“Racial and Religious Hate Speech in Singapore: Reclaiming the Victim’s Perspective”
(draft of forthcoming article in the Singapore Law Review, 2009)

Mas Selamat Escape: The Disciplinary Fallout

Edited: 27 May 2008 at 1200hrs

News has broken regarding the disciplinary action taken in light of the Mas Selamat escape. Appended at the bottom of this post is a ‘quick-reference’ table summarizing (from DPM Wong Kan Seng’s speech in Parliament on Monday) the disciplinary actions taken against the various officers and guards. Certain cells I have left blank, because the information was not available from DPM Wong’s speech.

In all, 9 individuals faced disciplinary action of some kind; 6 by the Internal Security Department, 2 by the Singapore Police Force, and 1 by the Minister for Home Affairs himself.

The Problem of Concurrent Appointments

From the Table, you’ll note that the most senior officer involved apparently held concurrent appointments, as a Command Director of the Internal Security Department (ISD), and as Officer-in-Charge (OIC) of the Whitley Road Detention Centre (WRDC).

Racist Speech — Whose Fault is It, Anyway?

A dude going by the rather charming moniker, Sexy Fragrance Prince, has been charged under s. 298 of the Penal Code. Since I’m presently researching on the topic of hate speech legislation, I thought I should weigh in a little on this debate.

A few good blog posts on this issue:

• Ian on the Red Dot, “Bloggers Should be Allowed to be as Racist as Possible”
• Simply Jean, “Local Blogger Arrested”
• Simply Inconceivable, “Jail the racist blogger. Legal?”

Before commenting on the free speech issues, I would note that the relevant provision used here is s. 298 of the Penal Code (for wounding another person’s racial or religious feelings with deliberate intention), and not the Sedition Act (as in 2005, with Benjamin Koh and his ilk).

The Pedra Branca Denouement: Between a Rock and a Hard Place?

To make up for a long absence, I will post in quick succession on a number of issues: Pedra Branca, racist bloggers, the Yaw Shin Leong mini-scandal, and (just in) the disciplinary fallout from Mas Selamat’s escape. Let me start with a short comment on Pedra Branca.

The Straits Times

May 26, 2008

SM: Accepting outcome shows maturing of ties

By Zakir Hussain

THE world court’s decision on Pedra Branca has untied a ‘tricky knot’ in bilateral ties between Singapore and Malaysia, Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong said yesterday.

Both sides can now ‘look forward instead of being bogged down by this issue’, he told reporters ahead of a charity golf tournament to raise funds for the needy in Yuhua constituency.

… … …

‘Personally, I’m disappointed that we did not get the award for Middle Rocks,’ he added.

‘I thought it would either be all or nothing, a binary solution, because the three rocky outcrops were quite close to one another.’

‘But nevertheless, there is a hint of Solomon in the decision,’ he said, referring to the Biblical king known for his wisdom.

‘And I think perhaps it’s the fair and best outcome for both sides.’

Full Story

Perhaps the most famed example of King Solomon’s wisdom is chronicled in 1 Kings 3:16-28 of the Bible. Two female prostitutes come before Solomon with an infant boy, each claiming that the child is hers. Aside from the rather unflattering comparison which SM Goh draws between Singapore and Malaysia, and prostitutes, there is yet another difference between the story of Solomon and the Pedra Branca dispute.

In the former, Solomon merely threatened to cut up the child with a sword as a means of determining its true mother. With its ruling on Friday, however, the International Court of Justice (“ICJ”) actually severs in two the group of islands comprising Pedra Branca, Middle Rocks and South Ledge. (The judgment is available here.)

JI Detainee’s Escape: Another Argument Against the ISA?

So the controversy surrounding the Budget 2008 Debate (which I haven’t the time to follow) has been drowned out by this news of the Manhunt. A rifle-totting, able-bodied, combat-trained CPL Dave Teo is apparently small-fry in comparison with the unarmed, partly-crippled former chief of the Jemaah Islamiah.

The Straits Times was notably quick to publish a report assuring readers that security at the Whitley Road detention centre (“WRDC”) is “very tight”. Conveniently, the report cites anonymous “people who have visited detainees there”. Surely the level of security should be gauged (on a technical basis) against those of regular prisons like Changi and Queenstown Remand, rather than on the basis of the opinions of ‘visitors’ to the WRDC.

Already, two differences of the WRDC from regular prisons may be noted from the Straits Times report. The WRDC has no watchtowers, and it is housed within a complex which rather bizarrely includes a “heritage centre” (not exactly what you would expect in a highly-secured facility).

A Non-Citizen’s Constitutional (Non-)Right to Freedom of Speech in Singapore

Let’s talk about the rights to freedom of speech, expression and assembly in Singapore, with regard to non-citizens.

The inspiration behind this is a series of recent incidents involving foreigners attempting to weigh in on local civic discourse, or to express themselves artistically… and curtly rebuffed by the authorities. These include:

Douglas Sanders
A Professor Emeritus from Chulalongkorn University who had wanted to speak on “Sexual orientation in international law: the case of Asia”, but denied a PEMA licence. See Yawning Bread, “Bark and Crumble”.

Human Rights Torch Relay
The Relay, which spanned across 37 countries, arrived in Singapore, only for local police to seize two of the Torches, and question the event participants. See Singabloodypore, “Singapore Police Size Human Rights Torch ‘For Investigation’”.

Complaints Choir
The Choir, having had its lyrics approved by the MDA, sought a PEMA licence to perform publicly. The police said they would grant a licence only if the foreigners stepped out. The Choir then decided to perform only privately. See theonlinecitizen, “TOC Report: Bureacratic muddle leads to canning of International Fringe Festival event”.

Before I go on, let me (rather belatedly) say two things about the Complaints Choir incident.

First, we should note that the complaints in the lyrics were compiled so as to give voice to the grouses of average Singaporeans. The content wasn’t some highly toxic ‘Western’ idea that is anathema to our conservative society; it came from our society.

Even if there were foreigners in the choir, they were merely repeating (call it ‘performing’ if you wish) the habitual complaints of most Singaporeans. It is a dangerous precedent, I think, if merely echoing someone else’s opinion can be censored, even though the opinion itself is unobjectionable (the lyrics, indeed, had gotten the MDA green-light) and notorious.

Second, the police, in stating that they would allow public performances only if the foreign members refrained from singing, offered what was in fact a poisoned olive-branch. Is it reasonable to expect a choir, having practised so laboriously, to then perform without some of its members, and potentially, its conductor?

Anyway, back to what I want to discuss. Feel free to skip this, because it is rather dry. The discussion, though, is so far quite sketchy, and is purely descriptive.

The Sounding of a TOCsin: Blogosphere in a Bog

I’ve been MIA for sometime, clearly… was planning originally to make a comeback with an essay of sorts on the constitutional rights (if any) of non-citizens in Singapore. Am still working on that. But this rather bemusing fracas has impelled me to write, a little sooner than planned:

• soc.culture.singapore: Beware TOC (The Online Cons)
• Newsintercom: The Unknown Extent of the PAP’s Net Offensive
• The Wayang Party Club of Singapore: 8 questions for The Online Citizen’s Remy Choo

All this talk of moles and counter-offensives! It makes one incredulous, the paranoia that’s awash in the blogosphere. But let’s try to draw some rational observations from the hullabaloo.