TR EMERITUS

By Abdul Malik For a start, let me congratulate our young Singaporean athletes and volunteers who have done us proud. You have put in many hours of training and I hope that you will continue to do Singapore proud in future sporting competitions. I am proud of every one of you, and to call you my fellow countrymen. To Dr Vivian Balakrishnan and Mr Teo Ser Luck, as well as the rest of the SYOGOC, I believe you have put in much effort into the Singapore 2010 Youth Olympic Games. That is an indisputable fact. When Singapore was announced to be the host of the first YOG, I was initially pleased that such a small island nation such as ours could have the honour of holding what promised to be a great international sporting event. As time went by, I saw that the mood of the public was generally that of apathy. That dampened my spirits, and forced me to question why this was so. The tripling of the YOG budget to $387 million from $105 million, which till date still remained unaccounted for, did nothing to lift my spirits, as I contemplated the fact that Singaporeans may end up footing a larger bill than we were originally prepared for. I saw red with the fact that there was no consultation done with the public, when it was public funds that were used for this event. An increase of such magnitude should have, at the very least, been disclosed transparently by those in charge so that Singaporeans may be made aware where their hard-earned money goes to. $387 million is by no means a small amount of money. As for the organisation of the Games, I would like to express that I would have expected a much better showing and level of support considering the large budget for the YOG. For a country known for its excellence, precision and efficiency, incidents such as the food poisoning scandals and the collapse of the canvas roof at the 3 a side basketball venue should not have happened. It mars our international image as a nation which prides itself on doing things right, all the time. It was certainly regrettable that they did occur, as it was preventable. I hope that such things will not happen again if we are ever to host another major event. As for the issue of forced volunteerism which has been a hot topic on the Internet, my view is that students should never have been made to attend the YOG for CCA points to just make up the numbers. I had watched some events on television and on the live internet feed, and most of the spectators looked as if they were in uniform. Is this a sign of real support from the public? I do not think students (and NSmen) who were made to go to the YOG as spectators and volunteers are representative of the People's support of the YOG. To me, the YOG has not met the expectations befitting of such an event. Empty seats at competition venues, even when they were supposed to be sold-out, does not bode well in the eyes of the international media. It is the wish of Dr Balakrishnan to reposition Singapore as a "happening" place, but I did not see that "happening"-ness during the event. Empty seats again, at the Celebrations@Marina Bay, are indicative of that. And if tickets had been sold out, why was there a need to resell those empty seats? To me, it seemed like a last-ditch effort to remedy the "ghost spectators" situation. I believe Dr Balakrishnan has tried to explain the need for the tripling of the YOG budget. However, an explanation at a press conference is not enough. Companies publish their reports openly for shareholders to scrutinize. Why should the YOG be any different? Aren't we Singaporeans all shareholders of this event? There needs to be more transparency in showing where the money went. Dr Balakrishnan has stated that he is confident Singapore will recoup its investment in the YOG. That still remains to be seen. It would help greatly if he could detail exactly why he feels that way. In the meantime, we are now confronted with the issue of $387 million of public funds being spent on a 12-day event that has scant mention in the international press and little support from the man in the street. I would also like to take issue with the fact that we won our bid for the inaugural YOG with an initial budget of $105 million, thus possibly pipping Moscow's bid for hosting this event. An increase of 3 times the initial amount should have alerted the IOC that Singapore's bid was unreasonably low and thus unfairly snatched the winning bid away from Moscow. If the Games were an exercise at diplomacy, I'm sure we did not win many friends in Russia. I may even go as far as saying it might have been an deliberate underhand tactic in winning the bid to host the Games. But the YOG is now over. What's done is done. We cannot turn back the hands of Time. Let us hope that something good will come out of these 12 days. I hope that Dr Balakrishnan will make good his promises of "tangible and intangible" benefits in the long run. My aim now is to get the Government and those responsible for the YOG to be held accountable for the various issues that blighted the Games. Action needs to be taken to bring those responsible for the failures to task. Even if it means "burning" their future political careers. This is how I would want a leader to be seen as taking responsibility for the actions of his subordinates. My initial view has changed drastically from one of support for the YOG to utter disappointment at the way the event was handled overall. Things could have been much better planned.   Abdul Malik       by Abdul Malik     Editor's note: The writer was arrested at his workplace three days ago by three plain-clothes police officers from Bedok Police Division on the charge of “inciting violence and public disorder” under Section 267 Chapter 244 of the penal code. The Commander of Bedok Police Division is DAC Teo Chun Ching. Its Head Investigator is DSP Goh Tat Boon. His laptop was also seized. Mr Abdul Malik is an alumnus of Raffles Institution.   Related articles: >> Dr Vivian: I don't care about arrest of YOG critic >> Arrest of YOG critic to squash dissent failed miserably >> Character assassination by Straits Times against YOG critic >> Netizens voice support for arrested YOG critic Abdul Malik >> Outcry among Singaporeans at arrest of YOG critic >> Singapore police put YOG on world map >> Did Dr Vivian lodge police report against YOG critic? >> YOG critic arrested by Singapore police >> Participant of “I hate YOG” Facebook arrested by police Please join our Facebook page here and invite your friends to do so to create awareness of the current affairs affecting Singaporeans. Please use our online web form to contact us  Read More →

According to a Straits Times report today, the Singapore police has declined to comment on the controversial case involving a NSman Mr Abdillah Zamzuri who has been called up for questioning by his reservist unit for blogging on the cuffing of Lianhe Wanbao photo-journalist Mr Shafie Goh. When contacted by the Straits Times this morning, a police spokesman said: "It is inappropriate for us to comment as the case is currently under investigation." [Source: Straits Times] Mr Abdillah was called up by his reservist unit for questioning a week after expressing his opinions on his blog and will be charged for “Prejudice to the Conduct of Good Order/Discipline” by the Police Provost and Discipline unit. The two paragraphs in Mr Abdillah's blog post which got him into trouble with his unit are as follows: 1. ‘As someone who still reports for reservist duty as a Police Officer, I am well aware of the Penal Code and Statutes that governs and dictates what a Police Officer can and cannot do.’ 2. ‘My take on this, sue the damn Singapore Police Force who will then put the officer on suspended patrolling duties, cut salary to half and hold the bonus till he is acquited from the case – THIS IS THE STANDARD PRACTICE.’ Mr Abdillah did not remove the post and it is still available for public viewing here. In an email interview with Temasek Review, Mr Abdillah revealed that he will be charged internally by the Singapore Police Force (SPF) for "disparaging its image": "I was told I will be charged internally by the SPF since I had claimed i was a reservist police officer." This is the first case of a NSman being charged by his reservist unit for posting his views on the internet. Mr Abdillah is the second person to be questioned lately over his online remarks after Mr Abdul Malik who was arrested three days ago for criticizing Singapore sports minister Dr Vivian Balakrishnan. The shocking arrest made the headlines of the international media agency Agence France-Presse and reproduced worldwide thereby damaging Singapore's reputation and reinforcing its image as a repressive police state. The recent spate of netizens being called up by the police for online postings on very flimsy grounds has eroded public confidence in the competency and impartiality of the Singapore Police Force. Unlike other democratic states, there is no independent body such as a Public Complaint Bureau for Police Misconduct to check on possible abuses of power by the police.       Related articles: >> Police NSman to be charged by unit for blogging on Shafie Goh's case >> Shanmugam: Wanbao photographer was handcuffed to restrain him >> Why Singaporeans must rally around Shafie Goh >> TR pledges support to Shafie Goh >> Singapore police: investigations on Shafie Goh’s case still ongoing >> Lianhe Wanbao refutes explanation by Singapore police Please join our Facebook page here and invite your friends to do so to create awareness of the current affairs affecting Singaporeans. Please use our online web form to contact us.  Read More →

Dear Vivian, We’re concerned by the recent arrest of Mr Malik for “inciting violence and public disorder” by the Singapore police (Bedok Division). Mr Malik has posted comments on facebook criticising the organizing and management of YOG. According to the New Paper, Mr Malik posted a comment saying that the mismanagement of YOG, including budget overrun and a host of other issues showed that it was time to “burn” you, the minister and the PAP. The “incriminating” sentence was immediately followed by the next line asking the people to rally together and vote the PAP out. These are the original sentences who got Mr Malik into trouble with the police: “This is the time for us to burn Vivian Balakrishnan and the PAP!!!!! Rally together and vote them out!!!” Now, you can physically burn a person but how are you supposed to burn a political party? Moving to the next sentence, “Rally together and vote them out!!!”, he was clearly qualifying his previous “burn” remark by asking the citizens to vote PAP out. Hence, reading both sentences together, the meaning of the word “burn” becomes clearer. It’s referring to burning as in the idiom, “burning someone at the stake”. Figuratively, it means “to chastise or denounce someone severely or excessively” (http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/burn+at+the+stake). In short, it’s clear to most people who have passed their GCE ‘O’ level English that Mr Malik was speaking metaphorically when he used the word “burn”. I’m puzzled that the person who reported this to the police cannot understand simple English? More critically to the netizens, we know that from the papers, you weren’t the one who reported Mr Malik to the police. According to a Temasek Review article, Mr Malik said that it was actually the investigating officer (IO) who lodged the report leading to his arrest. If this is true, how can the police arrest any law-abiding citizens as they like just because the police doesn’t like the language one uses or the way one criticises the Govt’s handling of events like the YOG? Malik’s arrest is on flimsy ground at best, given the lack of concrete evidence that a crime has been truly committed. The Singapore police must be held accountable to its actions. It is not above the law. The primary duty of law-enforcers is to protect citizens from criminals and NOT shield the PAP leaders from criticisms. Today, it is Mr Malik who was arrested for criticizing the Govt. Tomorrow, it may happen to someone else! Also, even if Mr Malik is not charged in court in the end, his personal life and work will surely be affected by the ongoing police investigations which sometimes take years to conclude, if ever. Who will compensate Mr Malik and his family for their emotional trauma, anguish and suffering? What if Mr Malik is sacked by his boss because of his arrest? And if he is subsequently not charged in court, will the Singapore police compensate him for the loss of income? In addition to the sufferings of Mr Malik, this arrest has damaged Singapore’s international reputation as well and reinforced Singapore’s image as a repressive police state intolerant of the slightest criticism and dissent. In short, I think the Singapore police and the Govt should explain the arrest of Mr Malik to the public so as to calm public concerns. Looking forward to your reply. Yours sincerely, Kojakbt date Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 6:58 PM subject Concerns of netizens who criticise YOG mailed-by gmail.com from BT Kojak to [email protected] cc [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]  Read More →