Tan Wah Piow's Views on Singapore Elections
-
I think he is quite right in most aspects except that GE 2006 is not a convincing win for PAP. In fact it is the most embrassing win for LHL.
Exiled dissident Tan Wah Piow on Singapore elections
Singapore: New regime, old authority?
Yong Kai Ping and Kuek Ser Kuang Keng
Malaysiakini
May 6, 06
Is Singapore opening up under the new administration of Lee Hsien Loong? Are the new casinos a sign of greater freedom? Will the Singapore elections promise any breakthrough for democracy in Singapore?
For one of Singapore's most renowned dissident, Tan Wah Piow, the new regime under Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong is experimenting with a slightly more liberal agenda to counter the cynicism among the young, but party politics is still very much under strict control.
According to Tan, the whole political process in Singapore is so "sterile" that nobody will challenge the state's authority unless the state feels there is a need to loosen up a bit for their own interest.
"In Singapore, they will give you the basic rights if only when they feel is good for them," Tan told malaysiakini while visiting friends in Kuala Lumpur last week.
Tan's 'infamy' stems from his student activism heydays at the National University of Singapore (NUS) during the 70s where he was jailed eight months for "inciting riots".
Fearing for his safety, Tan fled Singapore in 1975 and sought asylum in United Kingdom. Later he was admitted to Oxford and studied law. Currently holding a UK passport, Tan is a leading human rights lawyer in London.
Tan spoke extensively on Singapore's coming general election which takes place today. The People's Action Party (PAP) was denied a walk-over victory as in previous elections and now having to contest for 47 out of 84 parliamentary seats, an unprecedented event since 1988.
Q: How do you view the new administration under Lee Hsien Loong?
A: I don't see anything new in terms of mindset. They have made it illegal to campaign via blogging and text messaging during the elections.
Lee Hsien Loong tries to look as though he is giving the opposition a fighting chance. But why they need to take that kind of action against Chee Soon Juan (who was bankrupted for defamation by the government and thus not eligible to contest) if they want to show themselves as being democratic?
The message that you sent to the population is "don't mess around with us." That is the most serious consequence to Singapore's political culture.
It is reported that Lee Hsien Loong wants to wipe out all the opposition in the coming elections to gain a stronger mandate.
Goh Chok Tong's lost four seats when he first led PAP into an election. The second time, he lost two. It is not a question of losing the elections, but the percentage of votes obtained. The benchmark Hsien Loong will be judged on is probably Goh's first elections.
I think he will have to win with less than four opposition seats. However people say that the PAP is now fielding more professionals and they have also implemented the group representation constituencies (GRC) system. To win one (constituency) is already very difficult for the opposition, let alone a GRC.
Probably what they are most afraid of will be the active cynicism, the attitude of "I don't care, you will get in but I will dissociate with you" among the younger generation.
You can praise your own regime by whatever way, people just 'switch-off'. It means the justification for nation building is difficult for them. They won't identify with the party and the state, if I have to leave, I will leave (through migration).
So you think the PAP can't capture the people's attention? But there have been efforts since the 80's to get the people to be involved.
What they are doing appears to be extremely progressive in getting more public participation. There are a lot of those institutions for the old and young but the underlying motive behind is still the hegemony of one party, which is what distorts the whole process.
If you challenge the decision of the state, you will be accused of all kinds of things. They will undermine you before you start. The moment they smell that you have the opposition tendency, they will mark you and if you are really an oppositionist, then you will get into serious problems. If you exist as an individual, they can tolerate you as a eccentric, tolerate in the sense that they won't put you in jail. The moment they sense (you are) organising, then you are in deep trouble.
You don't think the regime is more open now? They are allowing gambling.
That is the neo-liberal economic philosophy, which needs not necessary involve political liberalism. I hope people are not misinterpreting this.
They are experimenting a bit of this and that, but that absolute control is undeniable.
Do you think they are experimenting with political liberalism?
I can't say they are exactly the same as the Lee Kuan Yew's regime, they are experimenting a slightly more liberal agenda but the party politics is still under very much direct control and monitoring.
They will never cease using the Internal Security Department (ISD) to monitor the opposition. I think once an instrument of the state is used to monitor the opposition to serve the ruling party, and not for national security, you can't call such a system democratic.
But why?
They need to respond to the demand of the younger generation, to address the perception that they (PAP) are intolerant and so on. They need to demonstrate that the government is open-minded and tolerant of dissent.
I suppose that is why the senior Lee (Kuan Yew) wanted to test the younger generation's disappointment. The (televised) debate among Kuan Yew and the youths ended up as (a debate) on whether it is right to be disrespectful (to Kuan Yew), but that is not the issue.
So do you still pin the hope on the younger generation?
I think in every political process, they still need new ideas. The youths seem more distracted and show more concern for materialism than political ideals. Singapore wanted to use, although not overtly, Israel as a model to harden national consensus and the sense of national survival.
But I think that is a different context because Israel is very different from Singapore in terms of ethnicity, religion and so on. You can't copy the whole model, the idealism and the sense of nationalism, The urgency is not there.
The whole justification that Singapore can't have democratic space is that you are surrounded, and thus adopting a kind of 'under siege' mentality. You might get some support in the early period but not in this age. I can always pack up and go, then come back to Singapore as a visitor.
There is definitely a close political culture and historical link between Singapore and Malaysia. It is better for us to emphasise on our common destiny instead of differences. Is it by coincidence that the younger generation did not feel any affinity for Malaysia or is it the consequences of the way the Singapore state handles the relationship. I think Singaporeans will know more about Europe or Australia or those places where the culture is alien compared to Malaysia. We have to ask ourselves, is this healthy? Can Singapore's long term destiny be completely independent from Malaysia?
You think Malaysians have the same misunderstanding towards Singaporeans?
If you study in Britain, then you will know how people in the campus look at Singaporeans. There is the impression that they are arrogant, does not have that kind of maturity to understand the differences and disparity; and that they always think they are more sophisticated. In UK campuses, the 'kiasu' mentality is alive and kicking.
Malaysian Chinese may see Singapore as a heaven for career, and really, Singapore, I must say, is very well managed. (But) that cannot be a justification for the restraints in giving political rights. I think Singapore is effective because it has a powerful state intervention apparatus which is far better than any industrialised country.
Someone told me that the government is giving more publicity to the opposition. Apparently Lee Hsien Long is trying to appear to have a clean fight so that they can enjoy a more convincing win. And PAP will win convincingly again.
The whole political process in Singapore is so sterile that nobody will challenge the state's authority unless the state feels there is the need to relax a bit for their interest. In Singapore, they will give you the basic rights if only when they feel is good for them. That's why I can never agree with them. -
I am seeing stone flying toward singapore, but cannot see the figures of the thrower.. 
Comeback then talk. Don't be another Li Ao -
Tan can't be compared with Li Ao for he is a Singaporean while Li isn't.
-
A cosmopolitan and inclusive society is a society which can accommodate different views and alternatives of people including those who disagree with established order like Tan Wah Piow.
So when Tan Wah Piow said the election is an embarrassment to the government of LHL, it will be for the cosmopolitan society to make due allowance of that view by trying to improve on the past performance.
Sterile or not is the present order may be a matter of opinion but where such differences exist, the cosmopolitan society will make adjustment by coming up with solutions to make it more vibrant - not by clamping down of Tan Wah Piow and start calling him names.
The record of LHL will be judged by his ability to stay cosmopolitan in his actions not repeating the past with justification and look-good presentation through the media. Like what Diana says, get real !!! -
Tan Wah Piow is a true-blue civil libertarian. There are hundreds of people like him all over the Western world who are embraced with open arms.
-
We will have more debates with people like Tan Wah Piow around. That will be good as there will be more accountability and less NKFs.Originally posted by iveco:Tan Wah Piow is a true-blue civil libertarian. There are hundreds of people like him all over the Western world who are embraced with open arms. -
yup. +1 on this.Originally posted by robertteh:We will have more debates with people like Tan Wah Piow around. That will be good as there will be more accountability and less NKFs.
-
Originally posted by pearlie27:Tan can't be compared with Li Ao for he is a Singaporean while Li isn't.
Both acted the same way, must be here then talk about here. Any one also can just throw some stones and then went hiding. You called it a "Man".
Come back. -
It is not much of a "Man" either, when you realised that your opponent is able to threaten your political position, and you will abuse all the powers in your possession to 'FIX' your opponent.Originally posted by king108: Both acted the same way, must be here then talk about here. Any one also can just throw some stones and then went hiding. You called it a "Man".
Come back.Extract from: 'The Politics of Judicial Institutions in Singapore'
Immediately after serving his jail sentence, Tan was 'called-up' for National Service, and sent to the Artillery Unit. He probably got additional 'fixxing' attention from the Artillery Unit, which was constantly moving the 120mm Mortars manually on route marches.
The notorious case of Public Prosecutor v Tan Wah Piow demonstrates the parlous state of the judiciary in Singapore. Tan -- a third-year architectural student, and president of the University of Singapore Students Union (USSU) -- was charged, together with two others, with rioting inside the premises of the Pioneer Industries Employees' Union (PIEU), a government-controlled trade union, whose general secretary was Phey Yew Kok, a member of parliament and rising star on the PAP firmament. Phey was also president of the National Trades Union Congress, which has strong symbiotic ties with the PAP government.
The trial was partisan justice at its ugliest before the ambitious district court judge T.S. Sinnathuray, who kept Tan and his co-accused on a choke-leash. Tan's application for an adjournment to enable his counsel, John Platts-Mills, QC -- who had already been specially admitted to the Singapore bar -- to travel to Singapore for the purpose was twice denied by the trial judge.
Vital defence witnesses were arrested on the morning of the trial, and deported.
The defendants claimed the riot within, and damage to, the premises had been fabricated by Phey Yew Kok, but they were not allowed to produce evidence of it at the trial, as indeed other matters they considered crucial to their case.
Concerned at the judge's selective recordings of the proceedings, Tan applied for the trial to be tape-recorded, which was denied.
The judge for his part made no bones of what the outcome of the proceedings would be. His periodic ejaculations, "Forget about public interest!", "Forget about justice!", and "Forget about a fair trial!" -- albeit vented in exasperation to Tan's urgent applications or protestations to his rulings -- punctuated the proceedings, setting a leitmotif, which became a grim reality.
All three accused were found guilty, and convicted. Tan was sentenced to one year's imprisonment, and his co-accused to one month's imprisonment each.
Shortly afterwards, Sinnathuray was promoted to the high court.
An Australian Queen's Counsel, Frank Galbally, who observed the trial for the Australian Union of Students, said: "In Australia, the case would be laughed out of court ... the evidence and procedure ... would, in my opinion, have aborted any trial in Australia ... [The three accused] did not get a fair trial. ... In my opinion, it is just a political trial."
The experience of an English silk in a criminal trial in Singapore provides another perspective. Alun Jones, QC, discharged himself "for the first time in 23 years' practice," describing the judicial proceedings as "a travesty of a trial" and a "perversion of a judicial process." The trial judge displayed a "craven attitude" towards the prosecution.
Do we need to guess who was carrying the 120mm Motar Base Plate or the Barrel ?
Knowing that you will be constantly humiliated and psychologically fixed, will you not AWOL and stay away ?
During about the same period, and as a 'White Horse' - did LHL even get to carry the bipod for 120mm motar, let alone the barrel or its base plate ?
Tan Wah Piow was only a NUS Student Union Leader, with youthful enthusiasm to be socially active, to help the industrial workers to understand their Workers' Rights.
What was the crime that Tan Wah Piow committed to be fixed to such an extent ?
Incidentally, Phey Yew Kok later absconded from Singapore Justice after he was discovered for corruption in the development of the Big Splash project at the East Coast Park.
Surprisingly, this Government spent more money and time to track and persecute Francis Seow than taking any interest in bringing Phey Yew Kok back to Singapore for justice to be executed. -
That is why he needed to comeback even more. So that we can see what will happen to him..
-
Tan Wah Piow already is charged for AWOL by the SAF.Originally posted by king108: That is why he needed to comeback even more. So that we can see what will happen to him..
What further worst events can befall on him, after all that he has been 'FIXED' with since his first swipe with the POWER OF ONE ? -
Originally posted by Atobe:Tan Wah Piow already is charged for AWOL by the SAF.
What further worst events can befall on him, after all that he has been 'FIXED' with since his first swipe with the POWER OF ONE ? Ask me to believe a AWOList, you must be kidding me. If facing the enemies during a battle, I wondered will I be fighting on my own while my dear friend go and take over..
Ask him go and take over..don't come out.. I also worried the enemies may realise my where about when he started to run for his life.. -
An Australian Queen's Counsel, Frank Galbally, who observed the trial for the Australian Union of Students, said: "In Australia, the case would be laughed out of court ... the evidence and procedure ... would, in my opinion, have aborted any trial in Australia ... [The three accused] did not get a fair trial. ... In my opinion, it is just a political trial."
I like these quotes. Lovely choice of words.
The experience of an English silk in a criminal trial in Singapore provides another perspective. Alun Jones, QC, discharged himself "for the first time in 23 years' practice," describing the judicial proceedings as "a travesty of a trial" and a "perversion of a judicial process." The trial judge displayed a "craven attitude" towards the prosecution. -
Immediately after serving his jail sentence, Tan was 'called-up' for National Service, and sent to the Artillery Unit. He probably got additional 'fixxing' attention from the Artillery Unit, which was constantly moving the 120mm Mortars manually on route marches.
Quiiter and NS defaulter
Do we need to guess who was carrying the 120mm Motar Base Plate or the Barrel ?
Knowing that you will be constantly humiliated and psychologically fixed, will you not AWOL and stay away ? -
Even so, he is a free man in England now. THe English did the right thing offering him citizenship despite being a military deserter and fugitive from Singapore's (mockery of) justice.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Quiiter and NS defaulter
THe justice system in WA, despite its obvious flaws, is still better than ours in some ways.
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
thank you for the input.
quote:
Extract from: 'The Politics of Judicial Institutions in Singapore'
The notorious case of Public Prosecutor v Tan Wah Piow demonstrates the parlous state of the judiciary in Singapore. Tan -- a third-year architectural student, and president of the University of Singapore Students Union (USSU) -- was charged, together with two others, with rioting inside the premises of the Pioneer Industries Employees' Union (PIEU), a government-controlled trade union, whose general secretary was Phey Yew Kok, a member of parliament and rising star on the PAP firmament. Phey was also president of the National Trades Union Congress, which has strong symbiotic ties with the PAP government.
The trial was partisan justice at its ugliest before the ambitious district court judge T.S. Sinnathuray, who kept Tan and his co-accused on a choke-leash. Tan's application for an adjournment to enable his counsel, John Platts-Mills, QC -- who had already been specially admitted to the Singapore bar -- to travel to Singapore for the purpose was twice denied by the trial judge.
Vital defence witnesses were arrested on the morning of the trial, and deported.
The defendants claimed the riot within, and damage to, the premises had been fabricated by Phey Yew Kok, but they were not allowed to produce evidence of it at the trial, as indeed other matters they considered crucial to their case.
Concerned at the judge's selective recordings of the proceedings, Tan applied for the trial to be tape-recorded, which was denied.
The judge for his part made no bones of what the outcome of the proceedings would be. His periodic ejaculations, "Forget about public interest!", "Forget about justice!", and "Forget about a fair trial!" -- albeit vented in exasperation to Tan's urgent applications or protestations to his rulings -- punctuated the proceedings, setting a leitmotif, which became a grim reality.
All three accused were found guilty, and convicted. Tan was sentenced to one year's imprisonment, and his co-accused to one month's imprisonment each.
Shortly afterwards, Sinnathuray was promoted to the high court.
An Australian Queen's Counsel, Frank Galbally, who observed the trial for the Australian Union of Students, said: "In Australia, the case would be laughed out of court ... the evidence and procedure ... would, in my opinion, have aborted any trial in Australia ... [The three accused] did not get a fair trial. ... In my opinion, it is just a political trial."
The experience of an English silk in a criminal trial in Singapore provides another perspective. Alun Jones, QC, discharged himself "for the first time in 23 years' practice," describing the judicial proceedings as "a travesty of a trial" and a "perversion of a judicial process." The trial judge displayed a "craven attitude" towards the prosecution.
Incidentally, [b]Phey Yew Kok later absconded from Singapore Justice after he was discovered for corruption in the development of the Big Splash project at the East Coast Park.
Surprisingly, this Government spent more money and time to track and persecute Francis Seow than taking any interest in bringing Phey Yew Kok back to Singapore for justice to be executed. [/color]
[/b]
it is smart of Tan to seek political aslyum in UK. If he were to remain here he wont be able to realise his full potential. He would be reduced to another worker ant in the colony! -
Originally posted by king108:
Fortunately, Tan Wah Piow had the decency to AWOL before the action started, so that your (and our) precious life will be protected before the enemies can know of your (and our) position if he decide to run later.. as he is already gone . Ask me to believe a AWOList, you must be kidding me. If facing the enemies during a battle, I wondered will I be fighting on my own while my dear friend go and take over..
Ask him go and take over..don't come out.. I also worried the enemies may realise my where about when he started to run for his life.. -
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
This statement smells of smugness.
Quiiter and NS defaulter
Will you - can you - even stand up for your sense of social justice, or quietly walk away, or turn a blind-eye from the past, present and on-going political and social injustices that have been done with inpunity by the POWER OF ONE ?
That was the turbulent politics of the 1970-1980s.
If you were in his shoes - knowing that you are constantly FIXED into a dead end - and without any family influence (see Page 6) to extract you from your predicament, perhaps you will be not so smug, and be smart to be the 'quitter and NS defaulter' - especially for the simple fact that you are being FIXED by the POWER OF ONE for daring to stand up for your sense of social justice. -
Originally posted by Atobe:
What noble arguments for NS defaulters. Those charged with AWOL would do well to remember this at their court martial
This statement smells of [b]smugness.
Will you - can you - even stand up for your sense of social justice, or quietly walk away, or turn a blind-eye from the past, present and on-going political and social injustices that have been done with inpunity by the POWER OF ONE ?
That was the turbulent politics of the 1970-1980s.
If you were in his shoes - knowing that you are constantly FIXED into a dead end - and without any family influence (see Page 6) to extract you from your predicament, perhaps you will be not so smug, and be smart to be the 'quitter and NS defaulter' - especially for the simple fact that you are being FIXED by the POWER OF ONE for daring to stand up for your sense of social justice.[/b] -
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Is there any nobility for anyone who will not hesistate to abuse one's authority so as to satisfy one's personal vendetta towards another helplessly held at one's mercy ?
What noble arguments for NS defaulters. Those charged with AWOL would do well to remember this at their court martial
There is a difference when a Singaporean shirks his NS duties to AWOL, and when a Singaporean runs away to avoid being fixed - by those who will unabashedly abuse their POWER and USE the tough National Service Training as an extension of personal vendetta.
Will you make the ultimate sacrifice for your sense of social justice and sacrifice your citizenship, or KNOWINGLY subject yourself to constant abuse and persecution by the pettiness and insecure intolerance of those in Power ? -
But it will effect our troop's morale at the backline when they started to see defaulters. Worst case will be they may thought we lost the battle and retreat further..Originally posted by Atobe:Fortunately, Tan Wah Piow had the decency to AWOL before the action started, so that your (and our) precious life will be protected before the enemies can know of your (and our) position if he decide to run later.. as he is already gone . and left us fighting in the front. 
Lucky our signaler very advance this days..don't needed to waive flags..(cause I scared they may waived the white one..) -
Originally posted by king108:
If you are referring to Tan Wah Piow's AWOL - it happened in the late 1970s; and he is already gone for more then 30 years.
But it will effect our troop's morale at the backline when they started to see defaulters. Worst case will be they may thought we lost the battle and retreat further.. and left us fighting in the front. Lucky our signaler very advance this days..don't needed to waive flags..(cause I scared they may waived the white one..)
How many know about him - and the reason for his AWOL - until this thread appeared ?
How many Singaporeans have run away from NS because of Political Persecution ?
Tan Wah Piow is probably the only one NS eligible Singaporean, who got involved in politics before he even graduated from NUS.
He will hardly wave the White Flag to surrender, as he continue to be prick the POWER OF ONE and become a national Singaporean embarrassment in UK.
BTW the SAF Exercise Controllers always use the White Flag, surely you are not mistaking them to surrender.
For your info, flags are still used in our Navy, Armour and Artillery Units even in this high tech age. -
That is exercise..In war time, white flag is surrender..am I right.
I am only a ground troop and my duty is to protect the "XXXX", hence don't tell me all those front line because my M16 can shoot only few hundred metres.
One things I know...if the "XXXX" fallen..likely we waive white flags.. -
Originally posted by king108:
Actually the 'WHITE FLAG' is NOT a surrender flag but a flag that is internationally recognised as the 'call for a TRUCE' or a temporary cease in the firing of weapons and fighting. That is exercise..In war time, white flag is surrender..am I right.
I am only a ground troop and my duty is to protect the "XXXX", hence don't tell me all those front line because my M16 can shoot only few hundred metres.
One things I know...if the "XXXX" fallen..likely we waive white flags..
In a military exercise, the Exercise Controller display the 'White Flag' as an indication of being 'NEUTRAL'.
BTW being a ground trooper, it will also involve you DIRECTLY in the Front Line, and you better not imagine for a moment that you will be safe somewhere in the rear protecting some 'XXXX' location.
Actually, in the rear and protecting some 'XXXX' location will only expose you to some enemy Elite Troopers sent to raid the 'XXXX' location, and you will be in serious trouble before you can fire your M-16, or even fly the 'White Flag' to surrender or to call for a 'Cease Fire'. -
I don't agree with above. If someone accuse u of a liar, you are corrupted, do you stand up and against the rebuttal while your name and reputation are at stake of being gulity.Lee Hsien Loong tries to look as though he is giving the opposition a fighting chance. But why they need to take that kind of action against Chee Soon Juan (who was bankrupted for defamation by the government and thus not eligible to contest) if they want to show themselves as being democratic?
The message that you sent to the population is "don't mess around with us." That is the most serious consequence to Singapore's political culture.