TR EMERITUS

By Fang Zhi Yuan The Singapore media, ranked  147th by Reporters without frontiers on its latest Press Freedom Index, is constantly being ridiculed and villified by its detractors for being a stooge of the PAP government, in short "The PAP Times". Not only does it churns out daily PAP propaganda to poison and brainwash the minds of Singaporeans (I admit that I am one of its "victims" for the last 18 years before the advent of the internet) to mould them into "obedient, subservient and unthinking citizens", it is also an indirect conduit for the PAP to monitor the sentiments on the ground through the ST Forum. Though we know the PAP is an arrogant political behemoth which will never admit its mistakes, it is actually more adverse to public opinion than we have thought. To put it succinctly, it knows cleverly when to "steer the wheel according to the winds". When it knows it is running against the mill, it will not hesitate to fine-tune, tone down and moderate its rhetoric and stance. The recent IBA's critique of Singapore's human rights record is a slap on the face of the PAP which had spent much time and resources courting the organization. Though it carried a robust defense to exonerate itself through the state media to the extent of dismissing them as a "Western conspiracy to do us in", it is well aware that in this digital era where information is widely availabe at the click of a button, most Singaporeans especially the young IT-savvy, remains unconvinced by its desperate attempts to redeem its bruised credibility, if there is any left in the first place. As such it is not surprising to see a subtle yet significant shift in the state media's stance on human rights. Initially it tried perhaps too hard to propagate the PAP's view that human rights is a western fallacy that is inapplicable and irrelevant to the Singaporean context amid some blatant character assassination. Now it appeared to have taken a more conciliatory and balanced approach bereft of the usual political rhetoric as evident by two articles published in the Straits Times today. In "Human rights: Not whether, but what to debate", Chua Mui Hoong (the sister of the "Dr" Chua Lee Hoong, the self-proclaimed psychiatrist who diagnosed Dr Chee to be suffering from a personality disorder) tried to put things into perspective by arguing that the two opposing prevailing views of human rights are not mutually exclusive of each other and it is more productive to look at its content and relevance to Singapore. She even offered a mild rebuttal to the PAP's rigid hardline attitude towards foreign criticism: "But this assertion of sovereignty over political discourse should not close our minds to what has merit in foreign criticism of Singapore." The next article "The biggest conundrum in Singapore politics" by Li Xueying bears uncanny similiarities to a communist-style self-confession of faults in which she outlined quite frankly the major grouses and grievances against the PAP such as gerrymandering, GRC, use of HDB upgrading as an electoral carrot and the PAP's restriction on civil and political rights. She even chided PM Lee for not moving faster in his promise during his swearing-in speech to liberalize the political landscape. The last paragraph strikes me as holding out an olive branch to Dr Chee: "After all, ultimately, everyone is battling for the same team: Singapore". I are glad that the PAP is aware of the widespread discontent and resentment on the ground against its political high-handness and repression. However, plain empathy alone is still not enough to win back the hearts and minds which have been lost. Unless the PAP reforms itself and the system it entrenched its power in, it is not inconceivable that Singapore ends up being the First World's Zimbabwe one day. The subliminal shift of the state media to a more middle ground is an indication that the PAP is not so monolith and rigid after all. There are liberals in the party who do not agree with how things are done currently. They are acutely concerned about how Singapore's image and standing in the international community had taken a battling lately. A first world economy is not commensurate with a third world political system. To the younger generation who are educated and widely traveled, it is not enough just to have basic economic rights such as a roof over our heads. We want equal civil and political rights as rightful citizens and owners of this land to participate in the running of our nation. We do not want to be told all the time by the PAP that only its decisions are right for Singapore and nobody else's. Does the post-65er MPs in the PAP really understand our concerns, needs and expectations ? I doubt so. Maybe there are some with a reformist streak, but they will be powerless to effect any meaningful changes in the presence of a certain octagenarian. Therefore, I do not expect any paradigm shift in the PAP's mindset on the whole though the subtle shift in the official stance do suggest there is some introspection in the PAP on recent developments so far. It is time the PAP and the state media stop treating Singaporeans as idiots with no minds of their own. The more it tried to impose its views on us, the more peeved we will be and eventually it will lose its credibility and clout completely if not already so. Let us get this clear that Singapore is built by countless of people - our grandfathers and grandmothers, with their blood and sweat, not by the PAP or one individual. We are not indebted to the PAP forever. We want the best for Singapore and if this involves reforming the entire political system and tossing out a rotten decadent political entity incapable of keeping up with modern times, we should do so without any reservations. Enough is enough. Tak Boleh Tahan !    Read More →

By Eugene Yeo Long regarded as politically apathetic and "bochap", there was a well of unprecedented interest amongst Singaporeans especially the young in the latest Malaysian general election. Whether in heartland kopitiams frequented by the Ah Peks and Ah Sohs or a cyberspace populated by young savvy bloggers and forumers, everybody is talking about the political "tsunami" which has hit Malaysia and if its effect will spill over to Singapore in the next GE. Many Singaporeans were inspired and electrified by the triumphs of the underdogs against all odds - the overwhelming grassroots machinery of BN, its seemingly infinite resources, vilification by the mainstream media, all of which they can easily identified with given the similar circumstances in Singapore. Bloggers post daily updates of the Malaysian election campaign and of the results on polling day itself. The podcasts of opposition campaigns, speeches and rallies were widely viewed. Internet chatrooms and forums were filled with threads praising, supporting and even lauding opposition figures though few Singaporeans have met them in person before. Though the ethnic composition of the electorate on both sides of the causeway differs greatly (Chinese is the majority race in Singapore with a majority of 76% as compared to 26% in Malaysia in which the Malays is the dominant race), the political landscape is uncannily similar with a monolith party or coalition leading the countries since independence. Political analysts hailed the internet as having a significant impact on the opposition's electoral success as evident in the high level of support received by the opposition in the urban constituencies with over 60% in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur alone. Malaysia's internet penetration is 62% compared to Singapore's 85% in 2007 and therefore it is not impossible, inferring from the Malaysia experience, that such stunning electoral outcome can be replicated in Singapore in the island's next general election in 2010 or 2011. Frustrated and peeved with the mainstream media's unshamed bias to the incumbent Barisan Nasional, many young Malaysians turned to the alternative media as a reliable source of news. The more biased and lopsided the reports of the state media are, the more credibility the alternative media gains. The popular online news blog Malaysiakini reported a record half a million visitors an hour on the election day itself causing its server to crash. Not surprisingly, the majority of netizens are anti-establishment opposition supporters. According to a mock election conducted by the popular news blog Malaysia Today, 88% of its readers voted for the opposition, Barisan Rakyat. The same trend is also noted in Singapore, not least by the ruling PAP, that more and more Singaporeans are obtaining their news from blogs and forums.   Like their Malaysian counterparts, Singapore netizens are voracious critics of the PAP. Surely it does dawn upon the politically astute PAP that this is a potential threat to their rule in the future. As Raja Petra Kamaruddin of Malaysia Today put it aptly:  "I also read that some politicians in Singapore are anxious as to what had happened in the last election in Malaysia. They feared that the tide will overspill on the island causing the People's Action Party (PAP) to collapse in their next general election."  Read More →

By Eugene Yeo  In a recent interview with the online newspaper Malaysiakini, Dr Mahathir commented that it would be a "disaster" for Malaysia if it "loses its opposition" as in Singapore. As a Singaporean who grew up during the Mahathir years, Dr M's tolerance and embrace of the opposition came as a pleasant surprise given his autocracic tendencies exhibited during 22 years of iron-fisted rule. He may even come across as being "magnanimous" and "gracious" when compared to the PM of this country who once threatened, in his very own words, to "fix the opposition" if more were to be elected into Parliament. Indeed, is this the reason why there is no opposition left in Singapore ? Since Singapore was separated from the Federation in 1965, politics on two sides of the straits had been dominated by a single mammoth entity - Barisan Nasional, a motley coalition led by UMNO in Malaysia and the People's Action Party (PAP) in Singapore. Ironically, the Democratic Action Party (DAP), one of the main opposition parties in Malaysia was an offshoot of the PAP, being formed by the Malaysian PAP cadres in 1966. Barisan Socialist's fatal mistake A flip through the history books will tell us that Singapore always has an active and vibrant opposition presence since the first legislative elections in 1955 held by the British colonial government in which the PAP, then in the opposition, won three seats. In 1961, left-wing members of the PAP, led by Lim Chin Siong and Dr Lee Siew Choh left the PAP and form Barisan Socialis taking away 35 out of 51 branches from the parent party. In February 1963, many members of the Barisan Socialis were arrested by the Internal Security Department (ISD) for "subversive" activities to set up a communist state in Singapore including its charismatic leaders Lim Chin Siong and Fong Swee Suan. Despite that, in the 1963 state elections, Barisan Socialis won 13 out of 51 seats to become the largest opposition in Parliament. After the elections, in a series of "anti-communist" and "anti-subversive" activities, the ISD would continue to arrest many members of the Barisan Socialis, including its MPs thereby crippling the party. However, the killer blow was not dealt by the PAP but by a disastrous move which led to serious repercussions for the opposition till today. After Singapore's independence from Malaysia, Barisan Socialis MPs began to resign one by one in 1966. Though the Barisan Sosialis' official position was to 'take the fight to the streets', in reality, the party believed that Singapore's future was in serious doubt and felt pointless to continue the political struggle. In the by-elections for these vacant seats, the PAP had a clean sweep. Calls for blank ballots by the Barisan Sosialis went unheeded. By 1968, there was no opposition member of parliament and it would take another 13 years before the opposition parties could win a seat in parliament. Since then, the party itself has failed to win a single seat in parliament. Later in an election rally in 1980, party chairman Dr Lee Siew Choh apologised to the voters for what they did in 1966 and admitted what they had done was a grave mistake. PAP consolidates its power It was to be a mistake that the opposition in Singapore never recovered from. Barisan Socialis's dramatic capitulation gave PAP 12 uninterrupted years of complete power and hegemony in Parliament in which they used the advantages of their incumbency to consolidate their presence and position in all branches of the government and civil society. Important institutions of the state which are previously independent, such as the press, civil service and grassroots organizations came to be dominated by the PAP and their continued stranglehold on them has kept the opposition weak and subdued to this day. Without a free press, the media soon became part of the PAP's propaganda machinery constantly extolling the virtues and achievements of the government where criticism are almost unheard of. At the same time, laws are strengthened to curb basic freedoms of speech and assembly guranteed for citizens under the Constitution. Political activism especially in the university is severely curtailed with transgressors being jailed or exiled, most notably the prominent student leader Tan Wah Piow. A subservient press and a subdued civil society serve only to perpetuate the PAP's unbridled penetration into all aspects of Singapore be it the judiciary, HDB which builds the flats 90% of the population lives in, the NTUC supermarts in which Singaporeans buy their groceries and even kindergartens for the next generation. The PAP's presence and pervasiveness is so complete that it will not be exaggerated to compare it to the Communist Party of China. Singapore has been turned into a virtual police state. In fact, the PAP's strongman Lee Kuan Yew once said unashamedly to a foreign journalist that he is proud to admit that the PAP is the government of Singapore and verse versa. More importantly, the PAP's absolute control of Parliament, state resources and even the Election Commission under the PM's Office enables them to change the rules at will to serve their own narrow political interests. HDB flats in opposition wards such as Potong Pasir were not upgraded even though its residents pay taxes like the rest of Singapore. Gerrymandering is rampant with single constituencies singled out as the bastions of the opposition being partitioned and amalgamated into bigger GRCs which have ballooned over the years further tip the playing field to the favor of the PAP. The opposition is often ridiculed and demonized by the media as foreigner saboteurs, enemies of the state or some lunatics fresh out of IMH. Not surprisingly, the ranks of the opposition continue to be decimated throughout the years. Nipping the nascent opposition in the bud Though the opposition is severely weakend, Singaporeans continue to yearn for an opposition in Parliament to check on the PAP whose paternalistic style of governing involves forcing unpopular policies down the throats of citizens has caused increasing voices of dissent to emerge from Singaporeans    In 1981, Mr J.B. Jeyaretnam of the Workers' Party won the Anson seat in a by-election with 51.9% to 47.1% of the vote to become Singapore's first opposition MP since 1968. He was again re-elected to the same seat in 1984 as one of only two opposition politicians to win in that election. Later, however, Jeyaretnam was brought down by a series of politically-motivated charges and fines in a successful effort to disbar him and prevent him from taking part in future elections. Two months after his 1984 re-election, he was charged for allegedly mis-stating his party accounts. In 1986, a district court found him innocent of all charges but one; the prosecution appealed and the Chief Justice ordered a retrial in a district court. At the retrial, Jeyaretnam was declared guilty on all charges. The judge sentenced him to three months' imprisonment (later commuted to one month), and fined him SGD5,000, sufficient to disqualify him from standing for election for a period of five years. He was also disbarred. In the 1988 election, Jeyaretnam was barred from contesting due to his 5-year disqualification. However, he did attend election rallies to help out his fellow party members. At an election rally, he challenged the PAP's claim to being an open and transparent government, and asked whether any investigation had been conducted as to how the Minister for National Development, Teh Cheang Wan, had obtained the tablets with which he had committed suicide, in the midst of being investigated for corruption. After the elections, Lee commenced proceedings against Jeyaretnam, alleging that the latter had slandered him as his words at the election rally were understood to mean that Lee had committed a criminal offence by aiding and abetting Teh to commit suicide, and thereby, had covered up on corruption. The action was heard by Justice Lai Kew Chai who found a case against Jeyaretnam and ordered him to pay Lee, damages of SGD 260,000, together with interest on the amount and costs. Jeyaretnam was subsequently being sued successfully for defamation in separate lawsuits in 1995 and 1997 resulting in over $S500,000 in damages. He was only discharged from bankruptcy and recalled to the Bar last year. The plight of Jeyaretnam as well as other prominent opposition leaders who have been embroiled defamation suits such as Tang Liang Hong, Francis Seow, Gopalan Nair and Chee Soon Juan have caused Singaporeans to shun politics altogether particularly the young, capable and professional intellectuals who have much to lose. Politics in Singapore has acquired such a sordid reputation that even the PAP has problems recruiting new candidates to stand for elections, let alone the opposition which has long been discredited and dismissed as a bunch of crankpots by the PAP and the state media. The Wayang of today - PAP's approved "opposition": In 2001, Mr J.B. Jeyaretnam, long seen as one of the few brave leaders in the opposition who dare to challenge the PAP, resigned abruptly from the Workers' Party, citing lack of party's support for his fight against bankruptcy. Mr Low Thia Kiang who became the WP's Secretary General swiftly pledged to chart WP from the "confrontational politics" promulgated by his predecessor and to serve as a "constructive opposition" in Parliament. He was later accused by Jeyaretnam for helping the PAP to oust him. Low's open deference to the PAP has made him an instant blue-eye boy of the regime and the media. MM Lee praised him in public as being "credible" and "acceptable". The media began to run favorable reports on WP and its new generation of leaders. This ringing endorsement by the establishment net WP the biggest number of votes during the last General Election in 2006 with 2 MPs in Parliament. Though decried often by detractors as being intolerant and insensitive, the PAP leadership does retain a certain degree of political acumen to realize that Singaporeans are getting tired and fed up with the ruthless and uncompromising approach it adopts towards its adversaries and the fact that there will always be support for the opposition. Since you can't beat them completely, might as well co-opt the acceptable ones into your fold! During the GE 2006, MM Lee gave his definition of what a "First World opposition" should be - in short, an "opposition" that is compliant, cooperative and does not confront the PAP so that its MPs can continue to breeze their bills through in Parliament without any problems. His words were directed at Low who by then was gaining a reputation as a "credible" opposition MP. Parliamentary sessions became more like a meeting with few questions asked or issues debated. Even PAP backbenchers and NMPs are more vocal than Low. In a lame attempt to live up to the PAP's "expectations" of him, Low went further by restricting his "opposition" to only making a few token speeches in Parliament and praising the PAP for its governance and laws in public. He even renounced the tag of "opposition", preferring to call WP an "alternative party" providing an "alternative" to the PAP.  In Malaysia, it is possible to get two ideologically polarized parties like DAP and PAS to collaborate in the civil campaign "Bersih" to call for free and fair elections. Not so in Singapore where WP leaders and members shun SDP like a plague and are eager to be seen aligned to the PAP by inviting its leaders to WP's 50th anniversary dinner last year. In one interview with the Straits Times last year, Low infuriated opposition supporters by defining the role of the opposition as a "watchdog" and not a "mad dog" alluding to SDP's Chief Chee who has been the most voracious critic of the PAP. With WP betraying the opposition's cause to become a pseudo-subsidiary of the PAP, the opposition in Singapore is not only "lost", it has also been rendered completely impotent and irrelevant. The PAP's "taming" of the opposition and its tacit approval of WP has severely curtailed the boundaries in which future opposition parties can operate. In other democracies, the opposition is expected to check on the ruling party by voicing its concerns and criticism freely without any fear or worries to the extent of being confrontational. Across the causeway, no opposition party will survive if its leaders prostitute themselves to Barisan Nasional with boot-licking antics of the WP. In Singapore, thanks to the new WP under Low Thia Kiang, the role of the opposition has now been denigrated to that of a "docile", "compliant" and "non-confrontational" "alternative" voice in Parliament.  Read More →