World Bank criticizes Singapore; Sg breached an agreement
-
What more can I say, but - LPPL!
==========================================
Sep 14, 12:49 AM EDT
World Bank criticizes Singapore for barring entry of some activists
By CHRISTOPHER TORCHIA
Associated Press Writer
SINGAPORE (AP) -- Singapore breached an agreement by barring 28 activists from entering the country to attend the annual meetings of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, the institutions said Thursday.
"We're very displeased with the current state of affairs," said Kevin Shaw Kellems, senior adviser to World Bank chief Paul Wolfowitz. "There was not an indication until late in the game that there was going to be a problem."
The dispute highlighted tension between Singapore's strict controls on politics and expression, and efforts by the IMF and the World Bank to be more open to the views of grassroots groups that have accused them of elitism. It also threatened to taint Singapore's efforts as host of the Washington-based groups to showcase its economy and hospitality on a global stage.
Singaporean police had said the activists would not be allowed entry for the IMF and World Bank meetings on Monday and Tuesday because they had been involved in "disruptive activities" in other nations. They did not identify the activists, but said some had participated in anti-globalization protests that turned violent in Seattle, Italy and Mexico.
Kellems, however, said the IMF and the World Bank had accredited the activists, and that Singapore's rationale for denying entry was unclear.
"There's insufficient clarity. I see on-the-record comments from various (Singaporean) officials on various days," he said at a news conference at the convention center where the meetings will be held.
"You may have seen some of the flavor of those comments; words like 'security,' words like 'undesirable,' words like 'troublemaker,' that sort of general characterization, but never have I seen a consistent coherent explanation," Kellems said.
The World Bank official read a statement accusing Singapore of violating a Sept. 23, 2003, agreement on the attendance of accredited activists at the meetings, and he urged Singapore to let them come.
"We work with these representatives of civil societies, and we value their role - even when we disagree with what they say," the statement said.
Singapore's police said it objected to the accreditation of the activists for the meetings, The Straits Times newspaper reported.
"If they decide to come to Singapore, we will assess their suitability to enter Singapore subject to a set of security criteria," a police statement said. "If they meet the criteria, they will be allowed into Singapore."
Singapore's police said it deported two Filipino activists and one Indian activist who arrived at the airport but were not accredited.
"Following interviews, and after full consideration of the circumstances, it was decided that the three persons should be deported as it was assessed that they posed a potential security and public order threat to the annual meetings," a police statement said.
The Filipino activists were China Leah Ramos of the Jubilee South and Global Call to Action Against Poverty, and Bobbie Diciembre of the Freedom from Debt Coalition. Marivic Raquiza, another Filipino activist, said her colleagues were interrogated and detained for five hours and slept in an airport barracks before deportation.
The European Union urged Singapore to allow accredited activists into the country for the conference of the IMF and World Bank.
"The (EU) presidency attaches great importance to an open and constructive dialogue between civil society and the World Bank institutions," said a statement issued by Finland, which currently holds the rotating EU presidency.
Singapore banned outdoor demonstrations during the IMF-World Bank meetings, saying they could lead to violence and damage to property. It set aside an indoor area where activists can gather to express their views.
In Indonesia, media said the government will allow activists to gather on Batam island, a short ferry ride from Singapore. -
You know, this matter of IMF meeting here and our gov's fear of activists creating a scene here is like; they (our gov) wants to swim, but don't want to get wet. (!!)
I mean, our home forces are so well equiped and well trained. I do not doubt the abilities of any of our home forces to HANDLE any riots or rowdiness that these activists may or may not cause.
Good grief man, if they don't wanna get wet, DON'T friggin swim! -
-
Our gov is going to make a "reputation" for themselves by insisting on acting 'Holier than Thou' towards international bodies like the WB...
Like I've said, their own actions defames themselves - no one needs to defame them. -
well said.Originally posted by ShutterBug:You know, this matter of IMF meeting here and our gov's fear of activists creating a scene here is like; they (our gov) wants to swim, but don't want to get wet. (!!)
I mean, our home forces are so well equiped and well trained. I do not doubt the abilities of any of our home forces to HANDLE any riots or rowdiness that these activists may or may not cause.
Good grief man, if they don't wanna get wet, DON'T friggin swim!
-
Anyone read the article about LKY filing a suit against FEER?
-
They started the fire, they have to put it out in front of the world's eyes!
Our gov is putting themselves along with all of us under embarrassing light!
=======================================================
More protests, now from the World Bank
By Ansley Ng, TODAY | Posted: 14 September 2006 1326 hrs
• Singapore 2006
The World Bank continued to press Singapore to allow accredited foreign activists into the country — even as three uninvited ones were turned away from the airport.
Singapore has insisted so far that it will not allow anyone it sees as a security threat to enter its borders. It has warned that some 28 activists from eight civil society organisations could be turned away, even though they have been accredited by the World Bank for meetings starting today.
A top World Bank official disagreed with this approach yesterday.
Excluding activists who have been "cleared" by their respective governments was a "breach" of a memorandum of understanding that Singapore signed with the World Bank three years ago, said Kevin Kellems, senior advisor to the president of World Bank Group in a statement.
"We work with these representatives of civil society and we value their role even when we disagree with what they say.
"These individuals have been cleared by their respective home governments and should not be excluded from our annual meetings.
"We continue to urge the Government of Singapore to let them participate by assuring expeditious entry procedures including the issuance of visas Â… for any observers and other persons Â… who are accredited to or invited by the organisers to be present for the meeting," said Mr Kellems, who is also the acting vice-president for external affairs at the World Bank.
Responding to Mr Kellem's remarks, a government spokesperson from the organising committee said: "We have just heard about it and are looking into it."
The Singapore police are firm on turning away anyone who could pose a "security and law and order threat".
Activists have been known to participate in violent protests before and some of them had threatened "vigorous action" in Singapore during the International Monetary Fund IMF-World Bank meet.
The activists will be interviewed before authorities decide whether to let them in or turn them back.
Three foreigners have been denied entry at Changi Airport since Tuesday.
Two Filipino activists — a man and a woman — were put on planes back to Manila after being quizzed for more than five hours by immigration officers. Chona Leah Ramos of anti-globalisation group Jubilee South and Bobby Diciembre of Freedom from Debt Coalition were on their way to Batam for an anti-IMF-World Bank forum, Filipino news website INQ7.net reported.
A third person, an Indian male activist, was rejected yesterday after arriving from India at 7am. At press time, the authorities were still trying to arrange his flight back.
"Following interviews, and after full consideration of the circumstances, it was decided that the three persons should be deported as it was assessed that they posed a potential security and public order threat to the Annual Meetings," police spokeswoman Grace Ting said.
The trio are not accredited by the World Bank and are not part of the 28 people whom the police have raised objection on accreditation, she added. - TODAY/sh -
Globalization indeed!
Well, globalize this ..... %$#@! -
After this, singapore will no longer be accredited by the world bank to organise the IMF anymore.
-
let them come in lor...let those riot police do something...
even if singaporeans chup ji kee...it won't be many oso...so why not take the risk and try it out?
if the spf managed to defuse the situation of a violent protest...wouldn't that show the world how safe we really ar? -
Precisely!Originally posted by R3SsH|n:let them come in lor...let those riot police do something...
even if singaporeans chup ji kee...it won't be many oso...so why not take the risk and try it out?
if the spf managed to defuse the situation of a violent protest...wouldn't that show the world how safe we really ar?
Flex some REAL MUSCLES, instead of political ego!
Show the world WE MEAN WHAT WE SAY! CAN TALK but NO RIOTS!
But unfortunately, our gov thinks a riot might break their Golden Rice Bowl.
But after all this bickering over accreditted activists being shut out, you can bet WB & IMF will have a different view of Singapore in future...
Like that, blame who? Who do you think? The terrorists or our paranoid gov? -
dammed if you do, dammed if you don't ....Originally posted by R3SsH|n:let them come in lor...let those riot police do something...
even if singaporeans chup ji kee...it won't be many oso...so why not take the risk and try it out?
if the spf managed to defuse the situation of a violent protest...wouldn't that show the world how safe we really ar?
but,
which one sounds better ? ...
simply be kiasi about it and bar potential trouble-makers from entry, and take some international flak for it ...
or
let them riot, loot nike boutiques, burn down mcdonalds, and have the SPF come in and crack a few heads and haul people away in cuffs on international live TV a la seattle ... and catch flak for police brutality (a la Genoa), and face compensation complaints from suntec tenants ? ... and gain a reputation for "police brutality" ? ...
mind you ... the international press doens't have to deal with the damages ... -
Everything THEY do, THEY have to OVER DO IT!
Walao...
Same thing for opening the floodgates for all the friggin PRC FTs into Singapore.. do they give a damn that we are deprived of jobs? Did they even believed that many lost jobs to ordinary talentless PRCs?
NO....
Here you have it; crap hitting the fan on this IMF thing. -
all the gates and precautions taken definately will help in maintaining security...plus suntec convention is seperated with those shops by barricades already...Originally posted by Fatum:dammed if you do, dammed if you don't ....
but,
which one sounds better ? ...
simply be kiasi about it and bar potential trouble-makers from entry, and take some international flak for it ...
or
let them riot, loot nike boutiques, burn down mcdonalds, and have the SPF come in and crack a few heads and haul people away in cuffs on international live TV a la seattle ... and catch flak for police brutality (a la Genoa), and face compensation complaints from suntec tenants ? ... and gain a reputation for "police brutality" ? ...
mind you ... the international press doens't have to deal with the damages ...
i still think they should be given a chance to express themselves...not turned away completely out of singapore.
possible ways of taking parts can be issueing written statements mahz...those who get turned away can issue written statements and express whatever views they have..maybe can distribute them as news paper articles during the IMF period...
if not prepare a room with a camera for them to speak out...without thousands of people looking on and prevent the speakers from provocating the crowd..and lead to a riot...
there are always alternatives...using elitism and "choosing" who can speak is not a good way to announce yourself to the world... -
we are not turning away people completely ... we're selectively turning away known trouble makers ....Originally posted by R3SsH|n:all the gates and precautions taken definately will help in maintaining security...plus suntec convention is seperated with those shops by barricades already...
i still think they should be given a chance to express themselves...not turned away completely out of singapore.
possible ways of taking parts can be issueing written statements mahz...those who get turned away can issue written statements and express whatever views they have..maybe can distribute them as news paper articles during the IMF period...
if not prepare a room with a camera for them to speak out...without thousands of people looking on and prevent the speakers from provocating the crowd..and lead to a riot...
there are always alternatives...using elitism and "choosing" who can speak is not a good way to announce yourself to the world...
would you agree on letting in say, a known Osama's associate into town, should he claim that he wants to protest against the world bank's policies ? ...
does his right of expression supersede our right to order and security ? ... -
Initially, before WB said anything in protest, 28 activists were reportedly TURNED AWAY. Only when WB started making noise loudly, did they start becoming detailed.Originally posted by Fatum:we are not turning away people completely ... we're selectively turning away known trouble makers ....
would you agree on letting in say, a known Osama's associate into town, should he claim that he wants to protest against the world bank's policies ? ...
does his right of expression supersede our right to order and security ? ...
This is what they get for being OPAQUE, VAGUE, and HIGH HANDED.
It's smacks of SNOB GLOSSINESS. -
Ka-ching! ka-ching! Ka-ching!
I can hear the Reputation Cashier churning up all the Reputation points for our gov....
heheheheee -
singapore has so called home ground advantage...Originally posted by Fatum:we are not turning away people completely ... we're selectively turning away known trouble makers ....
would you agree on letting in say, a known Osama's associate into town, should he claim that he wants to protest against the world bank's policies ? ...
does his right of expression supersede our right to order and security ? ...
they can literally control every aspects of the meeting...including how they speak and when they speak...if they are really worried about the potential protesters going to toa pa yoh hdb hub and expressing their views...they can get 24 hours survillence on these people...with the effort and manpower thrown into the meeting...i am sure manpower is sufficent for a small group of nearly 30 potential protester....
in a controlled enviroment...the organisers should be able to minus out all possible ways of threats to the order and security...its their job anyway... -
I have a feeling our gov doesn't want to spend money in deployments like this.Originally posted by R3SsH|n:singapore has so called home ground advantage...
they can literally control every aspects of the meeting...including how they speak and when they speak...if they are really worried about the potential protesters going to toa pa yoh hdb hub and expressing their views...they can get 24 hours survillence on these people...with the effort and manpower thrown into the meeting...i am sure manpower is sufficent for a small group of nearly 30 potential protester....
in a controlled enviroment...the organisers should be able to minus out all possible ways of threats to the order and security...its their job anyway...
Like I've said, if they don't want to get wet, don't swim lah! -
yes .... it's their job anyway, ... it's the goverment's job to keep us safe, it's the goverment's job to organize this meeting nicely to earn brownine points with the world, it's the goverment's job to please everybody from the tenants of suntec to some foreign protester ...Originally posted by R3SsH|n:singapore has so called home ground advantage...
they can literally control every aspects of the meeting...including how they speak and when they speak...if they are really worried about the potential protesters going to toa pa yoh hdb hub and expressing their views...they can get 24 hours survillence on these people...with the effort and manpower thrown into the meeting...i am sure manpower is sufficent for a small group of nearly 30 potential protester....
in a controlled enviroment...the organisers should be able to minus out all possible ways of threats to the order and security...its their job anyway...
london has the most advanced survillence systems on the planet, they have enough cameras to watch everyone and everything, to keep everybody safe .... that's what they must have been thinking before the london bombings eh ...
-
ermmm ....Originally posted by ShutterBug:I have a feeling our gov doesn't want to spend money in deployments like this.
Like I've said, if they don't want to get wet, don't swim lah!
I don't get it bro ....
you were talking about foreigners causing social problems in another thread here ... fine, I agree, there are some parasitic sort around ...
but you think it's okay for known trouble-making foreigners to come and wreck havoc and riot at this meeting ? ...
*scratches head ...
-
haha...you sound like a paranoid parent...Originally posted by Fatum:yes .... it's their job anyway, ... it's the goverment's job to keep us safe, it's the goverment's job to organize this meeting nicely to earn brownine points with the world, it's the goverment's job to please everybody from the tenants of suntec to some foreign protester ...
london has the most advanced survillence systems on the planet, they have enough cameras to watch everyone and everything, to keep everybody safe .... that's what they must have been thinking before the london bombings eh ...
anyway the decision is taken...so no point debating over this...
i still believe though...there are other ways of expressing their views...no necessary to send them back...
-
I do support their claims of KNOWN TROUBLEMAKERS, and barring them from entering to create the same. However, this world is filled with heck of a lot of UNKNOWN TROUBLEMAKERS. Then what? Ban the world?Originally posted by Fatum:ermmm ....
I don't get it bro ....
you were talking about foreigners causing social problems in another thread here ... fine, I agree, there are some parasitic sort around ...
but you think it's okay for known trouble-making foreigners to come and wreck havoc and riot at this meeting ? ...
*scratches head ...
I say mount up our big guns and techy security equipment, allow these activist to come and be vocal for the period and be known as a Gentleman. Rather than behave like a friggin terrified porcupine!
Malu you know! -
perhaps I'm just a kiasu and kiasi Singkapolean ...Originally posted by R3SsH|n:haha...you sound like a paranoid parent...
anyway the decision is taken...so no point debating over this...
i still believe though...there are other ways of expressing their views...no necessary to send them back...
yes, the decision's been made, but I still believe that when this blows over, the Singapore 2006 meeting would be remembered as one of the few in modern times without any attendant riots and havoc ...
you know ... to sidetrack things a bit, I AM involved in an alternative economics group here (spent a large part of this summer campaigning against a new walmart) ... I can understand where those people are coming from ... the world bank/IMF is no angel ... but a construct of the US treasury department (yes, "world" and "IMF" is a misnomer) ... responsible for economic collaspes and societal breakdown across the third world ... but I do not agree with some of the more militant groups' methods ... I actually met a guy who took part on the seattle protest ... it was like a free for all ruckus, people looting nike and GAP and burning down fast food resturants ...
I'd rather we catch some international flak than to have to deal with something like this ... -
To become a qualified Firefighter, one must be able to and willing to eventually get close to a fire, in order to fight it and yet not get burnt.
Otherwise, don't aspire to become one.