Tuesday, August 26, 2008 5:26
Of concessions and tokenism, worrying trends in policy making
In Guest Writers, Main Stories, TOC Feature, Top Story • 163 views • 20 Comments
Breaking News: Malaysiakini reports that Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim has won the Permatang Pauh by-election with a majority of 16,210 votes. He garnered 26,646 votes while Arif Shah Omar Shah got 10,436. Anwar’s wife, Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, won the seat with a 13,388 majority at the March 8 general elections. Malaysiakini.com is down at the moment due to “extremely high traffic”. You can read Reuters and the Sydney Morning Herald’s reports. “Malaysian govt concedes by-election defeat to Anwar” – Channel NewsAsia.
John Ang / Guest Writer
Singapore is once again stuck doing strange things in order to both “stick to her guns” and “move with the times”.
The Government’s position is that they will gradually open up and liberalise Singapore and so far, they have kept their word. But realistically, it is a no-brainer. It is in their own best interest to do it, lest two things occur. Either the populace chafes under archaic laws until they’re ready to boot the current political party out and replace it with a new one, or the Government manages to keep the populace under its boot heel, but turns Singapore into a likeness of some Middle Eastern countries: great for business, but not as a place to live and express yourself.
Having established that there is nothing much to cheer over the recent liberalisation of our laws, I’ll move on to the speed of these changes, and I believe that the Government is starting a worrying trend in that it only waits until laws are hopelessly obsolete (i.e., everybody is breaking them and making a mockery of the rule of law) before starting the machinery to make amendments.
The ban on political videos comes to mind, and I shall elaborate on it later. Sometimes, the laws aren’t even changed, and the general population simply has to take the Government’s word in trust that “we will keep this [obsolete] law for conservatism’s sake, but it shall not be proactively enforced.” It is made to seem like our government is liberal in spirit, but not in the laws that it creates.
Dredging up some history, the saga in repealing Section 377A of the Penal Code, which criminalises sex between mutually-consenting adult men, started off in fact with a comprehensive review of the Singapore Penal Code in order to “better [protect] the more vulnerable in society and to take into account technological advancements and crime trends“. Yet after vigorous public debate, the Government decided to keep it verbatim for conservative reasons, but stated they wouldn’t proactively enforce it.
In a lesser-known area, this liberal in spirit but not in word of law trend seems to repeat itself, this time with regards to drug trafficking and the death penalty (Yawning Bread). In that article by Alex Au, the prosecution allegedly arbitrarily changed the amount of heroin smuggled from 18.4 grams to 14.99 grams, just 0.01g below the threshold for the mandatory death penalty, allowing the traffickers to escape the gallows. The facts and motivations around this case are not set in concrete as it was not widely reported, but it looks to me that as the world is moving towards abolishment of capital punishment, Singapore is once again stuck doing strange things in order to both “stick to her guns” and “move with the times”.
In his recent National Day rally, PM Lee declared that laws concerning political videos would be liberalised, and that outdoor demonstrations would be given a place at the Speakers’ Corner (and to make the touch even lighter, the National Parks Board (NParks) would be managing it). In view of the previous positions held by both of PM Lee’s predecessors, this is tantamount to the slaughter of not one, but two sacred cows. In this light, it is a giant leap forward (to unabashedly splice Armstrong and Mao together), since the thought of this happening even a year ago shared equal measure with the thought of putting a Singaporean on the moon. That’s the giant leap for mankind part.
Yet this liberalisation is a mere concession on the Government’s part, since it already has an explosion of homemade political videos and small, peaceful demonstrations kicking around in its backyard, and it would be unthinkable to set the police on the man simply uploading a video of an opposition rally, or arresting people holding candlelight vigils.
But if we take this round of liberalisation as a victory and grow comfortable walking hand-in-hand with the Government down the path of being liberal in spirit but not in our laws, we could end up losing more freedom than we’ve actually gained. Perhaps in the future, police would conceivably actually arrest people holding candlelight vigils because they did it in a location other than the Speakers’ Corner. That’s the Great Leap Forward bit: done with good intentions, but ending as an absolute disaster.
We may meet them halfway, but we cannot stop: we must keep on pushing for more. We must keep pushing for laws to be brought more in line with the way we want our society to work, not how we can compromise. We must keep calling for the changes in our laws to take place before, not after, half the population of the island can viably be classified as criminals. We must.
————-
Related posts:
20 Comments
Overseas Singaporean
chenel
We have waited for 43 years, why is there the need to rush things. why not take a back seat and see how things goes. Every new introduction or amendments need time to be adjusted. Let’s not jump into conclusion assuming that things will never change.
Overseas Singaporean
Precisely it is because Singaporeans have waited 43 years for the government to change, that has caused the pace of change to be glacial to be point of non-existent. I believe that it is precisely because a small group of activist Singaporeans have in the recent years started pushing the boundaries, along with the attendant bad press that the government has got when they try their sledgehammer tactics, that has caused the pace of change to pick up recently.
Yawning Bread has reported that some of the Burmese dissidents have gotten their visas renewed in the past 2 days, after the press conferences/online coverage about their plight. One can only wonder if this would have happened had they “sat back and waited” to see what happens after appealing through official channels and not publicised the issue.
Sing Lang
The fact that many people, Singaporeans especially, think that efforts of Chee SJ and his co-protesters are stupid should stand up and take notice. If you do not rock the boat, will the PAP govt want to give in?
Kudoes to all these brave people.
Daniel
Has Dr Chee not face JOker Lee and senile Old man in court, will these clowns ever open up and allow protest after been exposed by International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute ? Dr Chee and his accomplices have sacrifice their jail terms to exert international pressure on the coffers, and liberalise Singapore in a radical way.
Look like the clowns regret not asking for summary judgement. Who will have thought the court hearing audio is been recorded and leaked out ? Look like gahmen never learn Murphy’s law. Anything that will go wrong can go wrong.
idontthinkappreciated
i do not think his effort is ever appreciated by the majority whose decisions gave us the status quo. whether this is good or not, i do not feel i am not at liberty to comment.
i find it interesting that the article compares spore to middle east ….hmmmm…first time i hear such comparisons. Refreshing!
well done.
Tew N S
Protest in Hong Lim Park is as good as going to Choa Chu Kang cemetery to protest. This govt treats us like an idiot.!!!
lim
Get an inch, want a yard. That’s life.
When we bring up children, we encourage the kids whenever they do something right even when its a small step or a garbled message. Surely, we don’t expect 6 month babies to start walking immediately.
Political openess in Singapore is in its infancy. We may disagree on the pace but anything in the right direction should be encouraged.
The SS
Lim; 1:04pm
The whole yard and more , in fact the whole playground, belonged to all citizens under the Constitution (original) until later sub-sections curtailed our rights? I am no legal expert but from what I gather this seems to be the interpretation.
If true, it’s like a father taking all your toys away then give you an arm and a leg back… you go play with that yourselves.. get the picture?
Your starting point is wrong.
lim
Before saying someone is wrong, it might be a good idea to check facts. Don’t be like Chee. Shoot first, shoot wrongly. Too late to take back bullets.
Section 14 of the constitution relating to assembly has never been amended.
You may want a playground but its not been built….
Of course, you could be Chee then in which case, the accuracy (or lack of) is understandable.
berak bagus
@ lim,
you picked on chee, how about your take on the IBAHRI report that cast doubts on the judiciary and LKY ? This is a far more serious matter. right ?
lim
I’m not picking on anyone. Just merely stating facts. Remember Chee going on about the indonesian loans? lol.
Since everyone is hiding behind a pseudonym, “the SS” could be Chee for all I know.
As to the Ibahri report, that was an LKY mistake (rare but acknowledged) but I’m pretty sure LKY wouldn’t be posting on this site. I think it’d be pretty dumb for me to assume “the SS” is LKY but you have the right to think so.
JACKSON
I dare the govt to legalise demonstrations outside Istana.
Both the police n Nparks are controlled by govt, so in the end it’s still the same.
free
once choose opposition party everything is free of charge and free
I think it’s a good start, albeit a baby step forward. I believe that as we engage each other more in online forums and blogs, they will have to return us what is due – the rights that are in the Constitution.
The best way to push the govt to liberalize is to make good use of the freedoms we already have. It’s time we stop debating about freedom as if it’s an end in itself. Freedom is but a tool to push for a more democratic, a more just and a more equal society.
I think Singaporeans have made good use of the freedoms we had on the Internet. We need to spread that to real life now. Based on statements from the government, I think the liberalization of rules at Speakers’ Corner is more than sufficient for Singaporeans at this point.
Daniel
“I dare the govt to legalise demonstrations outside Istana.”
I looking forward to that day people protesting while prataman making free prata for every vistor there. It is a cheap job for prataman that takes $4 millions per year.
RH:
1. I have long noticed that LIE KY, who is still very much in charge of everything [can he ever let go? including deciding whether HDB flats should have squatting or sitting toilet bowls} deliberately keeps all the laws no matter how stupid or obsolete SO AS TO CRIMINALISE EVERYBODY, REPEAT, EVERYBODY, SO THAT HE HAS A HOLD OVER ANYONE WHO DISPLEASES HIM.
2. By making everyone a criminal, the moment that person displeases him with a blog posting or a comment, not to mention actual activist demo against his policies, LIE KY HAS THE UPPER HAND, WITH THE ADVANTAGE OF FILING ACTUAL CRIMINAL CHARGES. Even if he does not file charges, this still gives him the luxury of doing so anytime later, at will. Good for blackmail and intimidation.
3. When you realise that LIE KY’s entire lawmaking and law enforcing is done PURELY TO ENTRENCH HIS POWER AND TO GIVE HIM EVERY POLITICAL ADVANTAGE, then you realise the real reasons behind all his actions and policies. Then you realise that the above discussion is way way off. It is not at all about liberalisation or about giving way a little in fact if not in name. It is all about CRIMINALISING EVERYBODY TO GIVE LIE KY THE ADVANTAGE AND THE LUXURY TO PRESS CRIMINAL CHARGES FOR PERSONAL OR POLITICAL REASONS.
123
I am glad that PAP have finally decided to take the small step out
but I feel that it’s still not enuff.
There are so much more which can be done.
Such as the Section 377A of the penal code, I do not agree with PAP stand.
And it’s useless to protest because once they made up their mind, no 1 can change it.
but at least they have try, I can only hope that a more flexible system could be setup to truly reflect on what we as citizens want from the govt.
Towards a more emphathetic civil service : Civic Advocator * Shout and be heard in Singapore
[...] 120,000? I guess his “empathy” will take a while to manifest itself. We know that tokenism is a hallmark of the government. Is this is yet another indication of [...]
Well said, this World Class/Division 1/best-thing-since-sliced-bread government has shown time and again the will not change until their laws/stance has been shown repeatedly to be dumb, out of touch and ridiculous. Well done to all involved for their efforts.
Working “within the system” for change will bring you nowhere.