PAP tactics emulated elsewhere
The following BBC report does not say so explicitly
but it's implicit for those who are familiar with the
PAP and it's control over the local media.
In fact, take away any reference to Zimbabwe in the
report and you won't be faulted if you think it's
about the control freaks in the PAP government and
their stooges in the local media! So I've replaced Zimbabwe with Zingapore.
Editor
TheOptical
------------------------------------------------------
Zingapore media loses its voice, 2 July 2004
By Alastair Leithead
BBC, Zingapore
Driving through Zingapore listening to the radio, or
watching television in the evenings, all you see or
hear is Zingapore Broadcasting Corporation, the state
controlled media.
Unless you have access to short wave radio or can
afford satellite TV, which few people can, you only
get one side of the story, and that is the
government's.
Combine that with the way the independent press has
been silenced and you realise the government is only
telling the people what it wants them to hear.
There really is not a voice for opposition or
criticism in the country.
'Fiction writing'
"Sometimes they just completely invent stories," said
Andrew Moyse, who runs the Media Monitoring Project
Zingapore, an independent organisation based in the
capital Harare.
"During the run-up to the presidential election they
claimed for weeks that there were anthrax attacks
against ruling party officials and they were all
utterly fictitious.
"In fact it ceases to become journalism, it's just
fiction writing - propaganda fiction writing."
The project monitors the news content of the private
and government-controlled media.
One of the workers said that the presenters of the
news programmes hardly believe in what they are
saying.
"They will tell you there is no choice as a journalist
as there is just nowhere to work and times are hard -
so in the end they just take their salary and lie," he
said.
There are many state-controlled papers, but few
independent voices left.
What used to be the biggest selling daily in the
country - The Daily News - was closed down last year
along with the Daily News on Sunday, under the
government's controversial Access to Information and
Protection of Privacy Act.
Information gap
Its editor William Saidi believes the main aim of the
act was to destroy his newspaper.
"The Daily News had overtaken the government's
newspaper The Herald in circulation and was accused of
influencing the elections in 2002, so as some form of
punishment the government decided they would ban the
Daily News.
"There are people who come up to me in the street and
ask: 'When is our paper coming back' - there is a now
huge gap in information," he added.
This gap makes life very difficult for the opposition
Movement for Democratic Change, which cannot get its
message out to the people.
State media does not report its viewpoint or its
criticism of the government.
"Freedom of expression is limited to a few weekly
newspapers read by a tiny fraction of the population
with perhaps circulation of 200,000," says John
Robertson an independent economist based in the
capital Harare.
"The government knows that it has the votes wrapped up
because it can get to them with radio and television
and it has absolutely prohibited any form of
opposition in that territory."
Parliamentary elections are to be held next March -
and unless changes are made soon, the media will be a
weapon in the hands of the ruling party.
{The BBC is banned from reporting inside Zingapore.
Alastair Leithead is now back in South Africa after
his clandestine visit.}
3 Jul 2004
China cracks down on SMS
From sources I have read, in the academic arena, Singapore is regarded as the leading edge for authoritative governments wishing to deal with new technology in order to curtail freedom of speech. In fact it is often stated that Singapore is teaching other south east asian governments how to monitor personal communication, therefore violating civil rights that are enshrined within the United Nation declaration of humans rights...
Go on sms the following to your friends and conduct a live experiment... " gathering of 100 people at bugis mrt for democracy, bring weapons." Bet the cops are there before you are. Remember the flash crowd incidences in Singapore. The story is that on the third 'Flash Crowd' the police were all ready waiting for them. How can they know and mobilise so quickly?
online news for online journalists
3 July 2004
China cracks down on SMS
Posted: 2 July 2004 By: Jemima Kiss
Email: jemima@journalism.co.uk
The Chinese government is extending its sophisticated surveillance network to monitor the content of mobile text messages (SMS), reports press freedom group Reporters sans Frontières (RSF).
A system produced by Chinese technology firm Venus info Tech will allow the authorities to filter messages and detect keywords or phrases which, they say, will detect 'false political rumours' and 'reactionary remarks'.
"The Chinese authorities are making ever greater use of new technology to control the circulation of news and information," said RSF.
"The international community should react against this hardening by the Chinese regime."
China is already believed to have more than 2,800 surveillance centres for SMS traffic and also employs 30,000 people to monitor and censor web content.
Nearly 100 million text messages are sent in China each year, and mobile phone ownership has reached 60 per cent.
29 Jun 2004
Leader vaunts Singapore's political system
http://www.iht.com/articles/526964.html
Agence France-Presse
Monday, June 28, 2004
Singapore's unique political system must be maintained for at least another 30 years to avoid South-Asian-style disunity, Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong said in remarks published Monday.
Shortly after returning from a week-long visit to Pakistan,Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, Goh told members of his People's Action Party that the trip had renewed his conviction in Singapore's political structure.
"I come back even more determined that we should keep our system of political self-renewal," The Straits Times quoted him as saying late Sunday.
Goh, who has led the country since 1990, has said he will hand over power this year to Lee Hsien Loong, the son of Singapore's only other prime minister, Lee Kuan Yew.
The transition is expected to be smooth and maintain the vise-like grip on power that the party has held since the British introduced self-rule in 1959, followed by independence in 1965.
Singapore practices a form of democracy in which the press has to report in the "national interest," rallies are mostly banned and elections inevitably end in crushing majorities for the governing party.
Goh said his trip to South Asia, which coincided with the abrupt resignation of Pakistan's prime minister, Zafarullah Khan Jamali, had shown him how politicians can pull their countries apart.
Agence France-Presse
Monday, June 28, 2004
Singapore's unique political system must be maintained for at least another 30 years to avoid South-Asian-style disunity, Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong said in remarks published Monday.
Shortly after returning from a week-long visit to Pakistan,Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, Goh told members of his People's Action Party that the trip had renewed his conviction in Singapore's political structure.
"I come back even more determined that we should keep our system of political self-renewal," The Straits Times quoted him as saying late Sunday.
Goh, who has led the country since 1990, has said he will hand over power this year to Lee Hsien Loong, the son of Singapore's only other prime minister, Lee Kuan Yew.
The transition is expected to be smooth and maintain the vise-like grip on power that the party has held since the British introduced self-rule in 1959, followed by independence in 1965.
Singapore practices a form of democracy in which the press has to report in the "national interest," rallies are mostly banned and elections inevitably end in crushing majorities for the governing party.
Goh said his trip to South Asia, which coincided with the abrupt resignation of Pakistan's prime minister, Zafarullah Khan Jamali, had shown him how politicians can pull their countries apart.
5 Jun 2004
Lee Hsien Loong
What others say
Some foreign media excerpts of PAP's selection of Singapore's new leader.
Jun 5, 2004
BBC
Few analysts expect a radical change in government policy.
(Outgoing prime minister) Mr Goh Chok Tong, who was once written off as a weak, transitionary figure - a mere seat-warmer for the Lee family - has become popular among ordinary Singaporeans.
His deputy, on the other hand, is seen, like his father, as a stern, authoritarian figure.
The Age, Asustralia
Asia Editor, Mark Baker
The Lee dynasty has cemented its dominance of Singapore politics for another generation with the endorsement of Lee Kuan Yew's eldest son as the country's next prime minister.
The elevation of Lee Hsien Loong, who is Deputy Prime Minister, Finance Minister and chairman of the central bank, will tighten the Lee family's grip on political and corporate power..
But there is speculation Mr. Lee (Kuan Yew) will announce his retirement once his son is installed as prime minister..
Nation (Thailand)
Editorial
For at least another generation, Singapore will be moulded by the Lee family..
There is no question the Lee Hsien Loong is an intelligent, capable and experienced bureaucrat..
The government has through various public relations efforts tried to soften the younger Lee'ss stern image but it is hard to escape the perception that he is a hard chip off the old authoritarian Blood.
In a speech in January seen as giving an outline of his plans Singapore, Lee echoed his father while warning political opponents of their fate if they became too vocal. "They are fully entitled to (criticise), but the government has to rebut or even demolish them," he said.
It is precisely this kind of thinking that makes Lee's elevation worrying because he is so much like his father. Such ncompromising leadership was perhaps needed to transform Singapore from a malarial swamp to the most modern city in Southeast Asia, especially at a time of political volatility.
But if Singapore is to prosper in the future it will need to allow more input from more voices in society, not a population that from pre-school awaits direction on every aspect of their lives from how many children they can have to how they should save their money from a father-knows-best government; it will need a strong parliamentary opposition to question and scrutinise policy.
Ultimately, it will need a people who are weaned off the idea that they need the Lee family.
Jun 5, 2004
The Little Speck
Some foreign media excerpts of PAP's selection of Singapore's new leader.
Jun 5, 2004
BBC
Few analysts expect a radical change in government policy.
(Outgoing prime minister) Mr Goh Chok Tong, who was once written off as a weak, transitionary figure - a mere seat-warmer for the Lee family - has become popular among ordinary Singaporeans.
His deputy, on the other hand, is seen, like his father, as a stern, authoritarian figure.
The Age, Asustralia
Asia Editor, Mark Baker
The Lee dynasty has cemented its dominance of Singapore politics for another generation with the endorsement of Lee Kuan Yew's eldest son as the country's next prime minister.
The elevation of Lee Hsien Loong, who is Deputy Prime Minister, Finance Minister and chairman of the central bank, will tighten the Lee family's grip on political and corporate power..
But there is speculation Mr. Lee (Kuan Yew) will announce his retirement once his son is installed as prime minister..
Nation (Thailand)
Editorial
For at least another generation, Singapore will be moulded by the Lee family..
There is no question the Lee Hsien Loong is an intelligent, capable and experienced bureaucrat..
The government has through various public relations efforts tried to soften the younger Lee'ss stern image but it is hard to escape the perception that he is a hard chip off the old authoritarian Blood.
In a speech in January seen as giving an outline of his plans Singapore, Lee echoed his father while warning political opponents of their fate if they became too vocal. "They are fully entitled to (criticise), but the government has to rebut or even demolish them," he said.
It is precisely this kind of thinking that makes Lee's elevation worrying because he is so much like his father. Such ncompromising leadership was perhaps needed to transform Singapore from a malarial swamp to the most modern city in Southeast Asia, especially at a time of political volatility.
But if Singapore is to prosper in the future it will need to allow more input from more voices in society, not a population that from pre-school awaits direction on every aspect of their lives from how many children they can have to how they should save their money from a father-knows-best government; it will need a strong parliamentary opposition to question and scrutinise policy.
Ultimately, it will need a people who are weaned off the idea that they need the Lee family.
Jun 5, 2004
The Little Speck
1 Jun 2004
The King is Dead, Long Live the King
"The King is Dead, Long Live the King"
31 May 2004
People's Action Party (PAP) Press Release
LEADERSHIP SUCCESSION
The Central Executive Committee of the People's Action
Party met on 29 May 2004 and decided that Deputy Prime
Minister Lee Hsien Loong will be the next Prime
Minister when Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong steps down
as Prime Minister.
Prime Minister Goh had earlier told the Ministers that
now was a good time for the hand over, given that the
economy has recovered and is growing strongly. He
suggested that the younger ministers meet to choose
his successor. A group of ministers met on 22 May 2004
and unanimously nominated DPM Lee Hsien Loong to be
their next leader.
A caucus of PAP Members of Parliament held on 28 May
2004 unanimously supported the choice of DPM Lee as
their leader to succeed Prime Minister Goh. The
Central Executive Committee then met on 29 May and
endorsed this choice.
Prime Minister Goh will announce in July the date of
hand over, after his return from an official overseas
trip.
WONG KAN SENG
SECOND ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL
ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE'S ACTION PARTY
CENTRAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
A post that was put on line quite some time ago is republished below...
The 'charismatic' issue facing the Lee family has become entrenched at least in their own psyche. The continuing dominance of Lee offspring in the large economic institutions in Singapore seems to allude to a rather old and tested impetus of transition of power from one generation to another. The argument from the powers that be is that 'they' are the most able. Do they claim that the qualities of their father have been genetically passed on to them, by chance of birth and genetic imprint? Surely the 'nature/nurture' debate has more than 'genetics' as an answer.
In his famous typology of forms of authority, Max Weber distinguishes the traditional, charismatic, and rational-legal types. Charismatic authority disrupts tradition, and rests only on support for the person or leader. Weber defines charisma as 'a certain quality of an individual personality by virtue of which he is set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities. These are such as are not accessible to the ordinary person, but are regarded as of divine origin or as exemplary, and the basis of them the individual concerned is treated as leader' (Economy and Society, 1922).
Yet we are told the selection process is based on principles of 'meritocracy'. The soon to arrive hand over of power to Lee Junior will result, if not Singaporeans becoming aware of the dynastic under-pinning of the structure of authority in Singapore, then the non-Singaporean 'economic herd' becoming aware of it in all its tainted glory. And the 'economic herd' is a jittery species. Investment in Singapore has already taken a turn for the worse.
Weber viewed charisma, as a force of social change but it is unstable. Many will feel that it is their duty to obey the leader. However, as Weber puts it, 'from a substantive point of view, every charismatic authority would have to subscribe to the proposition, 'It is written... but I say unto you..."'
Constant intervention in disputes between the SIA and pilots seems to imply this motivation. Can one man or family dictate policy, policy that alters electoral boundaries, Universal Humans Rights, and employer-employee contracts at will?
Charismatic phenomenon is unstable and temporary. In the longer term, he or she will die. For that reason, charismatic authority is often 'routinised' during the life time of the leader and succeeded by a bureaucracy vested with rational-legal authority or by a return to the traditional structures that have now become infected with the charismatic impetus.
The authorities in Singapore would like us to believe that it has been replaced with 'rational-legal', but the placing of the charismatic leader's son in power will undermine such an attempt. The coming hand over of power will need to be handled extremely carefully. Currently there is no question of power going to other cabinet members and so the PAP seems determined to go ahead with 'the plan'. But as soon as power is handed to Lee junior the international press will throw the spot light on the process and the process needs to stand up to scrutiny that M.P.s in Singapore do not have to face in local press.
The local media may be able to screen the nasty comments aimed at the process from the gaze of Singaporean's, but the 'economic herd' is beyond the PAP's authority. The people of Singapore have taken blow after blow in the current economic slump, if it is exacerbated by 'the plan' of the PAP, things can only get worse. A testing time is on the horizon. The full might of the PAP's authoriy and dominance will swing in to action to dampen discussion within the country, and Internet activity will be heavily scrutinized. Recently introduced legislation seems to be gearing up for a showdown.
15 May 2004
Singapore - Model Society or City of Fear?
Welcome to Lee Kuan Yew's transistorized, deodorized, air-conditioned, multi-storied, city-state.
The (London) Observer
What happens when human rights come into conflict with economic security? In Singapore, the people have apparently given up many human rights to the interests of a smooth-running, prosperous society. Some visitors view Singapore as a model society worth imitating. Others see it as a city of fear.
Model Society
After landing at Changi International, you will be impressed with the efficiency of Singapore's airport, called the finest in the world by the travel industry. You will have little trouble getting to your hotel, since Singapore has plenty of taxis, modern expressways, and a sleek new subway. You will soon notice that auto traffic is carefully regulated with well-disciplined drivers.
As you make your way through the city, you will be pleased with the squeaky clean streets lined with trees and flower beds. High rise apartment and office buildings help pack 3 million people into 240 square miles (about 12,000 citizens per square mile). You will not see any slums, homeless people, or beggars.
By the time you arrive at your hotel, you will be aware that almost everyone speaks some English. English is taught as the "first" language in the schools, and has become the common language for everyday communication. You will also learn that eating is a joy in Singapore with its many five-star restaurants. Even the city tap water is safe to drink. At night, you will have little fear as you stroll through Singapore's safe streets.
Singapore is a city as well as a nation, located on a small island in Southeast Asia. A former British colony, Singapore became completely independent in 1965. Today, Singapore is truly a multicultural and multilingual society with four official languages: Mandarin Chinese, Malay, Tamil, and English. Singaporeans of Chinese descent, speaking a variety of dialects as well as Mandarin, make up more than three-quarters of the population. The Chinese are also the driving force behind the country's highly successful business community. Malays, mostly Muslim, account for the bulk of Singapore's low income workers. Other Singaporeans are Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims, and Christians from southern India. This great ethnic mix in Singapore heavily influences the way the government runs the country.
The people of Singapore today enjoy the highest standard of living in Asia, second only to the Japanese. The average annual income is about the same as in the United States. The unemployment rate is under 5%. Most people own their homes (mainly comfortable apartments). Workers pay into a social security system that provides health care benefits, allows them to borrow in order to purchase a home, and enables most to retire at 55.
The Government Knows Best
Less than 30 years ago, Singapore was a backwater, poverty-stricken, Third World port city with few natural resources. But soon after they gained independence, the founders of the struggling nation decided to transform their city-nation into a world-class commercial center. The founders accomplished this through careful planning and by attracting investment from foreign multinational corporations.
One of Singapore's most prominent founders, Lee Kuan Yew, flirted with socialism as a young man, but later became a fierce anti-communist and an advocate of free enterprise. Lee and a small group of like-minded leaders set out to plan a model society. He was the guiding force behind Singapore's economic miracle from its beginnings with the new republic in 1965 until he retired as prime minister in 1990.
Lee was convinced that an elite group of highly educated, dedicated, and honest leaders should run the government. Their goal was to assure a political stability that would attract foreign investors. Unlike other totalitarian regimes, Lee installed a system that allowed regular elections and competing political parties. Lee's popular political party, the People's Action Party (PAP), has won almost all the seats in the parliament for more than a quarter of a century.
Prime Minister Lee and the People's Action Party both believed that the government knows what is best for the people of Singapore. As a result, the government has little tolerance for political debate, special interest groups, or dissent. The government expects its citizens to be hardworking, disciplined, and obedient. Most Singaporeans seem to agree.
When Singapore became an independent nation in the mid-1960s, the Vietnam War was raging nearby and the threat of a communist takeover seemed real. Consequently, the government under Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew passed a series of laws to suppress dissent. One of these laws, the Internal Security Act, allows the government to arrest and jail individuals without charge or trial.
Many of Singapore's laws are backed by stiff fines: failing to flush a public toilet ($100); spitting or smoking in public places ($300); eating or drinking on the subway ($300); littering ($600); selling chewing gum ($1600). The government came down against chewing gum after vandals began sticking wads on elevator buttons and subway car doors. Elevators in apartment buildings even have urine detectors that, when activated, take the violator's picture and lock the door until the police arrive. The fine is $1200.
For more serious crimes, Singapore resorts to imprisonment and caning (beating with a stick). The death penalty is used in cases of first degree murder, armed robbery, and drug trafficking. Over 30 persons have been hanged since 1975 for drug offenses.
Singapore's economic system has been described as "state capitalism." While private ownership and free enterprise are vigorously encouraged, the government still keeps a firm hand on most business activity and retains ownership of some industries. The government also controls wages and has weakened the labor unions so that strikes are rare.
The school system is patterned after the Japanese model. Periodic examinations weed out those who do not do well in academic subjects (especially English) and "stream" them into technical and vocational schools. The more academically successful youngsters go to "superschools" where they are prepared for the university and professional careers.
One of the most controversial government policies concerns population control. At first, the government launched a campaign to reduce the birth rate through tax incentives and easily available abortions ("Stop At Two"). However, after discovering that such a policy would cause Singapore's population to decrease after the year 2030, the government reversed itself. They offered tax rebates for a third child and made abortions more difficult to get ("Go For Three"). Then, when most three-child families turned out to have low incomes, the government became concerned. They enacted new laws that restricted valuable primary school registration to the children of mothers who were college graduates. This policy proved to be so unpopular that it was finally abandoned.
City of Fear
In recent years, some Singaporeans have begun to question the old belief that the government always knows what is best for the people. In 1987, 22 church social workers, professionals, and students publicly criticized certain government policies. They were accused of organizing a "Marxist conspiracy to subvert the existing social and political order." They were jailed without trial. Most of these "criminals" were released after confessing on television. However, several of them were rearrested after they issued a statement to the press retracting their confessions. They also charged that while they were held in jail they had been beaten, subjected to long interrogations, and otherwise mistreated.
Some of those who were rearrested appealed to the courts with habeas corpus petitions. These required the government to produce formal charges or release them. The courts ordered that they be let go, but as soon as they were free the government arrested them again. The last of the "Marxist conspirators" were not released from jail until June of 1990; they are restricted in their freedom of movement, speech, and association with others.
Government censorship is a fact of life in Singapore. The government screens books, magazines, movies, videos, music recordings, live performances, and the internet. Privately owned TV satellite dishes are illegal. All Singapore newspapers are controlled by a single holding company largely owned by the government.
Political gatherings of more than five persons in Singapore require a police permit. Therefore, public demonstrations are rarely allowed except in support of the government. When asked why university students were denied permission to protest against tuition increases, the current prime minister, Goh Chok Tong, replied:
If you allow students to do so, then workers will begin to do so over the slightest grievance. And if you have several demonstrations, right away the impression is created that government is not in control of the situation that the place may become unstable. That will have an impact on foreign investors.
In many ways, Singapore provides its inhabitants with an ideal existence. Singaporeans enjoy a clean, efficient, and attractive environment. Most citizens can expect full employment, a good education, and comprehensive healthcare. This seemingly secure, comfortable society depends on strictly enforced laws that were originally designed to combat communist subversion and prevent conflicts from breaking out among the country's ethnic groups. Singapore's rigid rules and numerous laws make sure that the tiny city state runs smoothly, but at what price to individual freedoms and human rights?
© 1993, Constitutional Rights Foundation, 601 South Kingsley Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90005, (213) 487-5590
The (London) Observer
What happens when human rights come into conflict with economic security? In Singapore, the people have apparently given up many human rights to the interests of a smooth-running, prosperous society. Some visitors view Singapore as a model society worth imitating. Others see it as a city of fear.
Model Society
After landing at Changi International, you will be impressed with the efficiency of Singapore's airport, called the finest in the world by the travel industry. You will have little trouble getting to your hotel, since Singapore has plenty of taxis, modern expressways, and a sleek new subway. You will soon notice that auto traffic is carefully regulated with well-disciplined drivers.
As you make your way through the city, you will be pleased with the squeaky clean streets lined with trees and flower beds. High rise apartment and office buildings help pack 3 million people into 240 square miles (about 12,000 citizens per square mile). You will not see any slums, homeless people, or beggars.
By the time you arrive at your hotel, you will be aware that almost everyone speaks some English. English is taught as the "first" language in the schools, and has become the common language for everyday communication. You will also learn that eating is a joy in Singapore with its many five-star restaurants. Even the city tap water is safe to drink. At night, you will have little fear as you stroll through Singapore's safe streets.
Singapore is a city as well as a nation, located on a small island in Southeast Asia. A former British colony, Singapore became completely independent in 1965. Today, Singapore is truly a multicultural and multilingual society with four official languages: Mandarin Chinese, Malay, Tamil, and English. Singaporeans of Chinese descent, speaking a variety of dialects as well as Mandarin, make up more than three-quarters of the population. The Chinese are also the driving force behind the country's highly successful business community. Malays, mostly Muslim, account for the bulk of Singapore's low income workers. Other Singaporeans are Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims, and Christians from southern India. This great ethnic mix in Singapore heavily influences the way the government runs the country.
The people of Singapore today enjoy the highest standard of living in Asia, second only to the Japanese. The average annual income is about the same as in the United States. The unemployment rate is under 5%. Most people own their homes (mainly comfortable apartments). Workers pay into a social security system that provides health care benefits, allows them to borrow in order to purchase a home, and enables most to retire at 55.
The Government Knows Best
Less than 30 years ago, Singapore was a backwater, poverty-stricken, Third World port city with few natural resources. But soon after they gained independence, the founders of the struggling nation decided to transform their city-nation into a world-class commercial center. The founders accomplished this through careful planning and by attracting investment from foreign multinational corporations.
One of Singapore's most prominent founders, Lee Kuan Yew, flirted with socialism as a young man, but later became a fierce anti-communist and an advocate of free enterprise. Lee and a small group of like-minded leaders set out to plan a model society. He was the guiding force behind Singapore's economic miracle from its beginnings with the new republic in 1965 until he retired as prime minister in 1990.
Lee was convinced that an elite group of highly educated, dedicated, and honest leaders should run the government. Their goal was to assure a political stability that would attract foreign investors. Unlike other totalitarian regimes, Lee installed a system that allowed regular elections and competing political parties. Lee's popular political party, the People's Action Party (PAP), has won almost all the seats in the parliament for more than a quarter of a century.
Prime Minister Lee and the People's Action Party both believed that the government knows what is best for the people of Singapore. As a result, the government has little tolerance for political debate, special interest groups, or dissent. The government expects its citizens to be hardworking, disciplined, and obedient. Most Singaporeans seem to agree.
When Singapore became an independent nation in the mid-1960s, the Vietnam War was raging nearby and the threat of a communist takeover seemed real. Consequently, the government under Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew passed a series of laws to suppress dissent. One of these laws, the Internal Security Act, allows the government to arrest and jail individuals without charge or trial.
Many of Singapore's laws are backed by stiff fines: failing to flush a public toilet ($100); spitting or smoking in public places ($300); eating or drinking on the subway ($300); littering ($600); selling chewing gum ($1600). The government came down against chewing gum after vandals began sticking wads on elevator buttons and subway car doors. Elevators in apartment buildings even have urine detectors that, when activated, take the violator's picture and lock the door until the police arrive. The fine is $1200.
For more serious crimes, Singapore resorts to imprisonment and caning (beating with a stick). The death penalty is used in cases of first degree murder, armed robbery, and drug trafficking. Over 30 persons have been hanged since 1975 for drug offenses.
Singapore's economic system has been described as "state capitalism." While private ownership and free enterprise are vigorously encouraged, the government still keeps a firm hand on most business activity and retains ownership of some industries. The government also controls wages and has weakened the labor unions so that strikes are rare.
The school system is patterned after the Japanese model. Periodic examinations weed out those who do not do well in academic subjects (especially English) and "stream" them into technical and vocational schools. The more academically successful youngsters go to "superschools" where they are prepared for the university and professional careers.
One of the most controversial government policies concerns population control. At first, the government launched a campaign to reduce the birth rate through tax incentives and easily available abortions ("Stop At Two"). However, after discovering that such a policy would cause Singapore's population to decrease after the year 2030, the government reversed itself. They offered tax rebates for a third child and made abortions more difficult to get ("Go For Three"). Then, when most three-child families turned out to have low incomes, the government became concerned. They enacted new laws that restricted valuable primary school registration to the children of mothers who were college graduates. This policy proved to be so unpopular that it was finally abandoned.
City of Fear
In recent years, some Singaporeans have begun to question the old belief that the government always knows what is best for the people. In 1987, 22 church social workers, professionals, and students publicly criticized certain government policies. They were accused of organizing a "Marxist conspiracy to subvert the existing social and political order." They were jailed without trial. Most of these "criminals" were released after confessing on television. However, several of them were rearrested after they issued a statement to the press retracting their confessions. They also charged that while they were held in jail they had been beaten, subjected to long interrogations, and otherwise mistreated.
Some of those who were rearrested appealed to the courts with habeas corpus petitions. These required the government to produce formal charges or release them. The courts ordered that they be let go, but as soon as they were free the government arrested them again. The last of the "Marxist conspirators" were not released from jail until June of 1990; they are restricted in their freedom of movement, speech, and association with others.
Government censorship is a fact of life in Singapore. The government screens books, magazines, movies, videos, music recordings, live performances, and the internet. Privately owned TV satellite dishes are illegal. All Singapore newspapers are controlled by a single holding company largely owned by the government.
Political gatherings of more than five persons in Singapore require a police permit. Therefore, public demonstrations are rarely allowed except in support of the government. When asked why university students were denied permission to protest against tuition increases, the current prime minister, Goh Chok Tong, replied:
If you allow students to do so, then workers will begin to do so over the slightest grievance. And if you have several demonstrations, right away the impression is created that government is not in control of the situation that the place may become unstable. That will have an impact on foreign investors.
In many ways, Singapore provides its inhabitants with an ideal existence. Singaporeans enjoy a clean, efficient, and attractive environment. Most citizens can expect full employment, a good education, and comprehensive healthcare. This seemingly secure, comfortable society depends on strictly enforced laws that were originally designed to combat communist subversion and prevent conflicts from breaking out among the country's ethnic groups. Singapore's rigid rules and numerous laws make sure that the tiny city state runs smoothly, but at what price to individual freedoms and human rights?
© 1993, Constitutional Rights Foundation, 601 South Kingsley Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90005, (213) 487-5590
4 May 2004
Singapore expels union activist
Singapore expels union activist
By Andrew Wood
BBC, Singapore
Singapore has expelled a union activist who angered the country's influential senior statesman, Lee Kuan Yew.
Captain Ryan Goh, a Malaysian, led a campaign at Singapore Airlines to oust union leaders who accepted pay cuts and redundancies last year.
The authorities told Mr Goh that he was an undesirable immigrant in March.
As he departed from Changi airport, Mr Goh said he hoped to remain a pilot - but restrictions on visiting Singapore might cause problems.
"Singapore Changi Airport is an international hub so most of the airlines will fly into Singapore," he told reporters.
"And if I do get a job with the international airlines, naturally I will fly into Singapore. And with the prohibition on me it will be difficult to get a job as a crew."
Mr Goh says he will live in Australia. The authorities have allowed one of his four children to remain in Singapore to finish school.
Strikes and labour protests are rare in Singapore.
In February, Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore's senior minister, intervened in the dispute at Singapore Airlines.
He singled out Mr Goh as the instigator of a revolt by union members, who had voted out union leaders after they accepted pay cuts at the state-owned airline.
The authorities then ordered Mr Goh and his family to leave.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/asia-pacific/3676881.stm
Published: 2004/05/01 17:07:56 GMT
© BBC MMIV
28 Apr 2004
Lawyer charged with disorderly conduct
Lawyer charged with disorderly conduct
So in Singapore if you dare to question or refuse to keep your mouth closed you can go to jail. The following article seems to smack of a vendetta against the defence lawyer of a man who has been condemned to death. Yet again it shows that the judiciary here can be used on an ad hoc basis to ensure that we are all 'criminals' if we question authority.
The article is from "The Straits" jacket, where they write only what they are told to write. I wonder if Amnesty International are aware of this situation.
And talking of Amnesty International I notice that the furore created by the PMs blopper of not knowing how many are put to death in Singapore, and the report citing Singapore as having the highest death penalty in the world, per capita; has never been refuted or a subject of discussion since promises were made quite sometime ago.
The Straits Jacket writes....
LAWYER M. Ravi was yesterday charged in a magistrate's court with behaving in a disorderly manner at a bar at Magazine Road.
Out on bail, Ravi is accused of yelling at the top of his voice in a bar.
The 35-year-old was accused of shouting at the top of his voice at the China Bar at about 1.55am on Nov 6.
He is out on bail of $5,000 until the case is mentioned again on May 25.
A person found guilty of disorderly behaviour in a public place can be jailed for up to one month and fined up to $1,000.
A second offender can be jailed for up to six months and fined up to $2,000.
Ravi first made the news in September last year after he had a heated exchange with High Court Judge Woo Bih Li while trying to seek a retrial for a condemned drug trafficker who had exhausted all avenues of appeal.
Justice Woo has since made a complaint to the Law Society against him for improper conduct in court.
27 Apr 2004
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)