~by: Teo Soh Lung~
The month of February 2012 must go down as the blackest month for bloggers and every Singaporean who treasures the right to free speech.
It started with Alex Au of Yawning Bread, a very well respected and formidable blogger who does extensive research for every article he writes. He chooses his words with great care, indeed much greater care than the senior counsel who acted for the Law and Foreign Minister, K Shanmugam in the letter threatening him with legal proceedings. Alex’s response to that letter speaks volume of his wit and courage. “I take Shanmugam’s word on this matter. I have withdrawn that comment as requested.” At the end of the post, he said: “Needless to say, no comments to this post will be necessary.”
The buzz and anxiety among the cyber community died down a little after the minister accepted that statement. But not for long. Within days, a second legal letter was issued, this time by no less a person than the prime minister himself, Lee Hsien Loong. It threatened TR Emeritus over a contributor’s article. Poor Richard Wan, one of the five editors who not too long ago, had emerged in a forum organised by TOC. I am sure he didn’t anticipate receiving a lawyer’s letter from anyone and worse, from the prime minister himself and must have regretted surfacing to the open. Happily, his trouble ended shortly with his removing the article and an apology. But that was not the end of the matter for him. The prime minister’s brother, Lee Hsien Yang followed suit, this time over a comment by one of its readers.
Bloggers know that every article is prone to being “attacked” by supposedly opposition or PAP supporters. Mostly, these commentators are anonymous and harmless. Most bloggers let them air their frustrations because there are too many of them. For most serious readers, they hardly read past the first five comments before they flip the page. So why on earth did Lee Hsien Yang, who does not hold any ministerial post, feel so bothered about a comment which in all probability, would not have been read by the majority of readers? Why did he bother to scrutinise readers’ comments and take them so seriously? Perhaps he could write to explain. I am sure TOC and TR Emeritus would give him whatever space he needs and bloggers will be happy to share what he writes with the world and to give him maximum publicity.
Opinions were gathered by the media about the three incidents. Some appear to be grateful that at least the three did not ask for monetary compensation as former prime ministers, senior ministers and ministers did in the past. Others complain helplessly.
Singaporeans like to read the hidden message of the government, like the Irish who enjoy reading tea leaves after the tea is drunk. Why did they not ask for money? Some attribute it to the magnanimity of the younger generation leaders. Others were more cynical. They feel that bloggers don’t have money and it is pointless to bankrupt them. And some think that the bloggers are spared because they may be sympathetic to opposition political parties but they are still independent of them. Yet others take the message more ominously – that the three acts coming so close to one another, is a warning to the blogging community, publishers and writers that the days of relative free speech have ended. Be careful, big brother is watching. His eyes are everywhere. His eyes are sharp and would leave no comment unread. He has plenty of money.
What then should we do or not do if we ever have the misfortune of receiving a lawyer’s letter? Apologise profusely and promise not to repeat even unoffending words or words of others even though we have taken so much care? Or should we stand up and fight for our right to freedom of speech as guaranteed by our constitution? If we take the latter course, can we withstand the onslaught without being hurt? I am sure some will be hurt in the process but do we have a choice if we want to retain our limited freedom which we took decades to regain? The danger is that if we do not stand up for our rights now and support those who may be in trouble now, then our right to free speech will continue to be eroded and one day, we may wake up deprived of all we have! Like wealth, rights are not lost in a day. They vanish slowly, without our realising it and when we are least attentive.
Pastor Martin Niemoller’s thoughts may be apt here :
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak for me.
This article first appeared on Ms Teo's Facebook. TOC thanks her for allowing us to reproduce it here.
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
You think LTK, SL, CSJ, KJ, GMS, NS, CST, LC, DL, TJS will let you talk freely about their spouse life if one day they rule SG? How sure are you?
I fully agree that if you truly believed that you were defamed, then you should sue – only problem is who end up deciding? A court of Judges or Court of Jury? Which set up is more independent and fair in present day Singapore? Which team, Judges or Jury have the ground feel and instinct and data to inform decisions and judgements crediblely? Real Singapore problem is that PAP has rule so long and getting so arrogant that every aspect of their doing is now not believed and questioned. Have a court that we can respect, then talk about your rights to sue.
And what does the ST say about all this.. SWEET F-ALL.
We deserve what we get.
Nobody is going to notice if they sued many of us bankrupt.
Its a done deal.
So easy to sue? Why not you try to sue someone who defames you, especially VIP. If you cannot stand on your own 2 feet, it is a gone case from the start. The best is to speak the true facts and fear none. Do not anyhow defame anyone who you do not like. Once a person sues, it means the article is full of holes waiting to be torn down in public.
Rather than send threatening letters to silence "defamations", they should attend to them and give due explanation and justification, just like government's longstanding policy of heeding and investigating even "anonymous letters" of complains against civil service and stats board staff, and such allegations sent to CPIB. If, for the sake of pure "transparency", nothing is to be left "unturned" and investigated, even possible irresponsible "poison letters", then why not also purported "rumours" of scandals and nepotism on the part of government persons aired in cyberspace? Why the double standard?
@mice is nice & his likeness,
Please open your mind…in this case the those threatening to sue are the victims. The power did not defame, they are righteous.
Why should we hold any against those who have struggled and gave us this modern Singapore.
Nobody is deprived in Singapore so long as one is willing to work honestly and not be lazy. We have the best in this world. Only the sick would grouch and many are on this page.
Is everyone rights to use the law, so now TOC says you should not have the rights to use the law even if someone started to defame you. Is this called free speech?
@Madhatters,
In case you are not aware:
Those who had struggled to create modern Singapore are no more in the current cabinet.
Those who had struggled are the elderly people among us citizens.
And what is the current cabinet doing to them?
– cut their salaries by letting the rich employers pay them less CPF.
– suppress their salaries by letting in cheap unskilled foreigners, which will also cause them lose their jobs.
Madhatters1 March 2012
Why should we hold any against those who have struggled and gave us this modern Singapore.
Nobody is deprived in Singapore so long as one is willing to work honestly and not be lazy.
……………………..
worked honestly and not lazy? you meant LTA worked honest and hardworkin by raisin a few erp gantries?
modern singapoor benefit WHO? the elite pap ministers from father to sons thru daughterinlaws and nephews amon them?
Its actually a misunderstanding of how the blogosphere and social media works. Whether that's an intended or unintended misreading, nobody knows. But if unintended, it does seem strange.
Too easy for an anonymous poster to write the wrong stuff. To go after the host reflects an ignorance of how blogs/articles work or it may be intentionally sent as a signal to the host. I suspect the latter. As to big brother is watching, there are no privacy laws in Singapore.
The Malay proverb says it aptly "Siapa makan chilli, siapa rasa pedas." For those consistently liars who defame others, they are the peopl who feel the heat and not us. More than 60% of Singaporeans can live and let live without any fear of civil suits. Honesty is the best policy!
Devagi
More than 60% of Singaporeans can live and let live without any fear of civil suits. Honesty is the best policy!
…………….
honesstly or cowardly? used the proper thesaru softwares
Big brother is watching.
PAP has execute the smear and scare tactic which is their usual style. From A1, TR, TOC case, it seems they are all political motivated. So far HR is monitoring the development……
Ms Teo asks why they should take these postings so seriously as to need to silence them. May I venture a guess? (Only a guess; so don't send another lawyer's letter!) Maybe the allegations, although untrue as they are stated, do point to something that may be mistaken for what was alleged. And therefore it was felt important enough, if need be, to distinguish the allegations from the truth in court. As they say, there is no smoke without fire (some sort of fire, that is, although not the one alleged).
I agree with Ms Teo that had the "defamations" been so obviously nonsensical, why all the fuss?
@iAMahMeng : Modern Singapore has benefited me and many of my friends. And I do believe that the apes and other animals in our Zoologigal Gdn are well-kept..
With regards to "honesty vs cowardly" , I simply cannot read the mind of Ah Meng? It would seem silly to try communicate with him…
Just be contented that you are fed daily…..and be thankful for the benevolence of the PAP government.
I think sending lawyer letters are unwarranted. :(
Madhatters vs The Ape2 March 2012
@iAMahMeng
Just be contented that you are fed daily…..and be thankful for the benevolence of the PAP government.
…………………..
you meant to thank leekingyou for the bone he throw @ you?….why mandai zoo don't fed you @ all? opps mongrel dog are not qualified in mandai zoo….
tit for tat
As a human being, I am ashamed of living in such an unfree country as Singapore.