Singapore’s Lee Offers Korea Advice

South Korea learns a thing or two on the art of neo-facism:

MAY 20, 2006 02:59
by Mi-Kyung Jung (mickey@donga.com)

Lee Kuan Yew, Minister Mentor of Singapore (former prime minister), stressed, “Korea’s further development into a first-class country in the world hinges on turning the “energy of conflict” into the “energy of harmony.”

At the 20th Inchon Memorial Lecture co-hosted by Dong-A Ilbo and Korea University on May 19, Lee advised that Korea should concentrate its energy on drawing up an agreement between social forces with different opinions and ideas, saying, “Korea is considered the ‘nation of conflict’ by foreigners despite its rapid economic development.” He added, “Korea will be able to develop further if it turns its intense energy deriving from conflicts between employer and employee, and between political parties toward its advance in the global market.”

Visiting Korea again in four years after his first visit in 2002, Lee received an honorary doctoral degree in Politics from Korea University and gave a special lecture on “the key to securing global talent and how to develop into a global university.”

In his lecture, he presented the three conditions of a successful country: leadership, stable political power, and consistent policies.

Lee, who is listed as one of the world-leading political leaders in the twentieth century, also said, “A true leader is one who can devise long-term strategies for the development of education and the economy.”

In the lecture, he warned that Korea’s competitive power against China in the area of high-technology might disappear rapidly with the advent of the “Century of China” thirty or forty years from now.

“To cultivate a global perspective and strengthen Korea’s national competitive power, multilingual ability is the most required. Most of all, master English and Chinese,” advised Lee.

Lee added that an economic alliance would be the general trend despite a continuance of the political conflict among Korea, China, and Japan over historical issues. “Through an ‘East Asian community’ embracing these three countries and the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), we can have our voice heard in our economic negotiations with the United States and EU,” stressed Lee.

- via Singapore Election Watch

Singapore

TNP Strikes Again

I will not traumatise the readers of this blog by copy-pasting the entire article from TNP. To summarise, the articles is yet another report on how gay men spread AIDS through clubs and saunas.

Another door next to the counter leads into the main premises. Through an opening on the door, we saw a few walking around topless with towels wrapped around their waists.

And notice, that TNP bolded the sensational statements - as if the fact that men walked around topless in towels was some unforgivable crime. Heard of locker rooms, anyone?

These illicit clubs advertise their services on the Internet. They also rely on members to bring in new patrons. Whenever a new club opens or an old one closes down, word gets around quickly, one member said...... One operator even proclaimed: 'We are an exclusive club! We don't need any publicity!'

Number one, these clubs are not illicit - they are registered businesses. And what exactly is incriminating about clubs not wanting to advertise?

But there are other health clubs and spas who do legitimate business. And these operators feel the shady joints give the industry a bad name.

The TNP seems to be implying that these gay clubs are the only ones with shady reputations. What about the hundreds of "massage parlours" which serve heterosexual male customers? Aren't these a bigger health risk than one or two gay saunas, at least by sheer numbers and ability to blend in with the legitimate businesses?

Andy said: 'It's always possible that one infected guy goes on to infect others in the club because he is angry and he wants to drag others in.'

It is possible, but not probable. Very few of these people exist - it is mostly an urban myth, of the needle inside the pay-phone, of the girls who hitchhike on motorbikes and give their riders a parting gift.

'If the Government can ban Nation and other gay parties because it thinks that they promote gay sex, how can it turn a blind eye to these men's clubs? The parties are held only once a year, but these clubs are open every day.'

Gay sex =/= promiscuous sex. Gay sex =/= AIDS

If the government can ban Nation and other gay parties because they think it spreads AIDS, why aren't they doing anything about the hundreds of Singaporeans who have paid sex with own girls, right here, around Orchard Towers and Geylang. Why isn't there anything done about Singaporeans travelling overseas and having paid sex with the girls there, in Batam, and other places?

I agree that HIV/AIDS is a real problem, and the gay population, as well as the straight population needs to be educated about the dangers of unprotected sex. But it does not help that papers like TNP run these articles to exploit the shock value, sensationalise the issue, and in the end, we are forced to take two steps back from where we are. Stop pointing fingers - it does not help anyone. Instead, start looking for ways to reach out to people and educate them, gay or straight, without bias. People at the MOH, stop being so darn homophobic and censor gay-affirming outreach programmes.

Until this can be done, they have no right to point fingers at gay men.

Singapore

DEMOCRACY IN SINGAPORE PART II

It doesn't take much to be a rebel in Singapore.

Throw a cigarette out the window, spit on the street.

Or more seriously, be a film student and make a documentary about an opposition leader, or write openly on the internet about being gay.

But increasingly, young Singaporeans are taking more risks and demanding a politically open society, where they're free to express themselves.

And, as Rebecca Henschke reports they're using the freedom of the internet and of music to create a quiet revolution.

Singapore

Nanny state Singapore shows some ankle

SINGAPORE When Lee Chin Koon was a member in the 1930s, the Chinese Swimming Club here offered more than just laps in the pool. There was mah- jongg and blackjack, too.

"We Chinese are gamblers," he told club historians before his death in 1997. "If two lizards scale up a wall, someone would bet on them!"

Lee's son, Kuan Yew, later recalled how after a losing night, his father would come home in a violent rage demanding his wife give him jewelry to pawn. So when Lee Kuan Yew became the first prime minister of independent Singapore in 1959, he hammered on the vice, transforming this once-squalid seaport into a tidy industrial park.

Cigarettes and alcohol are heavily taxed. Drugs traffickers are hanged. Casinos, naturally, were banned.

But Lee Kuan Yew's son, Lee Hsien Loong, is now prime minister. He is striving to shake Singapore's reputation as Asia's nanny state for one that is more tolerant and fun-loving. And one of his signature projects harks back more to his grandfather's Chinese Swimming Club than his father's profit-perfect industrial landscape: the world's most expensive casino complex.

Last year, the government lifted its ban against casinos. Next month it is due to choose from a list that includes some of the biggest names in Las Vegas - Harrah's, Las Vegas Sands and MGM Mirage - to build the first of two planned gambling resorts, a $3 billion extravaganza that will include a casino, entertainment, convention center and hotels.

"What we're really after is to create a compelling, critical mass of attractions and services," said Vivian Balakrishnan, a former eye surgeon who as minister for community development, youth and sports oversees the effort to enliven Singapore.

Singapore's bet is that in return for letting casino operators in, it can lure a world-class tourist attraction that will not only anchor an ambitious new property development but help give Singapore what Prime Minister Lee refers to as the "X-factor" that makes London, Paris and New York such urban magnets.

In many ways, the casino project is a test of Singapore's ability to transform itself once again. It is also a chance for the casino executives to prove their mettle in a new dimension. The question among many casino executives and analysts, however, is whether Singapore has attached so many strings that the projects won't be profitable.

Read more.....

Singapore

New NKF seeks over S$12m in damages from Durai, four others

I guess this means Durai will be down-grading his golden taps to iron. And alas a couple more patients with kidney failure will live at the expense of one man's luxurious handwash. As for this new/old NKF identity, I still patiently await to hear more of what steps they have taken to improve transparency. TT Durai will not go down only as a scapegoat.

SINGAPORE : The new National Kidney Foundation (NKF) management is seeking more than S$12 million in damages in a civil suit against its former chief, three former directors, and a business associate.

Lawyers explain that several unquantifiable claims, upon assessment before the courts, could tip the scales beyond S$12 million.

All the claims were detailed in an 85-page statement to the High Court on April 24, and NKF lawyers Allen & Gledhill say unquantifiable ones make up a substantial portion of it.

The new NKF claims it suffered losses not only through improper payments, but also in its credibility, resulting in a drop in donations and support from volunteers and agencies.

The charity alleges that the loss of its reputation and goodwill in the eyes of the public has resulted in a drop in donations from existing donors as well as those who had cancelled regular donations.

Projects such as the charity shows were also affected and there has been a drop in the number of volunteers and support from medical, government agencies, and corporations, both within Singapore and abroad.

It was therefore seeking compensation for breach of duty from the five defendants, TT Durai [pictured above], Richard Yong, Matilda Chua, Loo Say San, and Pharis Aboobacker.

Said defence lawyer K Shanmugam, "Part of it is quantified; part of it is unquantified. Some parts of it, NKF has put a dollar claim -- what is the claim amount -- and some part of it is a matter for the court to make an assessment after hearing evidence as to how much is the damages."

The quantifiable claims alone amount to:
- S$2.1 million in salaries, bonuses and other benefits "improperly" paid to Durai;
- S$4.08 million for loss of donations in the form of Lifedrops income;
- Over S$556,000 in legal costs incurred when Durai and the old NKF brought a defamation suit against Singapore Press Holdings;
- And S$5.28 million paid to three companies linked to Pharis Aboobacker.

Mr Pharis, a friend of Durai, is in India, where relevant authorities are in the process of serving him the writ of summons.

He is the last of the five defendants to be told he is being sued by the new NKF.

Durai has been given additional two weeks, till May 31, to file his defence.

Richard Yong and Loo Say San filed their defence last Friday, while Matilda Chua is expected to do it at the start of the week.

Failure to file by the stipulated time would allow lawyers for the new NKF to apply for judgment against the relevant defendants.

Channel NewsAsia understands the trial is expected to begin in six to nine months.

Meantime, the criminal cases against Durai, Yong, Chua, Loo, and former NKF staff Ragini Vijayalingam will be mentioned again on June 19 at the Subordinate Courts.

At the pre-trial conference on Monday, the defence asked the prosecution for more documents pertaining to the charges.

- Channelnewsasia

Singapore

From Siam to Singapore Again

"And the relevance of the developments in Thailand to Singapore, however remote, is something to reflect on. I ask again, can Singapore's head of state, the president, play an effective check and balance role in any political crisis in Singapore? Will Singapore's judiciary, objectively settle political disputes without fear or favour?"

Singapore Urban Legends

"Some elections back when the 'Mentor' was PM, he threatened the electorate by saying he would find out why those who voted against the PAP did so. That was in a speech after an election when the public was beginning to be brave enough to rub the dictatorship up the right way. I still remember the sinister and menacing tone when Harry Lee made his open threat."

From A.K. Tan, in comment to Voting must be kept secret

Pleinelune and I went down to the National Archives during the weekend to verify this claim. A.K. Tan has to be referring to the 1984 General Elections, notable for the loss of 2 seats to the opposition JB Jeyaratnam (WP-Anson) and Chiam See Tong (SDP-Potong Pasir). As the election was on 23 December, we checked the Straits Times from 24-27 December.

Results:
There was no account of Papalee issuing threats to find out who voted for whom. The Straits Times in the 1980s had to print every single word of Papalee's speeches; we waded through 5 pages of his election victory speech, printed over 2 days, and found nothing similar to AK Tan's anecdote.

That's not to say there weren't any harsh lectures from the then-PM.

On the morning of 24 December 1984, Papalee made several interesting remarks:

Because they had begun losing seats to the opposition: "at this rate, the one-man, one-vote system could lead to decline and disintegration"

He accused the opposition of "gutter politics": "Every election campaign starts off on a reasonable note, then in order to get the crowds excited, they make more and more brazen, scurrilous, wild accusations." (Like for example, accusing their opponents of planting bombs with their election manifestos?)

Papalee sternly warned the electorate in Potong Pasir and Anson that they would have to live with their choices; "the party would withdraw services to the two opposition-held seats of Anson and Potong Pasir"

Of course, there were the usual admonitions about Singapore descending into riots, that the people must realise this is not a game, you cannot change governments, etc.

However, the best speech came from the recently deceased S Rajaratnam, then Second Deputy Prime Minister in Papalee's cabinet. Said the man wrote the national pledge: "If this is an attempt by voters to blackmail the government, to compromise on important issues or principles, then we must show them we cannot be blackmailed. No government should succumb to blackmail." That was the most chilling quote from the 1984 election, and it didn't come from Papalee.

It was Rajaratnam who made the threat AK Tan remembers. In "Genuine distress or blackmail, asks Raja", the then-2DPM wanted to find out whether the vote swing to the opposition was a genuine distress signal or an attempt by voters to blackmail the Whiteshirts. He then followed up by saying "we must show them that we cannot be blackmailed". Perhaps due to the passage of time, we now have the impression that it was Papalee who threatened "he would find out why those who voted against the PAP did so"?

Now, on that night, with Papalee raised a clenched fist at the microphone during the election victory speech and interview, with Rajaratnam, Mah Bow Tan, Richard Hu taking turns to reiterate their leader's disappointments, one threat would've seemed indistinguishable from the next.

So please, everyone. Let that urban legend rest. Papalee did not threaten to undermine the secrecy of the vote.

Further reading: myth of fairer press coverage in 2006 elections debunked

Singapore

Bad Democracy Awards

From OpenDemocracy






Lee Hsien Loong

Singapore's leadership may be the most pigheaded example of the notion that democracy is little more than a financial inefficiency. Ahead of elections this month, the prime minister continues to rely on the mantra that you can't make an economic omelette without silencing a few eggs. Thus it is that opposition parties are bullied, their leaders persecuted and their supporters intimidated. True, a smattering of democratic pretence has been added to the proceedings, but Lee, like his father before him, has manifestly failed to loosen the political reins. Aiming for a clean sweep in the poll, Lee has even sunk to suing opponents who dared to compare his manner of government to the running of Singapore's opaque National Kidney Foundation.

Click here to vote for LEE HSIEN LOONG
or on the image below.

And look who is already winning.

Spread the word and allow other Singaporeans to take part and vote for whomever they wish.

Singapore

Regional NGOs do not do enough for Singapore’s human rights issues

From Forum-Asia.

Regional NGOs do not do enough for Singapore’s human rights issues, says media and political activist

(Bangkok, 17 May 2006) Regional NGOs (non-governmental organisations) lack proper responses to human rights issues in Singapore, said a media and political activist during a discussion held at the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Thailand on 16 May 2006.

James Gomez, who was also an electoral candidate from the opposition Workers’ Party in Singapore, presented his observations and analysis at an informal discussion session in the Bangkok venue. This was attended by representatives from FORUM-ASIA, SEAPA (Southeast Asian Press Alliance), other organisations and journalists.

“Regional NGOs need to respond in a coordinated, timely and competent manner, and they need to show more interest,” said Gomez, referring to the recent Singapore parliamentary elections and the case involving himself in its aftermath.

Gomez was detained by the Singaporean authorities as he was about to leave the country after the elections, following a complaint by the Elections Department that he had intimated and threatened some of its staff. This was due to an incident arising from an administrative foul-up in his dealings with the department, which was “blown out of proportion” by Singapore’s mainstream media and made into an election issue by the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP). Charges were dropped against Gomez after about a week, and he was allowed to leave the country. He spent a few days in Bangkok to hold meetings with several organisations, en-route to Sweden where he works as a researcher.

Although a few regional NGOs sent representatives separately to observe and monitor the Singapore elections, the lack of appropriately strong responses from regional NGOs led Gomez to question the efficacy of regional organisations such as human rights and press freedom groups. “What is the human rights focus of these groups and how much of a priority is Singapore for human rights issues in the region?” He asked.

He emphasised that there will be a growing “buzz of political party activity” because civil society organisations are weak or almost non-existent in Singapore, so regional NGOs should increase their monitoring of human rights violations committed in particular against individuals from Singapore’s Opposition parties.

Ruki Fernando from FORUM-ASIA said that Singapore needs more activists like James Gomez to stir up public and regional interest, as well as more time to develop this interest. Roby Alampay from SEAPA said that his organisation cannot work with the government-dominated traditional media in Singapore, but sees potential with new media, for example bloggers – people who have personal websites on the internet.

“We can work with bloggers, but they need to have the courage to come out on their own as well,” said Alampay. “Momentum has to come from Singaporean bloggers, and we also need to see trends and progress.”

Lance Woodruff from Thai news agency MCOT said most regional NGOs and civil society organisations do not do much on Singapore not because of a lack of interest or concern. Instead, he said, there is a common perception based on the authorities’ reputation for restrictions: “‘They won’t allow you to do anything anyway, so why bother [to cover Singapore]?’”

Singapore has been ruled by the PAP since its independence in 1965. It is considered a “one-party” or “dominant-party” state, and the recent elections returned the PAP to power on the polling day, 6 May 2006. The Opposition retained its previous two out of 84 seats and did not gain any more seats in parliament.

Singapore

Two SDP leaders resign as party's fate hangs in balance

SINGAPORE: Two SDP leaders resign as party's fate hangs in balance
Singapore Democratic Party leaders send in resignation letters after having made apologies for newsletter defamation

Straits Times
Friday, May 19, 2006

By Aaron Low

Two leaders of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) have thrown in the towel even as the fate of their party hangs in the balance after its leadership decided not to fight a lawsuit brought against them by two People's Action Party (PAP) leaders.

Mr Kwan Yue Keng told The Straits Times yesterday that he and Mr Abdul Rasheed Abdul Kuthus sent in their resignation letters to party chief Chee Soon Juan earlier this month.

Both were among the initial four who apologised to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew for defaming them in articles written in the party's newsletter.

Meanwhile, several other SDP leaders, including party stalwarts Wong Hong Toy and Christopher Neo, are mulling over their future in politics, especially now that the party faces the real possibility of being closed down.

The SDP has until midnight tonight to file a defence with the High Court against the defamation suit but its leadership, at a central executive committee (CEC) meeting on Wednesday night, had voted against fighting it.

The SDP, its 12-member CEC as well as its printer were issued legal letters on April 21 demanding an apology and damages for articles in The New Democrat that alleged that the two PAP leaders knew about problems at the National Kidney Foundation but covered them up. On April 26, those who did not meet the demands were sued. More have since said sorry, except for Dr Chee and his sister Chee Siok Chin.

In the event that no defence is filed by the SDP, the party will be deemed to have defamed the two PAP leaders.

It will have to pay costs and damages to them and lawyer Leonard Loo expects the amount to be in the six-figure range.

"The suit was filed in the High Court, which means the plaintiffs are claiming at least $250,000. Of course, the final judgment will depend on several factors and the amount awarded may be less," said Mr Loo, 35, from Leonard Loo & Co.

Mr Abdul Kuthus, the SDP treasurer, said the party has only about $100 in its coffers and no other notable assets. Its office in Serangoon is rented for about $600 a month. The SDP was founded 26 years ago by veteran opposition MP Chiam See Tong, who left it in 1996 to form the Singapore People's Party.

Although it faces the prospect of being wound up when it fails to pay the costs and damages from the lawsuit, a precedent involving the Workers' Party (WP) suggests that may not always be the case.

In 1998, the High Court ruled the WP had defamed the organisers of the first Tamil Language Week in an article published in the party's newsletter in 1995.

The 10 members of the organising committee then petitioned to wind up the WP but withdrew it indefinitely a few months later, as they sought other ways to get the money from the party.

In the SDP, some CEC members are clinging to the hope that it can be saved by say, pooling their money to pay for the damages.

Said Mr Wong Hong Toy, 69, who has been with the party for 18 years: "We will probably have a meeting to discuss this when the outcome is known. But if it cannot be saved then I don't think I will join any other party."

Another CEC member, Mr Christopher Neo, 43, plans to continue in politics even if the party is shut down. "I'm still executive director at Think Centre (a civil society group) and I am not ruling out joining other parties," he said.

Date Posted: 5/19/2006

Singapore