SDP asks International Bar Association for stand
-
28 Feb 07
28 February 2007
Mr Fernando Pombo
President
International Bar Association
Mr Fernando Peláez-Pier
Vice-President
Mr Akira Kawamura
Secretary-General
Mr David W Rivkin
Chair, Legal Practice Division
Mr Martin Solc
Chair, Public and Professional Interest Division
Mr Mark Ellis
Executive Director
Dear Sirs,
I thank you for your expeditious and most informative reply.
I am heartened to read that IBA continues to be a steadfast advocate for human rights and the rule of law throughout the world.
It is also noteworthy that the IBA has plans for a Rule of Law Day during your annual conference this year. Unfortunately, this still does not address the appeal that we are making to you. Having a general discussion on the Rule of Law Day does not speak to the issue of the egregious abuse of human rights by the Singapore Government.
In fact, as you will see below in the words of the Philip Jeyaretnam, immediate past president of the Law Society of Singapore (LSS), the Singapore establishment embraces the rhetoric of the rule of law but, in reality, practices exactly the opposite.
Laws are continually introduced, amended, and interpreted to ensure that the rights of Singaporeans remain suppressed. Examples that I cited in my opening letter to you amply illustrate this point.
I would venture to say that the planned Rule of Law Day, with discussion topics like ‘how the rule of law affects economic development’ and ‘the Asian perspective of the rule of law’ (a favourite topic of the Singapore Government), is exactly what the Singapore Government would like to see take place.
HereÂ’s why: These sessions will be opened only to conference attendees which means that Singaporean legal professionals participating in the event who know the reality beyond the rhetoric and who have the temerity to speak up will be few and far in between, whereas those with pro-establishment views will be there in force.
Singaporean lawyers who have been vocal and active in their pursuit of justice and human rights have either been imprisoned without trial, sued by ruling party leaders into bankruptcy, and/or have fled to other countries. Examples are J B Jeyaretnam, Francis Seow, Tang Liang Hong, Teo Soh Lung, Tang Fong Har, Kevin De Souza, Tan Wah Piow, and Gopalan Nair, just to name a few.
There will be few non-Singaporean conference attendees who have an intimate knowledge of human rights Singapore – intimate enough to conduct an intelligent discussion as it specifically relates to the city-state. This inadequacy can and will be easily countered by lawyers from Singapore’s establishment.
In the end, human rights situation in Singapore will be obscured, at best, and ignored, at worst. In the meantime, the Singapore Government will trumpet that if its human rights record was really that bad, the IBA would not have held its annual conference here.
To underscore our concerns, we note in your letter that the host for the conference is the LSS. I donÂ’t know if Philip Jeyaretnam, whom you cite in your letter, has revealed to you the SocietyÂ’s recent past. In any event allow me to brief you. In 1987, former solicitor-general and then-president of the LSS, Francis Seow, served notice that the Society intended to be a more assertive and caring bar. He also wanted to promote public awareness about impending changes to existing laws.
As a result, the Government roundly attacked the LSS and prohibited it from commenting on existing or proposed legislation, unless its views were expressedly solicited. The Government proceeded to amend the Legal Profession Act with the aim of cracking down on dissent within the profession. Before it could do so, however, the LSS' leadership unanimously voted to deplore the GovernmentÂ’s intention. The result was that Seow and a couple of other Society officials were imprisoned without trial.
The LSS assumes a very different role today. Nothing is more demonstrative of this than Philip Jeyaretnam’s introductory message in the August 2006 issue of the Law Gazette: “The foundational value of the rule of law is beyond debate, and [Singapore] lawyers must nurture, protect and uphold the rule of law.” There was nary a word, perhaps not surprisingly, about the problem of human rights in Singapore.
More pointedly, Attorney General Chao Hick Tin (and, more significantly, former appellate court judge) said in obvious reference to my fellow activists and I, and our campaign for freedoms of speech and assembly through Nonviolent Action: “Of course, some indefatigable critics have their own agenda to bring into disrepute key public institutions…They are often encouraged by foreigners in the name of human rights. We should be wary of this.” [emphasis mine]
Given all this, it is extremely difficult to see how dissenting views on the topic of the rule of law in Singapore can surface during your conference. The truth of the matter is that the severity of the situation in Singapore warrants more than a general discussion of the rule of law.
It is most discouraging that there have not been any comment by the IBA on the human rights situation in Singapore even though there has been a litany of reports and complaints through the years by international organizations such as the United Nations, Amnesty International, International Commission of Jurists, New York City Bar Association, National Endowment for Democracy, Human Rights Watch, LawyersÂ’ Rights Watch Canada, Liberal International, World Movement for Democracy, Reporters Without Borders, Asian Human Rights Commission, World Forum for Democratization in Asia, Alliance for Reform and Democracy in Asia, the list goes on.
I took pains to enumerate for you in my opening letter the many cases of human rights violations in my country in the hope that you can verify the seriousness and incontrovertibility of the matter for yourselves.
This is why we are appealing to the IBA to take a firm stand on the long list of human rights abuses by the Singapore Government as you have on several countries such as Zimbabwe, Ecuador, Turkey, Malaysia and even Japan. There is no better opportunity than now when the annual conference is slated for Singapore this year. It is imperative that the IBA takes this opportunity to make clearly and directly its concerns about the continued suppression of justice, the rule of law and human rights in Singapore.
Sirs, we hope you do not misunderstand our intentions. We do not for one moment presume to tell the IBA how to conduct its matters. If it has come across that way, please accept our sincere apologies. But when an esteemed organization such as the IBA comes to Singapore and makes no pointed reference to the human rights abuses of the countryÂ’s government, it is as good as the IBA honouring the regime with its presence.
I note your point that the IBA has held conferences in countries whose governments have little respect for human rights. But I also note that your annual conferences have been, or will be, staged in countries such as Spain, the United States, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South Africa, The Netherlands, etc. – countries that, although by no means free of human rights problems, do not have governments that systematically and comprehensively crush their peoples’ human rights.
While Singapore may be “brimming with energy and finesse” and offering “the perfect opportunity for both business and pleasure” as you highlight on your website, I hardly think that those are the only, or even major, considerations that the IBA takes into account when it chooses venues for its annual conferences. While Singapore is designed to seduce the five senses of the unsuspecting conference participants, I would like to think that an organization like the IBA would rise above these and exercise its sixth sense – the sense of justice.
My colleagues and I continue to be imprisoned, fined, sued and made bankrupt but we soldier on because we want justice and freedom for our fellow citizens. To this end, we ask that you lend us a hand. To quote Aung San Suu Kyi: “Please use your liberty to help us gain ours.”
I await, most anxiously, your response.
Sincerely,
Chee Soon Juan
Secretary-General
Singapore Democratic Party -
Beneath the glittering glass and greenery of Singapore, is there a Singaporean Soul ?
With over forty five years of constant development under the monopolistic rule of the Ruling Party aka the Singapore Government, they are still looking for the mystery factor to give a ZING to make Singapore more vibrant, and with more zest.
Yet, slogan after slogan, campaign after campaign, that mystery factor remain elusive.
Why is that so, despite all the supposed talent that have been harvested and collected into the leadership role amongst those annointed as the Singapore Elite ?
The self-imposed insecurity and fear of losing politial power will constantly PREVENT the Ruling Party - aka the present Singapore Government - from giving Singaporean the Political Space that is available to the citizens of the true First World Countries.
It seems that the Government view the sole purpose for the existence of Singaporeans seems to be to contribute to the wealth of the State.
However, what is the purpose of the State towards Singaporeans, besides absorbing the wealth of Singaporeans ?
Singaporeans are kept well fed, educated, housed, and kept healthy so as to ensure the status quo that exist at present that allow them to continue with the Master Plan of Wealth Creation for the 'State' - which have always carreid a sybiotic interpretation with the Ruling Party.
While members of the Ruling Elite and the State itself have prospered, Singaporeans exist only to toil with the constant reminder to be disciplined and not to be concerned nor involved with Politics, that Politics is only for Politicians.
Is there a future for Singaporeans ? Are Singaporeans toiling for themselves or for those who claim themselves to be Elite ? -
How is it that CSJ who is supposed to be a retarded idiot can write so well? It is amazing what controlling the mass media can do.
-
sollie, i'm afraid he's capable of betta writin den u.
u sure u politician anot. dis kind of small ting oso duno.
anyway, write so long n so many times oso no use de lah. they muz b tinkin he beri irritatin nia. -
Those with vested interests to perpetuate their grip on political power, will make anyone to look like an idiot - for daring to challenge their powerful position.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:How is it that CSJ who is supposed to be a retarded idiot can write so well? It is amazing what controlling the mass media can do.
Why are the 'thought provoking' books written by CSJ not allowed to be placed on the public shelves of bookstores, or even in the National Library ?
Is it not for the simple fact that it will not help to perpetuate the lie that the Elite intend for CSJ to continue to serve as a political idiot ?
Try reading CSJ's books, and one will be able to measure CSJ for what he is - even if his political maturity is as raw as LKY was during the early days of LKY's entry into 1950s politics of Singapore. -
We cannot be as free as the US of A, or even South Korea, for that matter, because of the precarious position our island is in. A little red dot in a vast expanse of Islamic green. Briefly. We cannot be divided as the US is over Iraq, and we cannot chant in the streets like the Koreans.Originally posted by Atobe:......Yet, slogan after slogan, campaign after campaign, that mystery factor remain elusive.
Why is that so, despite all the supposed talent that have been harvested and collected into the leadership role amongst those annointed as the Singapore Elite ?
The self-imposed insecurity and fear of losing politial power will constantly PREVENT the Ruling Party - aka the present Singapore Government - from giving Singaporean the Political Space that is available to the citizens of the true First World Countries......
Singapore (or Temasek) was historically part of the Johore state. We have made Singapore to what it is. Therefore it is now ours. And we have a real and present danger of losing everything. We cannot risk having chaos. Lest our neighbour(s) march in on the pretex of taking back what belongs to them, Saddam Hussein style. Any guarantee this won't ever happen in future, 20 30 years hence.
That said.
Now which political entity does not want to be in power and remain in power?
How would Chee Soon Juan fare if he were the Prime Minister of Singapore?
We need not go into discussion on this.
I rather the present "elite" rule than the "elite" of SDP.
Dr Chee Soon Juan himself is an elite in Singapore, although we expected better of him. This elite is clearly detrimental to Singaporeans. -
His books are everywhere in the NLB. Even my neighbourhood branch has all his works.Originally posted by Atobe:Those with vested interests to perpetuate their grip on political power, will make anyone to look like an idiot - for daring to challenge their powerful position.
Why are the 'thought provoking' books written by CSJ not allowed to be placed on the public shelves of bookstores, or even in the National Library ?
Is it not for the simple fact that it will not help to perpetuate the lie that the Elite intend for CSJ to continue to serve as a political idiot ?
Try reading CSJ's books, and one will be able to measure CSJ for what he is - even if his political maturity is as raw as LKY was during the early days of LKY's entry into 1950s politics of Singapore. -
I'd be thinking that our neighbours fear us more than we fear them.Originally posted by mancha:We cannot be as free as the US of A, or even South Korea, for that matter, because of the precarious position our island is in. A little red dot in a vast expanse of Islamic green. Briefly. We cannot be divided as the US is over Iraq, and we cannot chant in the streets like the Koreans.
Singapore (or Temasek) was historically part of the Johore state. We have made Singapore to what it is. Therefore it is now ours. And we have a real and present danger of losing everything. We cannot risk having chaos. Lest our neighbour(s) march in on the pretex of taking back what belongs to them, Saddam Hussein style. Any guarantee this won't ever happen in future, 20 30 years hence.
That said.
Now which political entity does not want to be in power and remain in power?
How would Chee Soon Juan fare if he were the Prime Minister of Singapore?
We need not go into discussion on this.
I rather the present "elite" rule than the "elite" of SDP.
Dr Chee Soon Juan himself is an elite in Singapore, although we expected better of him. This elite is clearly detrimental to Singaporeans.
We are on a completely different level, military and systems thinking wise.
This is the usual argument that is abused to push for one-party dominance. It;s an insult to the rest of Singaporeans by saying that only a select group can "run" this place.
You want a mature Republic that is inclusive and has strong robust democratic institutions that do not need statements of endangerment or a state constantly in fear because the people's abilities are not fully harnessed due to the overbearing presence and the lop-sided representation of one narrative in the unitary discourse of Singaporean politics? I'll take the former thank you very much. -
i wonder if he can write a singlish version anot..?
-
of coz can lah. me the engrish oladi as proficient as his liao, y u tink me canot help him translate.
-
Originally posted by LazerLordz:
Thanks for the info, I have not been to the NLB for more then two years, and those times that I have been into one, I have not found any on the shelves - perhaps CSJ's books must have been taken out.
His books are everywhere in the NLB. Even my neighbourhood branch has all his works.
I stand to be corrected. -
yawn~~~~ Dr chee again~~~~~
-
While I can agree with you that in terms of land mass and population size, we cannot compare ourselves with the "US of A or even South Korea" - would you consider the multi-party political systems of some countries that are closer to our population size of 4.5 MILLION - (with the following numbers in Millions) ?Originally posted by mancha:We cannot be as free as the US of A, or even South Korea, for that matter, because of the precarious position our island is in. A little red dot in a vast expanse of Islamic green. Briefly. We cannot be divided as the US is over Iraq, and we cannot chant in the streets like the Koreans.
Singapore (or Temasek) was historically part of the Johore state. We have made Singapore to what it is. Therefore it is now ours. And we have a real and present danger of losing everything. We cannot risk having chaos. Lest our neighbour(s) march in on the pretex of taking back what belongs to them, Saddam Hussein style. Any guarantee this won't ever happen in future, 20 30 years hence.
That said.
Now which political entity does not want to be in power and remain in power?
How would Chee Soon Juan fare if he were the Prime Minister of Singapore?
We need not go into discussion on this.
I rather the present "elite" rule than the "elite" of SDP.
Dr Chee Soon Juan himself is an elite in Singapore, although we expected better of him. This elite is clearly detrimental to Singaporeans.
Denmark has a population of 5.411; Slovakia (5.385), Finland (5.237), Ireland (4.109), Norway (4.606), Croatia (4.444), Lithuania (3.425), Latvia (2.306), Slovenia (1.998 ).
These are countries that are practising a more tolerant, more open type of democracies that are inclusive of all their citizens - irregardless of political preferences - as nations of the true First World should be.
Just in case you believe that they are not living in a dangerous neighborhood, so that they can afford to practise true First World politics of tolerance and multi-party politics - will you consider the robust multi-party politics that are practised in Israel, which has already reached a population of 6,352,117 - a magic number that this Govenment aspire for Singapore in another twenty years ?
Is the little red Singapore dot living in an openly hostile green environment resembling anything like Israel ?
Why is Israel able to survive a robust multi-party political system despite a real and immediate threat - internally and externally - and yet have an open society that tolerates robust political participation from every level and sectors of their society ?
Is Singapore's situation in South-east Asia as dire as that of Israel's precarious situation in the Middle-east ?
Regretably, your argument is an unthinking acceptance - (an unfortunate parrot like mindless repitition) - of what has been propagated for the self-interest of the MONOPOLISTIC mind of the Ruling Party, who believe that they are the only capable persons to run Singapore.
Fortunately, they have their Temasek Group and the GIC to display their pathethic business talents, and if it had not been the sheer size of capital for them to waste, the various companies that they are managing would have been sunk long ago.
Yes, you are correct that Singapore success is very much due to the efforts of all Singaporean in running the businesses that have made Singapore successful. Those private corporations that develop and own the numerous tower blocks, those private corporations that develop and sell condominiums offering better quality and choice in private housing than the government - and all with PRIVATE CAPITAL.
You are correct that it is the interest of every political party to hold on to power. However, in the process of holding onto political power, should the political party put itself above the Nation and the Citizens - by endangering the future with its own selfish interests to stay in power ?
Is Singapore safe in the hands of this Ruling Party aka the Government ?
Considering the present state of relations with our neighbors within ASEAN has deteriorate over the last ten years (or more) - despite the fact that ASEAN was supposed to be a vehicle to bring peace and prosperity to all in this region - why does the Singapore government perpeturate a feeling of insecurity with our neighbors ?
Is there any benefit in creating a seige mentality of THEM against us ? -
Actually, you can also buy them at Select Books.Originally posted by Atobe:Thanks for the info, I have not been to the NLB for more then two years, and those times that I have been into one, I have not found any on the shelves - perhaps CSJ's books must have been taken out.
I stand to be corrected.
-
Originally posted by LazerLordz:
Really ? It must have been too embarrassing to keep the books off the shelves - similar to the "Escape from Paradise" fiasco - which cause a calm environment to be more prickly then necessarily.
Actually, you can also buy them at Select Books.
I have not been to any book stores to purposefully see if CSJ's books are being stocked, as I already bought two during the early 1990s. -
Escape from Paradise is still banned, as the original court order pursued by Mrs Yeo Cheow Tong is still in effect. I don't believe SG has responded to the countersuit challenging the Yeos to validate their claims in a US Court though.Originally posted by Atobe:Really ? It must have been too embarrassing to keep the books off the shelves - similar to the "Escape from Paradise" fiasco - which cause a calm environment to be more prickly then necessarily.
I have not been to any book stores to purposefully see if CSJ's books are being stocked, as I already bought two during the early 1990s.
-
Originally posted by BillyBong:
Actually I was under the impression that Mrs Yeo used her own legal firm to write to all the bookstores selling "Escape from Paradise", and not that she had taken any court injunction to stop these stores from selling it.
[b]Escape from Paradise is still banned, as the original court order pursued by Mrs Yeo Cheow Tong is still in effect. I don't believe SG has responded to the countersuit challenging the Yeos to validate their claims in a US Court though. [/b]
The bookstores that received her letter of notice probably complied when they recognised the political link of her name, which was printed in her letters to the stores. -
Whoa! don't we have democracy here?Originally posted by LazerLordz:....................I'll take the former thank you very much.
-
We have "democracy" as espoused by one segment of the population.Originally posted by mancha:Whoa! don't we have democracy here? -
Please lah, at least he was a lecturer in NUS OK?Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:How is it that CSJ who is supposed to be a retarded idiot can write so well? It is amazing what controlling the mass media can do. -
Information on this issue is scarce, and www.yeocheowtong.com is not exactly a reliable website when it comes to facts.Originally posted by Atobe:Actually I was under the impression that Mrs Yeo used her own legal firm to write to all the bookstores selling "Escape from Paradise", and not that she had taken any court injunction to stop these stores from selling it.
The bookstores that received her letter of notice probably complied when they recognised the political link of her name, which was printed in her letters to the stores.
A check with the registrar should be able to determine if Mrs Yeo did indeed file an injunction. If none were filed, then it's pretty obvious.