TR EMERITUS

The Iswaran case reminded me of the importance of independent institutional checks. The more robust and resilient our institutions, the more reliable and effective they are in smoking out or preventing corruption. For a careful man watches himself carefully. But a wise man allows himself to be watched by others even more carefully. I recall a book I read recently. It’s titled “Party of One - The Rise of Xi JinPing & China’s Superpower Future” by journalist Chun Han Wong. It’s quite an eye-opener for me. There is an interesting conversation between the Great Helmsman Mao and American journalist Edgar Snow (@ p92-93). Snow wrote that Mao exhibited a curious level of modesty when Mao scoffed at the hero worship of him in the country. Mao said the personality cult over him was overdone. “As he courteously escorted me to the door, he said he was not a complicated man, but really very simple. He was, he said, a lone monk walking the world with a leaky umbrella.” That remark left a positive impression of Mao in Snow’s account. However, some observers felt there was more than meets the eye. Snow apparently missed out on the sinister subtlety expressed by Mao. One Sinologist Pierre Ryckmans (pen name Simon Leys) shed some light into Mao’s “cynical immodesty”. Simon pointed out that Snow’s command of the language was “never very fluently” He said: “”It is no wonder that (Snow) failed to recognise in Mao’s description of himself as “monk under an umbrella” was in fact a popular Chinese joke.”” Simon explained that the expression Mao used, heshang dasan, or “a monk opens an umbrella,” forms a riddle typically answered with another four-syllable phrase wufa wutian, or “no hair, no sky”. In other words, “no hair no sky” (wufa wutian) is translated to “I know no law, I hold nothing sacred.” Chun wrote: ““For many Chinese who lived through his reign, Mao was the law. His despotic “rule of man” was often a recipe for chaos, unleashing purges and mob justice against class enemies on a grand scale.”” ““Mao had even suggested that “rule of man” was better than the rule of law, saying, “an editorial in the People’s Daily gets implemented across the country, why is there a need for any laws?”” Alas, the lesson I have learned from history is that people are emotional beings, whose appetite for self-glory is boundless. And the one in power will always struggle to check on himself and others, especially when he or she is someone the one in power is beholden to, whether in ties, affection or favours. Mao is the tragic cumulation of that frightening embodiment. No matter how honourable we claim to be, we cannot guarantee that we will not be swayed when the rubber meets the road, or when push comes to shove. That is why we establish laws and these laws are premised on time-tested rules that prescribe the strict boundaries for its application. We then leave its enforcement to trusted and impartial institutions. Going back to Iswaran case, Lawrence Wong said: “But what I would say is that this is concrete proof of how we do things in Singapore and how our system works.” “We have always upheld a clean and incorrupt system of government, and our track record on this over the decades is clear and evident to all….This case is completely driven by CIPB from the beginning; there was no public complaint.” That’s the ruling party’s “zero tolerance” stance against corruption. That standard is set at its highest and is maintained by entrenched impartial institutional safeguards, for example, the CPIB. Of course, this is not a good time for the status quo. The hot seasonal wind had blown 2 controversies in - the Ridout Rd Properties probe that went up to parliament and the recent TCJ’s “unparliamentary language”. And now, we have the investigation of the transport minister, a veteran politician and stalwart of West Coast GRC. The political pall is indeed cast over the landscape. It’s leadership teetering at the edge of the straight and narrow. (Anyway, I sincerely wish him and his family well). And it is no less a test for PAP. Thus far, it is apparent that CPIB is investigating without fear or favour. The rule of law still rules, and that is the stellar system Lawrence was boasting about. I supposed it is still early in the investigation process, and we will just have to wait for its outcome in the coming weeks. While I don’t know whether there is going to be another parliamentary session to gingerly plaster the cracks in the trust reposed on the ruling party, I feel that this is the first crucial step towards transparency and accountability. It is a step in the right direction, if it is done clean and proper, above ranks, file, and board. And while the numerous hot mic incidents and the recent Ridout-gate seem to skirt precariously at the edge of a moral slippery slope towards elitism, an establishment mindset and a paternalistic “we-know-better”, I trust we are nowhere near the state where we can say that our leadership is one that is “no hair, no sky”. (Ps: it’s either they ban the use of mic in Parliament altogether, and allow the acoustic of the place to bring what is meant to be audible to the seated parliamentarians or risks more Freudian slips to shine a floodlight at what they really think about those who stand on the opposite side of the white line).   Michael Han   * The author blogs on Facebook.      Read More →

Leader of the Opposition I think it is appropriate for the Leader of the Opposition to lodge a formal complaint to the Privileges Committee about the deplorable conduct of the Speaker. His words clearly showed his contempt for the opposition. Do all army generals speak in that manner? It is clear that the Leader of the House will not lodge the complaint because she belongs to the same party. Similarly PM Lee has his own problems and will not take the matter up. There is no need to be nice to the PAP as they will never reciprocate. Lodge the complaint. The public esp the one who leaked the offensive words have already done more than they can to assist the WP.   Teo Soh Lung      Read More →

Tan Chuan-Jin This may be something that Heaven bedevils the PAP to curb their blatantly blustering tendencies. The lunatic utterance of expletive in Parliament by the cavalier Speaker Tan Chuan Jin (TCJ)has boomeranged so inimically against TCJ that it leaves the mentally-battered PM Lee Hsien Loong in such a muddled fluster. The victimised Workers' Party MP Jamus Lim had naively accepted TCJ's apology without realising the gravity of the matter which provoked a massive reaction from concerned Singaporeans calling for his resignation as Speaker of Parliament. This must have scared the shit out of both TCJ and Lee Hsien Loong. And this unfortunately looks like it's going to drag on until TCJ is removed as Speaker. Lee Hsien Loong can ignore this at his peril. It seems that with his abrasive character this is not the first time that TCJ has been caught using unparliamentary languages against Opposition MPs. Therefore it is patently clear that there is a character flaw with him.and it boggles the mind how he could be appointed an impartial Speaker with decorum. The expletive used against Jamus Lim comes with the realm of taboo and no sane and rational person will normally use it. So can it be said that Tan Chuan Jin was not sane and rational when he used this expletive against Jamus Lim. who should by now realise its graviity. I don't think the discerning public will be satisfied with a censure which is actually a slap on the wrist. .Opposition MPs will be placed in a dilemma as to how to accommodate an insane and irrational Speaker whose impartiality will be a big question mark. The die is cast and there does not appear to be any other course for Lee Hsien Loong. It he still dithers,there is an open course for him to seek public opinion like a referendum or other similar courses. Anyway, Tan Chuan Jin gives a public image of a swaggerer and blusterer and could he be expected to give advice and guidance to especially Opposition MPs?   Yoong Siew Wah * The author was the Director of Singapore’s Internal Security Department (ISD) from 1971 to 1974. He was Director of the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) in the 1960s, and had a distinguished career in the Singapore Special Branch in the 1950s. Mr Yoong has granted TR Emeritus exclusive right to his memoir, to be published on an independent website (work in progress), upon his passing.       Read More →