By Lisa Li
Crammed into Post-Museum’s exhibition space, the crowd kept shifting their chairs in to accomodate more and more people–eventually, about 70 people turned up at the forum ‘Politics and Ethnicity: Framing Racial Discrimination in Singapore’, held on 12 Febrary 2011.
Mr James Gomez
Dr James Gomez, the founding Executive-Director of Singaporeans for Democracy, started the forum discussion by presenting his paper “Politics and Ethnicity: Framing Racial Discrimination in Singapore”, which examined the significance of the UN Rapporteur Mr Githu Muigai’s visit to Singapore from 21 to 28 April 2010.
During this period, Mr Muigai met government authorities and members of civil society in order to ‘gather first-hand information on the main issues facing people living in Singapore in relation to racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance’.
The paper was also a timely reminder that Mr Muigai is due to present his findings on Singapore before the UN Human Rights Council and the UN General Assembly in June and November 2011, and–more importantly–that Singaporeans need to take stock of the current situation of race relations, in order to prepare for our response to Mr Muigai’s final report.
PAP’s likely rejection of the UN Rapporteur’s Report
It was noted that ‘in practice, states have often resisted or challenged the findings of the Special Rapporteur’ and the PAP-led Singapore government is not expected to behave differently.
UN Special Rapporteur Githu Muigai
In fact, within a few hours of Mr Muigai’s press conference in Singapore on 28 April 2010, the PAP government made a statement through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) which ‘rejected all of Mr Muigai’s suggestions’.
Although Mr Muigai’s press statement was not made public, his suggestions included allowing for more public debate and discourse, eliminating race from national identity documents in order to de-emphasize racial differences that contribute to racially based policies, and incorporating more flexibility in existing ethnic quotas for HDB housing.
James Gomez documented the PAP government’s rebuttal of Mr Muigai’s suggestions Although MFA stated that it had ‘an open mind’ and was ‘prepared to consider any practical suggestion that advances this goal [of racial harmony]‘, in essence, it showed no genuine interest in accepting or even considering any of the recommendations.
Click here for the full paper ‘Politics and Ethnicity: Framing Racial Discrimination in Singapore’ by Dr James Gomez.
Click here for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ Response to the Press Statement of Mr Githu Muigai, UN Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance.
Creating space for public debate
Moving on from the forum and papers, how should we, as ordinary Singaporeans, respond to the PAP government’s likely rejection of the UN Rapporteur’s report?
In response to Mr Muigai’s call for greater openness in the public discussion of sensitive issues, MFA’s statement was that they ‘emphatically disagree’ with his suggestion because ‘race, language and religion will always be sensitive issues in Singapore’ and while ‘this does not mean that they cannot be discussed, a balance must always be struck between free expression and preservation of racial and religious harmony’.
Race and religion are viewed as sensitive topics, and the status quo in Singapore seems to be to avoid criticism or any extensive public discussion of race-based practices or government policies.
Ironically, Singapore’s Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew himself recently provoked the anger of many with his free expression in his book ‘Hard Truths To Keep Singapore Going’.
In this book, he referred to Muslims’ preference in eating and dining separately (so that the halal and non-halal food would not get contaminated) as a ‘social divide’, and urged the Malay-Muslim community to be less strict in their practice of Islam. Besides that, MM Lee also said that the Malays will never be able to bridge the gap between educational attainments with Indians and Chinese.
Not surprisingly, MM Lee’s comments were viewed as racially divisive, and on 27 January 2011, the Association for Muslim Professionals (AMP) released a statement that MM Lee’s comments had ‘hurt the [Malay-Muslim] community and are potentially divisive’.
Yet, these comments by MM Lee received little beyond mild rebuke from PAP politicians.
On 29 January 2011, the Minister-in-Charge of Muslim Affairs Dr Yaacob Ibrahim urged Muslims to take Mr Lee’s comments in perspective. “Let’s look at this rationally, read the book and understand where he’s coming from… At the end of the day, he has a certain perspective. That perspective may not be accurate now, maybe 40 years ago. So that’s where I disagree with him, as I mentioned, in the book. That the reality on the ground is people are working together side by side”.
On 31 January 2011, it was reported in the Straits Times that Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said “My own perspective on how things are in Singapore… is not quite the same as MM’s… Muslims are a valued and respected community, who have done a good deal to strengthen our harmony and social cohesion”.
What do we make of MFA’s rejection of free expression and extensive public discussion of race and religion, in light of the PAP government’s reluctance to curb a senior Cabinet member in his freely contentious speech?
This points to double standards of the PAP government, or a paternalistic view that ordinary people cannot be trusted to have a mature discussion about these sensitive topics.
Yet, the gracious dignity of AMP’s criticism of MM Lee’s comments, and the lively and respectful debate about race issues at Saturday’s forum is indication that Singaporeans can certainly handle public debate about difficult issues–and even if some of us cannot, we need to learn, not by shutting up, but by emulating good examples of genuine debate in public arenas.
The MFA stated that ‘this balance [between free expression and preservation of racial and religious harmony] is only for the Singapore government to determine because only the Singapore government bears the responsibility should things go wrong’.
The PAP government is afraid of being blamed should things go wrong, but make no mistake–we will all suffer and bear the responsiblity should things go wrong. Playing it safe by staying closed to the UN Rapporteur’s report and curbing Singaporeans’ space for public debate does not allow Singapore to mature, and it does not allow for difficulties in race relations to be truly resolved.
The PAP government can indeed reject the UN Rapporteur’s suggestions–but if we disagree with the PAP government’s response, we can only rely on ourselves to reclaim that space of public debate through the new media, through conversations with our family, friends and community. It is our responsibility to speak up and speak loudly, with respect, reason and maturity.
This article is the first part in a two-part article about Race Issues in Singapore. The second part will deal with the actual discussion of race issues that took place during and after the forum on 12 February 2011.
and if the pap government do not grant an audience to the UN neutral reporter who is ere on a UN facts findin missions
which in real lives is doin the WALK..not earsays..
than our singapore democractic governmentships is FINISHED…
UNITED NATION don’t give face mey?
Our gahmen already gave him access what just that what Mr Muigai said is nothing new and our gahmen don’t agree so rebut lor.
What MM Lee said in Hard Truths is doing
Singaporeans a favour. You can talk about the same things using the same words but the outcome will be different when uttered by a different person.
And James Gomez still around ah.. Don’t trust this fella..
Thank God I’m WHITE. Oh yeah, sorry that’s racist. I mean thank God I’m “OTHER”.
I dun know why everytime get foreigner to involve in our politics. May be he thinks foreigner can rule the island better. Can’t believe he is still around. Sorry to say this but he does not have my trust. Ppl driven by anger can’t reap good result.
abc123
I dun know why everytime get foreigner to involve in our politics
Because ISD cannot catch them?
Singapore’s record on race-relations is quite good.
All the languages including the minority Tamil are recognised as official language.
Dr. Gomez told the audience that the UN Special Rapporteur Githu Muigai was invited by the Singapore government.
“Ppl driven by anger can’t reap good result.”
What a hateful and ignorant thing to say. I’ve met Mr Gomez in person, and he strikes me as someone who’s hardly driven by anger; rather, this is someone who is genuinely interested in activism and civil society issues. What on earth do you think he is angry about anyway? Please don’t lump him together with other angry politicians just because he’s in the opposition.
LOL, can’t believe two commenters above feel so distrustful of Gomez. The guy made a simple mistake in the stress and bustle of elections! Get over it already! Sheesh. Some people fall hook line and sinker for PAP’s Conspiracy Theory, and fail to see a good think when it’s right in front of them.
*thing
I dun feel any race issue and discrimination.Why the need to bring up this subject again.We are doing very fine in this area.Treasure our achievement on racial harmony.
I bet agongkia is Chinese and has zero true Malay/ Indian friends.
All Citizens are equal – some are just more equal than others……George Orwell – Animal Farm
i think we take for granted the present state of relations in s’pore simply bec whatever related to race/religion is either swept under the carpet or not acknowledged.
fact of the matter is that the govt has not trusted the malays in positions of authority in or out of govt. what mm has said shld hv not surprised many given his past comments. if anybody else had made those comments online or in a rally they would have been arrested under the sedition act, guranteed chop stamp. and that cannot be healthy in the long term.
mping
I bet agongkia is Chinese and has zero true Malay/ Indian friends.
You are half correct.
I am but many of those who let me down are of my same race.
I have many true friend of other races who share their joy and sorrow with me.All are my Abang Adek.Many of them share my idea and are happy.We talk all subject but respect each other’s opinion.Its just that there are those who like to take advantage and talk about this issue as if they are being discriminate,to gain popularity,not knowing they are stirring shit.We are fine.,we dun need outsider to interfere with our racial issue.
Oops,sorry,my Malay Kawan keep smsing me to buy me kopi.I have to stop here .
Abang,Tunggu,agongkia akan datang……
Looks like agongkia isn’t the sharpest tool in the shed. And please Singapore has as much racism (or worse) then other countries. I think only a minority knows what it feels to be a non-minority. So don’t go looking for the answers in the general public.
“Diversity, or variety, is the spice, and fact, of life.” I believe Singapore, like many other countries, has to be cosmopolitan, and must remain so, in order to survive. Internationalism is the key. In other words, Singapore has to be a country, or city, that embraces multicultural demographics.
agongkia 16 February 2011
mping
I bet agongkia is Chinese and has zero true Malay/ Indian friends.
…………….
when i go to cebu..i hav 4 kakis
1 malay…1 indian..1 angmor/american black
(whoever landed 1st)
we shared the same meal table..we molest the same group of bartop dancers..no we don’t induct in orgies..i would be left out in terms of size/length/duration