ST Forum : Reconsider ban on outdoor protests
-
Sep 12, 2006
Reconsider ban on outdoor protests
SINGAPORE is about to welcome high-profile visitors to the International Monetary Fund (IMF)/World Bank meetings. All seems well and good, or is it?
Apparently not. From what I have read in various newspapers and even our own Sunday Times, it is clear that the IMF and World Bank seek to actively engage, instead of ignore and marginalise, protesters.
Some non-governmental organisations have expressed deep concern about their loss of freedom of expression and inability to voice their concerns in public but we maintain that security and peace would not be compromised.
If we are to become a truly global nation, we should embrace some global practices and some of the problems that they bring.
Living in a cocoon with a unique set of practices may have served us well but are we not now seeking to be more receptive of foreigners and the practices they uphold?
Furthermore, the IMF and World Bank meetings will result in decisions that affect not only Singapore and a select group of nations but also the nations whose voices desperately have to be heard, especially those where poverty is commonplace and strife is rampant.
This is, in fact, an excellent opportunity to demonstrate to the world that this tightly-controlled, prosperous nation-state can respect the right to peaceful freedom of expression.
Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong has explained why we decided to ban all outdoor protests. He explained that things got out of hand in Seattle and Hong Kong and we cannot create the impression that 'foreigners have more rights than Singaporeans'. While I cannot contend with the former, the latter is becoming a fact in Singapore. For instance, foreigners will have free entry to the casinos in the integrated resorts while Singaporeans will have to pay a fee.
We can deal with the first issue that SM Goh mentioned by actively learning from the mistakes that Seattle and Hong Kong made in previous IMF/World Bank meetings.
Besides, we have emphasised that this set of meetings will help us achieve our aim of raising our international profile as a hub to conduct meetings and various conferences, just as how the 117th International Olympic Committee Session in Singapore last year generated a lot of positive publicity.
I am extremely concerned about the bad publicity the blanket ban on protesters has generated. I hope the authorities would reconsider their position and show that we are not only a peace-loving nation but also a responsive and flexible one that respects the basic right of freedom of expression.
Vincent Tan Yan Fu -
'foreigners have more rights than Singaporeans'.
who refused us the rights in the first place?
we did not agree to it!! -
The name of the letter writer looks familiar. I might know him from my church some years back.
-
Originally posted by dragg:'foreigners have more rights than Singaporeans'.
who refused us the rights in the first place?
we did not agree to it!!
We are increasingly being seen as unable to walk the talk.
I worry for our relevance in the future when you have an administration that pays lip service to their own words. -
many a times they used singaporeans as an excuse.Originally posted by LazerLordz: We are increasingly being seen as unable to walk the talk.
I worry for our relevance in the future when you have an administration that pays lip service to their own words.
since when do we even have a say in such issues? -
Singapore is already in the 21st Century, and yet we constantly remind ourselves of the vicious circumstances of the 1960s to justify the ban on all forms of public protests.
Any development that bring us back to the circumstances of the 1960s will be through a process of time, which the ever alert Home Ministry will be able to pick-up the obvious social symptoms having the experience of the 1960s.
However, are there any such anarchic development that is about to develop from WITHIN Singapore Society - which has been largely cowed by the various draconian laws and a strong internal security force ?
What could be the real reason for banning these Foreign Talents in the Art of Street Demonstration and Protests ?
Is the Singapore Government afraid that these undesireable Foreign Talents will pollute the pristine and sterile conditions which they have purposefully and carefully manicured for the last forty-five years ?
Is the reason to prevent Singaporeans from learning first hand the creative methods and the issues involved, or is it simply to prevent the possibility of unnecessarily having the ability of the local security forces being stretched to the maximum ?
Whatever the reason maybe, if Singapore is to be a vibrant city with the X-Factor to inject a buzz - banning voices with alternative views, or being afraid to engage those voices that are more vocal and seen to be radical, will simply ridicule our claim to have arrive as a member of the First World.
The paranoia of the Singapore Government - especially by the Home Ministry and its Home Team - has now exposed the incompetency of the Singapore Government in dealing with sections of the World or Singapore Communities that differ from what is seen to be the norm.
In the following weeks we will see how Singapore Government will soon have to accomodate to international pressue, and show to the leaders from countries of true First World standards - the existence of a Double Standard in dealing with Foreigners and with suppressed Singaporeans.
The Double Standard that Singaporeans are subjected to, has already existed when the Singapore Government was persuaded by the US President in the Michael Fay incident, and more recently by the Australian Justice System to suspend the death penalty before approving the extradition of the double murderer Michael McCrea. -
If it sieves the unruly trouble-makers from the peaceful demonstrators, then i consider it a small price to pay.
It only takes one or two to incite violence and then we have a real problem.
Besides, demonstrations only work if IMF and World bank address their concerns. There have been numerous protests since the IMF and World Bank began their 'world tour', yet nothing has changed.
So are these people hitting the right channels? Or are they merely demonstrating for publicity and media attention?
Outdoor protests: The crux of the issue
I READ recent reports on Singapore's stand against outdoor protests with great interest. It amuses me how foreign civil activists would kick up a fuss when they could not get around Singapore's laws.
Do they expect Singapore's laws to be bent at will just so they could stage
outdoor protests during the International Monetary Fund (IMF)/World Bank meetings?
Are they unable to put across the points they want to raise to the delegates through methods other than protests?
One wonders what they expect to achieve by staging protests this time round, when on so many other occasions their calls to solve the problems they raised have gone unheeded.
If the IMF and World Bank deem it important that the protesters be allowed to raise their concerns, then why has little been done to address their concerns?
Do both bodies accredit civil activists simply to create a positive image to the world that they welcome alternative views, only to turn a deaf ear to the demands of the protesters at the end of the day?
The crux of the issue is not whether civil activists are granted the right to stage outdoor protests in Singapore but whether the problems raised by them will eventually be heard by the IMF and World Bank.
No doubt the intense media coverage might prove irresistible to some of the activists but I believe that there are other ways for them to have their messages heard by the delegates, and they should explore these alternative methods, instead of wasting their energy trying to pressure Singapore into bending its laws in their favour.
Tim Mou Hui
WILL PROBLEMS RAISED BE ADDRESSED?
Will the problems raised by civil activists be heard by the IMF and World Bank?
Reference ST Forum -
my jc gt one gp lecturer once wrote something of this nature in his lecture notes
the garmen say such things will lead to racial tension then followed by riots like those in the 60's, make investors leave singapore blah blah blah, is just the garmen way to scare the gullible electorates....if Bali, london, NY, madrid can bounce back after suffering security scare? why can't singapore?
that is the most meaningful thing i have heard in my jc lfe
-
I think our gov is trying to emulate China by playing hard-ball to international bodies and traditions.Originally posted by LazerLordz:Sep 12, 2006
Reconsider ban on outdoor protests
SINGAPORE is about to welcome high-profile visitors to the International Monetary Fund (IMF)/World Bank meetings. All seems well and good, or is it?
Apparently not. From what I have read in various newspapers and even our own Sunday Times, it is clear that the IMF and World Bank seek to actively engage, instead of ignore and marginalise, protesters.
Some non-governmental organisations have expressed deep concern about their loss of freedom of expression and inability to voice their concerns in public but we maintain that security and peace would not be compromised.
If we are to become a truly global nation, we should embrace some global practices and some of the problems that they bring.
Living in a cocoon with a unique set of practices may have served us well but are we not now seeking to be more receptive of foreigners and the practices they uphold?
Furthermore, the IMF and World Bank meetings will result in decisions that affect not only Singapore and a select group of nations but also the nations whose voices desperately have to be heard, especially those where poverty is commonplace and strife is rampant.
This is, in fact, an excellent opportunity to demonstrate to the world that this tightly-controlled, prosperous nation-state can respect the right to peaceful freedom of expression.
Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong has explained why we decided to ban all outdoor protests. He explained that things got out of hand in Seattle and Hong Kong and we cannot create the impression that 'foreigners have more rights than Singaporeans'. While I cannot contend with the former, the latter is becoming a fact in Singapore. For instance, foreigners will have free entry to the casinos in the integrated resorts while Singaporeans will have to pay a fee.
We can deal with the first issue that SM Goh mentioned by actively learning from the mistakes that Seattle and Hong Kong made in previous IMF/World Bank meetings.
Besides, we have emphasised that this set of meetings will help us achieve our aim of raising our international profile as a hub to conduct meetings and various conferences, just as how the 117th International Olympic Committee Session in Singapore last year generated a lot of positive publicity.
I am extremely concerned about the bad publicity the blanket ban on protesters has generated. I hope the authorities would reconsider their position and show that we are not only a peace-loving nation but also a responsive and flexible one that respects the basic right of freedom of expression.
Vincent Tan Yan Fu
With the size of our country, if they finds it too much of a hassle to do things here, they can very well take it all somewhere else where there's freedom in both expression and policies.
Our gov is always like that; want to eat spicy food, but there must be NO CHILLIES in it!
Is it STUPID or is it STUPID?
Please lah... if cannot compromise on small things, don't waste people's time on the big things!! -
Where do you think, the two terms "Kiasi" and "Kiasu" came from??Originally posted by ctstalin:my jc gt one gp lecturer once wrote something of this nature in his lecture notes
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the garmen say such things will lead to racial tension then followed by riots like those in the 60's, make investors leave singapore blah blah blah, is just the garmen way to scare the gullible electorates....if Bali, london, NY, madrid can bounce back after suffering security scare? why can't singapore?
that is the most meaningful thing i have heard in my jc lfe -
Wayang!!!
Licking the Cs of foreigners!!!!
My sg gov!!!!
Double std!!!!! -
and you wonder how there are so many ill-mannered holier-than-thou Singaporeans around.Originally posted by ShutterBug:I think our gov is trying to emulate China by playing hard-ball to international bodies and traditions.
With the size of our country, if they finds it too much of a hassle to do things here, they can very well take it all somewhere else where there's freedom in both expression and policies.
Our gov is always like that; want to eat spicy food, but there must be NO CHILLIES in it!
Is it STUPID or is it STUPID?
Please lah... if cannot compromise on small things, don't waste people's time on the big things!!
All conditioned to be selfish. -
Take a look at these:
http://www.heartland.org/archives/environment/feb00/seattle.htm
heartland.org is an organization dedicated to alternative economics; e.g. big-box developments, industrial agriculture etc (read: anti-IMF)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/544786.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/gall/0,8542,524927,00.html
Genoa 2001
http://www.spectrezine.org/global/Bibi.htm
Gothenburg riots during EU summit
"The masked activists ran down Avenyn and broke practically all the windows, they robbed a couple of stores and burned furniture and carpets. Several activists and police officers were injured, about 200 activists were arrested." A swedish protester's eye-witness account
my view ?
it's all fine and dandy to say that the right to protest shouldn't be infringed blah blah blah .... untill you get your car burnt or your shop windows smashed ... it's easy to say that when it's not your property being destroyed, not your city that has to deal with the consequences ....
we're not banning protests totally, so what's the big fuss ? IMF/World bank should realise that if this keeps up, perhaps no cities would want to host their meetings in the future ! ... -
This is our country or their???Originally posted by Fatum:Take a look at these:
http://www.heartland.org/archives/environment/feb00/seattle.htm
heartland.org is an organization dedicated to alternative economics; e.g. big-box developments, industrial agriculture etc (read: anti-IMF)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/544786.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/gall/0,8542,524927,00.html
Genoa 2001
http://www.spectrezine.org/global/Bibi.htm
Gothenburg riots during EU summit
"The masked activists ran down Avenyn and broke practically all the windows, they robbed a couple of stores and burned furniture and carpets. Several activists and police officers were injured, about 200 activists were arrested." A swedish protester's eye-witness account
my view ?
it's all fine and dandy to say that the right to protest shouldn't be infringed blah blah blah .... untill you get your car burnt or your shop windows smashed ... it's easy to say that when it's not your property being destroyed, not your city that has to deal with the consequences ....
we're not banning protests totally, so what's the big fuss ? IMF/World bank should realise that if this keeps up, perhaps no cities would want to host their meetings in the future ! ...
-
We've given them their space, now it's time for it to be applied to everyone.Originally posted by Fatum:Take a look at these:
http://www.heartland.org/archives/environment/feb00/seattle.htm
heartland.org is an organization dedicated to alternative economics; e.g. big-box developments, industrial agriculture etc (read: anti-IMF)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/544786.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/gall/0,8542,524927,00.html
Genoa 2001
http://www.spectrezine.org/global/Bibi.htm
Gothenburg riots during EU summit
"The masked activists ran down Avenyn and broke practically all the windows, they robbed a couple of stores and burned furniture and carpets. Several activists and police officers were injured, about 200 activists were arrested." A swedish protester's eye-witness account
my view ?
it's all fine and dandy to say that the right to protest shouldn't be infringed blah blah blah .... untill you get your car burnt or your shop windows smashed ... it's easy to say that when it's not your property being destroyed, not your city that has to deal with the consequences ....
we're not banning protests totally, so what's the big fuss ? IMF/World bank should realise that if this keeps up, perhaps no cities would want to host their meetings in the future ! ... -
well ... take a look at this forum ...Originally posted by LazerLordz:We've given them their space, now it's time for it to be applied to everyone.
-
One word 2 say Spore ,we r the die 222!!!
My heart broken 4 the sick of the sg goc,wat r yr ps!!!!
How i can tell my sons 2 believe in U!!! -
you and I know that forums have a majority population of wackjobs and fringe elements.Originally posted by Fatum:well ... take a look at this forum ...
don't take it too hard -
I don't mean it that way ...Originally posted by LazerLordz:you and I know that forums have a majority population of wackjobs and fringe elements.
don't take it too hard
I was talking about space being given ...
no forumers were dragged off in the middle of the night or sued by the men in white yet eh ? ...
blogs are also another good example, mrbrown notwithstanding ... -
Originally posted by Fatum:I don't mean it that way ...
I was talking about space being given ...
no forumers were dragged off in the middle of the night or sued by the men in white yet eh ? ...
blogs are also another good example, mrbrown notwithstanding ...
talking about blogs, there are quite a lot of sharp and well-written blogs around the place. -
exactly ....Originally posted by LazerLordz:
talking about blogs, there are quite a lot of sharp and well-written blogs around the place.
put your arguments across, cut the mindless rhetoric, and you'll get your point across ...
if you start sounding like a wackjob ... you'll end up talking to yourself, this forum is a good example, no ? ...
but seriously, I don't want no trouble causing hippies burning up suntec shops, no matter what the world may think ...
I'm sure many Genoans and Seattleites were wishing they did the same ...
-
What about that Acidflask guy? didn't EDB want to sue the pants off him because he complained that Philip Yeo lacked flexibility?Originally posted by LazerLordz:
talking about blogs, there are quite a lot of sharp and well-written blogs around the place. -
The growth and sudden mushrooming of hardhitting blogs that strike into the facts have strengthened the blogosphere quite substantially over the last year..Originally posted by iveco:What about that Acidflask guy? didn't EDB want to sue the pants off him because he complained that Philip Yeo lacked flexibility?
These are scare tactics, most of it hollow. -
You really think so? Their meetings generate big big money you know?Originally posted by Fatum:........ IMF/World bank should realise that if this keeps up, perhaps no cities would want to host their meetings in the future ! ... -
Singapore government's reason for banning the 28 civil group activists is there will be similar occurrences of riots as has happened before.
IMF/WB meetings are big events for showcasing of civil groups' respective concern. Even if their expressions of concern are passionate and may cause certain degree of riots such riots will be localised to the immediate causes and groups and usually not against the general population or government.
All must really understand that basically people need a certain degree of freedom to be able to take part or be part of the social or world orders including expressions of their concerns or passions.
These civil activists do not come to the host nations with an agenda to overthrow governmen where the rioters have certain reasons to get agitated.
Their targets are not necessarily the police or the government. Will such riots lead to general uprising ? So why not there be more understanding of the limited purposes and isolated nature of any such expressions of passionate views of the particular activists for attention of the world press and nothing more.
So if police overreact and started to cause reprisals by heavy handed measures, of course that will definitely lead to spillovers.
If Singapore wants to host further world conferences then it should understand the true nature of such civil activists' showcasing of concerns with particular global or social problems.
Their actions will in the long run benefit all in upholding democracy thorughout the world and lead to stability and fairness, progress and future prosperity of all people.
Only closed systems which have caused pent-up populations are afraid of such civil activism. Let these controlled societies ponder again and see how in time they could liberalise and loosen up and get everyone on board instead of only working to serve their own self-serving agendas.
A time table will need to be set to free up controlled societies so that they will have no fear at all of any civil activism and will not have to keep giving law-and-order excuses to perpetuate in their undisclosed self-interests.