US Dept. of State on Singapore's Human Right Abuses.
-
RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS
Section 1 Respect for the Integrity of the Person, Including Freedom From:
a. Political and Other Extrajudicial Killing
There were no reports of political or other extrajudicial killings. b. Disappearance
There were no reports of politically motivated disappearances.
c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
The law prohibits torture; however, there have been occasional instances of police mistreatment of detainees, and there were a few reports of police abuse during the year. For example, a Malaysian youth claimed that Central Narcotics Bureau officers punched him when he was picked up for a random drug test on December 7. The media report fully on, and the Government takes action against, allegations of police abuse of those arrested. The press reported that approximately 10 law enforcement officers were jailed for using brute force on prisoners and suspects in the 1995-99 period. During the year, three prison guards were sentenced to between 6 and 10 years in prison and caned for attacking and killing a prisoner in 1995. In February a police officer was sentenced to 8 months in prison for throwing a prisoner against a wall in 1997.
The Government has been known to investigate and punish instances of such practices as sleep deprivation or interrogation of detainees in very cold rooms where the prisoners may be stripped of their clothes and doused with water. In 1993, the last year for which statistics are available, of the 94 complaints of police abuse investigated, 14 were substantiated.
The Penal Code mandates caning, in addition to imprisonment, as punishment for some 30 offenses involving the use of violence or threat of violence against a person, such as rape and robbery, and also for such nonviolent offenses as vandalism, drug trafficking, and violation of immigration laws. Caning is discretionary for convictions on other charges involving the use of criminal force, such as kidnaping, or voluntarily causing grievous hurt. Women, men over age 50 or under age 16, and those determined unfit by a medical officer are exempted from caning. Although current statistics were not available, caning is a commonly administered punishment within the stipulations of the law. In 1993, the last year for which statistics are available, the courts included a caning sentence in 3,244 cases. Prison conditions generally are good and meet minimum international standards.
The Government does not allow human rights monitors to visit prisons.
Source: http://www.state.gov/www/global/human_rights/1999_hrp_report/singapor.html
Are these facts or a result of US Department of State's vivid imagination?
-
e. Denial of Fair Public Trial
The Constitution provides for an independent judiciary, and the Government generally respects this provision; however, control over the assignment of judges and laws that limit judicial review allow for some restrictions in practice. Many judicial officials, especially Supreme Court judges, have close ties to the ruling party and its leaders. The President appoints judges to the Supreme Court on the recommendation of the Prime Minister in consultation with the Chief Justice. The President also appoints subordinate court judges on the recommendation of the Chief Justice. The term of appointment is determined by the Legal Service Commission, of which the Chief Justice is the chairman. The 1989 constitutional amendments that eliminated judicial review of the objective grounds for detention under the ISA and subversion laws allow the Government to restrict, or even eliminate, judicial review in such cases and thereby restrict, on vaguely defined national security grounds, the scope of certain fundamental liberties provided for in the Constitution. Under the ISA and the CLA, the President and the Minister of Home Affairs have substantial de facto judicial power, which explicitly (in the case of the ISA) or implicitly (in the case of the CLA) excludes normal judicial review.
Government leaders historically have used court proceedings, in particular defamation suits, against political opponents and critics. Both this practice and consistent awards in favor of government plaintiffs have raised questions about the relationship between the Government and the judiciary and led to a perception that the judiciary reflects the views of the executive in politically sensitive cases. A series of decisions in favor of political leader plaintiffs was taken as an indication of a compliant judiciary in these particular cases. The two most recent cases--defamation actions against Workers' Party (WP) politicians Tang Liang Hong and J.B. Jeyaretnam for statements they made during the 1996-97 election campaign (see Sections 2.a. and 3)--perpetuated the perception of undue judicial sympathy to government plaintiffs. During the February trial and May appeal of Chee Soon Juan on charges of speaking in public without a permit (see Sections 2.a. and 3), the appeal judge did not specifically address a key defense challenge to the constitutionality of the law under which Chee was convicted. The judicial system has two levels of courts: The Supreme Court, which includes the High Court and the Court of Appeal; and the subordinate courts. Subordinate court judges and magistrates, as well as public prosecutors, are civil servants whose specific assignments are determined by the Legal Service Commission, which can decide on job transfers to any of several legal service departments. If they wish, Supreme Court Justices may remain in office until the mandatory retirement age of 65, after which they may continue to serve at the Government's discretion for brief, renewable terms at full salary. The Constitution has a provision for the Prime Minister or the Chief Justice to convene a tribunal in order to remove a justice "on the ground of misbehavior or inability...to properly discharge the functions" of office, but it has never been used.
The subordinate courts handle the great majority of civil and criminal cases in the first instance. The High Court may hear any civil or criminal case, although it generally limits itself to civil matters involving substantial claims and criminal matters carrying the death penalty or imprisonment of more than 10 years. The Court of Appeal is the highest and final court of review for matters decided in the subordinate courts or the High Court.
In addition the law provides for Islamic courts whose authority is limited to Islamic family law. The judicial system provides citizens with an efficient judicial process. In normal cases, the Criminal Procedures Code provides that a charge against a defendant must be read and explained to him as soon as it is framed by the prosecution or the magistrate. Defendants enjoy a presumption of innocence and the right of appeal, in most cases. They have the right to be present at their trials, to be represented by an attorney, to confront witnesses against them, to provide witnesses and evidence on their own behalf, and to review government-held evidence relevant to their cases. Trials are public and by judge. There are no jury trials.
The Constitution extends these rights to all citizens. However, persons detained under the ISA or CLA are not entitled to a public trial. In addition proceedings of the advisory board under the ISA and CLA are not public (see Section 1.d.).
There were no reports of political prisoners.
-
huh?
-
http://singaporedemocrat.org/articleWoodlandsMRT_trial9.html
Australia's Greens Party writes to PM over Dr Chee's charges
Singapore Democrats
23 Feb 08Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong
Prime Minister's Office
Orchard Road
Istana
Singapore 238823Dear Prime Minister,
I am writing on behalf of The Australian Greens to express deep concerns at the news that charges of 'speaking in public without a permit' have been laid against Dr Chee Soon Juan of the Singapore Democratic Party and his colleague.
We respectfully ask that Dr Chee not be forced to face further charges that limit his human right to free speech and that he and his colleagues be allowed to continue their advocacy for democracy and human rights in South East Asia.
The Australian Greens take a keen interest in the promotion of democracy and human rights in our region and as a Senator I have and will continue to raise matters like the plight of Dr Chee in the Australian Federal Parliament.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter. We will continue to watch developments in Dr Chee's case with interest.
Yours sincerely,
Senator Kerry Nettle
[email protected]Dear Prime Minister,
I am writing on behalf of the Summer Hill-Ashfield Greens, a branch of the Australian Greens Party to express deep concerns at the news that charges of 'speaking in public without a permit' have been laid against Dr Chee Soon Juan of the Singapore Democratic Party and his colleague.
We respectfully ask that Dr Chee not be forced to face further charges that limit his human right to free speech and that he and his colleagues be allowed to continue their advocacy for democracy and human rights in South East Asia.
The Australian Greens take a keen interest in the promotion of democracy and human rights in our region and as a local group within a jurisdiction with a high Southeast and East Asian populations; we will endeavour to highlight these matters with these local communities in the near future.
We will continue to watch developments in Dr Chee's case with interest.
Yours sincerely,
Caroleena Wigbout
Secretary
Summer Hill Ashfield Greens
Australia -
Democracy and Human Rights are like poison to an autocratic regime.
-
Reminded me of Guantanamo Bay .......
But I do like this part.....
The Government has been known to investigate and punish instances of such practices as sleep deprivation or interrogation of detainees in very cold rooms where the prisoners may be stripped of their clothes and doused with water. In 1993, the last year for which statistics are available, of the 94 complaints of police abuse investigated, 14 were substantiated.
Didn't the US did the same thing to the inmate at Guantanamo Bay
-
Guess PAP can't afford to allow human right and democracy. If they allow, they will be ousted by the nation long ago.
-
Originally posted by hloc:
Reminded me of Guantanamo Bay .......
But I do like this part.....
Didn't the US did the same thing to the inmate at Guantanamo Bay
The only difference is, US abuses Human Rights on Prisoners of War.Whereas Singapore abuses Human Rights on her citizens.
-
Originally posted by qlqq9:
Guess PAP can't afford to allow human right and democracy. If they allow, they will be ousted by the nation long ago.
If they choose to remain in power, obviously they can't allow basic Human Rights and Democracy. They need to keep everybody on a short leash.
-
Originally posted by maurizio13:
The only difference is, US abuses Human Rights on Prisoners of War.Whereas Singapore abuses Human Rights on her citizens.
There are cases of police abusing criminals/prisoners in the U.S as well. Anyway if one believes in a set of moral values, then it should be universal.
-
There are cases of police abusing criminals/prisoners in the U.S as well. Anyway if one believes in a set of moral values, then it should be universal.
Could this be the reason why US, aka - The Defencer Of World Democracy - decided that the should INTERROGATE... or if interrogate is too strong a word, QUESTION those POW - which include British Tourist, Teenager force into the Army by Taliban and/or any poor soul caught at the Wrong Place at the Wrong Time - OUTSIDE US soil...
Wasn't this done, so that the Bush control govt could 'Bypass' some US LAW regarding 'Mistreatment' of Prisoner..... no matter who or where those prisoners came from.... ??
Btw.... aren't POW also HUMAN.... and is protected by some UN law. Then WHY is it OK for US to do what it does and comes around to 'Teach' other Countries what they should do....
Abuse of Human Rights is WRONG..... no matter done by PAP or by the Bush Administration. For US to condamn others but finding loop-holes for their own misdeed.... is being a Hypocrite.
-
US is a big bully!! Do they qualify to talk about human rights??
-
Today,unemployment rate of US black is about 10%,two and a half time than white.
No change since Dr King was killed.
1.can u ask Uncle Sam sweep his own back yard first.
-
With regards to human rights abuses both in US and Singapore.
One has to ask himself this question.
Were the Human Rights abuses authorized by the top echelons of power (like the President or Prime Minister)?
Or
Were the Human Rights abuses a result of mishandling by operational staff?
If there were indeed Human Rights abuses.
What actions were taken to ensure that future abuses do not occur?
I know of the Guantanamo Bay incident, after it was reported in the news media, were actions taken to prevent future occurences? Have you heard of any further occurences of Human Rights abuse in Guantanamo Bay after the news media report?
The abuse of Human Rights by the government and police is so widespread here, even after reports by the government controlled news media of such incidences, these Human Rights abuses still occur. Obviously such abuses are sanctioned by the higher echelons, else corrective action(s) would have been taken to prevent it.
上æ¢�ä¸�æ£ä¸‹æ¢�æª
-
The law prohibits torture; however, there have been occasional instances of police mistreatment of detainees, and there were a few reports of police abuse during the year. For example, a Malaysian youth claimed that Central Narcotics Bureau officers punched him when he was picked up for a random drug test on December 7. The media report fully on, and the Government takes action against, allegations of police abuse of those arrested. The press reported that approximately 10 law enforcement officers were jailed for using brute force on prisoners and suspects in the 1995-99 period. During the year, three prison guards were sentenced to between 6 and 10 years in prison and caned for attacking and killing a prisoner in 1995. In February a police officer was sentenced to 8 months in prison for throwing a prisoner against a wall in 1997.
This part was taken out from the US States Department website provided by TS.... under "c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment "......
As you could read from the above quote..... THE MEDIA reported a case of police mistreatment.... and the Govt took action. Ending with the arrest and sentencing of Police Officers that commited the offence. Even the US admitted that it was THE MEDIA reporting that gotten the case out into the open......
The Government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; however, there were significant problems in some areas. The Government has wide powers to limit citizens' rights and to handicap political opposition. There were occasional instances of police abuse; however, the Government investigates and punishes those found guilty and the media fully cover allegations of mistreatment. Caning, in addition to imprisonment, is a routine punishment for numerous offenses. The authorities sometimes infringe on citizens' privacy rights.
TS.... do show which part in the Website that shows support your statement -
The abuse of Human Rights by the government and police is so widespread here, even after reports by the government controlled news media of such incidences, these Human Rights abuses still occur. Obviously such abuses are sanctioned by the higher echelons, else corrective action(s) would have been taken to prevent it.
All I read was 'Generally' & 'Occasional Instances'...... where is the part where it said Abuse is Widespread
And didn't the 'blue' part said - "however, the Government investigates and punishes those found guilty and the media fully cover allegations of mistreatment"..... -
The law prohibits torture; however, there have been occasional instances of police mistreatment of detainees, and there were a few reports of police abuse during the year. For example, a Malaysian youth claimed that Central Narcotics Bureau officers punched him when he was picked up for a random drug test on December 7. The media report fully on, and the Government takes action against, allegations of police abuse of those arrested. The press reported that approximately 10 law enforcement officers were jailed for using brute force on prisoners and suspects in the 1995-99 period. During the year, three prison guards were sentenced to between 6 and 10 years in prison and caned for attacking and killing a prisoner in 1995. In February a police officer was sentenced to 8 months in prison for throwing a prisoner against a wall in 1997.
The Government has been known to investigate and punish instances of such practices as sleep deprivation or interrogation of detainees in very cold rooms where the prisoners may be stripped of their clothes and doused with water. In 1993, the last year for which statistics are available, of the 94 complaints of police abuse investigated, 14 were substantiated.
Think about it from 1995 to 1999, a span of 5 years and the police force have not stopped human rights abuses to suspects. These are only of the cases reported, what about cases not reported by the uneducated. If such things are allowed to continue freely for 5 years after being reported, obviously someone in the higher echelons have sanctioned it.
I personally know of a case regarding my staff, he was held up by the police for suspected secret society activities in 2006. He used to be a secret society member, but that was in the past, he is already reformed and married, but tatoos still exist. During one fine day in 2006, he was having lunch at a coffee shop in Geylang, but unbeknownst to him, there were 2 groups of secret society members having a settlement. He was just an innocent party.
At the same time, the plain clothes policemen were already in the scene waiting for something to happen, he told me it was likely that someone from either groups had tipped off the police. He was arrested, stripped and put in a cold room. The police threatened to beat him up unless he confess to being part of the gang, in the end he wasn't beaten up, but another gang member in the same room as him got beaten up. The police even threatened to lock him up permanently under ISA if he didn't confess, but he didn't confess to anything because he was really an innocent bystander.
He was supposed to turn up for work that night, but he didn't, we tried calling his handphone but to no avail. Afew days later after his release, he related to us what happened. He wasn't even allowed phone calls to inform his wife or anybody of his arrest and lockup, nobody knew of his whereabouts.
Don't be daft in asking me for proof, because I have none, it's up to you to believe. If you have friends in the police force or secret society, maybe you can ask them if such things still happen? I only know of this recent case. Issues like this have not been reported by the news media recently, perhaps a news blackout regarding such issues is in force.
The police officers were sworn in to protect and serve the citizens of Singapore, yet there were blatant abuses of Human Rights.
-
Think about it from 1995 to 1999, a span of 5 years and the police force have not stopped human rights abuses to suspects. These are only of the cases reported, what about cases not reported by the uneducated. If such things are allowed to continue freely for 5 years after being reported, obviously someone in the higher echelons have sanctioned it.
Err... Wasn't the 10 Officers case reported by THE PRESS and those officers were sentence to sit along side their charges
Again which part of the States Department website Concluded that Human Rights Abuse is ''Widespread" For the case of your Staff.... I do believe you, as similar thing happen to a Navy friend of mine.
Which is WHY I'm glad that I didn't join any gangs or Secret Society when I was younger...... KNOWING FULLY WELL that when the LAW come around..... My life would be ruin. And isn't that why we teach our children never to get involed with Secret Society
Isn't that's why we, ourselves, don't break the law when it suit us There is a price to PAY for all our action..... NO MATTER if we were young or NOT.The police officers were sworn in to protect and serve the citizens of Singapore, yet there were blatant abuses of Human Rights.
As far as I'm concern...... as to your staff case ONLY..... The Police DID protect and serve the citizen of S'pore..... they were there to ROUND UP known GANGS MEMBER or anyone who might be a GANG MEMBER around that area to PROTECT Citizen who are only at Geylang for food or to visit the 'Gals'. I would be angry IF the Police didn't round up those Gangster fearing that it is against their 'Human Rights'.... then what's the used of the Police if Gangs Members are allow to do ''Settlement'' everywhere.
-
Originally posted by hloc:
Err... Wasn't the 10 Officers case reported by THE PRESS and those officers were sentence to sit along side their charges
Again which part of the States Department website Concluded that Human Rights Abuse is ''Widespread" For the case of your Staff.... I do believe you, as similar thing happen to a Navy friend of mine.
Which is WHY I'm glad that I didn't join any gangs or Secret Society when I was younger...... KNOWING FULLY WELL that when the LAW come around..... My life would be ruin. And isn't that why we teach our children never to get involed with Secret Society
Isn't that's why we, ourselves, don't break the law when it suit us There is a price to PAY for all our action..... NO MATTER if we were young or NOT.As far as I'm concern...... as to your staff case ONLY..... The Police DID protect and serve the citizen of S'pore..... they were there to ROUND UP known GANGS MEMBER or anyone who might be a GANG MEMBER around that area to PROTECT Citizen who are only at Geylang for food or to visit the 'Gals'. I would be angry IF the Police didn't round up those Gangster fearing that it is against their 'Human Rights'.... then what's the used of the Police if Gangs Members are allow to do ''Settlement'' everywhere.
The police by abusing suspected secret society members in lock up is protecting citizens?
What form of protection do they achieve by beating them and subjecting them to cold room treatment?
There are courts, though they are bias, but they provide judgement and citizens can form opinions on the legal system.
Were they even proven in a court of law that they members of a group with premeditation to commit criminal offence?
Since when do police end up as judge, jury and executioner?
-
So you believe that 'Sweet Talking' will get secret society members to confess their crime.... and that interrgation is not needed
I'm not sure about you...... but I do believe that MOST S'poreans really like the low crime rates in S'pore.....Btw.... a question for you.
1) Were you ever afraid of reportion a crime or problem to the S'pore Police Force at any police station or NPP
2) Do you ever hid or move away quickly when you spot any policeman from a distance
Thxs.....
-
It happen all over the world. you have Human rights if you have power and money.
-
Hi.... OPEN QUESTION TO ALL....
1) Is anyone here ever afraid of reportion a crime or problem to the S'pore Police Force at any police station or NPP
2) Do you ever hid or move away quickly when you spot any policeman from a distance
Thxs....