' Party. The insidious purpose of this unusual legal manoeuvre was intended to overwhelm the resources in personnel and finances of the defendants, and of Tang in particular, and to hamper their defence - a manoeuvre that was patently obvious to the judges but who, chose to turn a Nelsonian eye on these legal shenanigans.

Read more

Host Not Found

2007-04-02T18:55:00.000+08:00

Dissidents must be protected from internet censorship, argues Hari Kunzru in an essay for a PEN anthology, Another Sky.

Saturday March 31, 2007
The Guardian

"Sometimes the 'Don't be evil' policy leads to many discussions about what exactly is evil. One thing we know is that people can make better decisions with better information. Google is a useful tool in people's lives. There are extreme cases, we're told, when Google has saved people's lives." Sergey Brin, Google founder, interviewed in Playboy, September 2004

As the internet enters its second decade as a mass medium, it's worth looking back at one of the old saws that was bandied around in the covered-wagon days, when Californian sages made gnomic pronouncements about the future and the rest of the world repeated them at dinner parties. "The net treats censorship as damage and routes around it." These are the words of John Gilmore, radical libertarian, Sun Microsystems employee number five and bona fide west-coast guru-gazillionaire, and for much of the last 10 years they've been repeated as part of the founding story of the internet, along with a gloss about the net's inception as a military communications network designed to withstand partial destruction by nuclear attack.

In a technical sense, Gilmore (who was talking to a Time magazine journalist in 1993) has been proved right. The internet has provided an efficient conduit for people to share all manner of information other people don't want them to, whether those people are government whistle-blowers, child pornographers, political dissidents, intellectual property pirates or terrorists. From the Drudge Report to beheading videos, censorship is being successfully circumvented around the globe. Looked on from the neutral standpoint adopted by network engineers, this is proof of a robust system. Ethical or political judgements about the content of the information flowing through the networks aren't relevant. It's all data. We should celebrate.

However, around the world, people have also discovered that, despite the abstractions of network architecture and the nostrums of boosters who predicted a "new economy" free of material constraints, the internet is also a physical thing, which has its existence on real telephone lines, internet service provider (ISP) routers, undersea fibre-optic lines and hard drives humming under tangible desks. And it's used by people sitting in real offices with real doors that can be broken down by all-too-real police if the information they're sharing contravenes local laws - and in some cases even if they don't, but some foreign power strong-arms their government, as happened in Sweden in May 2006, when US diplomats incited a police raid on an ISP hosting a popular file-sharing service called the Pirate Bay. The internet's ability to route round censorship has the character of an ideal rather than a reality, a theoretical property.

No one understands this better than the Chinese journalist Shi Tao, who in April 2005 received a 10-year prison sentence for "divulging state secrets abroad". A translation of court proceedings showed that Yahoo! Holdings (Hong Kong), a subsidiary of the American search corporation, had given information to Chinese state investigators allowing them to link him to re-postings on foreign-based websites of an internal message the authorities sent to his newspaper regarding coverage of the 15th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre.

to continue reading

Singapore Meeting: Ngee Ann City Shopping Centre, Saturday 31 March

2007-03-30T19:07:00.000+08:00

Singapore Government Promotes Obscentity

From Yawning Bread of course.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong shed figurative tears last week, saying that he and his ministers are underpaid: the floor rate for a minister should be S$2.2 million, but currently they're only getting S$1.2 million. Adjustments will be made soon, he said.

Singaporeans hurled abuse at the whole idea.

Lee justified his notion of appropriate salaries with reference to the benchmarking model established in 1994. But however they are calculated, to the public, the key issue is that the outcome is one of obscene levels of remuneration. There must be something wrong with the model. No use referencing it when it produces such results.

What is wrong with the model? Let me try to pick it apart.

But first, I had to force myself -- it made me sick to my stomach -- to read the 4 broadsheet pages of the Straits Times, 23 March 2007, devoted to apologia for the salary increase.

Having (in)digested that, this critique will comes in 4 parts, discussing various points that came to my mind.

The conflation of civil service and ministerial salaries
The MR4 benchmark
The SR9 benchmark
Increase in benchmarks since 2000

The conflation of civil service and ministerial service

It strikes me as unproven why Singapore has to have a salary scale where political officers are lumped together with career civil service officers. In most other countries, they are on quite separate scales, enacted separately.

to continue reading Yawning Breads detailed breakdown of the recent pay increase click here.

You can also go to numerous other blog sites, forums, chatrooms and continue to discuss the pros and cons of the recent pay raise.

Or you could get up out of you defeatest comfort zone and actually do something.

Go down to Orchard Road at Ngee Ann City Shopping Centre this Saturday, 31 March, starting from 12 noon to about 3 pm

to comment

AUSTRALIA: Controversial visit by Singapore's founding father

2007-03-29T19:54:00.000+08:00

Last Updated 29/03/2007 2:44:38 PM

Singapore's founding leader, Lee Kuan Yew, says Australia has outgrown the dark future he once predicted, that Australians would be the "poor white trash of Asia". Mr Lee was speaking in Canberra after receiving an honorary law doctorate from the Australian National University.

Listen | Audio Help

Presenter/Interviewer: Graeme Dobell
Speakers: Singapore's founding leader, Lee Kuan Yew

DOBELL: Lee Kuan Yew is 83, but he still knows how to throw a political punch, at protesters or questioning journalists.

LEE: I'm quite accustomed to a hostile group of questions, it's not going to change me and I'm not going to change you. We are going to prosper, you are going to prosper. But if I allow you to run my country it will spiral downwards and will hit rockbottom.

DOBELL: The protests from university staff and students were about Singapore's human rights record and whether Lee Kuan Yew should be honoured. Australia's Foreign Minister, Alexander Downer, has acknowledged some concerns about Singapore's record, but emphasised Mr Lee's role as what he calls a great regional leader. The citation for the honorary doctor of laws describes Mr Lee as the father of modern Singapore, a statesman of unique standing in the Asia Pacific and an honest friend of Australia.

After the receiving the award, Mr Lee gave was asked about the protesters, outside the hall, who described him as a dictator. He replies that Singapore meets every governance standard as set by the World Economic Forum in its global competitiveness report.

LEE: Run through every single item, rule of law, transparency, integrity of the system, efficiency of the civil service, confidence of the courts both domestically and internationally.

JOURNO: Would you have allowed a similar protest when you were prime minister to occur in your country?

LEE: Well you know I have protests of about 100 to 100-thousand people, communist-led, and in the 1950s and 60s if I didn't have the kind of robust energy to counter them in a huge heckling exchange I wouldn't be here today.

DOBELL: The university citation describes Singapore's founding leader as a long standing and candid friend of Australia, who hasn't hesitated to tell Australia when it's in error. Most famously, nearly 40 years ago, Lee Kuan Yew warned Australians that they could become the poor white trash of Asia. Today, he says, Australia is different.

LEE: No you have changed, I mean the Australia I came to in 1965 was a very different Australia, you were a white Australia, there was the Asian exclusion act, and in 1960s the US changed their rules and in 1967 or 68 you changed yours, and Canadians followed suit and we lost a lot of talent. And today we've not only lost Malaysians and others who used to come to Singapore, in your last census there were 50-thousand Singapore born persons now in Australia, and more will come over time because they find when they can't make the top jobs and it's easier living here.

to comment

Let's not get mad, let's get busy

2007-03-29T19:53:00.000+08:00

From the Singapore Democrats site
29 Mar 07

Dear fellow Singaporeans,

The Internet has been seething with anger over the latest round of salary increase for our ministers. I don’t need to go into the figures for you already know them.

Not only have the ministers lavished on themselves quite obscene salaries but they have also, through their remarks, shown complete and utter contempt for the feelings of Singaporeans. Which prime minister would say that he and his colleagues should not be expected to make 'unnecessary financial sacrifices' when even a minister is paid more than the president of the United States?

What's more, this comes on the heel of a GST hike amidst data showing that lower-income earners continue to see their wages shrink. And then the Prime Minister tells us that it does this in order to help the poor.

Enough of blogging. Enough of posting your frustrations online. Enough of complains. We’ve been doing that ever since the scheme of pegging ministerial pay to the most lucrative professional salaries started in the mid-1990s.

We need to stop talking and start exercising our rights – no, our solemn duty – to speak up for our nation. We need to let the PAP know that it cannot treat us like doormats.

I know many of you are still fearful. But you must act in spite of your fears. When you do, you'll discover the power of your courage you never thought you had. When enough of us overcome that fear, the PAP will listen.

Let not our fear freeze us into inaction. And let it not be remarked that, like Nero, we fiddled while Rome burned.

What can you do? For starters, go down to Orchard Road at Ngee Ann City Shopping Centre this Saturday, 31 March, starting from 12 noon to about 3 pm where my colleagues and I will be selling the book The Power of Courage. Come by to say hello and leave us your contact. If you have children, bring them along. My kids will be there.

We will need your assistance in the planning of a series of activities leading up to May Day in a month’s time. Here’s your opportunity to do something constructive and to really stand up for Singapore.

Remember my fellow Singaporeans, we are citizens, not slaves! Citizens have rights and we need to exercise those rights. I leave you with this thought: Aeroplanes are safer on the ground, but that was not what aeroplanes are made for.

See you on Saturday!

Chee Soon Juan

to comment

Talkr: Instant Voice Conferencing

2007-03-29T19:51:00.000+08:00

Refers to singabloodypore.rsfblog.org site

Thought I should say a few words about the latest widgets added to the left side bar. The top image will take you to an rss feed that enables you to listen to Singabloodypore on your ipod or simply listen online to the posts via itunes or yahoo podcast facilities. You may also have noticed that each post on this page now contains a 'Listen to this article' tag. By clicking on it a new window should open and an mp3 file will launch. The voice is not my own. So you can now listen to the posts and continue to surf this site or others. Give it a go by clicking on 'Listen to this article' just under the top of this post.

The intelligent among you may also have noticed the large widget containing a large green arrow. Click on this to start the Instant Voice Conferencing facility. If it is working properly you should here a voice informing you that you are listening to blah blah. The widget is a new development from Talkr and LiveOnTheNet. This widget is in the very early days of development and so there may still be a few bugs but I suggest, if you are a blogger that you get your own widget soon. They intend to make money and share it with those who host it on their sites.

If you are not currently seeing the large green arrow in the left hand corner you need to upgrade your Java,
, I 'll say it again 'update your Java'... this is a painless process that you can find at:

http://www.java.com/en/

To talk you will need a headphone set with microphone.

to comment

Singaporean rights activist criticises ANU over Honour

2007-03-28T18:58:00.000+08:00

Wednesday, 28 March 2007. 18:33 (AEDT)

Pictures from New Mandala

A leading Singaporean civil rights activist says the Australian National University's decision to honour former Singaporean prime minister Lee Kuan Yew is baffling.

Dr Chee Soon Juan is the secretary-general of the Singapore Democratic Party.

He has been imprisoned several times for speaking in public without a license and alleges mistreatment while in custody, including food poisoning.

Dr Chee has criticised Mr Lee's civil rights record many times and is surprised by today's awards ceremony.

"It's just very baffling, given the track record of Singapore," he said.

Dr Chee says the legal honour for Mr Lee is inappropriate, given the erosion of civil rights under his government.

"Lee has used laws very cleverly to make sure that democratic activities, political activities are kept to a bare minimum," he said.

He says the award for the visitor is sending the wrong message.

"I think it's a big slap, I think Australia is sending this signal that, look come here, we want your dollars, we really don't care how society functions for you," he said.

Mr Lee has defended himself, saying that Singapore topped reports by the World Economic Forum.

"Rule of law, transparency, integrity of the system, efficiency of the civil service, confidence of the courts both domestically and internationally, it's at the top," he said.

But Dr Chee disagrees.

"There is no rule of law in Singapore," he said.

"The Government of Singapore use laws to run the country the way that it sees fit."

Mr Lee is currently the Singaporean Minister Mentor to his son's Government.

to comment

Son of TIA: Pentagon Surveillance System Is Reborn in Singapore

2007-03-27T19:23:00.000+08:00

From Wired but first spotted on Bruce Schneier's blog.
Sharon Weinberger 03.22.07 | 12:00 PM

Nearly four years after Congress pulled the plug on what critics assailed as an Orwellian scheme to spy on private citizens, Singapore is set to launch an even more ambitious incarnation of the Pentagon's controversial Total Information Awareness program -- an effort to collect and mine data across all government agencies in the hopes of pinpointing threats to national security.

The Singapore prototype of the system -- dubbed Risk Assessment and Horizon Scanning, or RAHS -- was rolled out early this week at a conference in the Southeast Asia city-state. Retired U.S. Adm. John Poindexter, the architect of the original Pentagon program, traveled to Singapore to deliver a speech at the unveiling, while backers have already begun quietly touting the system to U.S. intelligence officials.

In 2003, plans for Total Information Awareness, or TIA, sparked outrage among privacy advocates. TIA was one of several programs run out of the Information Awareness Office at Darpa, the Pentagon's advanced research projects agency. Fueling public indignation was news that Poindexter, President Reagan's national security adviser and a key figure in the '80s Iran-Contra scandal, was in charge of the office.

Facing an avalanche of bad publicity, Poindexter resigned in August 2003. Congress pulled funding for the program, and TIA and related programs were either terminated or moved to other agencies. The Information Awareness Office was closed.

But Poindexter's vision never lost currency among advocates of data mining, particularly in Singapore, a country that mixes elements of democratic governance with authoritarian rule.

Related Links:
Beware of Total Information Awareness

John Poindexter, head of the Pentagon's Office of Information Awareness, is developing a vast surveillance database to track terror suspects. The Total Information Awareness (TIA) system will, according to Poindexter, "break down the stovepipes" that separate commercial and government databases, allowing OIA access to citizens' credit card purchases, travel itineraries, telephone calling records, email, medical histories and financial information. It would give government the power to generate a comprehensive data profile on any U.S. citizen.

A Spy Machine of DARPA's Dreams

It's a memory aid! A robotic assistant! An epidemic detector! An all-seeing, ultra-intrusive spying program!

The Pentagon is about to embark on a stunningly ambitious research project designed to gather every conceivable bit of information about a person's life, index all the information and make it searchable.

What national security experts and civil libertarians want to know is, why would the Defense Department want to do such a thing?

The embryonic LifeLog program would dump everything an individual does into a giant database: every e-mail sent or received, every picture taken, every Web page surfed, every phone call made, every TV show watched, every magazine read.

Total Information Awareness Lives On Inside the National Security Agency

"Every purchase you make with a credit card, every magazine subscription you buy and medical prescription you fill, every Web site you visit and e-mail you send or receive, every academic grade you receive, every bank deposit you make, every trip you book and every event you attend -- all these transactions and communications will go into what the Defense Department describes as 'a virtual, centralized grand database.'

to continue reading and comment

Singapore's Lee to face student protest

2007-03-27T18:44:00.000+08:00

The Age
March 27, 2007 - 7:29PM

Former Singapore prime minister Lee Kuan Yew will face protests when he is awarded an honorary doctorate at Canberra's Australian National University on Wednesday.

Mr Lee's award has angered some ANU academics who accuse him of running an authoritarian regime.

He will be awarded the Honorary Doctorate of Laws at a ceremony on Wednesday morning.

ANU's branch of Young Labor Left is organising a protest against the award, saying it will draw members of all ANU colleges and a large number of staff, students and organisations on campus.

The rally is due to begin at University House at 10.30am (AEST).

A motion condemning the decision will be debated at the ANU Student's Association's ordinary general meeting on Thursday afternoon.

Foreign Minister Alexander Downer on Monday acknowledged there had been international concern about human rights issues in Singapore but praised Mr Lee as a "great regional leader".

"The fact is in the overall sense, Singapore has been a spectacular success," Mr Downer said.

Mr Lee will receive the doctorate from ANU Chancellor Allan Hawke at 11am (AEST).

to comment

FEER and Singapore

2007-03-27T18:00:00.000+08:00

Access at the Washington Post is restricted but thankfully someone at SammyBoy's forum has posted it.
March 26, 2007; Page A14

Our sister publication, the Far Eastern Economic Review, has been defending itself against a lawsuit in Singapore after it published an article last year on opposition leader Chee Soon Juan. So we hope you'll forgive us if we take some pride that the Review has now been honored by its peers for its journalism.

Review Editor Hugo Restall received first place in the magazine category of the annual Human Rights Press Awards [pdf], organized by the Hong Kong Journalists Association, the Hong Kong Foreign Correspondents Club and Amnesty International. Among the attributes the judges look for is "courage on the part of the journalists or publisher." The monthly Review is published by Review Publishing Company Ltd., a subsidiary of Dow Jones & Co., which also publishes this newspaper.

In Singapore, reporting on the political opposition carries risks, as virtually every Western publication that circulates in the city state has been the subject of a lawsuit or been threatened with one. The Review and Mr. Restall are being sued by Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore's founding Prime Minister who is now Minister Mentor, and his son, current Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who claim the article on Mr. Chee defamed them. The Review is also banned in Singapore, where it is a criminal offense to subscribe to the magazine or to import or reproduce it for distribution. The Review is defending itself against the defamation claims.

The Review's award is a rebuke to Singapore's attempt to silence anyone who reports on the political opposition and is especially welcome support for a vigorous and free press in Asia.

And here is a CNN news report on the issue of the lawsuit.

to comment

The Queer Sensibilities of Singapore's Wordscape

2007-03-26T23:36:00.000+08:00

From Xenoboy in Singapore

The media is in overdrive. Spinning and spinning. Telling us the reasons why we have to pay 55% more to the Ministers and the top civil servants, of that stream known as the Administrative Service. No one expects an objection from the media. But not even a "concern" has been raised this time.

Instead, its a monopolistic narrative that calls upon the hallowed traditions of the Singapore Wordscape. The sense of crisis, of siege that will soon befall the Government if they are not paid more. That there will be a vacuum in Government. That the talent will leave or will not come. And without the talent, the Government suffers. And if the Government suffers, Singapore suffers. And if Singapore suffers, the Singaporeans suffer most of all.

This sense of impending doom, of competitiveness, that forces the Government to review salaries, forces them to accept the ignonimity of accepting 55% more money. It almost makes this salary review become noble. A form of noble-ness that is almost surreal. It is a review that becomes a ceremonial sacrifice by these talents to accept this necessary money. It is for the sake of Singapore that they make this sacrifice. Ultimately. It is for the good of Singapore. They take this 55% not because they need it, $290 is enough after all, but because the survival of Singapore needs them to accept this. So the narrative rolls across the Singapore Wordscape.

And the citizens look on, listening to and watching as this narrative embraces the Singapore Wordscape. Formulating their indignations, their counter-narratives, mostly in silence. Forming words, mostly in silence. Only in new media does dissonance surface. That this narrative, flattening the Singapore Wordscape with its moral loud-hailing, is perhaps only one side of the picture, one side of the fence, one level above in the hierarchy of political meanings in Singapore. But it is new media after all, where lies and truths are enmeshed in an adulterous embrace.

to continue reading

ANU College of Law Registers Protest Against LKY's Doctorate of Laws

2007-03-26T21:50:00.000+08:00

AUSTRALIA: Academic outrage over honour for Lee Kuan Yew

22/03/2007

A plan to award former Singapore Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew with an honorary degree has outraged academics at one of Australia's top universities. Mr Lee will be given an Honorary Doctorate of Laws by Canberra's Australian National University next week.

Presenter/Interviewer: Linda LoPresti

Speakers: Dr Michael McKinley, senior lecturer in international relations at the Australian National University

Listen[approx.3mins 55 secs]

Spotted the following letters from Michael Coper posted on the New Mandala site

Professor Coper (Dean of the law faculty at the ANU) has responded to recent inquiries regarding the decision to bestow LKY with the Doctorate of Laws by denying any Law faculty involvement with the decision. …

Dear Students

I am copying to you an email I have just sent to my colleagues here.

In a nutshell, the purpose of the email is to make it clear that the recent decision of the ANU to award an honorary doctorate of laws (Hon LLD) to Mr Lee Kuan Yew, former Prime Minister of Singapore, was a decision of the ANU Council, not a decision of the ANU College of Law. In fact, the College was neither consulted about, nor had any part in, the decision. Had the College been consulted, it is clear from the protests lodged with the Vice Chancellor that many colleagues would have opposed the decision.

I re-emphasise the point made in the attached about how much ANU values its relationship with the National University of Singapore, with Singapore itself and with its people. Nothing in the current controversy detracts from that.

Regards

Michael Coper

(the attached message)

To continue reading

Reframing the ‘global’, the ‘digital’ and the ‘local’

2007-03-26T19:44:00.000+08:00

Introduction

by Chua Siew Keng

Introduction (8:2) Reframing the ‘global’, the ‘digital’ and the ‘local’ — communication theories and Asian perspectives Chua Siew Keng.

In the last decade of the last century/millennium there has been an explosion of the ‘global’ and the ‘digital’ communications within the geopolity of the Asian region. From a universalised discourse, ‘globalisation’ has become increasingly contested in relation to both economic and communications development. Linked to the ‘digital’, the term ‘global’, from the perspectives of communication scholars in the Asia and the Australasian region, is in need of being reframed, if not redefined. This reframed globalisation may articulate a politics of communication that critiques and reshapes the old theme of cultural imperialism but it does not render the latter entirely obsolete. The ‘international development’ era of communications has morphed into the ‘global’ era with continuities and change. Whereas the international era had projected communications from the top down within the modernisation project of progress and development, in the reframed global era there needs to be ‘careful consideration of the democratic potential of the new communications media ... along with limits placed by global markets’. There can be ‘globalisation from below’ (see Sosale’s article), contextualising the global within the history of the local. ‘Asia’ as a region, too, has been subjected to contestable boundaries. As a designation for a geopolitical terrain, it has expanded during the past two decades to include the countries of Australasia, comprising Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific nations, from the perspectives of the scholars within the region.

Indeed one Indonesian scholar-journalist has made out a strong case for considering Australia as the ‘white tribe of Asia’ (Hardjono 1993). New Zealand scholars have increasingly aligned their perspectives more with Asia than with the ‘West’. This turn against the West in communication theories within the region has been active in contesting globalisation as applied to Asian and non-western media studies. From another angle, the technologising capability of the ‘new’ digital communications has also contributed to the rhetoric of globalisation to link it with ‘modernisation’ and ‘development’. Scholars in the Asian region have also begun to demystify the new digital communications technologies and have called into question what may be regarded as new. In Japan, the most economically developed nation in Asia and the most technologically advanced country in relation to communications development, the rhetoric of the digital can be critiqued. Jungbong Choi discusses the limits of such a rhetoric about new communications, such as digital television, in the Japanese situation. His article ‘Embedding digital television in an IT economy: The case of Japan’ explores the tension between public service broadcasting and the commercial consumption of the digital potential of the medium. He locates the economic discourse of the new communications within its social and cultural contexts. Choi attempts to ‘situate Japan’s launch of digital TV within the larger campaign to reshape economic structures and sociocultural domains in correspondence with the fast-changing configurations of information capitalism’. Goode and Little explore the tension between the political economy of digital television and cultural issues through the investigation of the term ‘local’ as it applies to content production.

They argue that the issue of local content ‘may be more under threat’ as a result of digital television. They question the accepted contours of local culture as ‘national’ culture in relation to global imports, and suggest that in effect what may emerge is a ‘localisation’ which is hybrid in nature, comprising an amalgam of imported features and everyday local realities.

to continue reading

Singapore: Government sets rules of engagement in face of new media

2007-03-26T19:32:00.000+08:00

By Hasnita A Majid, Channel NewsAsia | Posted: 22 March 2007 1957 hrs

Government sets rules of engagement in face of new media

SINGAPORE: The government will continue to set political agendas and rules of engagement in the face of the new media, and will not be dictated by online petitions or polls.

And while it will try to balance the diverse interests of the society when it comes to issues of sex, nudity and violence online, it said it would not hesitate to prosecute those who post seditious or racially offensive content in cyberspace.

Singapore has a diverse community with different races, languages and religions living in harmony.

But it is also here where the fault lines lie.

Speaking at a Foreign Correspondents Association lunch on the government's approach to the new media, Second Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, said with the internet, these fault lines are even more exposed to foreign influence in the form of religious extremism and terrorism.

However, there is no need to suppress the new media.

He said: "We are not going in with our eyes closed. Generally, we adopt a 'light touch approach'. Although there is much offensive and untrue material in cyberspace, there is no need, nor is it practical, to pursue each and every transgression.

"All we need is the government to selectively target those who pose a clear risk to the real world. Consequently, we have seen no need to suppress new media unless specific laws are broken by posting seditious or racially offensive content which has come to our attention and gained traction in our society.

"Race and religion are sensitive and volatile issues that tug at the visceral feelings of people. We have a few such cases in the previous year and we have not hesitated to prosecute them in court."

Similarly, when it comes to alternative lifestyle, sex, nudity, violence or coarse language in cyberspace, the government will practise what is called 'ceremonial censorship' – drawing a line in cyberspace but taking into account the evolution of society.

Dr Balakrishnan feels the most potent impact the new media will have on politics is that politicians will find it hard to lie in future as there will always be citizens who will publish the truth in blogs or online.

He said: "Fortunately for us in Singapore, we run a clean system, and therefore we have nothing to hide. That is the reason why we can have our cake and eat it too, and that is why we do not fear the new media."

The government, he said, would seize the economic opportunities that the new media revolution presents by investing in infrastructure, promoting new e-services and overcoming the digital divide.

It will also use the new media to reach out to the public.

"So what really keeps me awake at night is the excitement of being able to live through a revolution. Just like you, I stay at the side and watch it all happen in our lifetime," added Dr Balakrishnan.

Despite the abundance of information in cyberspace, he said there is still a need for journalists in the mainstream media like television, print and radio, to provide the public with accurate, responsible and credible sources of information.

- CNA/so

to comment

Singapore: Pay raise for gov't ministers, civil servants to close gap with private sector

2007-03-23T20:44:00.000+08:00

Makes you wonder how every other country on the planet manages.

IHT

SINGAPORE: Singapore's Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said the million-dollar paychecks of ministers and top civil servants must be raised to close a 55 percent gap with private-sector income levels.

Lee said the current S$1.2 million (US$790,000; €590,000) salary a minister currently draws is outdated, remaining unchanged since 2000, and is 55 percent of a 2.2 million Singapore dollars (US$1.4 million; €1.1 million) a year benchmark.

The salary benchmark for ministers and top civil servants is pegged at two-thirds of the median income of the top eight earners in each of six private sector professions including bankers, lawyers and engineers, he said.

"We have to close this gap," the prime minister said at an annual Administrative Service dinner Thursday evening.

The high salaries for ministers have caused grumbling in the wealthy, tightly controlled city-state, but the ruling People's Action Party has said ministers' and civil servants' pay must be high enough to attract the best talent and prevent corruption.

Parliament approved the benchmarks in 1994, according to the Straits Times newspaper.

"We do not expect (public servants) to make unreasonable financial sacrifices to be in the public sector, but they must feel a sense of idealism, of duty and responsibility, and of a larger purpose," Lee said.

to comment

Snap Action! Protest ANU’s Honorary Doctorate for Lee Kuan Yew

2007-03-23T20:40:00.000+08:00

An article calling for a protest from Young Labor Left Act called as a result the decision to confer a Doctor of Laws, honoris causa, on Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore. Spread the word bloggers.

Where: The Great Hall, University House

When: 10:30am, Wednesday March 28

The ANU’s decision to confer a Doctor of Laws, honoris causa, on Lee Kwan [sic] Yew has outraged academics and human rights campaigners. Rightly so! It shouldn’t just be academics that are outraged though.
Lee Kwan Yew, former Prime Minister of Singapore governed with an iron fist for 31 years. His regime, democratic in name only, was autocratic and repressive. In his current role as Minister Mentor Mr Lee still wields considerable influence over the authoritarian and paternalistic government. Where some tyrants use violence to keep their populations in check, Lee Kwan Yew used the law. In his hands it became a weapon wielded with accuracy and efficiency to crush dissent and tighten the ruling People’s Action Party’s grip on power.

That the ANU would honour this arrogant autocrat with a Doctorate of Law of all things is absolutely atrocious. That news of this would break just a day after Vice Chancellor Ian Chubb was encouraging As Chee Soon Yuan wrote in his letter, it is a decision that “boggles the mind and rankles the soul.” Join us at University House this Wednesday at 10:30am as we stand up for democracy and human rights in Singapore.

Chee Soon Yuan, Secretary General of the Opposition Singapore Democratic Party, himself a target of Mr Lee’s repressive regime has written to Vice Chancellor Ian Chubb to express his “deep concern” and “utmost dissapointment,” asking “what values are you imparting to the minds of those who walk through the gates of ANU? What image are you conferring on the ANU?” He also asks for your support. Register your own protest by emailing Ian Chubb at Vice-Chancellor@anu.edu.au and join us in a Snap Action Protest this Wednesday.

to continue reading

Anger at ANU honour for Lee

2007-03-22T18:54:00.000+08:00

Emma Macdonald

Australian National University academics are outraged at a decision by university management to bestow an honorary Doctorate of Laws on former prime minister of Singapore Lee Kuan Yew in Canberra next Wednesday.
Mr Lee and his wife are due in Australia on Monday as part of a tour of the region where they will meet with Australian political and business leaders.

But the decision to honour Mr Lee has incensed university staff, students and human rights advocates who accuse him of running an authoritarian regime in Singapore over the past four decades in which he has quashed any political opposition.

ANU chancellor Allan Hawke alerted staff to Mr Lee's visit when he invited them to the ceremony due to take place in the Great Hall of University House at 11am next Wednesday via an internal email.

He said "the ceremony is a special occasion to honour Mr Lee's achievements and further the university's relationship with Singapore".A number of academics contacted by The Canberra Times expressed their shock at the move, which they say was taken without any wider consultation and would embarrass the university.

Director of the ANU's Centre for International Governance and Justice Hilary Charlesworth said her concern had been so strong that she and senior staff had written to vice-chancellor Ian Chubb in protest, while several other academics chose to air their anger at university management on their personal blogs.

"Any human rights lawyer would be really concerned by this. Frankly, I am baffled, I do not understand why they have done it," Professor Charlesworth said.

Another senior academic, who asked not to be named, said, "Since when does an institution which prides itself on openness and speaking truth to power give honorary degrees to those who have overseen authoritarian regimes which restrict democratic expression and academic freedom and implement the death penalty?"

Dr Hawke said the academics were entitled to their views and he would always be happy to hear their opinions.

While he was aware of Mr Lee's controversial reputation, he believed "the good outweighs the bad" in terms of Mr Lee's contribution to Asia, support of Australia in the region and strong involvement in APEC.

Australia's relationship with Singapore was severely strained throughout last year when the Singaporean Government now headed by Mr Lee's son Lee Hsien Loong carried out the execution in December of 25-year-old Melbourne man Van Tuong Nguyen after finding him guilty of drug trafficking.

This was despite the personal appeals of both Prime Minister John Howard and Foreign Minister Alexander Downer.

Mr Lee still maintains a strong political presence as "Minister Mentor" at age 83.

High-profile QC Stuart Littlemore said the ANU's decision was "seriously inappropriate".

"You have to wonder what their motives are and whether they are to strengthen revenue prospects for the ANU which could only be described as a terrible sellout."

Mr Littlemore is a staunch critic of Singapore's legal system, having attended a number of defamation trials as an observer for the International Commission of Jurists.

He has also recently been banned from entering the country to represent Secretary-General of the Singapore Democratic Party, Chee Soon Juan, against defamation claims made by Mr Lee.

Mr Littlemore has written to Professor Chubb this week, saying "I can't understand why the ANU should wish to ingratiate itself with the anti-democratic Lee regime ... The university's decision brings shame upon it."

Mr Chee has also condemned the decision in a letter to Professor Chubb, saying "do you not think that the award of this honorary degree to Lee Kuan Yew mocks the memory of Nguyen and the others who were hanged by the Singapore Government?"

"The irony, nay, hypocrisy of conferring this award, and of the Doctor of Laws to boot, boggles the mind and rankles the soul."

Professor Chubb defended the decision yesterday, saying it merely reflected the close ties the ANU had with Singapore and the National University of Singapore in particular. "We have staff exchanges, split degrees, secondments, student exchanges, and significant interaction at a number of levels. The ANU and NUS are both represented in the Association of Pacific Rim Universities and in the International Alliance of Research Universities." Mr Lee's visit coincides with a presidents' meeting of the alliance in Canberra next week. Professor Chubb said the ANU catered for about 200 undergraduate and postgraduate Singaporean students each year.

In 1994, the University of Melbourne bestowed an honorary Doctorate of Laws upon Mr Lee. The university was also forced to defend the decision at the time.

Source: The Canberra Times

to comment

Burmese PM in Singapore General Hospital

2007-03-21T23:34:00.000+08:00

Anyone like to organise a peaceful protest and show the leader of the Orwellian state, with teashops that their continued detention under house arrest of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi is not acceptable? Why not get a few posters of Aung San Suu Kyi?

Soe Win was made prime minister in 2004 from the BBC

Burma's Prime Minister Soe Win is being treated at a hospital in Singapore, an official from the Burmese embassy in the city-state said.

The official would not give details of Soe Win's illness, saying only that it was a "serious health matter".

The Irrawaddy, a publication run by Burmese journalists in exile, reported last week that the prime minister may be suffering from leukaemia.

Some might argue that the protest would simply amount to the harassment of a 'patient'. This patient is however no ordinary patient. The people of Burma and I might add the world would never have such an opportunity to voice their concerns. A protest would simply reinforce condemnation of the fact that after the national elections were won by a landslide in 1990, the military refused to hand over power to Aung San Suu Kyi and it is unacceptable. This is the man who is "the suspected mastermind of a deadly attack on opposition forces four years ago." which left up to 80 people dead, according to dissidents (AFP).

Since then, the pro-democracy leader has spent most of her time in some form of detention, despite a barrage of criticism from home and abroad - and even international sanctions. BBC

So where is Soe Win? [Just realised that a previous anonymous statement also refers to Singapore General Hospital]

Soe Win is the second of Burma’s ruling junta to seek medical care in Singapore this year. In January, junta leader Snr-Gen Than Shwe, 73, was treated at the same hospital after arriving in the city-state on December 31. Than Shwe is believed to be suffering from diabetes, hypertension and other ailments. BBC

And with the power of the internet at my finger tips I was able to work out that Burma’s Prime Minister Gen Soe Win is being treated in Singapore General Hospital for Leukemia.

January 08, 2007
Burmese military leader Snr-Gen Than Shwe was discharged from Singapore General Hospital on Monday, according to sources in the city state. He was reportedly admitted in late December with an intestinal ailment. Some news reports said that he was suffering from intestinal cancer. Sources within Singapore’s Burmese community said that he is expected to return to Burma in the next two days.

Protest anyone?
Post the date, time and place in the comment section. Go on I dare you.
to comment

IBA to hold public session on Singapore during conference

2007-03-21T20:59:00.000+08:00

Letter posted on the SDP site indicates that Dr Chee's request has not fallen on deaf ears. When the conference does take place it would be wonderful if someone managed to video it and get it placed on the net.

16 March 2007

Dear Dr Chee Soon Juan,

Thank you for your letter of March 14, 2007. Thank you too for your support of the IBA's upcoming conference in Singapore.

On a personal note, I hope that you and I will have an opportunity to meet during my time in Singapore. Although it is a very hectic time for me, I'm sure we could find time to meet.

As to your specific questions:

There will be a panel discussion at the Rule of Law Day specifically focused on Singapore. As I have indicated in the past, the IBA conference is designed to provide a forum for debate and discussion on a wide variety of legal topics affecting Singapore, the region, and the international community.

The Rule of Law Day is open to the public, including lawyers, non-lawyers, and the media. We expect a particularly engaging audience on this day.

The Rule of Law Day will also have a series of breakout sessions, where concrete proposals undoubtedly will be discussed and, subsequently, presented to all attendees.

The IBA's Human Rights Institute is currently reviewing your earlier request for intervention regarding re-opening of the "Order 14" case. The notion of a "fact-finding mission" is obviously the IBA conference itself.

Finally, thank you for agreeing to add the IBA's letter to your website. Unfortunately, we do not maintain the same flexibility within the IBA. As I hope you will appreciate, if we "opened" our website for "position letters", we would be overwhelmed with submissions. Because you had initially placed your letter on the web, we had hoped to have ours included.

Thank you again for your letter.

Sincerely,

Mark Ellis
Executive Director
International Bar Association

Note: So keep a date with the IBA. The conference will be held from 14-19 Oct 07 at the Suntec City. This website will announce the date and time of the public session when the information becomes available.

to comment

URGENT ACTION - Block Singpore's Lee Kuan Yew Honorary Doctor of Laws

2007-03-21T00:17:00.000+08:00

Note: The SDP asks all of our friends to register your protest against the conferment of an honorary Doctor of Laws on Lee Kuan Yew by the Australian National University (ANU; see letter below). Please write to Vice-Chancellor Ian Chubb at Vice-Chancellor@anu.edu.au

Letter to ANU

20 March 2007

Professor Ian Chubb AO
Vice-Chancellor and President
Australia National University
Canberra, ACT 0200
Australia
Vice-Chancellor@anu.edu.au

Dear Sir,

I read, with deep concern, in the Straits Times (18 Mar 07) that the Australian National University (ANU) is conferring the degree of Doctor of Laws honoris causa on Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore's Minister Mentor, on 28 Mar 07.

If this is indeed true (strangely, I could not find any announcement of this event on the ANU's website http://www.anu.edu.au/), then I must register my utmost disappointment with your institution.

You may remember that one of your fellow citizens, the late Nguyen Van Tuong, was hanged by the Singapore Government for peddling drugs. In all probability, Nguyen's contraband emanated from the poppy fields of Burma, Asia's foremost producer and trafficker of narcotics.

This is where it gets interesting. The Singapore Government invests in commercial projects with Burma's drug lords, notably a man by the name of Lo Hsing Han. It was the Australian Special Broadcasting Services that first broke the story. The US State Department confirmed that "over half of [the investments from] Singapore have been tied to the family of narco-trafficker Lo Hsing Han'' since 1998. Andrew Selth, an analyst with – of all institutions – the ANU, reported "notorious [Burmese drug] traffickers like Lo Hsing Han are thought to control a number of companies in Singapore that are investing heavily in Burma." He also wrote that, in September 1988, two months after the US State Department said that Burma's junta killed more than 1,000 students during a popular rebellion, "the first country to come to the regime's rescue was in fact Singapore".

I believe that the abominable irony is not lost on you.

Coming back to Nguyen's death, Lee's administration rejected all pleas for clemency by the Australian, Singaporean, and international communities. Nguyen, then 25 years old, was hanged in November 2005.

Contrast this with the case of Julia Bohl, a 22-year-old German lady who was also convicted of drug trafficking. Because of quick and quiet diplomatic pressure brought to bear on the Singapore authorities, the amount of drugs she was carrying was miraculously reduced to below the legal limit that would have mandated a death sentence. Instead of being hanged, she served a three-year prison sentence and was released in 2005.

Tragic as Nguyen's execution was, he at least got to hold his mother the day before he was killed. This was a result of intense pressure from all concerned, especially his lawyers and the Australian media. His former death-row mate, Shanmugam, a Singaporean, who went to the gallows before him never had the same privilege. Shanmugam's mother begged to touch his son one last time on the eve of his execution. It was denied.

It is hard to imagine that things could be any worse. But it was for Amara Tochi, a Nigerian, who was hanged for trafficking diamorphine together with Nelson Malachy, another African national. It is reported that Malachy had testified that his co-accused had no knowledge that the packet Tochi was handed contained illicit drugs. Even the trial judge admitted that: "There was no direct evidence that [Tochi] knew the capsules contained diamorphine. There was nothing to suggest that [Tochi's supplier] had told him they contained diamorphine, or that he had found that out of his own." But for some legal reason that escapes many, Tochi was found guilty and hanged. As he pleaded for his life and asked his counsel not to "allow these people to kill me" he was led to his death without ever seeing his loved ones ever since his arrest two years earlier in 2004. He was only 21 years old.

The United Nations Special Rapporteur for extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Philip Alston, stated that in Tochi's case "the Government of Singapore has failed to ensure respect for the relevant legal safeguards." More generally, Alston said that Singapore law making the death penalty mandatory for drug trafficking was inconsistent with international human rights standards.

Vice-Chancellor Chubb, do you not think that the award of this honorary degree to Lee Kuan Yew mocks the memory of Nguyen and the others who were hanged by the Singapore Government? More important, what message are you sending to those drug peddlers awaiting their executions in Singapore?

The irony, nay, hypocrisy of conferring this award, and of the Doctor of Laws to boot, boggles the mind and rankles the soul.

And speaking of laws, the Singapore Government continues to introduce, amend, and apply laws to cripple freedoms of speech, association and assembly of my fellow citizens. Just a couple of weeks ago, your conferee said in an interview: "The Americans try to prescribe democracy by saying governments should allow free association, demonstrations and a free press. Here you want to hold a demonstration, you must have a permit first." His minister for home affairs, however, says that "the government does not authorise protests and demonstrations of any nature." In 2005, a group of four Singaporean democracy advocates staged a silent protest, calling for transparency and accountability from the Government. They were met by the riot squad and ordered to disperse. My fellow activists and I continue to be harassed, prosecuted and jailed for speaking in public.

to continue reading

Myanmar PM in Singapore hospital

2007-03-20T22:33:00.000+08:00

Just move the entire military junta over to Singapore and then they could run Burma and keep Aung San Suu Kyi under house arrest while they shift the cash over to Singaporean banks.

SINGAPORE (AFP) - Myanmar's prime minister Soe Win, the suspected mastermind of a deadly attack on opposition forces four years ago, is in a Singapore hospital with an unspecified medical problem, an embassy official told AFP Tuesday.

Soe Win arrived "quite some time ago" and is in the Singapore General Hospital, said the official who asked not to be identified, and who declined to provide details of his condition.

"He is here in a private capacity and it is true that he is here for medical reasons," the official said. "He doesn't want any publicity whatsoever with regard to his health problem."

Officials rarely speak on the record in military-ruled Myanmar, for fear of repercussions by the junta, which runs the isolated Southeast Asian nation with an iron fist.

Soe Win, a lieutenant general, is thought to be aged about 58, and replaced the disgraced Khin Nyunt as prime minister in October 2004.

He had risen swiftly in the leadership after allegedly plotting an attack on the motorcade of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi in May 2003.

After the attack she was imprisoned and then placed under house arrest, where she remains.

The clash between supporters of Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD) and a pro-junta group left up to 80 people dead, according to dissidents. The government said four people were killed and 50 injured.

Soe Win, a tall and stern man, is considered to be among the leadership hardliners.

The embassy official in Singapore would not detail when Soe Win had arrived in the city-state, except to say it was prior to March. On February 6, Myanmar state media said Soe Win had issued a warning to the nation's judges against corruption.

In January, Myanmar's aging junta leader Senior General Than Shwe returned home after medical tests at Singapore General Hospital. The checks showed him to be "very much OK," the embassy official said at the time.

to comment

Singapore - Semidemocracy or Semi-dictatorship?

2007-03-20T00:17:00.000+08:00

Decided to place a little extract from a book I am currently studying on the nature of certain non-democratic regimes. Singapore seems to come out rather favourably in this interpretation of the situation up until the year 2000. I am sure that there are some of you out there who will disagree. Although not a fully paid up member of the democracy club Singapore does seem to be slowly shifting in the direction of democracy. What changes though would need to be made and can the 'survivalism' argument ever been countered successfully?

The Singapore regime, like the Malaysian, has emphasised that it has developed a form of democracy that suits its country’s circumstances, and has argued that it is important to retain this ‘dominant-party system’ (Rodan, 1993a: 78). However, among Western analysts Singapore is usually seen as less than democratic, and the issue is whether this ambiguous regime should be categorised as a semidemocracy or as effectively a one-party state (Case, 1996; Rodan, 1993a: 78, 86, 103). The People’s Action Party (PAP) regime in Singapore developed in quite different fashion from its Malaysian counterpart, UMNO. The PAP came to power in 1959, in a British decolonising election, by mobilising mass support from the Chinese ethnic majority, but it was a socialist rather than a communal or ethnic party and sought support from the Malay and Indian ethnic minorities as well as from the Chinese majority. Moreover, in 1961 the party’s communist-sympathising (and massmobilising) faction broke away from the PAP and formed the Barisan Sosialis (BS) party. The BS was ‘seriously crippled’, though, in 1963 when more than a hundred leading leftists fell victim to anti-communist preventive detention measures (Chan, 1976: 198), and later in the year a now rebuilt PAP handed the BS a heavy electoral defeat. Within a decade the BS had declined into obscurity, leaving the PAP with an unchallenged electoral dominance. Although in the 1970s– 80s elections there were always five or more opposition parties contesting elections with the PAP, it won every parliamentary seat in the 1970s and thereafter retained all but a few seats, despite its share of the vote falling to 61– 63 per cent.

In fact the development of the PAP regime shows some resemblances with that of African one-party states (see Chapter 4). Like them, the PAP exploited the unique organisational and electoral opportunity presented by decolonising elections. As Singapore’s first mass party the PAP was the first party to establish a link with the bulk of ethnic-majority Chinese voters, and therefore once the challenge from the breakaway BS had been defeated the party had an impregnable electoral advantage over ‘fledgling’ competing parties (Chan, 1976: 229, 218).

Another similarity with the African pattern was the use of cooption and coercion to consolidate the party’s monopoly, but the PAP’s commitment to a formally multiparty system meant that the cooption/ coercion was aimed at parties’ potential leaders and activists rather than the parties themselves. Influential or potential local leaders were appointed to the Citizens Consultative Committees – where they were at least ‘quarantined’ from the opposition parties – while fears of retribution deterred careerconscious individuals from becoming election candidates, or even visible supporters, of opposition parties (Chan, 1976: 144, 219; Milne and Mauzy, 1990: 93). A further similarity with the African one-party states was the manner in which the ‘founding’ head of government elected during the decolonising transition went on to establish a powerful personal position within the post-independence regime. Although he shared power with a small team of other senior ministers/ party-leaders, Singapore’s founding Prime Minister (and founding PAP Secretary-General) Lee Kuan Yew dominated party and state until his retirement in 1990, and thereafter retained a ‘crucial’ personal role as privileged Senior Minister and wielder of ‘considerable influence through less formal means’ (Milne and Mauzy, 1990: 103– 4; Tillman, 1989: 54– 7; Cotton, 1993: 9, 14, 11).

to continue reading