TR EMERITUS

OPINION Singapore Law Minister K Shanmugam is a busy man of late having to defend his ruling party's miserable human rights record to the international community and he appears to be running out of excuses to convince skeptics otherwise. New York-based NGO Human Rights Watch released a lengthy report last Thursday accusing Singapore of being a "textbook example of a politically repressive state." As expected, Mr Shanmugam regurgitated Singapore's standings in other studies to rebuke Human Rights Watch: "Singapore is a democratic state with a clean and transparent government, whose public officials are held responsible against the highest standards of probity and integrity,” the Ministry of Law said in a statement to international news agency AFP. The ministry cited the latest World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report which rated Singapore as “first out of 133 countries for public trust of politicians and transparency of government policymaking”. The Law Ministry does not seem to appreciate the difference between "repression" and "public trust". The WEF Global competitiveness report collected its data by interviewing ordinary Singaporeans and expatriates on how much they trust Singapore politicians. The findings must be taken with a heavy dose of salt for three reasons: one, there is no free and independent press in Singapore and two, the citizenry is not informed and educated in Singapore and three, few Singaporeans dare to criticize the ruling party in public especially to foreigners. As such, we cannot take the ranking at face value to arrive at the conclusion that Singapore has a "clean and transparent" government. Furthermore, a "clean and transparent" government can be repressive at the same time as history has shown us. If you were to interview citizens living in Hitler's Germany, Stalin's USSR, Mao's China or Kim Jong IL's North Korea, it is likely that they would praise their leaders sky-high for leading a "clean and transparent" government as well. Very often, citizens living in a state of repression are unaware of the fact that they are being oppressed by the state and many continue to worship it blindly as the guardian of their rights after years of relentless brainwashing by the state propaganda. Other than conducting elections on a regular basis, Singapore does not have any resemblance of a democracy for which democratic country in the world will have the ruling party winning elections after elections by such overwhelming margin? Singapore lacks the fundamental pillars necessary to build a functioning democratic society - a free and independent media, an independent judiciary, a robust civil society, a well-informed and educated citizenry and political rights such as freedom of speech and assembly. All the major newspapers in Singapore are owned by one single media agency - Singapore Press Holdings (SPH) which is under the firm control of the ruling party. The current Chairman of SPH is Dr Tony Tan, a former deputy prime minister. The International Bar Association's human right institute issued a damning reporting in October 2009 expressing "concerns about the objective and subjective independence and impartiality" of the judiciary.  (read article here) In cases involving litigants from the ruling People’s Action Party or PAP interests, the IBA finds “concerns about an actual or apparent lack of impartiality and/or independence, which casts doubt on the decisions made in such cases.” There is no independent civil society in Singapore. All the grassroots organizations are under the purview of the People's Association whose Chairman is none other than the Prime Minister himself. Singapore's octagenarian leader Lee Kuan Yew admitted recently that "all CCs, CCCs and RCs are part of the PAP" during a dialogue session. (read article here) Though Singapore citizens are entitled to freedom of speech and assembly as enshrined under the Singapore Constitution, it is rarely practised in real life. A Public Order Act was introduced last year which makes even a solo protest illegal. Citizens are often harassed, arrested and jailed by the security apparatus for legitimate political activities. Last week, three opposition members of the Singapore Democratic Party were jailed a week each for distributing flyers critical of the ruling party. Neither is the ruling party accountable and transparent. Blatant mistakes made by senior leaders often went unpunished and a veil of secrecy enshroud many sensitive issues such as the extent of losses suffered by the country's two sovereign wealth funds. When former President Ong Teng Cheong wanted to find out more about Singapore's reserves, he was told by the Auditor-General that it would take 52 man-years to compute the figures. Both GIC and Temasek Holdings reportedly lost a few billion dollars in failed overseas investments last year, but no commission of inquiry was set up to investigate the losses and their board of directors remain unchanged. Besides Human Rights Watch, other international organizations which have criticized Singapore for its atrocious human rights records are Freedom House, Amnesty International, Liberal International, International Bar Association and Reporters without Borders. If the Singapore government is as good as it claims, then it should not be having such a poor reputation among developed nations for its "repressive" track record at all. Mr Shanmugam should seriously reflect on the criticisms to see if there are any element of truth in them instead of brushing them aside immediately. The more defensive he is, the more it appeared that his administration has something to hide. A strong and secure government is one which is not afraid of criticisms. Only an insecure one will resort to the use of repressive measures via the law to silence its critics.  Read More →

Written by Our Correspondent Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong wants Singaporeans to work smarter and harder to pick up new skills to keep the economy growing over the next decade. Speaking at a community event yesterday, SM Goh noted that while average annual economic growth was 5 per cent over the past 10 years, productivity rose just 1 per cent a year on average. Singapore's economic growth in the last decade was fueled largely by the influx of cheap foreign labor which helped keep labor costs down and pop up the GDP figures artificially. A significant proportion of Singapore ministers' multi-million annual salary is pegged to GDP growth - the higher the growth, the more pay they take home. However, the lives of ordinary Singaporeans have not improved during the same period. The income gap has widened considerably and Singapore now has the highest income gap between the poor and rich among the 30 most developed economies in the world - this means that under PAP rule, the rich has become richer while the poor has become poorer. A recent Wall Street Journal editorial wrote that the influx of foreigners into Singapore has depressed the wages of ordinary Singaporeans, increased the cost of living, especially that of public housing, decreased overall labor productivity and led to a decrease in the standards of living. Below is a graph depicting how Singapore's labor productivity has decreased with the increase in the population of foreigners in Singapore, courtesy of Kojakbt, moderator of 3in1kopitiam forum:   According to the latest Global Wages Report from the International Labor Organization (ILO), Singapore workers clock the most hours at hour, just below the mandatory cap of 44 hours a week, more than workers in 12 other countries used for comparison, yet SM Goh still exhorted Singaporeans to work "harder." (read article here) It is not known how "hard" Singaporeans can continue to work given the fact that many workers are finding it increasingly difficult to survive in Singapore. Perhaps SM Goh has forgotten that even "sheep" needs quality time to rest and recharge as well. He said in an earlier speech that "an army of sheep led by lion is stronger than an army of lion led by a sheep." to emphasize on the importance of having good leaders in Singapore. (read article here) Unfortunately, right now the "sheep" are not led by any "lions", but are merely being chased around by a pack of hungry "wolves".  Read More →

By Seah Chiang Nee from The Star (Malaysia) NOT usually known for speaking up, people in this legalistic society have turned a bit more aggressive in fighting for their rights in public. This is largely due to the infusion of 1.25 million foreigners in the past five years, which has partly altered the texture of society. The outspokenness has not come from locals but foreigners who have arrived from different parts of the world with their values. They are beginning to show passive Singaporeans what being pushy in life means. Some have staged illegal public demonstrations – solo or in large groups – outside government buildings, while others have gone on strike, things that are not suppose to happen in Singapore. Most locals would not dream of doing such things even if they feel very aggrieved because of the fear of arrest. It’s also because of their upbringing. Take these examples last week: > A mother staged a protest for two days at the Education Ministry demanding that her child be transferred to a top primary school. > Annoyed by “poor taxi service”, an unhappy woman commuter complained to the company, which fired the driver. > A family of five held up a public bus for six hours, insisting on boarding it with a wheelchair (for their grandmother). Passengers were dislodged, police were called and a tedious negotiation ensued. The saga ended only when the bus company agreed to transport the group in a nine-seat Maxi-cab – at its expense. In this case standing their ground did work. All these were done by mainland Chinese who make up the largest – and arguably the most vocal – group of settlers here. Others come from India, Sri Lanka and places with a tough fight-back environment. Few have been charged under any of Singapore’s tough laws forbidding even peaceful protests or public disturbances. As one school teacher observed, “It’s difficult to condemn someone who fights to board a bus with granny’s wheelchair. Laws are not everything!” Many surfers have complained against double standards in applying the law in favour of foreigners. Opposition politicians, they recall, have often been prosecuted for similar illegal assemblies. Others, however, believe the government is treating political protests more seriously than socially-caused ones, rather than enforcing the law discriminately. Last week’s cases were not the only ones. In the past five years, more serious and bigger demonstrations have been regularly staged by disgruntled foreigners. In fact the grounds of the Manpower Ministry were a frequent scene of mass demonstrations by foreigners seeking help to recover wages or seek jobs promised to them. During the construction of Marina Sands casino resort, foreign workers downed tools in one instance, one of Singapore’s rare strikes. In another instance, more than 100 Chinese workers marched along a main busy road watched by thousands of startled citizens. Most young Singaporeans have never witnessed a public demonstration or a strike on Singapore soil. One young couple timed their visit to Hong Kong to coincide with a mass demonstration over the Tiananmen incident. “We’d like to see what a real protest looks like since we’ve never seen one,” the young woman said. The aggressiveness was aggravated by the financial crisis, which had put many firms out of business, and workers on the street. The common view was: “I’m glad they were not jailed since they were the victims.” With foreigners forming 36% of the population, Singapore has undergone a deeper transformation than even Singaporeans can fathom. Read rest of article here  Read More →