Disgraceful Act and Over Reacted
-
Saturday September 16, 10:53 AM
Singapore's climbdown on activists too late: NGOs
ADVERTISEMENT
AFP Photo
Singapore acted too late in finally agreeing to admit 22 activists whose accreditation for World Bank and International Monetary Fund meetings it had opposed, non-governmental organizations say.
The city-state's partial climbdown late Friday followed stinging criticism from the World Bank in a controversy which activists say reinforces the city-state's image as a restrictive society, despite its economic success.
Singapore had said there were security concerns about 27 of the hundreds of activists accredited by the Bank and Fund as part of a long-standing dialogue between the financial institutions and their critics.
But it partially reversed its stand after Bank president Paul Wolfowitz said the issue had damaged the reputation of the city-state, which prides itself on its image as an efficiently-run regional commercial hub.
Singapore said 22 of the 27 activists would now be allowed entry.
The Bank welcomed Singapore's move but said it wants all 27 admitted "without delay" in line with a memorandum of understanding with the Singapore government.
"This gesture is, quite simply, too little too late. Expensive travel plans have already been undone, and many civil society organizations are unable to fly to Singapore on a moment's notice," said Romilly Greenhill, of the relief agency ActionAid International.
Lidy Nacpil, of the non-governmental organization (NGO) Jubilee South, agreed.
"Also, why only 22 of the 27?" she said on the Indonesian island of Batam, near Singapore, where more than 160 NGOs on Friday declared a boycott of the meetings in Singapore to protest the clampdown on free speech and banning of activists.
Wolfowitz said at a meeting with NGOs in Singapore on Friday that "enormous damage has been done ... A lot of that damage has been to Singapore and it's self-inflicted."
A few hours later, Singapore announced its climbdown.
"Singapore apparently has realised that their image has been tarnished, to say the least," Nacpil said.
It was a rare reversal by the city-state which generally stands firm in the face of criticisms. Last year Singapore hanged an Australian drug trafficker despite a high-level diplomatic campaign to save the man's life.
The city-state's hard line against the NGOs "has underlined how cut off Singapore is from a world where free speech, free association and democratic choice are established norms of political association," said Walden Bello, executive director of Focus on the Global South, another NGO.
Singapore is "out of step with the times," Bello said.
Political stability has been the bedrock of the economic success of the city-state, which grew from a Third World country to become one of Asia's wealthiest nations.
Critics say this came at a price, in the form of restrictions on freedom of speech and political activity.
Sinapan Samydorai, president of local human rights group Think Centre, said the controversy over the activists "just strengthened that view that it's a very closed society when it comes to political rights."
He said Singapore should have been "more mature" and allowed the foreign protesters to make their point against the financial institutions.
Despite appeals from the Bank that accredited protesters be allowed to hold outdoor demonstrations, Singapore has refused to waive a long-standing ban on public protests.
Police have said tough security measures were necessary because the country is a high-profile "terrorist" target.
But NGOs said the measures -- enforced by 10,000 security personnel -- were directed toward local activists, not outsiders.
Bello said Singapore "fears the effect that civil society organisations criticising and debating the IMF and World Bank might have on the citizens of Singapore."
A local opposition politician, Chee Soon Juan, was set to break the ban on outdoor protests Saturday.
He said the international community has begun to see the nature of Singapore's system.
"How do you expect to become a financial centre, a global hub... and yet be so repressive?" he said. -
idiots!
if the singapore gabrament had let the whole lot in without restraint, and orchard road is reduced to rubble, all you asswipes will be singing a different tune...
-
Idiot? yourself....Originally posted by the Bear:idiots!
if the singapore gabrament had let the whole lot in without restraint, and orchard road is reduced to rubble, all you asswipes will be singing a different tune...
Noboby wants riot!!!
The whole purpose of IMF is let these protesters to sound their ideals and of course, in a professional manner.
Any problem with the last IMF meeting in Hong Kong? No right?
Sg govt is over reacted...... -
they let them in.. stupid of them...
look at what they wanted in the first place?
to let the "activists" in... unrestrained... which mean ALL the fricken rioters..
GET A GRIP!
they are out to gouge singapore, MY COUNTRY... they have already gouged us enough and you sing their tune?? you have been played like a fiddle...
damn.. -
Is my country tooOriginally posted by the Bear:they let them in.. stupid of them...
look at what they wanted in the first place?
to let the "activists" in... unrestrained... which mean ALL the fricken rioters..
GET A GRIP!
they are out to gouge singapore, MY COUNTRY... they have already gouged us enough and you sing their tune?? you have been played like a fiddle...
damn..
I had done my NS with pride and been serious in every aspect of training alocated to me. But still, I won't respect PAP. -
you think PAP = singapore then you are part of the problem
-
Originally posted by Lowclassman:Idiot? yourself....
Noboby wants riot!!!
The whole purpose of IMF is let these protesters to sound their ideals and of course, in a professional manner.
Any problem with the last IMF meeting in Hong Kong? No right?
Sg govt is over reacted......
Hong Kong.
But you're right, we should have let them in. We have nothing to lose. If their protest is peaceful, everything will be suay suay. But if their protest is violent, it would prove that SG is right all along and we can bash their heads in -
simple ah....why host....host liao kanna backfire by them.....then allow say too late....then lose face.....
-
Exactly lor.....in this kind of situation, everyone goes in with their eyes open. Its not like its the first IMF meeting in the world, so everyone should already know the possible consequences.Originally posted by duotiga83:simple ah....why host....host liao kanna backfire by them.....then allow say too late....then lose face.....
So either you accept it as a package (including things which can go wrong), or you don't accept it as a package (including things which can go wrong).
When you do things halfway, there's always a risk of high cost and negative feedback, which destroys the whole objective in the first place (after all, this is about money and reputation).
Money and reputation are good. But riots and violence are no good. If the deal is that money, reputation, riots and violence have to come together for full effectiveness, then we have to decide if we want to accept it all, or reject it all.
This is a case where doing things halfway just doesn't work, as we're seeing now.
I'm wondering what in this world inspired the organisers to think that they could control the world without receiving any feedback? Maybe they're too much of a big fish in a small pond.....too used to controlling just the small pond and assumed that they could control the whole ocean in a similar way. -
lousy goverment
-
just nice, we have banners of 4 millions faces laughing at ourselves.
Thanks PAP. -
Sudden influx of korean 'tourists' ....
eng eng eng...
-
I already said so in Hokkien;
"Ai sng, mai kia... ah si kia, mai sng!"
Want to play, don't be afraid. If afraid, don't play.
They must have signed the MOU with IMF with one eye closed, 3 years ago.
Or they simply thought they could swim without getting wet??? -
They are always on the wrong ball...especially those balls carriers ...giving inaccurate informations and feedback.Originally posted by ceecookie:lousy goverment
If I were to be Minister of Home Affair..I would have let them all come in grace.
First, we'll have to honour our MOU signed. (as a world class leader)
and not just chicken out and gave sneaky and nonsense excuses!!!
Second, Afterall we already spent so much money on securities with 10,000 security personnel involved.
Third, I must be confident that my defence force is well trained and ready to strike. (This is to tell the world that singapore is genuine friendly and welcome all IMF members, NGOs, civil societies with whole heartly...and in the mean time also prove to world we are not ordinary but superb small chilli padi .
Fourth, I will also show the world that our defence force is capable of handling drastical situation at any time.
Fifth, most, or infact 99% of singaporeans will be well behaved in public..so... what's there to be fear about and so ridiculously defensive?
What is our minister doing...trying to show his superior in managing the securities of IMF meeting? or....???????
-
and also revert to communism...
-
U sure nothing happened in HK during the WTO? U go youtube search videos.. dun wan to spoon feed u..
-
Those in Hong Kong were chicken lah.....Originally posted by Pitot:U sure nothing happened in HK during the WTO? U go youtube search videos.. dun wan to spoon feed u..
So what?...... Can't the ministry prove to world that our defence force is capable of putting everything in control even with all the members of IMF or NGOs or whoever might get into havoc?
Afterall, how many hundreds of these people will create havoc during the IMF meeting? Don't forget, we have ten thousand security personnel on guard at any moment. -
By the end of next week, the media will be reporting on how successful the IMF meeting was, how impressive Singapore was to foreigners.
Some prominent foreigner may be polite and casually say: "nice country you have here". And the media may pick on this one sentence and claim the foreigners adore us.
There will be either no mention, or little mention (means a few seconds) on the hiccups. Of course if the IMF and World Bank chiefs say "heck, we're not coming back here again", the media also won't report it lah. -
double post
-
haha. sad to see all planning done by our govt to portray sg as a "global city of oppurtunities" backfired because they were not given oppurtunity to protest.
-
Its the same thing if you go to USA, Japan or china....in the press conference, you will say the same thing..good, good, good..right?Originally posted by gentlerock:By the end of next week, the media will be reporting on how successful the IMF meeting was, how impressive Singapore was to foreigners.
Some prominent foreigner may be polite and casually say: "nice country you have here". And the media may pick on this one sentence and claim the foreigners adore us.
There will be either no mention, or little mention (means a few seconds) on the hiccups. Of course if the IMF and World Bank chiefs say "heck, we're not coming back here again", the media also won't report it lah. -
For press conference, of course they will say everything good lah.Originally posted by Lowclassman:Its the same thing if you go to USA, Japan or china....in the press conference, you will say the same thing..good, good, good..right?
But I was talking about how the media reports lah.
In some countries, the media very polite, reports everything good.
In other countries, the media will not hesitate to report anything bad as well.
In yet other countries, the media sometimes anyhow whack one. -
It doesn't matter if our media paints it two ways from success.Originally posted by gentlerock:By the end of next week, the media will be reporting on how successful the IMF meeting was, how impressive Singapore was to foreigners.
Some prominent foreigner may be polite and casually say: "nice country you have here". And the media may pick on this one sentence and claim the foreigners adore us.
There will be either no mention, or little mention (means a few seconds) on the hiccups. Of course if the IMF and World Bank chiefs say "heck, we're not coming back here again", the media also won't report it lah.
Any attempt at reaching out to nations who are not major investors here, will depend on their first hand impression of what we have done. I think it will be a mixed impression.