Singapore Democrats

Home News Singapore Singapore bent on protest-free APEC summit
Singapore bent on protest-free APEC summit Print E-mail
Tuesday, 10 November 2009

AFP

Singapore's legendary zeal for public order will be on full display this week when it hosts a summit involving US President Barack Obama and 20 other leaders. Even one-man protests are banned.

Protest laws, already among the toughest in Asia, have been further tightened heading into a week of meetings culminating in the November 14-15 summit of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) group.

Singapore, a staunch US ally, considers itself a prime terrorism target but is also on guard against foreign and local activists who have disrupted summit gatherings in other countries.

One of the city-state's most vocal dissidents, Singapore Democratic Party secretary-general Chee Soon Juan, believes the government is using the summit as a pretext to impose permanent restrictions on political gatherings.

"The Public Order Act (POA) which bans even one individual from conducting a protest is targeted more broadly at the growing desire of Singaporeans for more political space, which includes the right to express themselves freely and publicly," he told AFP.

"But is this what leaders, especially those from democratic countries, really want? Is silencing the people through repressive laws like the POA the way forward for APEC and the world?"

Chee declined to say if his party was planning any protests during the summit, which is also to be attended by Chinese President Hu Jintao and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, among other Pacific-rim leaders.

No one expects gatherings similar to the violent protests that forced the cancellation of a Southeast Asian summit in the Thai resort of Pattaya in April. But Singapore is taking no chances.

"In the current security climate, we have a duty to ensure the safety and security of the delegates as well as the general public," the APEC Organising Committee told AFP in a written response to queries on the security plans.

"We will do what is necessary to ensure their safety, including having enhanced border checks during the period. Offenders will be dealt with accordingly under our laws regardless of their nationality or cause."

Police special forces and Nepalese Gurkha units are expected to be at the forefront of security at public buildings and hotels to be used by leaders, ministers and other VIPs attending the summit and a business forum.

The international sect Falungong, which is banned in China, claims two of its members -- a Malaysian and an Indonesian -- were barred from entering Singapore in late October as part of the pre-summit restrictions.

Local practitioners have also been told to stay away from a park near the summit venue in an apparent attempt to spare President Hu from protests, sect members said.

"All sovereign nations have the prerogative to decide who enters their borders. Singapore is no exception," the APEC committee said in response to the Falungong allegation.

A Singaporean member of the sect said the summit hosts should lift the restrictions to show other APEC leaders that "Singapore is a democratic country which respects human rights and religious freedom".

There is no love lost between Singapore and foreign activists.

In 2006, the wealthy state barred 27 campaigners from attending meetings of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, even though they were accredited to meet the official delegates.

After a very public scolding from the World Bank and IMF, Singapore's government had to back down and allow most of the activists in. But APEC has no such arrangements for dialogue with non-governmental organisations.

http://news.malaysia.msn.com/regional/article.aspx?cp-documentid=3697445

Share this article:
Facebook Technorati Stumble It! Newsvine Reddit Del.icio.us Digg This!
Comments (3)
Search RSS
BryanT  -  Restrictions for SDP... by SDP
I have my reservations about the POA, and even more after the additional restrictions imposed in recent times. But let’s be clear about why this law was further tightened.

It was NOT as what CSJ says, to “(target) more broadly at the growing desire of Singaporeans for more political space, which includes the right to express themselves freely and publicly”.

It was BECAUSE CSJ and his outfit tried all means and ways to bypass the previous legal stipulations. It was tightened precisely because SDP was all out to see how the laws would stack up against its attention-grabbing theatrics.

Singaporeans, especially the emerging generations, yearn for more political space. But only the SDP defines this space SOLELY as the right to parade themselves with banners and placards (and badly designed T-shirts) on the sidewalks. Their hope is that the foreign media would turn up so that they can prostrate themselves before them as victims of repression, or display their well-rehearsed tango skills with the men(and women)-in-blue.

We have CSJ and his sidekicks to thank for the law in its tightening form.

I suggest SDP stops using the excuse that it is doing something for Singaporeans to justify its urge to break the law.
quantum  - 
BryanT: Politicians do things using people as excuses. Its within their job scope. You should be mature enough to know this.
waterfirex  - 
Thanks to Mr T, we now know that PAP banned outdoor political demonstrations not because of public order and safety concerns. It was the 'attention grabbing theatrics' all along. The Public Order Act is a major misnomer. The press has hoodwinked us yet again.

But why are outdoor musical and theatrical performances not also banned?

The original set of restrictions on public assemblies in the Miscellaneous Offences Act have been in place years before SDP took to the streets. How might we also explain this?

If POA was meant to target only political 'theatrics' which is presumably undesirable, how could the act then encroach on political space that never existed or should ever exist?

If the government is so concerned about 'theatrics' but wish to allow other forms of political expression outdoors that do not degenerate into such, it could lift its blanket ban and consider the merits of each proposed activity on a case by case basis. Was that not how our permit system was designed to function?

Lastly, 'tis strange for Mr T to be infuriated by the POA, even though according to him, its terms would not apply to him. EVER.

(I of course would like to believe his level of hypocrisy would not extend so far as to practice what he publicly denounces.)
Please login or register to post your comments.
 

Announcements

An Evening of Dazzle with The Democrats

Event: SDP's 30th anniversary gala dinner
Date:
27 Feb 2010 (Saturday)
More information here

 

Let's Talk

SDP's Let's Talk with Ng Yi-Sheng
by SingaporeDemocrats

You need a Flash Player enabled browser to view this YouTube video
youtube link
Share this article:
Facebook Technorati Stumble It! Newsvine Reddit Del.icio.us Digg This!
 

Awesome Words

Where ignorance is our master, there is no possibility of real peace.

Dalai Lama

Other languages

Banner
Banner
Banner

Act Now

More options
 
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
 

News feeds

Singapore Democrat News
Joomla Templates by JoomlaShack