Damned by politeness

On March 6, 1997, Mr Nelson Mandela, President of South Africa, spoke at the annual Singapore Lecture. He spoke of the search for South Africa's place in a rapidly changing world entering a new millennium. More importantly, he spoke of the ideals that guide this search. Among them was his belief in the virtues of a liberal democratic system, the primacy of law and human rights, and a strong civil society.

These themes were expanded upon in answer to a question posed by Mr J B Jeyaretnam, a prominent opposition figure in Singapore. Mr Mandela gave a ringing defence of his faith in democratic institutions. He spoke of the separation of powers, independence of the judiciary, and the paramountcy of constitutional guarantees. He pointed out that in South Africa, the constitution cannot be tampered with, even by the government. He told the audience that they have in his country a Public Protector, a Commission for Human Rights and a Constitutional Court, which has even overruled him, as he proudly recalled:

"In the Western Cape, won by the National Party, Parliament gave me power to issue two proclamations which effected the elections in that province. The Premier took me to the Constitutional Court. Now that Court had a President who was my attorney, but on this particular question, he felt so independent and so deeply entrenched that he overruled me, and he said that I had acted beyond the powers I had.

"And within an hour of that judgment, I issued a public statement and I called upon the whole country, and in particular, members of the African National Congress, to obey that judgment."

Then, finishing off, he said, "How democracy is interpreted in Asia, that's a matter for Asians to decide in the light of the specific conditions existing in their country."

So many speakers have encapsulated their remarks with this kind of caveat that we treat it as a polite formality. But I wondered. If Mr Mandela had been speaking in the United States, in Germany or in Australia, or even in Asian countries like the Philippines or Taiwan perhaps, would he have added the same qualifier? Would he not have spoken of his convictions and left it at that?

Why did he feel that this caveat was needed when speaking in Singapore? I think most of us would agree that he did that so as not to offend Singapore's leaders who have long expounded the idea that in Asia things are different.

But we can look at it another way too. If a speaker, like Mr Mandela, speaks forcefully about the importance of putting the constitution above political tactics, about judicial independence and about human rights, and then ends off by saying, but of course, Asia is different, what does that imply? That maybe all these do not exist here?

If not, why not? Why shouldn't they exist here?

The next time we hear a speaker make this kind of disclaimer, Singaporeans should not feel so smug; we should feel ashamed. We should think: Yes he's only making a polite kowtow to his hosts, but the fact that he felt a kowtow was required is damning in itself. Other hosts don't require the kowtow; they are confident they measure up.

© Yawning Bread 

Footnotes

1. Quotes from President Mandela's speech

   Singapore Lecture, 6 March 1997

   "... societies are coming to the common realisation that, without the all-round development of the individual, without ensuring that everyone feels a sense of belonging to the political and economic endeavours of society, there cannot be technological advance, let alone economic growth."

   * * * * * * * * * *

   "We live in a world in which democratic systems of government are becoming the norm in all continents, affording societies the right to freely elect governments of their choice.

   "Beyond this, there is a realisation that civil society has a central role to play in governance. Gradually a redefinition of government is under way, with various social sectors claiming their right to directly influence policy determination and implementation.

   "Transparency and openness are gradually becoming the norm, spurred on not only by political factors, but also by the communications revolution. Government as an institution is gradually becoming a facilitator of people governing themselves."

   * * * * * * * * * *

   "Among the lessons we have learnt is that nation-building and reconciliation depend on consistent thorough-going democracy. Openness and transparency in matters of governance are the best guarantee for the survival of the democratic process.

   Our national parliament, the judiciary and other institutions such as the Human Rights Commission, the Public Protector and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission are firmly committed not only to exorcise the evils of the past. They are also actively promoting the new culture of human rights so all our people, irrespective of race, gender, religion and language can live as equals in a just society."

   * * * * * * * * * *

   Question posed by Mr J B Jeyaretnam:
   What is the democracy that you are practising? Because in this country, there are voices, and particularly one voice, which says that democracy is not for Singaporeans, not for Asians; that we must have our own brand of democracy.

   Answer by Mr Mandela:
   "Democracy can have as many definitions as there are people here. I'll tell you what democracy means for South Africans.

   "The first thing we did was to maintain the basis for democracy: separation of powers. We have a Parliament, the Executive. We have the independent judiciary. In order to ensure the basic rights contained in the Constitution, we made sure the document cannot be tampered with, even by the government.

   "We created the office of a Public Protector, a Commission for Human Rights, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Above all, we set up the Consitutional Court. In the Western Cape, won by the National Party, Parliament gave me power to issue two proclamations which effected the elections in that province. The Premier took me to the Constitutional Court. Now that Court had a President who was my attorney, but on this particular question, he felt so independent and so deeply entrenched that he overruled me, and he said that I had acted beyond the powers I had.

   "And within an hour of that judgment, I issued a public statement and I called upon the whole country, and in particular, members of the African National Congress, to obey that judgment.

   "How democracy is interpreted in Asia, that's a matter for Asians to decide in the light of the specific conditions existing in their country."
   

2. South Africa is the only country in the world where guarantees of non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation are enshrined in the constitution.

Addenda

None