TR EMERITUS

Written by Our Correspondent For the second time in the last 6 weeks, the Singapore government is forced to respond to accusations that it is a repressive government which uses draconian laws to stifle public dissent. Law Minister K Shanmugan had earlier made a plead to a visiting delegation of American lawyers to accept Singapore's "unique" system which is critical to its continued survival and prosperity. Now, Ms Chong Wan Yieng, his press secretary has written to the Straits Times Forum to clarify an "inaccurate" statement from a book written by a British author John Kampfner - "Freedom for Sale". In his book, Mr Kampfner wrote that in the context of Singapore, 'any politician or journalist who says anything controversial about those in power is open to arrest and the subsequent charge of defamation. If they run out of money, they are declared bankrupt and may be sent to jail'. Ms Chong denied that criticism is a "crime" in Singapore: "This is quite inaccurate. Engaging in robust criticism per se is not and has never been a crime or libellous in Singapore......There can be, and there is, vigorous debate on public policies. But if allegations of personal misconduct are made, then those who make such allegations have to prove the truth of their statements." Ms Chong might not be aware of an on-going case against three members of the Singapore Democratic Party - Dr Chee Soon Juan, Chee Siok Chin and Gandhi Ambalam who are charged with illegal assembly because they had distributed flyers critical of the PAP in September 2006. In its closing submissions, Deputy Public Prosecutor Anandan Bala insisted that the three had demonstrated “opposition to the actions of the Government” and were therefore in violation of the law. He took issue with the fact that the pamphlet made the following statements: "Tired of being a voiceless 2nd class citizen in your own country without any rights? Sick of the Mnisters paying themselves millions of dollars while they tell you to keep making sacrifices for Singapore?" Ms Chong next regurgitated oft-repeated argument that Singapore "holds itself to the highest standards of probity and integrity." and quoted a report international report to substantiate her statements: "The latest World Economic Competitiveness Report rated Singapore first out of 131 countries for 'public trust of politicians' and 'transparency of government policymaking." The ranking is highly inaccurate because of the absence of a free and independent press in Singapore. With the press controlled by the ruling party to serve as its mouthpiece, it is impossible for Singaporeans to assess the performance of the ruling party objectively. The Singapore media is ranked a pathetic 133th position in terms of press freedom on the World Press Freedom Index this year by respected International NGO Reporters without Borders which was conveniently ignored by Ms Chong. The PAP has always proclaimed itself to be a "transparent" government. Till today, Singaporeans still have no idea the exact losses suffered by the two sovereign wealth funds - Temasek Holdings and GIC during the financial crisis last year.  Read More →

Written by Our Correspondent Singapore's pro-foreigner government has lent a helping hand to Resort World Sentosa (RWS) to secure two blocks of HDB flats in Toa Payoh for its foreign employees working at the soon to open integrated resort. It was reported earlier that RWS is hunting for flats in the Telok Blangah area for its foreign workers which includes hotel service staff and casino pit supervisors. There is no official statement on the number of foreigners that RWS could hire. Overall, it will employ about 10,000 people when it opens next year. RWS spokesman Robin Goh told Business Times earlier that "it remains committed in recruiting Singaporeans and Singapore permanent residents." However, Filipino President Gloria Arroyo said in April this year that around 5,000 new jobs would be made available to Filipinos in the island resort of Sentosa in Singapore which means that about half of them will go to foreigners. (Source: GMA news) According to the Straits Times, the two flats designated to be converted into worker dormitories are blocks 32 and 33 in Toa Payoh Lorong 6. They contain more than 300 units. Each flat houses four to six workers, who pay below market monthly rents ranging from $140 to $260 each. (which means there are between 1,200 to 1,800 foreign workers). The flats appear to be better furnished than some flats of locals. The bedrooms are air-conditioned and they come with furniture like dining tables and beds. Fridges and washing machines are also provided. It is not known if these foreign staff of RWS will be offered Singapore permanent residency whose criteria is so lax that even cleaners and masseurs can qualify. Despite rising resentment and anger on the ground at the large number of foreigners in Singapore which now make up 36 per cent of the population, the ruling party is adamant that they are "essential" to Singapore's continued growth. With the opening of the two IRs next year, Singapore can expect a flood of foreigners including some unsavory characters like prostitutes.  Read More →

OPINION For the second time in two months, Singapore Law Minister K Shanmugam warned of the pitfalls of Singapore adopting a "Western" model of liberal democracy, this time in the PAP magazine Petir, which was given extensive publicity in the state media. Mr Shanmugam had earlier spoken on the topic to an audience of American lawyers in Singapore a month ago. In this instance, it is obvious that his targeted audience are not only PAP members, but the general public as well. Mr Shanmugam expressed his concerns that "a younger generation of better-educated voters feels the political process and system in a democratic state should be based on the Western model of liberal democracy." The Straits Times reported that "Mr Shanmugam and government leaders reject the view, arguing that the best systems are those that fit the society they govern." "Younger Singaporeans may therefore believe that the Western model of liberal democracy can be adopted without trade-offs....And if the majority chooses slower development and a lower quality of life, and is willing to accept more tensions within our society in return for changes in the political system, then so be it,’ he added. There are three inherent fallacies in Mr Shanmugam's arguments, one - there is a "Western model of liberal democracy", two - it does not fit Singapore society and three - it will lead to slower development and a lower quality of life. #1 Liberal democracy is a "Western" concept: It is disingenuous for Mr Shanmugan to label liberal democracy as a "Western model" to generate the impression that it is not applicable to an Asian society like ours. Democracy, or liberal democracy as anybody calls it, is a universal set of principles and practices of governance which applies across the board to all races, cultures and religions. It is akin to human values like filial piety. Can we say that there is a Chinese filial piety or an American one? No, all human beings, regardless of nationalities or cultures subscribe to filial piety as an intrinsic value of showing gratitude to our parents. There is no need to put a label on it. Similarly, democracy is a system of government which ensures that the ordinary people have a say in the running of their country. It is based on the rule of law and put in a place an institutionalized system of checks and balances on the ruling party. In all democracies, there is a clear separation of powers between the legislative and the executive. The judiciary is independent and the press is relatively free to criticize the government and expose its wrong-doing. According to such strict definitions, Singapore does not even qualify to be a "democracy" in the first place. Holding regular elections is simply not enough to justify its status as a "democracy" when all the other critical pillars of democracy are absent. #2 "Western" democracy will not work in Singapore: Only until recently, Singapore's octogenarian leader Lee Kuan Yew was trumpeting "Asian" or "Confucian" values as the ideal model of governance for Asia democracies as opposed to "Western" democracy. His "values" were rubbished by former South Korean President Kim Dae Jung as an "excuse for dictatorship and tyranny". Kim himself was a fervent believer in democracy and he almost lost his life when he was kidnapped by agents from South Korea's military dictatorship in the 1970s. When he won the South Korean presidency in 1997, he introduced further political and economic reforms in South Korea including dismantling the cozy ties between the government and the conglomerates or chaebols. South Korea was ruled by a military dictatorship in one form or another since the 1950s and it is in a perpetual state of war with North Korea since the two have yet to sign a formal peace treaty to the Korean War. It has been more than 10 years since South Korea makes the peaceful transition to a vibrant multi-party democracy and its economy is still booming. Besides South Korea, a wave of democratization has engulfted the entire Asia-Pacific region from Indonesia, Taiwan, Malaysia and Japan. Taiwan was governed by a one party uninterrupted for 40 over years and is definitely more "Confucian" than Singapore. It is now a full-fledged liberal democracy.  Even Communist China is adopting democratic principles at the grassroots level. The Chinese Communist Party now rules by consensus and is trying to introduce a proper system of power transfer and succession within its ranks. The era of rule by a single strong man like Mao and Deng is gone and there is no dynastic politics in China. Do we see the children of Mao and Deng in the Chinese Polituro? So if liberal democracies can work in these Asian societies with the exception of China, why can't it work in Singapore? In fact, Singapore is a more conducive place for a multi-party democracy because of a few factors: - it is a small place which is relatively easy to govern, try conducting elections in Indonesia, a sprawling archipelago of over 20,000 islands. - Singaporeans are highly educated and are able to understand the issues concerning the nation. They can be trusted to make an informed choice. - being a docile, mature and peace-loving people, there is little risk of social disorder or unrest breaking out. #3 Adopting "Western" democracy will lead to a lower quality of life and more tensions in society: With due respect to Mr Shanmugam, he should substantiate his statements instead of regurgitating an old wife's tale from Lee Kuan Yew who said this in 1992 during a visit to Tokyo: "With few exceptions, democracy has not brought good government to new developing countries…What Asians value may not necessarily be what Americans or Europeans value. Westerners value the freedoms and liberties of the individual. As an Asian of Chinese cultural backround, my values are for a government which is honest, effective and efficient.” Mr Shanmugan should show Singaporeans how adopting a "Western" model of democracy will lead to a lower quality of life for Singaporeans. According to a recently released United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) report, the most developed countries in the world are all liberal democracies like the Nordic countries, Canada, United States, Australia, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Luxembourg and Japan. Singapore is the exception rather than the rule. Under the rule of the PAP, only a small percentage of the population get to enjoy the high quality of life befitting of a first world nation as the fruits of the nation are inequally distributed leading to a widening income gap. As a minister, Mr Shanmugam earns about $2 million dollars a year or $166,660 a month which is 64 times the median monthly pay of an ordinary Singaporean, or $2,600. The people are frustrated because there is no opposition or credible alternatives to challenge the PAP. There is increasing resentment and disgruntlement on the ground at the relentless influx of foreigners into Singapore. The social tension is rising, but kept suppressed by the repressive political system, but it doesn't mean it is non-existent - it will build up gradually till it explodes one day. Under a democratic system of government, the people will have the opportunity to toss out an incompetent, uncaring and unpopular government to elect one which truly cares for their interests and will strive to improve their standard of living. It will also allow disagreements and differences to be aired and settled publicly in a civil, mature and responsible manner instead of allowing grievances and animosities to fester beneath under the veneer of normalcy. Mr Shanmugam said that "Singaporeans are entitled to decide whether they want the trade-offs," but we are unable to do so because of the repressive system put in place by the PAP to perpetuate its rule for eternality. This is not a democracy works, be it "Western", "Asian" or otherwise, but a dictatorship, a feudal dynasty and a totalitarian state! Whatever system of government which best fit Singapore is for the people of Singapore to decide, and not Mr Shanmugam or the PAP. Copyright © The Temasek Review, 2009   Related articles: >> A rebuttal to Shanmugam that Singapore needs a strong leadership for speedy decisions to be made >> Shanmugam wants PAP to provide greater political education to Singaporeans >> Educate students about politics, says Shanmugam  Read More →