15

I am unable to embed the video on this site but you can click the link to watch it on Youtube.
Gangster 15 Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Part 8
Part 9
Part 10
The End

Singapore

SDP calls on the PAP to identify itself on the Internet and challenges it to an online debate

05 Feb 07

Mr Ng Eng Hen
Minister for Manpower and
Chairman, PAP New Media Committee

Dear Sir,

It is with much pleasure that the Singapore Democrats learn of the PAP's admission that its members have been actively rebutting its critics, albeit anonymously, on the Internet.

We are disturbed, however, that you choose to do so using pseudonyms thus avoiding identifying yourselves as members of the ruling party.

This is odd given the Government's claims that its policies and the way it runs the country is well-supported by the people of Singapore. One would think that under such circumstances, you would want to proclaim your views like a shining beacon upon a (cyber) mountaintop.

Instead you choose to engage netizens under a cloak of anonymity which is, frankly, unbefitting of a ruling party that has been in power for close to half a century.

It also seems a trifle hypocritical given the fact that years ago, the Government insisted that writers to forum pages in the newspapers not conceal their identities and use their real names but now choose to hide behind nicknames when the shoe is on the other foot.

Worse, didn't Mrs K Bhavani from the Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts, challenge Mr Lee Kin Mun over the Mr Brown affair last year to "come out from behind his pseudonym to defend his views openly"? You see, Mr Ng, here at the SDP we would like to think that what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Perhaps, the PAP is afraid of being criticized by Singaporeans if it identifies itself to Internet users. In which case, we say: "Welcome to the democratic world of free speech!" This is where the ruled are not, and cannot be, bullied into silence and, worse, their silence is not distorted into support for the PAP and its policies.

Since you have been hanging around on the Internet, you must know that the Singapore Democrats have participated in online forums, in particular the Sammyboy Coffeeshop. A few of my colleagues and I have posted our views, answered questions, and, yes, responded to criticisms from our fellow Singaporeans in our real names and affiliations.

We did this because we believe that political parties aspiring to governing this country must subject themselves to questions and criticisms from the people. Debates must be conducted freely and openly, and the people given the means to question and challenge policies that affect them and their loved ones.

It is the only means where the rulers are held accountable and compelled to govern in the interest of the masses, not just the rich and powerful. It is the surest way that a thinking and mature society can be developed, one that will make our society more competitive and stable. It is, in short, the best thing that can happen for Singapore and its future.

In this regard, we, the Singapore Democrats, would like to engage you and your colleagues in the Government to a debate on the Internet. Since you are already in cyberspace, it wouldn't take too much to organise yourselves for an online debate.

The only reason that you would turn down this invitation, or simply ignore it, is that the Internet, which you don't control, is a medium that allows for genuine exchange of views while the mass media, which you do, censor your opponent's views.

But if the inability to suppress your opponent's right to speak and counter-argue is what prevents the PAP from debating the SDP online, then I must say that your effort to persuade netizens of your views, even if carried out anonymously, is doomed.

The SDP is happy to discuss the format and procedures by which such a debate takes place. In fact, we would propose an online, realtime video-conference debate where representatives of the PAP and the SDP engage each other, and invite Singaporeans to participate and judge the exchange.

We hope you will welcome this initiative and make your presence on the Internet less surreptitious. We look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Chee Soon Juan
Secretary-General
Singapore Democratic Party

Singapore

PAP moves to counter criticism of party, Govt in cyberspace

Feb 3, 2007

By Li Xueying

THE People's Action Party (PAP) is mounting a quiet counter-insurgency against its online critics.

It has members going into Internet forums and blogs to rebut anti-establishment views and putting up postings anonymously.

Sources told The Straits Times the initiative is driven by two sub-committees of the PAP's 'new media' committee chaired by Manpower Minister Ng Eng Hen.

One sub-committee, co-headed by Minister of State (Education) Lui Tuck Yew and Hong Kah GRC MP Zaqy Mohamad, strategises the campaign.

The other is led by Tanjong Pagar GRC MP Baey Yam Keng and Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC MP Josephine Teo. Called the 'new media capabilities group', it executes the strategies.

Both were set up after last year's General Election. Aside from politicians, some 20 IT-savvy party activists are also involved.

When contacted, Mr Baey declined to give details of the group's activities, but he outlined the broad principles of the initiative.

It was necessary for the PAP to have a voice in cyberspace as there were few in the online community who were pro-establishment, he said.

As such, the committees aim to 'observe how new media is developing and see how we can use the new media as part of the overall media landscape', he added.

'How do we facilitate views that are pro-party and propagate them through the Internet?'

The approach reflects comments by Rear-Admiral (NS) Lui at the PAP's party conference in December. He called on younger activists to put up views 'to moderate the vitriol and balance the skewed comments' on the Internet.

But this can only work if activists are not 'too obvious' about it, Mr Baey said yesterday. Otherwise it comes across as 'propaganda'.

'The identity is not important. It is the message that is important,' he added.

One activist who is involved said that when posting comments on online forums and the feedback boxes of blogs, he does not identify himself as a PAP member.

He tracks popular blogs and forums to 'see if there is anything we can clarify' on hot-button topics such as the impending hike in the Goods and Services Tax.

But he added: 'We don't rebut everything. Sometimes, what is said is fair enough, and we send the feedback on to the committee.'

This latest initiative comes on top of a blog site with posts by 12 MPs born after Singapore's Independence in 1965.

It recognises that more younger Singaporeans are relying on the new media as a main source of information.

An Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) study conducted last year found that younger and better-educated Singaporeans relied on information from the Internet when shaping their voting choices at the last GE.

Among the opposition parties, members and supporters of the Workers' Party, in particular, post regularly on forums online.

But IPS senior research fellow Tan Tarn How wonders about the effectiveness of the PAP's campaign.

He said Internet users who post on forums such as Sammyboy tend not to be interested in 'intellectual debate' and so will not be persuaded by PAP activists anyway.

As for more serious-minded bloggers, he said the views that the activists may put out are already available in the mainstream media.

xueying@sph.com.sg

Singapore

Singapore - Affluenza

From the Author of the bestselling They F*** You Up: How to Survive Family Life.

The blurb reads...

An epidemic of 'affluenza' is sweeping through the English-speaking world - an obsessive, envious, keeping-up-with-Joneses that makes us twice as prone to depression, anxiety and addictions than people in other developed nations. And now we are infecting the rest of the world with this virulent virus.

By visiting cities as diverse as Singapore, Moscow and Copenhagen and interviewing a cross section of their inhabitants, psychologist Oliver James has charted the spread of this potentially crippling disease and identified the key factors - vaccines - that will protect us against it.

In this colourful and eloquent account, James reveals how issues like consumerism, raising children, appearances, property fever and the battle of the sexes vary across societies with different governments, values, beliefs and traditions. And in doing so, leads us to an unavoidable and potentially life-changing conclusion: that to ensure our mental health we can and must pursue our needs rather than our wants.

And a little extract to whet your appetite.

I met few Singaporeans who seemed to have any life outside work. Most are doing jobs that entail very long hours (sixty or more a week), dedicating their minds and bodies to selling of sevices or commodities rather than to activities they find intrinsically absorbing. All had been caned as children by parents and subsequently put under tremendous pressure at school. This surely means that they are more easily coerced into subservience to authority and its goals in the workplace, and a sense of filial duty (originally based on fear of the cane) anchors the people-machines in place. Until they are married they remain in the family home, where parents can continue to monitor them; it is barely thinkable for them to take off for other countries where they would have greater freedom.

These examples, and that of Singapore as a nation, were the purest that I encountered on my mind tour of the damage done by the Virus to the playfulness and sense of volition which are so important for well-being. p.67

Singapore

"Tochi was crying right up to his last 5 minutes"

01 Feb 07 from Singapore Democratic Party

The funeral service for Amara Tochi was held today, a week after he was hanged by the Singapore Government. A simple Catholic Mass was held for him.

Tochi, a Nigeria was convicted for trafficking diamorphine in Singapore even though trial judge, Mr Kan Ting Chiu, found that "there was no direct evidence that he knew the capsules contained diamorphine."

Despite protesting his innocence and pleading for his life – he had told lawyer M Ravi who visited him in prison last year: "Please don't let these people kill me"- Tochi was hanged last Friday together with co-accused, Nelson Malachy.

The executions have caused an international outcry and focused on the mandatory sentence for drug peddlers in Singapore which legal experts say run afoul of international law.

To make matters worse, it was reported on German television that Malachy had testified that Tochi was never aware of carrying the drug. Malachy has taken all the blame and confirmed that Tochi had never been part of the plan but used only as an unsuspecting drug mule.

At the funeral today held at the Marymount Concent Chapel, the congregation was told that Tochi was crying during the last five minutes of his life. He asked the priest to pray over him.

At precisely 6 am, his life was cruelly snuffed out just as others of his age are just beginning to take shape.

The casket was closed except for a glass panel through which Tochi's face was visible. Towards the end of the half hour service, the congregation was asked to pay its last respects by viewing the casket.

A striped scarf adorned the boy's neck and a golf cap covered the top of his head. He looked much older than a 21-year-old.

At the burial site at Chua Chu Kang cemetery, Tochi's last rites were performed before his coffin was lowered into the ground. Next to his plot lay Nelson Malachy's. Malachy's funeral was held on the day of his execution.

It is a heart-wrenching thought that none of their family or friends were able to see the men when they were in Changi prison and sadder still that their remains are not sent back to those who love them.

Rest in peace, Tochi and Malachy.

Singapore

FICTION • Singapour Expérience

Time to see if that French O'level was ever worth it. Or you could do what I normally do and go to Babel. The Babel translation starts,

In this news of policy-fiction, the essay writer Catherine Lim evokes the consequences of the democratic absence of debate in the country. A cynical portrait of a blocked company.

The reference to a 'blocked company' doesn't make any sense though...

Or you could just read the original English version here.
by Catherine Lim on Courrier International

Dans cette nouvelle de politique-fiction, l'essayiste Catherine Lim évoque les conséquences de l'absence de débat démocratique dans le pays. Un portrait cynique d'une société bloquée.

Lors de la quatrième réunion des ministres consacrée à Frankie Mah, un jeune activiste très problématique, le ministre Supremo demande : "Alors, quelles sont les nouvelles ?" Il obtient une avalanche de réponses : le jeune rebelle s'enhardit ; ses partisans sont toujours plus nombreux ; il attire un public sans précédent autour de la tribune du Speaker's Corner [place dans le quartier de Singapour où les citoyens peuvent, selon des règles très strictes, exprimer leur point de vue] ; sur une multitude de forums de discussion en ligne, les jeunes se demandent fiévreusement comment forcer le gouvernement à céder.

"Mais qu'est-ce que c'est ?" s'enquiert le ministre Supremo de sa voix douce et mélodieuse. Le ministre G.C. qui, depuis des années, n'est connu que sous ces initiales, répond avec colère : "La liberté ! Vous y croyez ? Les jeunes sont libérés de la pauvreté, de la misère, de la corruption, et ils veulent la liberté !"

Il émet encore un grognement de colère. Les autres ministres tentent de le calmer.
"Combien de temps allez-vous tolérer ces absurdités ?" demande-t-il. "Ecoutez, je me suis renseigné sur ce type. A 16 ans, il a triché à un examen. A 18 ans, il a engrossé sa petite amie. Pourquoi n'utilisons-nous pas ces informations…"

"Non !" oppose le ministre Supremo avec fermeté, avant de faire l'annonce la plus inattendue qui soit : "Je vais accorder à Frankie Mah tout ce qu'il veut. L'assemblée n'en croit pas ses oreilles. Le ministre G.C. tombe de sa chaise. "Oui", ajoute le ministre Supremo avec calme, "Frankie Mah va obtenir toute la liberté qu'il souhaite."

L'annonce laisse d'abord les Singapouriens muets de stupéfaction, puis c'est l'euphorie. Ça y est ! Ça y est ! Frankie Mah est un héros national.

Les jours suivants, les Singapouriens assistent à des choses qu'ils pensaient ne jamais voir : une foule immense, devant la prison de Changi, brandissant des pancartes contre les condamnations à mort massives ; un public furieux, frappant l'air du poing, réuni autour du Speaker's Corner pour s'opposer à diverses mesures du gouvernement ; un long cortège descendant la Orchard Road [l'artère principale de la cité-Etat] avec un portrait de Frankie Mah, au-dessus duquel on peut lire le mot "Révolution".

"Et vous n'allez rien faire ?" hurle le ministre G.C. "Hier, un manifestant a montré des obscénités tatouées sur ses fesses pour se moquer du gouvernement !"

Le ministre Supremo laisse échapper un petit rire et le rassure : "Ne vous inquiétez pas, tout ira bien." Puis il regarde à nouveau par la fenêtre la foule se rassembler sous un immense portrait de lui, affublé d'une moustache à la Hitler. Il écoute Frankie Mah crier dans un mégaphone :
"Hé, hé, hé, P - A - P
Notre parti à perpétuité
On est drôlement gâté !"

Les autres ministres se lancent des regards inquiets lorsque le ministre Supremo laisse échapper un nouveau rire.

Au cours de la troisième semaine, les choses changent soudainement. Une foule énorme, bruyante, se rassemble pour manifester non plus en faveur de Frankie Mah, mais contre lui. Les manifestants demandent au gouvernement de l'arrêter : il trouble la paix de la vie singapourienne.

La veille, une personne a été gravement blessée lors d'une échauffourée. Avant, une bagarre avait éclaté dans un centre commercial et des voyous en avaient profité pour se livrer à des pillages. Où qu'ils se retrouvent, ses partisans laissent des tas de détritus derrière eux. On n'avait jamais vu une chose pareille à Singapour.

Le ministre Supremo reçoit des délégations de Singapouriens l'empressant d'agir au plus vite. L'Association des parents et des enseignants s'inquiète de voir les étudiants manquer les cours à cause des manifestations. La Société de la morale déplore l'influence délétère que le comportement grossier et cruel des rebelles exerce sur la jeunesse. La Société de promotion du tourisme redoute que toute cette agitation ne fasse fuir les touristes.

Mais le ministre reste imperturbable. "J'attends", dit-il serein, avant d'ajouter énigmatiquement : "Ça va venir."

Et ça arrive assez vite, le 37e jour de l'Expérience. Une avalanche de lettres dans la presse et sur Internet accompagne la plus grande délégation jamais envoyée au gouvernement pour exprimer le problème le plus urgent de tous les Singapouriens : "La valeur de nos biens est en train de chuter !"

Le ministre Supremo se décide à agir. Le ministre G.C. jubile : "Jetez cette ordure en prison ! Condamnez-le ! Donnez-lui des coups de bâton !" Mais le ministre Supremo l'arrête : "Non. Je vais l'inviter à prendre le thé."

Frankie Mah paraît très nerveux lorsqu'il est introduit dans le bureau du ministre. Dès son entrée, il voit une immense affiche avec son portrait, et ces mots :
"Hé, hé, hé, Frank – Kie – Mah
Tu croyais gagner,
Tu t'es bien trompé !"

Le visage de Frankie devient livide comme celui d'un cadavre.

to continue reading

Singapore

How To Plan A Revolution

Two young political activists, Murad and Emin, are on a mission. They want to overthrow the government in Azerbaijan by staging a peaceful "Orange" revolution.

Filmed over three months in the run-up to parliamentary elections in Azerbaijan in November 2005, This World profiles Murad and Emin as they make their plans and attempt to carry them out.


How To Plan A Revolution
Thursday 20 April 2006
2100 BST on BBC Two

They are inspired by similar opposition movements in Serbia, Georgia and the Ukraine, where mass protests following elections removed authoritarian regimes from power.

The difference for these two men however, is that the West is not in favour of a revolution in Azerbaijan.

Although the US say the country has a dismal human rights record and the Council of Europe has reported the torture of political prisoners there, Azerbaijan is a Muslim ally in the "war on terror" and has troops in Iraq.

It also has oil.

So with no support from the West, Murad and Emin need all the help they can get.

Vote rigging

We follow Murad to Georgia, where he meets the revolutionary movement Kmara.

NOTE ADDED: 25 October 2006
Director Ivan O'Mahoney and producer Shahida Tulaganova won the Berlin Prix Europa Award 2006 for this film

To start a revolution, they say, it is crucial to start celebrating victory on the night of the elections, no matter what their outcome.

But the authorities are taking precautions.

We see how the Azeri pro-democracy youth movements, one of them founded by Emin, are decapitated by the arrest of their leadership and how protests against these arrests are violently broken up by police.

Explosives are planted in the youth movements' headquarters in order to discredit them, opposition rallies are smashed and Murad himself gets arrested.

On election day, observers confirm the elections are flawed but the opposition are too scared to seize the moment.

When they finally organise a peaceful sit-in in Baku - hoping to start the revolution - the government responds decisively. Riot troops are sent in and the crowd is dispersed.

With no foreign support, the opposition is powerless to continue.

And even worse for Murad and Emin... the US endorses the election results.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Director: Ivan O'Mahoney
Producer: Shahida Tulaganova
Executive producer: Karen O'Connor

Singapore

Reporters Without Borders' 2007 Singapore Annual Report

An extract from the RSF 2007 Report (pdf)
Reporters sans frontières
01 Feb 07

Singapore - Annual report 2007

The government headed by Lee Hsien Loong, with his father Lee Kuan Yew behind the scenes, has been engaged in a fierce battle with several foreign publications and at the same time has cracked down on Singaporean bloggers and cyberdissidents.

While hosting a World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) meeting in October 2006, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong spoke out against the international media, which he said were trying to impose "their norms and their standards" on the country in relation to freedom of expression. The head of government justified control on the press in comments in July when he said that Asian countries who got "the best financial results were those whose media was less aggressive".

The opposition was given very little opportunity to get its message across during the legislative election campaign in May. The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) was given two and a half minutes air time on TV channels while many pro-government media spread false information about opposition candidates. And the government used a number of ruses to silence critical voices. Before the campaign, they banned political podcasts which are increasingly popular in Singapore.

Under threat of a defamation suit brought by both father and son Lee, the printer of The New Democrat, the SDP newsletter, was forced in April to apologise and promise not to print it again. To intimidate him still further, local pro-government newspapers published rumours about his private life. Police summoned SDP secretary general Chee Soon Juan on several occasions for selling The New Democrat in the street.

After the ruling PAP comfortably won the election, one leader, Baey Yam Keng speaking in November called for more debate in the national media. "When I read commentaries in the press and those published on blogs, it seems to me as though they come from two different populations speaking about two different countries," he said. There was no reaction from the government.

The authorities tried to browbeat the foreign press into submission in 2006, in particular the Far Eastern Economic Review (FEER). After the paper carried an article about opposition leader Chee Soon Juan, which it called the "country's martyr" because of the numerous legal suits which he has had to face, the prime minister unleashed a series of retaliatory measures against the Hong Kong-based FEER. Lee Hsien Loong and his father brought a "defamation" case at the end of August against editor Hugo Restall and the magazine's publisher. They were also told to conform to section 23 of the law on newspapers and the written press which obliges foreign media to recruit a legal representative in the country and to pay a deposit of 200,000 Singapore dollars (100,000 euros).

Four other English-language newspapers the International Herald Tribune, Time, the Financial Times and Newsweek, all received instructions to comply with the same rules when their licence expired. The FEER decided not to give in and, on the contrary, its editor announced that he planned to fight the government in the courts. At the end of September the FEER was banned from circulating in Singapore.

The Singaporean press is relatively independent as far as regional and international news goes. But it clearly operates self-censorship on domestic politics. In July the weekly column of blogger Lee Kin Mun, alias "mr brown", in the daily Today was axed after a criticism of a member of the government. The blogger had received several warnings.

In 2006, the government struck hard at the Internet. Several legal cases were launched for posting news, podcasts or videos on the Web. SDP activist Yap Keng Ho was sentenced in November to a fine of 2,000 dollars for posting a video of an illegal gathering of his party on his blog. Since the blogger refused to pay the fine, it was commuted to a prison sentence and he was jailed the same day for a period of ten days.

Singapore

Dictatorships get to grips with Web 2.0

RSF

A decade ago, regime opponents in Vietnam or Tunisia were still printing leaflets in their basements and handing them out to fellow militants at clandestine meetings. Independent newspapers were no more than a few hastily-stapled photocopies distributed secretly.

These days,“subversive” or “counter-revolutionary” material goes on the Internet and political dissidents and journalists have become “cyber-dissidents” and “online journalists.” Most of them know how to create a blog, organise a chat group, make phone calls through a computer and use a proxy to get round censorship.

New technology allows them to receive and share news out of sight of the authorities. The Web is also a blessing for human rights groups, which can now build a file on a political prisoner with a few mouseclicks instead of over weeks and sometimes months.The Web makes networking much easier, for political activists as well as teenagers. Unfortunately, this progress and use of new tools by activists is now being matched by the efforts of dictatorships to fight them. Dictators too have entered the world of Web 2.0.

Sixty people are currently in jail for posting criticism of governments online, with China’s 50 making it by far the world’s worst prison for cyber-dissidents.The Chinese have been aped by other countries - four such dissidents are in jail in Vietnam, three in Syria and one each in Tunisia, Libya and Iran.

Parliaments in these countries, along with the local cyber-police, closely follow the latest technological developments. When instant messaging, such as MSN Messenger, became all the rage, China asked the firms that made these programmes to automatically block some key-words, making it impossible for Chinese users to talk about the Dalai Lama and Taiwanese independence, for example.

And with the success of YouTube, China and Iran are keen to filter the videos that appear there - too much “subversive” content for China and too much “immorality” for Iran. In Vietnam, police and dissidents chase play cat-and-mouse with “chat rooms” and three people were arrested there in October 2005 for discussing democracy on Paltalk, a US website that organises remote meetings. One of them, Truong Quoc Huy, was still in prison at the end of 2006.

SPYWARE THAT FILTERS E-MAIL

The Internet was not designed to protect message confidentiality. It is fast and fairly reliable but also easy to spy on and censor. From the first mouse-click, users leave a trail and reveal information about themselves and what their tastes and habits are.This data is very valuable to commercial firms, who sort through it to target their advertising better.

The police also use it.The best way to spy on journalists a few years ago was still to send a plainclothes officer to stand outside their house.This can be done more cheaply and efficiently now, because machines can spy, report back and automatically prevent subversive conversations.

Cuba has installed spyware in cybercafé computers so that when users type “banned” words in an email, such as the name of a known political dissident, they see a warning that they are writing things considered a “threat to state security” and the Web navigator then immediately shuts down.

THE INTERNET GIANTS WORK WITH THE DICTATORSHIPS

The predators of free expression are not all the same. China keeps a tight grip on what is written and downloaded by users and spends an enormous amount on Internet surveillance equipment and hires armies of informants and cyber-police. It also has the political weight to force the companies in the sector
such as Yahoo!, Google, Microsoft and Cisco Systems - to do what it wants them to, and all have agreed to censor their search-engines to filter out websites overcritical of the authorities.

This makes the regime’s job very much easier because these firms are the main entry-points to the Internet. If a website is not listed by these search-engines, material posted on them has about as much chance of being found as a message in a bottle thrown into the sea.

Not all countries are strong enough to make the US multinational Internet firms bend to their will, but all authoritarian regimes are now working to censor the Web, even countries in sub-Saharan Africa.The Ethiopian regime of prime minister Meles Zenawi has blocked openly-critical websites and blogs since May 2006 and Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe is considering a law allowing security forces to intercept online messages without reference to the courts. One of the first moves by Thailand’s military rulers after their September coup was to censor news websites, even foreign ones, that criticized the takeover.

When a dictator cannot effectively censor the Internet, he can take a more radical approach - barring Internet access to virtually everyone, as in North Korea and Turkmenistan. And when a tyrant dies, as Turkmenistan’s “President-for-Life” Separmurad Nyazov did in December, his successor starts work by declaring his policy towards the Internet.These days, dictators talk about the Web when they want to show their regime is progressive.

Internet users are organising themselves and conjuring up new solutions to tackle these dictatorships, get round the filters and protect their anonymity.They use and create new technology, encrypt their email and use other tools that are still not detected by cyber-police.

The Web phone service Skype, for example, has made it much easier for journalists - and Reporters Without Borders - to communicate with their sources. It works especially well because it is encrypted and so conversations are hard to tap. But China has already signed an agreement with Skype to block key-words, so how can we be sure our conversations are not being listened to? How do we know if Skype will not also allow (or already has allowed) the Chinese police to spy on its customers?

It has become vital to examine new technology from a moral standpoint and understand the secondary effects of it. If firms and democratic countries continue to duck the issue and pass off ethical responsibility on others, we shall soon be in a world where all our communications are spied on.

Singapore

Workers' Party Invites You to a Forum on the Penal code

E.D.: Received in my email inbox at 5:41 a.m. CST. Reposted with permission.

In Nov 2006, the government floated a draft Penal Code Amendment Bill (pdf) and called for public comment. The Penal Code reflects our rights and responsibilities living in Singapore. Despite the tremendous significance of the Penal Code in guiding the way Singaporeans order their daily lives, the government has given little explanation for the proposals so far.

In line with the Workers' Party's concern with justice and the rule of law since the Party's foundation in 1957, the Party will be holding a public forum on the topic: "Amendments to the Penal Code – Why We Should Be Concerned". The details are as follows:

Date: Sat Feb 3rd, 2007

Time: 2:30 pm to 4:30 pm

Venue: WP HQ, 216G Syed Alwi Road #02-03, Singapore 207799.

What will be covered:

The forum will cover some key concerns about the draft Bill such as the proposed changes to punishments and sentencing options, provisions regarding sexual crime and aspects omitted by the draft Bill. Views from the public are also sought so as to give comprehensive input for debate about crime issues and for decision-making.

The speakers at the Forum will be:

• Ms Sylvia Lim, Chairman, Workers' Party and Non-Constituency Member of Parliament. Ms Lim has law enforcement and criminal defence experience, and now teaches and writes about law and procedure.

• Mr Firuz Khan, Member, Workers' Party Youth Wing Executive Committee. Firuz graduated from the University of Birmingham with Masters of Business Administration in International Business. He has been working in several industries including the social service sector. During the course of his work he manages children, family and domestic violence cases.

Guest Speakers:

• Mr Thomas Koshy, a lawyer in private practice of 10 years' standing with experience in criminal litigation.

• Mr Anthony Yeo, a Consultant Therapist of Counselling and Care Centre with 35 years of experience in the field of psychological counselling including marital counselling. He is author of over 10 books on marriage, counselling and stress as well as being consultant to various government and non-government organizations.

Who should attend:

All citizens concerned about criminal justice and having a balanced approach towards law and order.

Those interested are requested to come early as we have limited places.

I will be looking forward to your presence at the forum. :)

BERNARD CHEN JIAXI

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL MEMBER OF THE WORKERS' PARTY YOUTH WING.

Singapore, Penal Code, Law, Forum, Workers' Party