From Human Rights watch.
British author’s critique of death penalty leads to arrest
(New York, July 28, 2010) – Singapore officials should cease using criminal defamation and contempt laws to silence government critics, Human Rights Watch said today. The arrest of Alan Shadrake, the 75-year-old British author of Once A Jolly Hangman: Singapore Justice in the Dock, a critical review of Singapore’s death penalty law and its administration, further narrows the space for reporting and analysis of issues the government prefers to keep under tight control, Human Rights Watch said.
On July 16, 2010, the day before the book launch, the Media Development Authority, responsible for regulation of Singapore’s media and publishing industry, filed a police complaint against Shadrake for criminal defamation and contempt of court. The defamation charge is still under investigation. On the same day, Singapore’s attorney general submitted an affidavit saying that Shadrake should be “committed to prison or receive such other punishment … for his contempt of court … for bringing into existence, publication and distribution of the Book which contains passages that scandalize the Singapore Judiciary.” Supporting documents add that passages “undermine the authority of the Singapore courts and public confidence in the administration of justice…” If convicted, Shadrake faces a potential two-year sentence and fines.
“Free speech is an endangered species in Singapore,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “It’s sadly predictable that the government did not hesitate to threaten prosecution, fines, and imprisonment against an author whose views run contrary to its own.”
Authorities arrested Shadrake, a death penalty opponent, on July 18, seized his passport, and released him on bail the following day. The court hearing on the contempt charge is set for July 30, but in the interim the 75-year-old author has been subjected to several days of police interrogation without benefit of counsel. Shadrake stated that the lengthy interrogation sessions left him exhausted, and his lawyer reported that he had been placed on a heart monitor.
Once a Jolly Hangman is based on interviews with a longtime executioner at Changi Prison who has now retired and with dozens of lawyers and death penalty opponents. Shadrake also reviewed years of court case files. He is outspoken in his suggestion that Singapore death penalty sentencing decisions are not always made through impartial and independent examination of the alleged crimes.
Human Rights Watch considers criminal penalties for defamation to be disproportionate and unduly harmful to freedom of expression. Many states have abandoned such laws, recognizing that civil defamation is generally adequate to protect the reputation of others.
Scandalizing the court, the contempt charge applied in Shadrake’s case, is a relic of British colonial law no longer in use in the UK or in other commonwealth countries such as Brunei, Hong Kong, New Zealand, and Canada, but retained in Singapore. And although Singapore’s constitution protects free expression, it also specifically protects against contempt of court.
Another well known case was that of the academic Christopher Lingle and the International Herald Tribune, who were fined for contempt when Singapore’s High Court deemed that a reference in an October 7, 1994 op-ed article to “intolerant regimes” and a “compliant judiciary” could only refer to Singapore. In the 2009 case of Attorney-General v. Hertzberg, the High Court rejected the proposition that contempt had to pose a “real risk” to the administration of justice and affirmed that conviction could be based merely on the “inherent tendency” of words to suggest bias, impropriety, or other judicial wrongdoing.
“All the government’s action will do is jail yet another author, while ensuring that Shadrake’s book will be a best seller outside Singapore, most likely in Southeast Asia’s airport bookstores” Robertson said.
Although media reports state the book is not banned in Singapore, it is apparently hard to purchase because the government has advised bookstores not to stock it.
The death penalty is a touchy issue for Singapore officials, who rigorously defend the state’s mandatory death penalty for murder, treason, and some 20 drug-related offenses. The latest high-profile case on Singapore’s death row involves a Malaysian, Yong Vui Kong, due to be executed in August for a drug-related offense committed when he was 19. Singapore refuses to make public statistics on executions in the city-state, but is believed to have one of the highest per capita execution rates in the world. Human Rights Watch opposes capital punishment in all circumstances because of its cruel, inhumane, and irreversible nature.
Singapore’s drug law, which carries a mandatory death penalty for some offenses, also fails to meet international human rights standards, Human Rights Watch said. The mandatory nature of this penalty effectively obstructs judges from considering the circumstances of a case or handing down lighter sentences. The United Nations special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions has stated that the death penalty should under no circumstances be mandatory by law, regardless of the charges involved.
“If the government is truly concerned with protecting its reputation, it could do better than to jail authors and execute drug offenders,” Robertson said. “Abandoning criminal punishment for defamation and prosecutions for criticizing the judiciary would be a good start.”
For more Human Rights Watch reporting on Singapore, please visit:
http://www.hrw.org/en/asia/singapore
Related posts:
- Breaking News: Gopalan Nair pleads guilty to contempt charges
- WP: Political films “an expression of diverse opinion in a healthy democracy”
- The legal canon of death
- Gopalan Nair denies charges
- $2 billion in PAP town councils’ sinking funds but need to increase charges?
I am not surprised what the Spore govt does.
Nor does anyone else I suppose.
Its THEIR country. The people just happen to live in it.
But I would have thought..the govt would have ignored it. They would have instructed the lap dog ST not to print anything about it..and the story would never have surfaced in S’pore. Instead they chose to give the international community another laugh about Singapore.
Or if they really want more cred..they should have instructed ST to write a counter article about it. This way,..it would have been fair..for all to see and judge.
(unless of course there is no one at ST who can write an article..like that. That is possibly true.)
Its a laugh when they say. the book is not banned in Singapore, but is apparently hard to purchase because the government has advised bookstores not to stock it.
After all, which bookshop will. If they still want to be in business , after.
time to think of of the box, why not use science (bio-med) to fight drug addiction instead?
that would thumb the drug cartels at their noses, knowing that people will no longer be addicted to those stuff!
Those who are afraid of the light, will do their best to keep everyone and everything in the dark.
This will allow these perpetrators to perform their evil deeds so as to achieve their own agendas.
Welcome to Singapore – a First World created by politicians with a Third World mentality.
Imagine this being New York City, with “Robert Mugabe” – [in his better days] – and a select team of “Mynamar Generals” running the entire city according to their preferred ways.
“[T]hreat to freedom of expression” implies there is “freedom of expression”. Come on leh.
You mean got “freedom of expression” here?
this is a tool a ver strong tool that the government can’t let it go. if they do so,then they will be doom in no time as the truth will be out.
singaporeans have been too weak or fear to battle against them include PAP. this had silent many singaporeans in anger towards the government.
year after years MM LEE changes and the evil side of him appear to be seen but not to be question or touch as he is holding a tool of defamation suit and imprisonment and other deadly tool that no one would even think of getting near him. this had make him even stronger and heartless.
he had run the country like a ‘’singapore pte ltd as mention by some.
it is true indeed. similar if work in a company and you are to listen and take order and only sharing the right things. if you were to voice up,discuss,publish any company bad issue you will be terminate.
this is singaporeans force to live with the only option if things go very down for them would be suicide.
suicide if the only way to walk away from this goverment wrong doing and heartless act for some. i wouldn’t support the idea of suicide but when one have come to that state would they ever think the same as a normal human being? would they feel hope when they are being turn down by the government and their organization( PAP ) itself?
i didn’t see any of a single issue of this news in online citizen that had been publish in straits times. the reason? defamation suit/imprisonment/fine/charges.
if free speech and publication will be given the green light, the government will have to face lots of act and defamation suit/imprisonment and charges against them from the way they run the country and wonder what is hidden on they backyard and their cronies PAP.
we urge singaporeans to consider this coming GE to vote wisely and not vote out of fear which will ruin your future and love ones along with other singaporeans. one singaporeans make alot of different.
if this is what singaporeans are happy to live with then go as you like and prepare to endure the bigger bites you going to face in future. don’t be surprise it make come right after the winning of the election if they win.
we want singapore our singapura and not singapore pte ltd.
first class government and singapore?how about Singaporeans?
1 class government and singapore? singaporeans leh?
we inherited this from the british, so good, what else did we inherit ???
i hope the maker will come soon to punish all evil doers….there is no 2nd chance or 7777 chance….
power crazy people are condemm to hell.
Conrade Castro would be proud of us.
Well folks…just a gentle reminder…
PAP Government is PAP Government.
PAP Governement is just a party appointed Government of Singapore.
PAP Government is not the same as Singapore Government…since only 66% out of 43% actual singapore voters vote for the PAP party.
Irony here is in a parliament of 84 MPs…82 are PAP…and only 2 are opposition.
Makes you wonder how come 66% out of the 43% actual voters we can arrived at a figure of 82 PAP MPs out of 84 MPs in parliament.
Really nuts or contrived lah.
@let me go 29 July 2010
1 class government and singapore? singaporeans leh
ANSWER BELOW,
http://www.temasekreview.com/2010/07/28/ypap-leader-jack-lin-xinli-clarified-his-3rd-class-citizen-remarks-on-cna/
Supposing some other opposition party like WP or SDP is now in power and play all these kind of dirty politic tricks like what PAP is doing now, ask ourselves this fundamental question :
Can we accept that ?
So why should we allow PAP to get away with playing dirty politics and causing such harm to Singapore ?
1st class casinos 3rd class human rights?
The really sad thing is: THE SINGAPORE GOVERNMENT IS USING OUR TAX MONEY TO PROSECUTE PEOPLE WITH OTHER OPINIONS!!!
@Alan Wong..that is a good question.
Answer:
Simply..do what millions of people in free societies do..at elections.. oust some big names in the govt. DONT TALK ABOUT IT.DO IT.
VOTE..for the opposition. This will give the PAP a jolt. MAYbe..just maybe..they wil understand that we are all grown up.
Because no point wasting time and writing to the forum of the lap dog ST. They owe their licence to the PAP.
And who is their boss there in any case!!
I still wonder if it has anything to do with the death penalty itself. If the PAP wanted to silence death penalty critics, then wouldnt this site be a much bigger target than Shadrake.