IT TOOKS THE LEES AND PAP 30YEARS TO DESTORY J B JEYARETNAM
-
The Ruling PAP have slowly but finally destroyed JBJeyaretnam in 2001. This man have fought for us in Parliament, He speaks for the common Laymen. He is a True Opposition which needed to be destroyed by the PAP.
"He(JBJeyaretnam) has never crawled, nor begged for mercy...Jeyaretnam will leave the political scene with his head held high...
(CV Devan Nair,President of Singapore 1981 to 1985 in the SYDNEY MORNING HERALD - 5th April 1999)
1972:
Farrer Park - JBJeyaretnam(WP) 23.11% Lee Chiaw Meng(PAP) 73.82%
1976:
Kampong Chai Chee - JBJeyaretnam(WP) 40.08% Fong Sip Chee(PAP) 59.92%
1976- PAP transferred the incumbent candidate, a Malay and brought in a Chinese candidate who campaigned that JBJ was not able to speak Mandarin or any Chinese dialect, and Chinese voters would not be able to speak to him. Despite this campaign, JBJ obtained 40% of votes.
1980:
Telok Blangah - JBJeyaretnam(WP) 46.98% Rohan Bin Kamis(PAP) 53.02%
1980: Forced to sell his banglow property at Rebecca Road to pay for these LEE Dynasty lawsuits of 1976.
1981
By-Elections)
Anson - JBJeyaretnam(WP) 51.93% Pang Kim Hin(PAP) 47.10%
JBJ became the First Opposition Mp since Independence.
Elections was called within 4 Years, As LKY considered JBJ a threat to the system. LKY has said on numerous occasion that JBJ had to be destroyed.
1984:
Anson - JBJeyaretnam(WP) 56.81% Ng Pock Too(PAP) 43.19%
During the 84 Elections PAP was determined to unseat JBJ .The man chosen to fight JBJ was handpicked by LKY. The PAP so confident that JBJ will be unseated that his supporters had come to the counting centre with a banner congratulating the PAP Candidate for beating him. The Reality is JBJ won with a increase % of votes. The ruling PAP's share of national votes dropped by 12.5% after JBJ's 3 years in parliament.
1986: JBJeyaretnam was unseated from his beloved Anson from the ruling of the Singapore Courts. JBJ was Criminaly Charged with of Having Mis-Used party finances, barring him from his practice as an attorney.
The Privy Council noted that JBJ had suffered a serious "miscarriage of justice". The Singapore Government's response was to abolish the Privy Council as S'pore's Highest Court and to refuse to reinstate JBJ in Parliament. JBJ was thus unable to stand for the next two elections, due to his fine of S$5000 and 3Mths Jail Sentance.
1988- JBJ banned from standing in this Elections.
2nd defamation suit brought by Lee Kuan Yew over questions asked at a rally.LKY was awarded damages of $260,000-00. JBJ once again hit by another Defamation Lawsuit.Legal costs to over $500,000-00. Forced to sell his apartment property at Mount Sanai Rise to pay for 1988 lawsuits.
1988- LEE Dynasty also prevented The Privy Council to continue as Singapore's highest court of appeal, after Mr. JBJ's cases.
1988- The GRC was formed. GRC was formed because in 1984 JBJ retain his Anson with a increase % of votes while Potong Pasir was captured by Mr.Chiam See Tong, this triggered the panick button for the PAP. JBJeyaretnam was the major contributing factor of the formation of GRC. PAP were afraid that more seats would be lost, its simple as that.
1991- The Next Elections is supposed to be held in 1993 but PM GCT called the elections much earlier just two months before JBJ's disqualification ran out on the 10th Nov 1991. So Elections was called to prevent JBJ from standing in the 1991 GE.
1991- JBJ still was banned due to Elections being called earlier.
1995- One new suit brought by S JAYAKUMAR and four PAP MPs
Another suit brought by eleven Indian members of Tamil Language Week that they had organised.$200,000-00 awarded against JBJ and 12 other defendants for JAYAKUMAR .$265,000-00 awarded against JBJ and 2 other defendeants for the eleven Indian members. Judgment enforced only against Mr. JBJ
1997:
Cheng San GRC:
JBJeyaretnam
Huang Seow Kwang
Abdul Rahim Bin Osman
Tan Bin Seng
Tang Liang Hong
(Worker's Party) 45.18%
Heng Chiang Meng
Lee Yock Suan
Michael Lim Chun Leng
Yeo Guat Kwang
Zainul Abidin Rasheed
(PAP) 54.82%
1997: JBJeyaretnam again entered Parliament as an NCMP despite Govt's called to Cheng San voters not to vote for Worker's Party if not all help from the Govt will be withdrawn, no upgrading etc.
1997:
7 suits brought by 11 PAP MPs including:-
Lee Kuan Yew
Lee Hsien Loong
Goh Chok Tong
plus other cabinet ministers and PAP MPs over a statement made at CHENG SAN election rally that Tang Liang Hong had filed a police report against these ministers and MPs.Only the suit by Goh Chok Tong was heard, and awarded $100,000-00 against Mr. JBJcosts $20 awarded, plus additional expense for JBJ's QC.
2001: After 4years as an NCMP fighting for worker's and low income earners, JBJ was destroyed by the Lees. Just in time for the 2001GE.
JBJeyaretnam Adjudicated a bankrupt and forced to leave the parliament.
2001 till Present:
J B Jeyaretnam still sells his books on a platform where it is also a so called Tourist Attraction for some.
During my NS days i hate calling Sir's to anybody. If theres one person who deserved to be called "sir" is JBJ. JBJ sir, all i can say is take a break, its not worth fighting for coward Singaporeans.
IT TOOKS THE LEES AND PAP 30YEARS TO DESTORY J B JEYARETNAM. A TRUE, CREDIBLE OPPOSITION. -
Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam:
Date of Birth: January 5, 1926
Served as a judge in Singapore District Court (1952-1957)
Served with Attorney Generals' Chamber (1957-1961)
Served as The Registrar Of Singapore Supreme Court, District Judge and Head of Subordinate Judiciary (1961-1963)
A very senior lawyer in private practice (1964-2000)
Elected as member of Singapore Parliament in 1981, re-elected in 1984. He is the icon of Singaporeans' political struggle against Long Term Single Party Rule and Power Monopoly of Lee Kuan Yew family. Mr. Jeyaretnam is also the icon victim of Lee Kuan Yew's notorious style of bully & oppression.
Some additional datelines that should have been included:
1971 - Joined the Workers' Party in June and was elected on the same day as Secretary-General.
1986 - Some of the epithets applied to him in parliament by Mr Lee include "hustler", "skunk", "mangy dog", "charlatan", and "political riff-raff".
(Hansard, Parliamentary debates, March 19, 1986, cols. 688-689, 720)
2002 Jeyaretnam labelled true blue Singaporean in rare tribute
Is J B Jeyaretnam a 'true blue Singaporean Loyalist' or a 'mangy dog', 'political riff-raff' ?
What kind of Political Leader does Singapore deserve, who will call an Opposition Leader a "mangy dog" in Parliament ?
If this is not another indication of sheer arrogance ? -
He never really fought for our brain and butter issues or he was too late.Originally posted by caramon.:During my NS days i hate calling Sir's to anybody. If theres one person who deserved to be called "sir" is JBJ. JBJ sir, all i can say is take a break, its not worth fighting for coward Singaporeans.
I respect him for his ideals stemmed from his faith in Christianity. But he was stubborn, the just whack kind, not surprised he was destroyed. -
Must everyone fight on bread and butter issues to be an effective activist?Originally posted by Icemoon:He never really fought for our brain and butter issues or he was too late.
I respect him for his ideals stemmed from his faith in Christianity. But he was stubborn, the just whack kind, not surprised he was destroyed.
He surely ignited the fires within many of us , and some of us do have this attitude that we should always question everything we see before passing judgement.
A good chap, I admire his gumption. -
If you challenge PAP on the foundations, you'll be destroyed. More so if you're the just whack kind like him.Originally posted by LazerLordz:Must everyone fight on bread and butter issues to be an effective activist?
He surely ignited the fires within many of us , and some of us do have this attitude that we should always question everything we see before passing judgement.
A good chap, I admire his gumption.
Is he effective? After all, after 30 years, what did he achieve? His actions almost ruin the WP and they did boot him out in the end. -
he sacrificed everything for politics.
-
Maybe not in the macro sense, but at least people do talk of political reform, and the fact is that the fear factor is not there anymore.Originally posted by Icemoon:If you challenge PAP on the foundations, you'll be destroyed. More so if you're the just whack kind like him.
Is he effective? After all, after 30 years, what did he achieve? His actions almost ruin the WP and they did boot him out in the end.
Call me an idealist, but isn't what idealism keeps us going?He may not have been a grassroots guy, but he has his place, and we must all realise that nothing is ever permanent.
Reforms will be made, systems will evolve, and perhaps future generations will understand what he and CSJ's message were.We cannot judge them from the point of view of community leadership and grassroots organisation.They are more value-based activists than politicians, and its clear that the majority of our population are not sufficiently educated and informed in civil society affairs and politics to properly engage their platforms.
Think about it, why do you think the MIW choose to confront and engage them robustly?These are intellectuals, people who can stand eye to eye to them in intelligence and policy analysis, which was the same as Gomez.
Building Singapore is like building a puzzle, we may not be able to fit the odd pieces in right now, but to acheive a complete picture, they must be in the frame too, eventually. -
yup.. i agree.. if not for so many lawsuits by the pap, he would b enjoying life now instead of being bankrupt..Originally posted by dragg:he sacrificed everything for politics.
-
double
-
I have a question.
Why wasn't Jeya detained by the ISD?
After all, they did detain some people from the WP during his time. -
luckily he has a capable son.Originally posted by monoslayer:yup.. i agree.. if not for so many lawsuits by the pap, he would b enjoying life now instead of being bankrupt.. -
bankrupt better than detention without trial. or becoming prisoner of sentosa theme park.Originally posted by monoslayer:yup.. i agree.. if not for so many lawsuits by the pap, he would b enjoying life now instead of being bankrupt.. -
I thought he has two? not sure what they are doing now.Originally posted by dragg:luckily he has a capable son. -
i think they r civil servants (correct me if i m wrong).. anyway, heard they dun wanna get into politics leh...Originally posted by Icemoon:I thought he has two? not sure what they are doing now. -
I think one is doctor the other one is lawyer. Names are kenneth and phillip?Originally posted by monoslayer:i think they r civil servants (correct me if i m wrong).. anyway, heard they dun wanna get into politics leh...
one definitely is lawyer. 'cos jeya attended the ceremony where he was called to the bar.
edited: the other son is an economist. -
-
President of the Law Society.
ISA is not something you use on your political opponents without economic fallout from your investors. -
i saw him at city hall mrt entrance selling his books... still passionate in what he believes in.......
-
Big fark?Originally posted by LazerLordz:President of the Law Society.
Francis Seow also President of Law Society before. Where is he now?
-
but last time leh? Last time ISA was used without any discrement.Originally posted by LazerLordz:ISA is not something you use on your political opponents without economic fallout from your investors.
When they detain the Catholic people, got Vatican fallout or not?
Even Francis Seow himself was detained, according CSJ. But I don't remember Jeya was detained. -
His books or CSJ's books more popular?Originally posted by TehJarVu:i saw him at city hall mrt entrance selling his books... still passionate in what he believes in....... -
It is still a shameful episode.Let's hope Lee Jr learns from that.Originally posted by Icemoon:but last time leh? Last time ISA was used without any discrement.
When they detain the Catholic people, got Vatican fallout or not?
Even Francis Seow himself was detained, according CSJ. But I don't remember Jeya was detained.
The system we see today, won't last another 50 years without constitutional reform, that's my take on things. -
Lee Senior has no qualms about using the ISA to 'fix' political opponents. Nor will it adversely affect foregin investors.Originally posted by LazerLordz:President of the Law Society.
ISA is not something you use on your political opponents without economic fallout from your investors.
To this date, Chia Thye Poh remains a prime example of abuse of the system, without any compensation or apology despite 32 years of interrogation, isolation and wrongful arrest by the SG Govt. Not a shred of evidence was found and his case never went to trial.
Today, he has nothing left, and continues to remain under the watchful eye of the home affairs ministry.
If the PAP is so self-righteous and insistent on 'transparency', why isn't there anything official published to explain this disgraceful injustice?
Who can sincerely believe that the Ruling Party with Lee Senior at the helm have even an inkling of the word 'INTEGRITY'? -
DISSIDENTS IN SINGAPORE
Carl Parkes
Singapore Handbook, 1st edition
Joining an opposition party or running in elections against the PAP can be a risky career move as shown by the stories below.
Chia Thye Poh
SingaporeÂ’s original political dissident and near-holder of worldÂ’s record for political detention is former assemblyman and university lecturer, Chia Thye Poh, who was held in detention from 1966 to 1989, a 23-year stretch exceeded only by that of Nelson Mandela.
Chia had been a lecturer at Singapore’s Nanyang University and an opposition member of Parliament representing the now defunct Barisan Socialis party. In October 1966 Chia resigned his parliamentary seat to protest the detention of other Barisan legislators and was arrested three weeks later under Singapore’s Internal Security Act. Chia was held without formal charge or a trial for 22 years in Whitley Road Detention Centre. When the Internal Security Department (ISD) offered to release him on condition that he “give a public undertaking renouncing the use of force and terror to overthrow the government,” Chia refused on the grounds that he never advocated violence or been a member of the communist party.
Chia was finally released from prison in 1989 under the condition that he remain confined on the tourist resort island of Sentosa, where he worked in a converted souvenir stand as assistant curator of the museum. Some say he his release from prison a few weeks before Nelson MandelaÂ’s release was timed so that Singapore could avoid the dubious distinction of having the worldÂ’s longest serving political prisoner. An unapologetic Chia was later sent home and now lives with his father but is forbidden to be employed, travel abroad, issue public statements, or associate with other former detainees without ISD approval.
J.B. Jeyaretnam
SingaporeÂ’s most defiant opposition figure is Sri Lankan-born attorney Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam who, during the mid-1980s, claimed the citizens of Singapore suffered from the authoritarian and paternalistic behavior of Lee's government. Perhaps alarmed by the decline in PAP popularity and the election of J.B. Jeyaretnam to Parliament in 1981 as the first opposition candidate in over a decade, the government introduced a series of constitutional amendments and disciplinary measures aimed at troublesome politicians. Punitive lawsuits eventually bankrupted the cash-poor Workers Party and put Jeyaretnam on trial where he was denied legal council, convicted, stripped of his parliamentary position, banned from contesting future elections, and disbarred from legal practice.
Jeyaretnam's appeal to the Privy Council in London--a right generally granted all citizens of British Commonwealth nations--ruled that he and his co-accused had suffered “grievous injustice” and were “fined, imprisoned and publicly disgraced of offenses of which they were not guilty.” After another incident with Francis Seow, the government passed legislation which prohibited the right of appeal to the Privy Council, a British institution which the ruling party portrayed as an unnecessary legacy of colonialism.
Jeyaretnam later withdrew his appeal before the Singapore Court of Appeals for parliamentary reinstatement and lost a US$232,723 defamation suit to former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew. Jeyaretnam was later sued by the Straits Times which forced him back into bankruptcy court and threatened to end his colorful political career. He lost the case in late 1994 and was ordered to pay the Straits Times almost US$100,000.
Jeyaretnam and his WorkerÂ’s Party has lost ground to younger opposition parties such as the Singapore Democratic Party which won three parliamentary seats in the 1991 general elections. Although Jeyaretnam has returned to legal practice, he has lost all subsequent parliamentary elections after a 10-year forced hiatus from politics.
Vincent Cheng and the Marxist Conspiracy
Although Vincent Cheng has never served in a political position, mention must be made of the 1987 arrest of 22 people involved in what the government called a “Marxist conspiracy” to overthrow the government. Among the arrested were Catholic Church social workers, employees of Jeyaretnam's Workers Party newspaper, and members of a theatrical company called Third Stage. The government claimed the two leaders of the Marxist conspiracy were Vincent Cheng, a Catholic Church activist, and Tan Wah Piow, a former student leader who, according to the government, had been attempting to overthrow the Singapore government since attending law school in Oxford.
Reaction to the arrests was disbelief since few observers thought it possible that this loose collection of lawyers, Christian activists, and theatrical performers comprised some sort of Marxist conspiracy against the Singapore government. Thirty-nine members of the U.S. Congress signed a letter condemning the arrests and the subsequent detentions of the accused without trial.
Those arrested were interrogated and then paraded before the media in an orchestrated campaign to convince the public of their guilt, while the Straits Times presented accusations made by the Ministry of Home Affairs as fact rather than allegation. Amnesty International claimed that both psychological and physical torture were used to extract the confessions of the political detainees. All but one of the suspects were eventually set free, but eight were re-arrested after signing a statement saying that their confessions had been obtained after beatings, intimidation, and deceit.
Vincent Cheng remained under ISD house arrest until 1995 when restrictions were finally lifted. -
continuation:
Francis Seow
Another sad case of government actions against political activists is Francis Seow, a former solicitor general and ex-president of Singapore's Law Society who harshly criticized the government while representing the suspects in “Marxist conspiracy” described above. The government responded by arresting Seow as a threat to national security and placing him under the control of the Internal Security Department, a secret police agency which taps phones, searches mail, and has the power to detain suspects without trail under the terms of the Internal Security Act. Seow, accused of plotting with Americans to interfere in Singapore’s internal affairs, was held for 72 days while the ISD interrogated his about his political beliefs, sources of income, and possible financial support from the American government.
The crisis peaked when the Singapore government demanded that Mason Hendrickson, a U.S. Embassy employee, be removed from his Singapore post for interfering in domestic politics and secretly urging lawyers such as Seow to run in general elections. The U.S. government denied the charges and, in response, ordered the expulsion of a Singaporean envoy from Washington.
Soon after his release from ISA detention, Seow further infuriated the government by announcing his plans to run as an opposition candidate in the upcoming election. Seow won a non-constituency parliamentary seat. The government responded by filing six counts of tax evasion against Seow, who promptly fled the country for the United States. Seow was subsequently convicted of tax evasion in absentia and disqualified from his seat in Parliament. Fearing that Seow would appeal to the Privy Council and still angry with the earlier success of Jeyeratnam , the government abolished the defendant's right of habeas corpus and right of final appeal to the Privy Council.
Rather than returning to Singapore, Seow accepted a fellowship at Yale University and now resides in the United States. Seow authored an account of his experiences in To Catch a Tartar: A Dissident in Lee Kuan YewÂ’s Prison. The book, as you might imagine, is not sold in Singapore but is widely available in Malaysia.
Chee Soon Juan
Dr. Chee, a neuropsychologist and former lecturer at the National University of Singapore, is one of the few individuals in Singapore who continues to challenge the ruling party in his position of head of the Singapore Democratic Party.
Chee was educated in the United States where he obtained his Ph.D. from the University of Georgia in 1990 before returning to Singapore to work in the Department of Social Work and Psychology at the National University of Singapore. In 1992, Chee joined the Singapore Democratic Party and ran for prime minister against Goh Chok Tong, the former prime minister and major figure within the ruling party. Chee even sought public assurances from Prime Minister Goh that there would be no hard feelings if he opposed him in the elections.
Just months after losing the election to Goh, Chee was fired by the university on charges that he had spent US$138 of university research funds to ship his wife's doctoral thesis to Pennsylvania State University. Chee insisted that the reimbursement voucher had been signed by Dr. Vasoo, the head of the department and a PAP member of Parliament. Vasoo presented an altered voucher but Chee was in a hopeless position. After he lost his job at the university, Chee continued to insist that his dismissal was politically motivated. For these remarks, Chee was sued for libel by Dr. Vasoo and two other senior members of the department.
Rather than settle out of court, Chee sold his house to finance his defense but lost the case and was forced to pay the almost $300,000 to the litigants.
His problems did not end there. Back in private psychology practice, Chee finds most doctors unwilling to refer patients and most of his friends have abandoned him out of fear of reprisal. Yet Chee continues to stand up to the government. His first book, Dare To Change, argues that authoritarian forms of government will ultimately fail as democracy, free speech, and individual rights spread across Asia. Chee later wrote Singapore My Home Too. Both books receive limited distribution in Singapore.
Chee stirred up more controversy in September 1995 when he delivered a message about the state of Singapore at Williams College in Massachusetts. Parliament censured Chee two months later on the grounds that he had allegedly failed to contradict attacks on the judiciary made by CheeÂ’s fellow panelists, dissident Francis Seow and academic Christopher Lingle.
Chee found himself in hot water again in August 1996 after he accepted an offer to debate the government on political issues and the rising costs of public health care. During the debate, Chee misquoted some statistics which infuriated the PAP and brought charges of parliamentary contempt from the Minister of Health.
Persecutor :
Lee Kuan Yew Speaks
Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew, once one of the world’s most articulate voices of freedom, had this to say in 1956 as an opposition member of Parliament: “But either we believe in democracy or we do not. If we do, then we must say categorically, without qualification, that no restraint from any democratic process, other than by ordinary law of the land, should be allowed. If you believe in democracy, you must believe in it unconditionally. If you believe that men should be free, then they should have the right of free association, of free speech, of free publication. Then no law should permit those democratic processes to be set at naught. . .”
In a subsequent speech made when Singapore was part of the Malaysian federation, Lee articulated his feelings about freedom of the press and media. ”Let us get down to fundamentals. Is this an open or a closed society? Is it a society where men can preach ideas—the novel, unorthodox, heresies. . . where there is a constant contest for men’s heats and minds on the basis of what is right, of what I just, or what is in the national interest? Or is it a closed society where the mass media—the newspapers, journals, publications, TV, radio. . . feed men’s minds with a constant drone of sycophantic support for a particular orthodox philosophy?”