« Singapore looking at lighter touch in regulating internet | HomePage | Chan Mun Chiong should not have been charged under Section 377A »
09/05/2008
Singapore: Defamation suit threatens shut-down of opposition party
Listen to this article AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL Canada
May 8, 2008
Defamation suit threatens shut-down of opposition party
Amnesty International has on numerous occasions expressed its concern about the continuing use of restrictive laws and civil defamation suits to muzzle critics and opposition party members. Laws allowing the authorities to impose restrictions on freedom of expression and assembly violate international standards. Such laws, combined with a pattern of politically motivated defamation suits, have served to maintain a climate of political intimidation and self-censorship in Singapore.
In the most recent development, leaders of the small opposition Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) fear that a defamation suit won by Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and his son, Prime MInister Lee Hsieng Loong, may result in their party being made bankrupt. On Monday, May 12, the court will determine the amount to be paid in damages to the Lee plaintiffs by the SDP and two prominent SDP members, Dr Chee Soon Juan (Secretary-General) and Ms Chee Siok Chin (Central Executive member). The amount may be assessed at over US$500,000, which would result in bankruptcy and possible de-registration of the party.
The defamation suit was launched by MM Lee and PM Lee in 2006 following publication in the SDP newsletter of an article comparing the running of Singapore with a scandal involving lavish spending by the head of Singapore's charitable National Kidney Foundation. The assessment to be made on May 12 follows a court process whose fairness has been questioned by critics. The case was decided against the defendants in a summary judgment (i.e. in the judge's chambers rather than in open court). The SDP defendants were not allowed to call witnesses or cross-examine Lee Kuan Yew or Lee Hsien Loong. And the judge continued to hear the plaintiffs' testimony, despite the absence of the defendants' lawyer, who was ill.
Both Dr Chee and Ms Chee (his sister) are recognised internationally for their commitment to human rights and democracy through non-violence. Ms Chee, already made bankrupt, continues to speak at high-level international meetings. Dr Chee, also made bankrupt, is barred from seeking election, has been heavily fined, repeatedly imprisoned, sacked from his university position, and is not allowed to travel abroad without permission (which has repeatedly been denied). A recipient of the Defender of Democracy award by Parliamentarians for Global Action, he is a leading member of a number of international human rights and democracy bodies and is the author of several books on related matters.
Despite continuing moves against critics, the government has repeatedly claimed that it is building an " open society". Amnesty International remains gravely concerned that restrictive laws and civil defamation suits continue to be used in Singapore to stifle criticism and debate -- in clear violation of international law.
08:50 Posted by soci | Permalink | Comments (4) | Trackbacks (0) | Email this | Tags: Singapore, Defamation
Trackbacks
The URL to Trackback this post is: http://singabloodypore.rsfblog.org/trackback/1546730
Comments
> Laws allowing the authorities to impose restrictions on freedom of expression and assembly violate international standards. Such laws, combined with a pattern of politically motivated defamation suits, have served to maintain a climate of political intimidation and self-censorship in Singapore. <
There is nothing really surprising about having restrictive and unreasonable laws. Every govt in the world tries this 'cunning stunt' on the electorate. And we can't really blame the electorate too much as most of them are busy trying to stay alive and look after themselves and their families.
Lee KY and Co wouldn't have a prayer if the courts were independent. The judge would probably throw his gavel at the plaintiffs, tell them to fuck off, and threaten them with contempt should the plaintiffs tried to bring anymore ludicrous law suits.
Amnesty Inc has got its focus wrong--their 'gun-sights' are trained on the wrong 'enemy'.
I have mentioned this time after time. since unreasonable laws are no surprise to me, and the fact is every politician worth his salt will try to author legislation which will empower the govt even more, it is squarely up to THE COURTS and THE JUDICIARY to strike down these laws.
Amnesty Inc -- focus on the importance of an independent judiciary, i.e. the seperation of powers in the structure of The State, to remove ALL the political influence on the courts.
If the courts are in cahoots with the govt, all is lost. We, The Citizens have absolutely NO PROTECTION from govt incursion whatsoever. The govt then can run rough shod over any aspect of our lives, and script any laws which gives them more 'authority' and usurpates our liberty.
This nonsense of "justice in the political interest" has simply got to stop. If there is going to be liberty and freedom, then the Rule of Law is absolutely necessary in ENFORCING the lines which the government cannot cross--lines which mean the difference between liberty and tyranny, a free society or a feudal society.
Posted by: Matilah_Singapura | 09/05/2008
Mr Chee should recieve a nobel prize for the sacrifices he've made for your country IMO. =)
Posted by: Gabriel | 09/05/2008
So, Matilah, where can we expect to see you stand up and lead the fight against the gov't? Seems there is a lot to say from your corner on how the gov't is controlling the people, and yet very little about how you have stood to lead the charge.
How about little things like applying for a licence to protest in front of the police department (or gov't offices) protesting how silly it is that you have to get a permit to protest? My excuse is that being an expat here if I even HINT at the gov't being slightly flawed I am told to shut up and mind my own business or go home. What is yours? If you have done these acts to bring about these good changes in the gov't please let me know where I can go to read about your glorious exploits; or should I just assume that you are the typical Singaporean, ready to flame at the gov't under protection of internet anonymity but smile and shake the PAP's hand if they come to your door (complete with police officers in tow)?
Posted by: Capt_Canuck | 11/05/2008
> So, Matilah, where can we expect to see you stand up and lead the fight against the gov't? <
You must be nuts.
Protesting rarely works -- it is futile. Protesting against a fascist government NEVER works. Petitions don't work either. And I don't vote because IMO the idea of democracy is deeply flawed. I also do not, at any point, want to give legitimacy to The State -- any State, and being FORCED to vote by law, as we are in Australia, IMO is State interfering with my free will to choose for myself. Jury duty is off the cards too -- that is State force, as is conscription and taxes.
I don't believe in "self-sacrifice" of "selflessness" as I come from the "selfishness and egoism are virtues" camp, and thus "charging" (as you put it) up against the government is definitely not in my own best (self) interest.
> I just assume that you are the typical Singaporean, ready to flame at the gov't under protection of internet anonymity but smile and shake the PAP's hand if they come to your door (complete with police officers in tow)? <
Far be it for me to tell you what to assume and what you shouldn't. Think whatever you like. I don't care.
I don't know what you mean by "typical Singaporean". You can, if you wish explain what you mean by that sweeping generalisation. I always thought that every individual is different... but I could be wrong.
As for anyone coming to my door, as long as they don't threaten me, they are entitled to civility, politeness and a smile... that includes the cops. I smile alot, because (despite my copious ranting on the net) I'm a very happy chappy. And I don't allow anyone or anyone's bad mood to ruin my day, because that would not be in my own best (self) interest.
I treat Singapore as a Hotel. This serves my self-interest very well. I come in, do my business because Singapore is FANTASTIC for doing business -- low taxes, free markets, best labour laws in the world etc. I enjoy commenting on the society and on politics, but whatever happens is not within my control.
We live in a world of ideas. Unless the majority of Singaporeans change, the government won't. The People Always Get The Government They Deserve.
I agree with H L Mencken:
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." H. L. Mencken
You want me to stand up against that? I begin with what I started: You must be nuts!
Posted by: Matilah_Singapura | 11/05/2008