Connect with us

Civil Society

“Activism does not go against Lasallian values; it is central to it”: St Joseph Institution alumni

Published

on

In a submission to TOC, an alumnus of St Joseph Institution (SJI) has expressed his disappointment towards the anti-activism stance held by the current heads of his alma mater, and their subsequent silence regarding the matter.

The alumnus wrote that “many alumni of the school were in shock, and there have been intense debates on closed Facebook groups” regarding Vice-Principal Leonard Tan’s arguments against activism in SJI and Singapore society as a whole in a speech to the school’s current students in July.

From a discussion in the SJI Alumni’s Facebook group.

 

Screenshot of a comment by Brother Michael Broughton, who is previously the spiritual ‘brother president’ and former vice-principal of SJI, and who is now working abroad.

 

He and several other SJI alumni had then decided “to communicate to the Principal directly in a letter sent via email, in the hope that he would clarified the school’s position” regarding the school’s decision to bar the Inter-University LGBT Network’s Research & Advocacy Director Ms Rachel Yeo from speaking at a TEDXYouth@SJI event in July.

A petition started by several young alumni of the school, which has garnered around “50 or so signatories” was also sent to Fr Adrian Danker.

However, they have yet to receive any response from Fr Adrian Danker after “almost 2 months” since they wrote in to him.

Consequently, the alumnus said that he and his fellow former schoolmates are “sorely disappointed with the radio silence on the part of the principal,” and what bothers him the most “as a member of the Catholic faith” is that Fr Adrian Danker is “the head of the Catholic Archdiocese’s Courage Singapore,” which is “a support ministry for persons with same-sex attraction”.

He added that their act of writing a letter to the school’s Principal, The Reverend Father (Dr.) Adrian Augustus Danker SJ, could potentially serve as “a teachable moment to young SJI boys that while we might disagree with someone’s views, we should always allow their right to be heard without any prejudice”.

“There is no one better in the church to speak on this controversy than him. What a moment of support it would have been to boys in SJI who had been uncertain of their sexuality, to know that their principal had come out in support of them, and had explained that the institution did not actually think that 377A challengers were activists who were a danger to the community,” wrote the alumnus.

He added that it has hurt him and “many Old Boys of the school to see the way this controversy has tarnished the name of the school, which has long been a place that has taught moral courage,” adding that the SJI brand has always been centred around the education of good moral and ethical values.

“The response from the school leadership has been disappointing to say the least. I hope members of the public will know that the school stands for so much more,” he concluded.

SJI, like other educational institutions, have a duty to provide space for open dialogue and critical thinking for its students

Quoting the Ministry of Education’s press release “Refreshing Our Approach to National Education” which was published on 5 March 2018, the alumni wrote, in their letter to Fr Adrian Danker, that “educational institutions have a duty to provide space for open dialogue, exposing students to a multiplicity of ideas, and giving them the opportunity to explore and deconstruct them within a conducive and safe learning environment”.

They added: “Encouraging open dialogue provides equal opportunity for differing – and even conflicting – perspectives and beliefs to be shared and discussed in a mature and respectful manner,” which “nurtures critical thinking and fosters open-mindedness among students.”

“Students should be taught to respect people with differing opinions and be given opportunities to engage in frank and constructive conversations on important and pressing issues, however difficult these issues may be,” wrote the SJI alumni, thus arguing that the school’s decision to disinvite Ms Yeo runs against the grain of what education truly ought to be.

They expressed, in their letter, their hope that “the school will address, clarify and/or reframe where appropriate,” the following:

(1) its withdrawal of Ms Yeo’s invitation to speak in an event that is meant to serve as a platform for open dialogue; and

(2) its misportrayal of Ms Yeo and activism as socially divisive and incorrect.

The alumni added: “We would like for the school to restate its commitment to staying true to its Lasallian values of inclusivity – through creating a safe space for open dialogue, protecting the marginalised, and respecting differing perspectives (even those of non-Catholic) – and to do so with sincerity, importance and resolve.”

Crucial to have “multi-faith inclusivity in education”

In reference to Mr Tan’s statement regarding SJI having its own “set of values,” the school’s alumni have expressed, in their letter, concern over the implication of his statement, as it can be interpreted as suggesting that “the school’s Catholic identity is more important than the students’ own sense of belonging and prerogative to their own values and beliefs, in the context of educational activities, such as the TEDxYouth@SJI event.”

They added: “These statements are dangerous, as they may have inadvertently perpetuated the damaging misconception that one can only be a Josephian if one is a practicing Catholic. We perceive such an idea as not only contrary to the Lasallian commitment to inclusion, but also a rejection of many of our classmates, who strongly embody the Josephian spirit, even as they do not profess a belief in the Catholic religion.”

“Singapore’s education system is a largely secular one that respects the principles of a multiracial and multi-religious society. Like all Singapore schools, SJI should prepare students to be comfortable with diversity and respect their individual faiths, rather than insist that they subscribe solely to one objectively valid belief system, in the context of discussing social concerns,” stressed the alumni.

They also emphasised that “it is SJI’s social and moral duty to provide a safe, inclusive space for open dialogue,” and that in the spirit of Saint John Baptist De La Salle, the Catholic saint who fought against socioeconomic discrimination during his time and whose words Mr Tan had quoted in his speech, SJI “should similarly refrain against discriminating against students who are not of Catholic faith, equally respecting students of all faiths and beliefs.”

“No student should ever feel that he or she is any less of a Josephian because he or she is not a Catholic,” wrote the SJI alumni.

Additionally, they disagreed with Mr Tan’s argument that “all forms of activism are socially divisive,” stating that St John Baptist de La Salle himself “embodies the very definition of an activist” through his “vision of establishing a network of schools for poor children,” which was objected to by the French monarchy.

De La Salle, they added, had “exposed societal divisions and compelled French society to confront the injustices it was perpetrating against the poor, helping to build communities where there were none”.

The SJI alumni strongly believed that “we would not have a Lasallian community today” if de La Salle “had meekly caved in to the demands of his detractors.”

Consequently, they further dispelled Mr Tan’s statements regarding activism by highlighting the nuances within different forms of activism, and rejecting the notion that superficial meekness is a sign of a peaceful and harmonious society:

Activism allows us to amplify these voices so that society becomes more aware of the injustices it knowingly or unknowingly inflicts upon them. A lack of activism does not resolve social divisions but, rather, masks them and leaves them to fester.

Activism should not be confused with extremism: activism is often conducted peacefully and within the remit of the law, and merely seeks to acknowledge and address social deficiencies through pushing for change.

As Josephians, it is important for us to uphold de La Salle’s courage and resolve in his lifelong campaign against inequality and injustice, and continue to bravely advocate for those marginalised and forgotten by society so that they need not suffer in silence or feel isolated.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Civil Society

RSF Director General meets Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te, proposes measures to combat disinformation

Thibaut Bruttin, Director General of Reporters Without Borders (RSF), met Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te on 16 October 2024 to discuss measures for strengthening Taiwan’s democracy against disinformation. Bruttin highlighted the importance of media reform, citing Taiwan’s improved press freedom ranking and RSF’s global initiatives.

Published

on

Thibaut Bruttin, Director General of Reporters Without Borders (RSF), met with Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te in Taipei on 16 October 2024.

The meeting focused on strategies to bolster Taiwan’s democratic resilience against disinformation. Bruttin was accompanied by key figures from RSF and Taiwan’s leadership, including Secretary-General of the National Security Council Joseph Wu and Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs François Wu.

The delegation also included notable figures from RSF’s Taipei Bureau, such as Director Cédric Alviani, Advocacy Manager Aleksandra Bielakowska, and Development and Projects Manager Shataakshi Verma.

The talks were held in the context of Taiwan’s rising prominence in global press freedom, with the nation moving from 35th to 27th place in RSF’s 2024 World Press Freedom Index.

Bruttin praised Taiwan’s advancement but emphasised the importance of continued reforms to ensure that Taiwan’s media remains resilient in the face of increasing disinformation campaigns, particularly given the island’s tense geopolitical situation with the People’s Republic of China.

“Taiwan, as a regional leader in press freedom and the only democracy in the Chinese-speaking world, has everything to gain from aligning its media regulations with international standards,” Bruttin stated. He argued that reforms are crucial not only for combating disinformation but also for restoring public trust in the Taiwanese media, which he noted is alarmingly low.

According to recent studies, only three out of ten Taiwanese citizens trust the media, a figure that ranks among the lowest in democratic nations. Bruttin attributed this in part to Taiwan’s polarised and sensationalist media landscape.

During the meeting, Bruttin outlined several key RSF initiatives that Taiwan could adopt to enhance its media environment.

Among these was the Journalism Trust Initiative (JTI), the world’s first ISO-certified media quality standard, designed to promote reliable and transparent journalism.

He also discussed the Paris Charter on Artificial Intelligence and Journalism, which aims to ensure ethical standards in the use of AI within the media.

Additionally, Bruttin introduced RSF’s Propaganda Monitor, a project that tracks and counters propaganda and disinformation worldwide, including efforts by state actors.

Bruttin stressed that implementing these initiatives could help Taiwan build a more transparent and trusted media sector, crucial for democratic stability. He also addressed the role of international platforms, which often dominate local media landscapes, posing a long-term threat to the viability of independent journalism.

Bruttin’s visit coincided with two significant events for RSF in Taiwan.

Firstly, the organisation held its inaugural Asia-Pacific Correspondents Seminar, which gathered regional representatives from RSF for internal discussions on the state of press freedom across Asia.

Secondly, RSF celebrated the seventh anniversary of its Taipei Bureau, which was opened in 2017 to strengthen RSF’s presence in the region. The anniversary reception saw over 200 prominent figures from the media and academic spheres attend, highlighting the increasing significance of RSF’s work in Asia.

Taiwan’s media landscape has long been under pressure due to aggressive efforts by the People’s Republic of China to assert sovereignty over the island. China’s state-sponsored disinformation campaigns are frequently aimed at destabilising Taiwan’s democratic institutions.

These efforts have exacerbated divisions within Taiwan’s media sector, which is already fragmented and prone to sensationalist reporting. Bruttin’s recommendations reflect a broader push to enhance Taiwan’s ability to resist such external interference through robust media governance and public trust-building measures.

Bruttin’s discussions with President Lai follow a similar visit by RSF’s previous Director General, Christophe Deloire, in 2017, when he met with then-President Tsai Ing-wen. RSF has consistently praised Taiwan for its commitment to press freedom but continues to advocate for further regulatory improvements.

Continue Reading

Civil Society

Meta and X served targeted POFMA order after activist’s non-compliance

Meta and X received targeted correction directions under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act on 11 Oct after activist Kokila Annamalai failed to comply with a correction order. The Ministry of Home Affairs stated her misleading posts claimed the government executes arbitrarily without due legal process and will refer her to the POFMA Office for investigation.

Published

on

SINGAPORE: Two social media platforms have been served with targeted correction directions under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) on Friday (11 October), after activist Kokila Annamalai failed to comply with a correction order issued to her last week.

Ms Annamalai received the order on 5 October for misleading posts made on Facebook and X.

In a statement, The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) said the posts falsely claimed that “the government schedules and stays executions arbitrarily and without regard for due legal process, and that the State does not bear the legal burden of proving a drug trafficking charge against the accused person.”

MHA noted that an article on the government fact-checking website Factually elaborated on why Ms Annamalai’s assertions were false.

The order mandated that she post a correction notice on the two posts; however, she has not complied.

In light of this non-compliance, the Minister for Home Affairs has directed the POFMA Office to issue a targeted correction direction to Meta Platforms and X.

This order requires the platforms to notify users who have seen the posts that they contain false statements and to provide a link to the Factually article explaining the inaccuracies.

MHA also announced that it would refer Ms Annamalai to the POFMA Office for investigations regarding her failure to comply with the correction direction issued on 5 October.

Earlier, the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN), an organisation advocating for the abolition of the death penalty in the Asia-Pacific region, was also served with a correction order by the Singapore government under POFMA.

This order, initiated by Minister for Home Affairs and Law K Shanmugam, was in response to alleged false claims made by ADPAN in social media posts on 3 October 2024.

The posts, which were circulated on Facebook, Instagram, and LinkedIn, related to Singapore’s legal processes for death row prisoners and the treatment of activists opposing the death penalty.

They were released just before the scheduled execution of Mohammad Azwan Bohari, a drug trafficking convict sentenced to death for possessing over 26.5 grammes of pure heroin.

While ADPAN has since complied with the correction order by adding a notice to the original posts across its social media accounts, the group has expressed its intention to engage further with the order.

ADPAN reiterated its commitment to its statements and opinions, which it asserts are protected by international human rights law and standards, and expressed solidarity with human rights defenders and groups on the ground.

The organisation also reserved the right to issue additional statements on the matter.

Continue Reading

Trending