Report from the Straits Times:
POLICE on Monday arrested two Singaporean activists for staging a protest in support of Myanmar nationals allegedly being forced to leave the city-state for involvement in political activities.
Seelan Palay and Chong Kai Xiong stood outside the Ministry of Manpower’s building in the city’s business district for about an hour before they were handcuffed by police without showing any resistance.
They wore red T-shirts and held a banner that read ‘Stop ill-treatment of Burmese activists’.
The protest was in support of two Myanmar nationals, Moe Kyaw Thu and Win Kyaw, whose work permits have not been renewed by Singapore, effectively forcing them to leave, Palay said.
He said the two men were among 40 Myanmar nationals who took part in a protest against their country’s ruling junta during a summit of Southeast Asian leaders hosted by Singapore in November 2007.
‘We can’t just stand by as Singaporeans, as personal friends, and watch them being expelled one by one,’ he said.
Full report on the Straits Times.
Update: TOC has just learned that the activists have been released from the police station (6pm, Jan 12).
———
In the past they justified their abuse of human rights by saying it is dangerous to have more than 5 people gathering. They had the illegal gathering law.
Today it has come to this, even 2 persons also cannot. The law is ignored and the police do what they want.
2 Singaporeans protesting at MOM cannot!
100 foreign workers protesting at MOM can!
Is this still my country?
Actually there is no crime in wearing red T-shirts, standing side by side, having a banner that says “stop ill-treatment of Burmese activists” Where is the crime? In fact, the govt should encourage these two as they are promoting compassion, love and understanding. Isn’t that what the govt has been talking about and trying to knock it into our heads all the time? What about the talk of being gracious? How does the govt expect people to be kind and loving when they themselves are not behaving thus?
The law states 5 or more. So under what statute were these two arrested under? Disorderly conduct? Public nuisance?
2) JohnnyKid on January 12th, 2009 6.15 pm
2 Singaporeans protesting at MOM cannot!
100 foreign workers protesting at MOM can!
They cannot handle anything more than 100 pax so better give in, or else they have to call in an army battalion to do the work. 2 pax, easy lah, just call in 10 to arrest 2, pow chiak!
Our mini-stars must be regreting giving PR status to so many foreigners. They think they can control these foreigners the same way they control S’poreans. They think these foreigners are as docile as S’poreans.
Tan,
“In fact, the govt should encourage these two as they are promoting compassion, love and understanding.”
Compassion love and understanding can only happen under govt sactioned charities like NKF and RenCi.. oops…
Selamat,
I hope IBA donche criticise singapore anymore.
K
So what were they being charged under? I really want to know.
5 people cannot, 2 people cannot, next time we go out walk walk with a friend also can kena charge.
what bull?
i suspect some have already tak boleh tahan to a point
where their resentment have translated into action.
Probably under Public Nuisance (Miscellaneous Act) although the irony is that 2 men with a signboard are much, MUCH less a nuisance than a battalion of Police Officers descending on them…
They have been charged under criminal trespassing. Clearly shown in the picture(s), Seelan and Kai Xiong DID NOT enter the building so I wonder how that could ever be possible.
Its a truely sad day for Singapore to have 2 of its young peace loving people arrested for doing some thing which they strongly believe in…
But how come those Chinamen are not arrested? Are the authorities afraid of the Chinamen? Where is the sense of justice and fairness?
These Police officers can be heavy-handed. And looking at past incidents, there is some form of discrimination. Like against opposition party members.
Why u so like dat?
I think our police force is such a joke!
Hi I’d like to remind TOC and readers that the report is not written by Straits Times, the entire article was written originally by AFP.
All ST did was add the photo. So it is featured on ST’s site, their story will probably be out tomorrow.
let’s all be very clear on this. this is the way “FAMILY” is being treated, as pm was asserting kinship just the other day.
apparently in a “FAMILY”, children are taken to task while guests can do so with impunity.
this is utter national disgrace.
What fairness is there in our laws and court when it is selectively applied….. the justice system here sucks !!!!
I think SP and CKX would have done better if they had:
a. protested opposite MOM
b. walk in protest instead of standing still
c. use worn-out cardboard with marker-written protest messages.
d. held crutches under both arms
Take a leaf from the DBS woman. She wasn’t arrested for trespassing along Raffles Place and she got her message across as well.
The intepretation of civil law is becoming another laughing stock, as laughable as our kangaroo court, which will now take over from here.
Who say these two poor guys cannot be arrested,..the Home Affair Min said can so what can u do. The china FWs were not arrested, the Home Affair Min said cannot because they are afraid of enraging the big brother’s children.
what a shame…..only dare to take on own citizens protesting infront of MOM and not those FTs who also protested infront of MOM……
foreign workers have to go back to their country anyway. that’s why singaporeans who protest have to be arrested….
This is sad. All they did was wearing a red Tee and signs. You can’t get arrested for that…Two people is not a protest. Hope they’re alright …
Check out the joint statement by MHA and MOM as posted on the MOM website – http://www.mom.gov.sg/publish/momportal/en/press_room/press_releases/2009/20090112-Joint_statement.html
“3. A handful of Myanmar nationals here however has decided not to observe this basic obligation of respecting the laws of the land and the local sensitivities of its people. They have shown in their actions and attitude a wilful disregard and contempt for the law and the Singapore authorities. In fact, some of them who have acted in this manner, notwithstanding their having benefited from education subsidies and the hospitality of Singaporeans, even demand the right to stay in Singapore as if it is a matter of their personal entitlement. They threaten to lobby political pressure through the media and agitate foreign public opinion against the authorities so as to compel them to concede to their demands. These persons are not welcomed in Singapore. They should leave Singapore once their existing passes expire. They are free to leave for any country of their choice or any country which will have them.
4. Our laws apply equally to every person. No one is allowed to break the law with impunity regardless of how morally superior he thinks his cause is.”
Wow! Doesn’t it sound condescending and high-handed? I’m suprised that an official statement carries such powerful emotions and is far from being objective. How do the authorities know what the person thinks (“morally superior he thinks”) or if he/she broke the law with “impunity” and considered it “a personal entitlement”? It could have been simply a case of desperation, isn’t it.
For authorities that pride themselves on being objective and impartial, this statement reveals all sorts of negative feelings…
Section 441 Chapter 224 (Penal Code)
Criminal Trespass
Whoever enters into or upon property in the possession of another with intent to commit an offence or to intimidate, insult or annoy any person in possession of such property, or having lawfully entered into or upon such property, unlawfully remains there with intent thereby to intimidate, insult or annoy any such person, or with intent to commit an offence, is said to commit “criminal trespass”.
Section 447 Chapter 224 (Penal Code)
Punishment for Criminal Trespass
Whoever commits criminal trespass shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 3 months, or with fine which may extend to $1,500, or with both.
***
I think the 2 guys are first timers and would expect a verbal warning. However, they might be fined, in which case, $3,000 ($1,500 x 2) will be need to be made available. Would someone consider setting up and manning an Activist Fund for this purpose (and future occurrences, if any)?
However, the courts could very well apply the Kangaroo T-shirt Case style and demand an apology from the 2 and when they don’t apologise, consider it as being unremorseful and use it as justification for a prison sentence.
One Country, Two system.
This Country has once again show that they care/respect the foreigners more than its own Singaporeans.
16) Clarification on January 13th, 2009 1.54 am
Hi I’d like to remind TOC and readers that the report is not written by Straits Times, the entire article was written originally by AFP.
All ST did was add the photo. So it is featured on ST’s site, their story will probably be out tomorrow.
———————–
i wonder is it true that ST is slower than AFP for report in singapore news in this case? could someone conform for me?
thankyou.
To comment 26) Joseph Ong,
Martyn See’s latest blogpost might be a good show of that – http://singaporerebel.blogspot.com/2009/01/one-country-two-systems-part-lll.html
It’s just technicality to CYA – seen it many times already, especially for reports on Temasek.
If ST report on the matter – they become accountable for the information. If they quote another news agency, they are only accountable in making sure it is a credible or bona fide news agency without having to worry about the actual content or facts as stated.
In this way, ST can report a sensitive local story without having to worry about anyone taking them to task for not practising self-censorship.
ST report in Home Section of today’s paper. Small article with no photo, although it is their own photo they used for the online version using AFP’s article.
i wonder is it true that ST is slower than AFP for report in singapore news in this case? could someone conform for me?
It is likely the two protesters informed the foreign press only. If they informed the local press, the police might be tipped off.
Remember the press statement from the police when the media reported minibond investors planned to gather at DSB HQ?
How I wished the foreign press had been there and show this to the global
audience for the world to see. The more they say they are opening up with
all these tokenism (HL park protest, political videos etc), the more they are
tightening the lid on expression.
Its Uniquely Singapore, a democracy that runs like a communist dictatorship.
What bugs me is that the official statement jointly issued by MHA and MOM is a bit rude and showing too much air of negative stigma and personal feelings against the Mynamar nationals (who protested about their own government in Nov 2007), instead of just being professional and objective about the facts of what happened.
33) Akhayar
At least the elites are consistent. They always talk down to sg or foreign peasants with the same arrogance and self-righteousness.
Pecking Order of People in Singapore:
1. Elites in government (e.g. Ministers) and business (e.g. C.K. Tangs boss)
2. Associates of Elites (scholars, upper class)
3. White people from 1st world countries
4. Elites from influential developing countries (e.g. China, India)
5. Rich people or professionals without connections (e.g. rich bosses, doctor)
6. Foreign average joes from influential developing countries (e.g. students, professionals from China, India)
7. Foreign average joe citizens from non-influential countries (e.g. Malaysia, South Africa, Brazil, etc)
8. Foreign labourers from China and India
9. Singapore average joe citizens <- I AM HERE!
10. Foreign labourers
.
.
.
10000000000. Activists and non-PAP politically involved people
“At least the elites are consistent. They always talk down to sg or foreign peasants with the same arrogance and self-righteousness.”
in other words, they are consistently rude, arrogant and self-righteous.
I agree. would one person protesting also constitute a protest? the police force is a joke.
I am going to stand for the next ge. wish me luck please.
2 persons with signboard. And the policemen came. They sure know how to deploy national resources.
No wonder limping MAS knew better not to show them the signboard, and the whole nation of armed forces was not able to get him.
“I agree. would one person protesting also constitute a protest? the police force is a joke.”
well, stupid system will make average intelligent or very smart people look like clowns. Fee glad that you are able to have very good circus shows for free.
no wonder they crave for the need of foreign talents as we do have plenty of clowns here.