Latest: Alan Shadrake visited the Gleneagles hospital on Saturday. TOC understands he has been advised to wear a heart monitor for 24 hours starting Tuesday as his heart is weak.
Excerpts from the British Weekly’s interview with author of Once A Jolly Hangman, Alan Shadrake:
“Although they are giving me a very gruelling time here – every day I am interrogated for eight to ten hours, often covering the same ground - I would write the book again in a heartbeat. I am not allowed to have an attorney to be present when I am questioned. But I’m not going to be cowed. I’m looking forward to my day in court.
“I feel I am making history with this book. I have had messages of support from all over the world. I have the British government, Amnesty International and the Committee to Protect Journalists on my side and I’m hopeful I will prevail.
“Everything I have written is true. There is a wave of change coming in this country. It’s time for Lee Kwan Yew to stop running Singapore like his own private fiefdom.”
Read the interview here: British Weekly.
—————-
Letter by Mr M Ravi, counsel for Mr Alan Shadrake:
Criminal Investigation Department
391 New Bridge Road
Police Cantonment Complex
Block C
Singapore 088762
23th July 2010
RE: ALAN SHADRAKE
Dear Sir,
We are instructed on behalf of our client to request that you allow our client to rest for 48 hours prior to taking instructions to defend him in the forthcoming proceedings.
We are further instructed to place on record serious concerns regarding the impact on the physical health and mental well-being which your unrelenting interrogation appears to be having upon him.
Our client is 75 years old.
He suffers from serious medical conditions which are made worse by stress.
You arrested him on 17th July 2010 and began interrogating him and now although he is on bail, you have subjected him to several hours of questioning for the past 3 days continuously.
You will agree that this is not a case where it is essential in the interests of the security of the State that evidence be gathered urgently before members of the public are injured or before another offence is committed by accomplices. It is not a case where evidence must be gathered immediately in order to prevent evidence being destroyed. Indeed, insofar as the alleged offence consists of a publication, all the facts are already there in front of you. In these circumstances relentless and continued interrogation appears as a form of harassment. As such we are instructed it is unnecessary, inappropriate and ill-befitting Singapore and on his behalf we formally request that it stop immediately.
It appears to us that in a civilised society in which the conduct of the Police and other Prosecutorial Officials is an important measure of the strength of moral and civic virtue, it is unbecoming for those who have the power over individuals who are subject to their custody and subject to their command to act in a manner which results in physical or mental harm or causes undue stress. We therefore must ask you to consider the age and condition of our client and to ensure that he is not subject to untoward stress and alarm.
We reserve the right to bring to the attention of the Court (and to file official complaints in appropriate national and international tribunals) should an independent medical examination indicate that our client’s health has been and is being placed in jeopardy by the conduct of officials under your command.
Yours faithfully,
M. Ravi
cc. client
cc. British High Commission
———————–
Open letter to the authorities: Judicial harassment of journalist is an affront to freedom of expression by the International Federation for Human Rights:
The Honourable Mrs. Koh Juat Jong
Acting Attorney-General
The Attorney-General’s Chambers
Republic of Singapore
Subject: Judicial harassment of journalist, an affront to freedom of expression
Your Excellency,
The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), representing 164 organisations across the world, is deeply concerned about the arrest of and charges leveled against British journalist Mr. Alan Shadrake on 18 July 2010, a day after he launched his book, Once a Jolly Hangman: Singapore Justice on the Dock, which contained evidence suggesting double standards in Singapore’s policy and the use of the death penalty. According to information received, the arrest was made based on a complaint lodged by the Media Development Authority.
According to court documents obtained by the media, your office accuses Mr. Shadrake for making allegations in his book that impugn on the impartiality, integrity and independence of the judiciary. During his detention at a police complex, he was reportedly kept awake for interrogation for extended period of time and he was asked to explain all chapters in his book, his research and the reasons behind authoring the book. Publishing a book of investigative journalism is not a crime, nor is peaceful expression of dissent, and by taking legal action against someone for doing so, Singapore is seriously undermining the freedom of expression and brings into question the independence and integrity of the very institution it is accusing Mr. Shadrake of impugning, namely its judiciary.
While FIDH welcomes Mr. Shadrake’s subsequent release on 20 July after posting bail, we remain troubled about the continued restriction of freedom of expression and the press in Singapore. The arrest and the legal action against Mr. Shadrake is the latest example in a worrying trend of suppression of opposition and criticisms through judicial intimidation. FIDH recalls that “in October 2009, former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew and current Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, successfully brought a defamation suit against the “Far Eastern Economic Review” and its editor-in-chief Hugo Restall for a 2006 article based on an interview of an opposition politician who was critical of the ruling party. There have been other defamation lawsuits filed by the government against international media, including Bloomberg, “The Economist” and “The International Herald Tribune” and “Wall Street Journal”, the latter for allegedly ‘impugning the independence of Singapore’s judiciary’.
The judicial harassment of Mr. Shadrake for authoring a book critical of the use of the death penalty also creates a climate of fear and restricts the openness of the public discussion on sensitive issues, such as the death penalty. Furthermore, it underscores Singapore’s refusal to take note of changing international opinion in favour of abolition of this inhuman practice and of empirical evidence and experience that strongly suggest that the death penalty is not an effective deterrent of crimes.
Singapore’s handling of the case of Mr. Shadrake will be a barometer of its readiness to match its economic progress as the most prosperous nation in ASEAN with strong commitment to adhere to the human rights clauses in the ASEAN Charter as well as the rights guaranteed by the United Nations Universal Declaration for Human Rights. FIDH sincerely hopes Singapore will end the use of judicial action against individuals or organisations peacefully expressing their opinions or dissent regarding governmental policies and actions.
Thank you in advance for taking into consideration our concerns and recommendations.
Sincerely yours,
Souhayr Belhassen
FIDH President
Copied to :
* The Honourable Mr. George Yong-Boon Yeo, Minister for Foreign Affairs
* The Honourable Mr. K. Shanmugam, Minister of Law and Second Minister for Home Affairs
* The Honourable Mr. Mr Lui Tuck Yew, Acting Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts
* The Media Development Authority
I admire his guts. Perhaps he wants to do something good before he leaves this world. He just puts ordinary singaporeans to shame. I am no exception.
In any case, I think the PAP has to grow up and learn that in today’s world, they cannot “enforce desired outcomes” by the elites. The best way forward would be to generate goodwill and let each citizen of singapore self-motivate themselves to make this a happier place to live in.
Alright babe singaporeans,
Lets be unite together as singaporeans ourselves , stop become so complacent anymore. I know out there are other singaporeans not suffering cos financial wise they may not have got the hit yet, but it does not mean that in future it wont hit them.
So lets be real and open up and lets see how we can come together as a united singaporeans to make our PAPPIES really work for us becos SINGAPORE belongs to all true native born singaporeans, and not like that old man says : Singapore belongs to PAP.
Period.
He really say that:’Singapore belongs to PAP’ God will not be very happy. Beware of the thunders strikes.
Yes that old man did says that statement.
And he added somemore that he hold no apologies at all.
What a evil person!
@singaporeans not belong here
do you respect your government back in your own country and obey the rules?
And if you don’t like the rules of the ruling party of your country, you should leave?
Do you think that is the right way? Sometimes, when one complains.. it is because one cares. Think about your own personal complains about things at home or back in your own country.. why do you have issue with it?
Base on your logic.. if I am not happy with this world, I should apply for a seat in a rocket and fly off from this planet? Or do you think perhaps naturally I will make unhappy noises first?
We have different history and background. Not higher, not lower… just different. And because we have different background and history, we have different ways of seeing things. And we want to see different things.
For example, to many natives of third world countries, all they want is clean water and a meal a day. But for first world, they need freedom of speech, expressions, human rights.. etc.
Now although I am sure many know they are fortunate not be sleeping on the streets or starving in the first world, you cannot expect them to feel like a North Korean or someone from Ethiopia..
And neither can the first world expect people from the third world to care about freedom of speech and press, or about the environment or animal rights.
You are reacting with emotions. And while it is good to have emotions, it is wiser to stand back a little and think why certain things are happening. It is easier to see things from your angle.. of course.. just like it is easier for singaporeans to see it from ours.
Whoever is aiming the anger at you or other foreigners just trying to make a living, they are doing it with misplaced emotions, judgement and directions.
I am glad you feel happy here. But I also know your position is being exploited here… and in my opinion, it is not fair and it is morally wrong.
I am also glad that you are reading this website.. and I am sure it is difficult not to read them with emotions… I would find it hard as well. But I do hope, you will be able to read them with different perspective next time.
is there a crime committed at all ?
if there is none, then it is simply an abuse of power against someone who is simply saying things that are not flattering but the truth nonetheless.
and this is the kind of treatment you get.. wtf i say. what the bloody f–k!!
“barometer of its readiness to match its economic progress as the most prosperous nation in ASEAN with strong commitment to adhere to the human rights ”
veryvery true…
would like to see the outcome of this event. Impressed by Alan Shadrake for his firmness. Glad he has so many supporters.
Just ask the British officials to issue a statement that they are going to release more archive documents from the late 1950s till 1965 to inform the world and singaporeans as to what really happened and this case will be dropped in a second.
@wui
1)May we go ” Globalization” train or just “Close Door” lives by ourselves?
2)What history that we may leave for the next generation to study and learn ? “Phobia of Changes” ??
No amount of rationalisation and deliberation will get us anywhere as the Papies has orchestrated their hegonomy over us for many decades.We can take relief that with the help of the “GRACIOUS ONE” we could gain emancipation from their grips sooner then we thought possible.I sense that somthing ominous is about to happen to this slut regime as recently there were many adverse incidents that crop up to the dismay of the Papies.They’ve been scheming,orchestrating and manipulating the political scene for many decades and Heaven forbids such heinous things to go on forever.Let’s wait patiently for the big day to arrive!!!!!
I keep wondering why the gahman has taken this stand. All they had to do was ignore it. By virtually all bookshops afraid to stovck it..plus the fact the the media is controlled..this story would have died.
The 75 year old Brit ..should not hve tried it..knowing the laws of spore.But at least it showed the world AGAIN..how tight control Spore is.
The book must really be something, i heard reports of the Shadrake case on BBC just this morning. And SG was painted badly- if i were a foreigner, i would think it some backward shack where people farm for subsistence.
I think its perfectly valid to critique the justice system if someone notices a problem. How else is justice going to be just if the system is not improved according to times/needs etc. Though Im definitely not brave enough to do so, i’m glad that someone cares enough to publish a seemingly thoroughly investigated book on it. See..limited resources, there’s almost no way to know.
I mean, I’m proud of my country, but when stuff like that comes up, and it will, I don’t know/dare what to say when asked.
If the courts are the best non-violent (mostly) way to resolve problems, then it must be credible. Questions dont erode that credibility, but properly researched/cited case-based questions increase legitimacy of the verdict.
I wonder if Alan interviewed the families of those murdered or wrecked by drug abusers… While I’m uncomfortable with the death penalty, I’ve seen what drugs do to destroy families first-hand… I volunteer at the Prisons.
If Alan’s own family member was brutally murdered, I wonder if he’ll have the magnanimity to say to the murderer, “I don’t want you dead.” I guess it’s always easier to theorise, hypothesise, generalise when you are not the affected party.
By the way, I’m not a PAP supporter.
Hi,
This is my first time here.I could see some brave postings here and some execellent language from pjsandwitch and voteforchange.
You can call me paranoid if you like,but is it to safe to post here?
@Linda
If my family members were brutally murdered – emotionally I would want the perpetrators dead, I would not shed a tear if they were killed accidentally and I would probably even fantasized torture and killing them myself… but still I would not, could not condone the death penalty base on my morality, my principles and knowledge.
I was pro death penalty long time ago for all the reasons you can reasonably think of. However, through the process of listening to counter arguments, through evidence based research, through understanding and learning about the difference between emotional response and moral/ intellectual response.
Of course it will be harder if you are the affected party, but civilization has come a long way.. and I hope it will continue a long way. Civilization has come about from brutality against brutality, to brutality against reasons and enlightened knowledge and maturity. And although uncivilized brutality is still seen in many parts of the world, civilized ways have developed and influenced humanity positively again and again.
I understand the lure and can be attracted innately for what is perceived as fair play since humanity began with the practice or idea an eye for an eye, I have also learned that an eye for an eye makes the world go blind.
I think Alan is knowledgeable enough, mature enough, enlightened enough, complex enough, experienced enough to not give a one dimensional response such as “I don’t you dead” if he is a sufferer of horrible crimes.
In the meantime I will quench my blood thirst, satisfy my fantasies of vengeance from moments to moments when I go to the movies.
I am and always have been a supporter of both the DP and MDP but having read the book in detail I believe that what he has researched deserves to be fully dealt with in debate but that he has been a little guilty of hyperbole just as much as the AGC has.
Firstly even as his book says its ” Singapore’s justice in the docks.” he fails to differentiate between the courts and the AGC or prosecution which decides which charges to bring. Similarly I can’t understand why the AGC is brining charges of contempt of court against him as all his accounts point to well selective prosecutors discretion on the part of the AGC and not how the cases are tried by the courts
Locke
i think the main case against the death penalty is that there’s evidence built up againt a ‘criminal’ might be wrong. A person’s death is obviously irrevocable, and the judgement is handed down through second-hand deductions. That is why i oppose the death penalty on moral grounds for cases that do not have an outright confession.
and voteforchange, that was a bold statement, though i disagree, but i wish more would dare to.
the death penalty is of course THE biggest deterrent, and a means of social justice for those of the ‘one life for a life’ logic.
The issue that shadrake brought up is more of a freedom of expression thing. How else do we even know if we are for or against the death penalty, and when is it called for?
@Linda-you got your views and that is cool democracy. Now about drugs killing people and you having having knowledge is good too. Now is hanging for trafficking and possessionok?. I know lives have been wasted through abuse.Look beyond that and ask did anyone force them to dance with Cocaine, Heroin, Marijuana etc.No never.In the early 60s and 70s there was no programme in Singapore to educate Singaporeans on the dangers of drugs. Later the law cmae and 15gms is death and abusers locked up. Thwe World Health Programme had ways to deal with this. Many countries has humane ways to deal with drugs not the barbaric way. Don’t be part of it.Peace N Love
Thats right, Linda. It just depends on whose bull is gored. With the death penalty and csning in place, drugs and violent crimes still prevail. without it, we can expect worse. The PAP is hand in glove in bringing S’pore from 3rd to 1st world. Who is he, a foreigner to say S’pore does not belong to PAP. What he has done is just a publicity stunt and I will not waste time reading his book ( even if availabe foc )
This web page is known as a stroll-by for all the data you needed about this and didnít know who to ask. Glimpse right here, and also youíll definitely uncover it.