TR EMERITUS

Associated Press, 19 November 2009 Human rights group Amnesty International urged Singapore on Thursday to protect freedom of expression after an Asian magazine paid 405,000 Singapore dollars ($290,000) to settle a defamation suit by the country's prime minister and his father. Far Eastern Economic Review reached the settlement Tuesday after the Court of Appeal upheld a 2008 decision finding the defendants guilty of defaming Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his father, former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew. The Review's editor, Hugo Restal, and the Review Publishing Co. Ltd. were alleged to have defamed the Lees in a 2006 article based on an interview with Chee Soon Juan, an opposition party leader. The magazine is owned by the U.S.-based Dow Jones & Co. "This ruling further illustrates how press freedom is under threat in Singapore and sets a dangerous precedent for freedom of expression and journalism in the region," Sam Zarifi of Amnesty International said in a statement. He said Singapore's Parliament should enact legislation to allow the media to act as a watchdog and bring laws on freedom of expression in line with international law and standards. "Laws that allow the authorities to impose restrictions on freedom of expression together with a pattern of politically motivated defamation suits, have created a climate of political intimidation and self-censorship in Singapore," he said. Critics, including opposition leaders, contend that Singapore applies defamation laws selectively to silence criticism. The government says restrictions on speech and assembly are necessary to preserve the economic prosperity and racial stability of the multiethnic city-state of 4.8 million people. It says any slight on its leaders will hinder their ability to rule effectively. The elder Lee founded the People's Action Party, which has ruled Singapore since 1959 and has 82 of Parliament's 84 members. He was prime minister from 1959 to 1990, and today has an advisory role in the government with the title of mentor minister. The Review said in a statement while it did not agree with the verdict, it settled to avoid prolonging the case. Dow Jones does not believe it defamed the Lees and this decision will not "deter us from (providing) fair and timely reporting and commentary on matters of importance from around the world, including in Singapore," said the statement. The article that got Review into trouble, "Singapore's Martyr, Chee Soon Juan," featured an interview with Chee and criticized a scandal at the National Kidney Foundation charity. Chee was forced into bankruptcy in 2006 by a $300,000 ruling against him for defaming the elder Lee and former Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong. The city-state's leaders have sued journalists and political opponents several times in past years for alleged defamation. They have won lawsuits and damages against Bloomberg, the Economist and the International Herald Tribune. - AP Republished from Associated Press  Read More →

By Tan Keng Leng, Guest Columnist We want to see true equal opportunity employment i.e. no discrimination against the disabled and anyone over 35 by all employers and an end to discriminatory practices such as reduced salaries and employer CPF contributions. After all, if the older workers are performing the same duties as their younger counterparts, then there’s absolutely no reason why they should be paid less. Likewise, we also want to see workers receive true protection from abusive managers, specifically; we want to see a whistleblower protection and an external third party abuse investigation program implemented immediately. We are always being told that a whistleblower protection program can be abused by disgruntled workers, but what about workers being abused by corrupted managers? For example, an honest worker refuses to falsify incident and accident reports as ordered by his corrupted manager because this will compromise the safety of his coworkers and possibly even the public. Without whistleblower protection, how can this worker report such abuses of authority, especially since the current practice here seems to be that such reports will always be referred back to the company where the abuses are taking place for their own internal investigation? Without whistleblower protection, the worker will be subjected to reprisals from the corrupted manager while the manager himself gets away scot-free because he would be investigating himself; in other words, the worker will pay the price for doing the right thing while the manager gets away with his abuses unpunished. As for the argument that disgruntled workers will abuse a whistleblower protection system, wouldn’t a thorough proper investigation reveal whether there are genuine reasons for the workers’ grievances? In a country that prides itself for its honesty and as being under the rule of law, there is absolutely no reason not to have a whistleblower protection system, especially since the only people who would fear such a program are those who have done actually something illegal that they want kept secret. There’s something else we’re very unhappy about. When JI leader Mas Selamat Kestari escaped from the Whitley Road Detention Center, we ordinary locals were rebuked by several government ministers who said that we were complacent. With all due respect, in what way were we complacent? Given the sensitivity of his post, the commander of the WRDC would be an elite scholar; the officers escorting him were Nepalese Gurkhas, foreign talent in other words. So how exactly were we ordinary locals complacent and negligent when we had absolutely nothing to do with his escape? Furthermore, the circumstances surrounding Kestari’s escape would seem totally ludicrous had they come from the pen of a Hollywood screenwriter. The commander of the WRDC ignored repeated warnings that the design of the washroom was dangerous as someone could easily escape from it, especially given the lack of a window grill. The chaotic response to his escape showed a total lack of contingency planning and preparedness. Any ordinary person would know that someone can easily climb up a reinforced concrete shelf and out through an open window that has no grill, and likewise any ordinary person knows that contingency plans and regular emergency drills are absolutely necessary to prepare for any eventuality; so why is it then that an elite scholar didn’t take these possibilities seriously? What about the Geylang Serai food poisoning debacle? We were told that it happened because we were complacent and had forgotten the lessons of good hygiene from the SARS days. Again, with all due respect, how exactly were we complacent, that the victims didn’t wash their hands after using the toilet? In the very first place, who eats Indian rojak with their bare hands? It’s always eaten with a fork. Also, several stallholders at the Geylang Serai temporary market reported that there was an unannounced rat eradication program carried out a day before the incident: if this was so, then would it not be possible that the gravy or ingredients at the Rojak Geylang Serai stall was actually contaminated with rat poison as well as the Vibrio parahaemolyticus bacteria? Rat poisons are usually anticoagulants; similar compounds are prescribed to patients with hypertension, such as the two fatalities in the incident; might they have actually died as a result of the combined effects of the V. parahaemolyticus bacteria and the rat poison? This theory would certainly explain why the usually mild V. parahaemolyticus bacteria could have been so virulent in this case, and why the two fatalities died. Was this possibility actually investigated, and if it was not, why not? Surely the victims and the families of the deceased deserve answers and closure? And surely we the people deserve answers as to how these debacles could have ever happened with all the “top talents” in charge? Finally, we also want to see full accountability from all officials, whether from MPs or from CEOs in GLCs. As the taxpayers and stakeholders of the country, we deserve to know how and why our sovereign wealth funds lost as much money as they did. We also want to see the Group Representation Constituency abolished immediately as we want each and every individual MP to be accountable for his or her statements or actions. For example, we want Mr. Charles Chong to explain clearly why he called us ordinary locals “lesser mortals” as though he was some sort of deity, for Mr. Wee Siew Kim to explain why his daughter demanded that we ordinary locals “should get out of (her) elite uncaring face”, and for Er. Lee Bee Wah to explain exactly what former national table-tennis coach Mr. Liu Guo Dong did wrong during his tenure that she should describe him as a “person of questionable character”. We also want to know why MoH Mr. Khaw Boon Wan was not aware if it was true that two managers in the North-West CDC received 8 months bonus each and for what reason, since according to MND Mr. Mah Bow Tan, the constituencies’ grassroots leaders, who in this case would be Mr. Khaw, deal directly with the People’s Association, the employers of the two managers when he explained why the two opposition MPs were not the ones to announce the lift upgrading programs in their respective constituencies. As the people that these elected representatives are supposed to serve, we deserve answers to such matters of public interests from them as these, and if their answers are not forthcoming or are unsatisfactory, then we want our right to remove them as MPs restored and not have their positions shielded by government ministers. Mr. Prime Minister, we have said all we have to say for now. We were told that the government is moving towards greater openness and inclusiveness, and that even frank feedback would be welcome as long as it is constructive. We were also told that that we should offer constructive solutions as well and not simply criticize. As such, we have already spoken with our voices and offered constructive alternative solutions to official policies here, and we want to see these measures implemented before the next general elections, and not just put forward as election promises that are subjected to review. If they are not, then perhaps we should consider electing representatives who would speak for us and implement them for us instead. Respectfully yours, Several concerned netizens of Singapore.     Other parts in the series: >> Part 3: Foreign workers >> Part 2: Foreign scholars >> Part 1: Introduction  Read More →

By Se Young Lee from Wall Street Journal, 19 November 2009 Singapore's economy expanded slower than initially estimated in the third quarter, but the government expects growth to resume next year as the global recovery progresses. Still, the government retained a cautious outlook, warning that the pace of the rebound will likely be sluggish and possibly uneven amid persisting uncertainties in external conditions. The island state's gross domestic product in the three-month period ended Sept. 30 grew by 14.2% from the second quarter in seasonally adjusted, annualized terms, government data showed Thursday. While weaker than the government's advance estimate for a 14.9% expansion, the revised figure matched the median forecast of economists polled. From a year earlier, the economy grew 0.6%, slower than the government's initial estimate of a 0.8% expansion. The economists polled by Dow Jones Newswires had tipped a 0.5% rise under such terms. "Singapore's economic outlook for 2010 will be closely linked to global conditions," the Ministry of Trade and Industry said in a statement. "The sluggish recovery in advanced economies suggests a slower pace of growth, and the uncertainties in the recovery in external private final demand may signal an uneven recovery." The ministry noted that while the pace of the recovery will likely be stronger in Asia, conditions in the advanced economies remains fragile. "Growth momentum thus far has been driven by targeted fiscal stimulus measures and inventory cycle adjustments, but these factors are likely to taper off in the second half of 2010," the ministry said. "Even though there are some initial signs of a recovery in private demand, the durability of the recovery remains uncertain." The government also revised up its inflation forecast for 2010, now expecting the consumer price index to rise by between 2.5% and 3.5% compared with a rise of between 1% to 2% previously tipped. Trade promotion agency International Enterprise Singapore said in a separate statement Thursday that non-oil domestic exports will likely contract between 11% and 10% this year compared with a fall of between 12% and 10% seen previously. "There are stronger signs of stabilization in external demand, but the levels are still low," the agency said in the statement. "For the last quarter of 2009, Singapore's trade is expected to continue on its path of recovery." - WSJ Republished from Wall Street Journal  Read More →