Breaking news: MDA tells bookstore to remove death penalty book

Home

News

Singapore

Thursday, 08 July 2010

Singapore Democrats

The SDP has received information that the Media Development Authority has asked Kinokuniya Bookstore to remove copies of Once A Jolly Hangman written by Mr Alan Shadrake from its shelves. The book describes the work of Mr Darshan Singh who was Singapore's main executioner.

Mr Shadrake, a freelance writer and journalist, has written a compelling book looking behind the scenes of Singapore's execution machine. The death penalty, as it is applied in Singapore, hangs on average one person a week, a rate that is one of the highest in the world.

Once A Jolly Hangman has been making its rounds in Singapore and the Singapore Democrats have obtained a copy. It recounts in shocking detail the gruesome hangings that go on in Changi prison.

Although the book has not been officially banned yet, it seems that the authorities are concerned about its contents and has ordered Kinokuniya not to sell it. This is reminiscent of communist type rule in China and erstwhile Eastern Europe. It certainly does not befit a modern First World government that the PAP touts itself to be.

In the past, Mr Francis Seow's book To Catch A Tartar received similar treatment. Sold at Select Books in the 1990s, Government officials ordered the copies to be removed although the book was not officially banned.

Perhaps nervous about the growing antipathy towards the mandatory death penalty for small-time drug mules who do the bidding of druglords, the Government is trying to restrict information on the subject.

Mr M Ravi, Singapore's human rights lawyer, has been rigorously campaigning and advocating against the law. His efforts have resulted in the Malaysian Government appealing to its Singaporean counterpart to spare the life of 21-year-old Yong Vui Kong, a Malaysian due to be hanged soon for peddling heroin.

Mr Shadrake has been researching the book for years. He dedicates one chapter to different persons who were hanged or had faced the gallows. His interviews include Dr Chee Soon Juan who was involved in the rudimentary stages of the campaign against the mandatory death penalty.

He also wrote about how a German lady Ms Julia Bohl got off the death sentence when Germany pressed the PAP Government not to execute her, and compared the case to Nguyen Van Tuong, an Australian of Vietnamese descent, who was hanged because the Australian Government did not pressure Singapore.

Share this article:

Comments (10)

Thu 08 Jul 2010 8:03 PM | quantum

I thought Singapore is a developed, advanced, forward, modern, open, vibrant, dynamic, pluralistic and cosmopolitan city?

Fri 09 Jul 2010 7:56 AM | Tan Tai Wei

Not banning it, but telling bookstores to withdraw or not stock it (probably meant to be confidential although you can't prevent one or two from talking: "you can't bluff all of the people all of the time"), is a less than honest and "transparent" atrategy to effect unjust control, and yet maintain a front of bookstore autonomy.

Fri 09 Jul 2010 10:04 AM | joanna - Disturbing News

Dear SDP

Thank you for bring this news to us. Have Singaporeans lost their freedom in deciding what they want to read? You are right, Singapore is now like China or Eastern Europe where authorities withheld free information whether in newspapers or print media from her citizens.

Please work to get this book and other books that are withdrawn from selling back to the bookstores where Singaporeans can purchase this book.

Fri 09 Jul 2010 12:18 PM | quantum - Newton's Third Law

The amazing fact about such infantile actions is : they always have the opposite effect and help in raising the readership and sales of the books.

Now even I feel like buying the "banned" book, and find out what really is INSIDE it.

Fri 09 Jul 2010 4:23 PM | | Singa Crew

I didn't even know about this book till they banned it! Now it just makes me want to buy the book and encourage others to do the same. I wouldn't be surprised if MDA's move ends up making this book a sensational bestseller.

Is there anyway for us to buy this book online? I am asking because I am sure many of my friends overseas would love to buy a book banned by the Singapore government. It somehow makes the book seems a lot more interesting.

Fri 09 Jul 2010 5:23 PM | | Singa Crew - Book still available online!

While the book may be removed from the bookstores, it is still available online.

Here: http://www.kinibooks.com/product_info.php?products_id=1214

Or here: http://www.marymartin.com/web/selectedIndex;jsessionid=78D817AFCAD8ACBC90FDB71DEE6272F6?mEntry=119535

Fri 09 Jul 2010 7:36 PM | quantum - Why not show it to the world?

If you think that what you are doing is right, ethical, noble and world-class, why not do Singapore proud by showing it to the world in full glory?

The Straits Times should proudly show the book in front cover!

Sat 10 Jul 2010 1:48 PM | rahulmehta87

Ah, The Straits Times does not have the cheek to do such a thing.

In India too, the media are often harassed. In fact, one of the biggest fallacies of the Indian Constitution is that it does not discuss press freedom explicitly. However, the media here is still strong enough to voice its opposition despite threats from the government or other powerful bodies. A case in point is this recent news article:

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article507464.ece

Sun 11 Jul 2010 9:48 AM | maxchew - Sub Judice for all except the PAP Ministers?

It is unsurprising the manner the shameless PAP responded to the allegations of lawyer Mr M Ravi that Yong Vui Kong's appeal conviction was prejudiced by sub judice public remarks by Law Minister Shanmugam. The latter had stated "The Govt is entitled to comment on such policies"...even though it's sub judice as the case before the Appeal Court was ongoing.

What he's inferring is that the PAP Govt is exempt from sub judice restrictions which apply to all others.(Wasn't there another incident when PAP Ministers illegally entered voting premises but was "excused" by the then AG now CJ citing roundabout legalese? Do they all take us lesser mortals for fools?)

Reminds me also of what fmr President Nixon replied to David Frost when asked why he did not apologise for the Watergate crimes.."I'm saying that when the President does these things, it's not illegal" The blog "Singapore Notes" has an excellent rebuttal to Shameless Shanmugam's response to Ravi's accusations. Don't miss it.

Tue 13 Jul 2010 8:00 AM | Tan Tai Wei

Max,
I haven't seen the minister's remarks. They are very silly if so.

Surely, the LAW minister should have the common sense of justice to see that that "sub judice" rule is to prevent interference with the legal process and judgement that is being effected.

And if comments by common people about the issue, when a case is still in process at court, could thus interfere, how much more so when persons in political leadership in "authoritarian" Singapore, especially the LAW minister himself, so comment!

So, rather than claiming government has the special right to so comment, the just truth is that government ESPECIALLY should not do so.