As I recall, Russell said it was done with a brusqueness that was totally uncalled for. The censors could simply have said, we cannot rate this film because in our opinion, this film contradicts the 1998 amendment to the Films Act, which bans 'party political films'.

Instead, they told the SIFF organisers that Martyn See, the producer of Singapore Rebel, must withdraw the film from the SIFF within a few hours, or else they would report him to the police and have him charged. Imagine that!

See withdrew the film and thought that would be the end of it.

* * * * *

Sometime in April, I had the opportunity of seeing this work. A comparison with the documentary series 'Close up' being shown the same month by Mediacorp on ChannelNewsAsia (CNA) was inescapable. They were so alike.

In 'Singapore Rebel', Martyn See conducted a number of interviews with opposition politician Chee Soon Juan, in which Chee explained his motivation for getting involved in politics and why he engages in civil disobedience (which twice resulted in him serving jailtime). He also gave his side of various incidents involving himself through the years in which our government-controlled press tended to report only the government's side of the story.

At the heart of the documentary was an attempt by Chee to hold a small rally on May 1st (Labour Day) in front of the Istana gates [1]. A large posse of police came and arrested him in full view of dozens of reporters. See's documentary covered the action and left the viewer in no doubt that this was unjustifiably heavy-handed action by agents of the State.

There were scenes of Chee with his infant children, which no doubt humanised the public persona.

CNA's TV documentaries featured one cabinet minister a week. In each 60-minute episode, the minister got a chance to speak about why he entered politics, and what were his guiding principles when he took on his cabinet portfolio. There were shots of ministers doing the rounds of their constituencies (which no doubt made them look oh so approachable), and of them doing regular things like jogging. Similar to See's film on Chee Soon Juan, CNA's documentaries humanised their subjects.

Cabinet ministers may be doing a government job, but they are first and foremost politicians. As Chee is.

Everyone whom I mentioned the CNA series to said, of course the 'Close up' documentaries are meant to make the ministers look brilliant and capable, yet sympathetic and approachable, in preparation for the general election expected before long. So yes, everybody knows, they're for party political purposes.

Why is 'Close up' allowed to be made (probably ordered to be made) and shown over prime-time TV, with no threat of prosecution, when 'Singapore Rebel' earned an ultimatum?

* * * * *

The 1998 amendment to the Films Act dealt with a class of films, (which includes video and the like) termed as 'party political films'.

This is defined as a film made by or on behalf of any political party or any body that is primarily political in its objectives; or made by anyone and is "directed towards a political end."

What exactly is "directed towards a political end"?

The Act tries to clarify. It is anything that is "intended or likely to affect voting", "contains wholly or partly either partisan or biased references" to any political matter.

And what is a "political matter"? Elections, referendums, election candidates, any issue being put to the vote, anything to do with the government, or the previous government, or the opposition, or a member of parliament, or any controversy, or any political party....and anything else that might not have been so specified above (through the use of the phrase "including but not limited to...")

In other words, anything can be political once the PAP government doesn't like it.

The penalty was 2 years' jail or a fine of up to $100,000.

"This Act shall not apply to any film sponsored by the Government."

"The Minister may, subject to such conditions as he thinks fit, exempt any person or class of persons or any film or class of films from all or any of the provisions of this Act."

"... any film which is made solely for the purpose of ... reporting of current events is not a party political film."

* * * * *

In her commentary published in the Straits Times 11 May 2005, "A new model of PAP governance - Utopia or dystopia?", writer Catherine Lim said that despite a new veneer of a "friendly, patient, consultative approach", under Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, the stern, old authoritarian model remains. She explained,

It is actually an updated version of the old model, to fit in with the changing climate of the times. Basically, it has kept intact the substance of the old model but dispensed with the style.

In her analysis, the tight control of politics was likely to continue.

This stance was maintained through the Goh Chok Tong administration, and is likely to continue in the present administration of PM Lee, since allowing political freedom, especially in the present times when the young have become bolder and more vocal, could open the floodgates of a long, pent-up need and unleash a torrent of criticism that would prove unmanageable.

Between his adherence to traditional PAP practice, and his new avowal to reach out to everyone in society, PM Lee cannot be in too comfortable a position. His response so far has been to play down the issue, tolerate it, or isolate it if possible. At the worst, the Government could simply wait it out, politely listening and explaining, but doing nothing.

The overall result of this response is that while the winds of change are allowed to sweep through the corridors of business, education, the arts, entertainment, etc, they bypass the political domain, which continues to be in the doldrums.

* * * * *

And so it has turned out.

On 6 May 2005, the police phoned Martyn See asking him to show up for a police interview. See was informed that the police had obtained a copy of 'Singapore Rebel' and was conducting an "investigation".

According to the AFP report (10 May 2005), 

See said police told him they were investigating him over the film's political content, but no more.

"Basically all they said was that the film was politically related, and because I was the maker, therefore I had to be questioned," he said.

See said he had no political agenda in making the film, and insisted he chose to focus on Chee "only in order to understand why political opposition in Singapore is marginalised".

 
But didn't Martyn See do as told back in March? Didn't he withdraw his documentary from the SIFF?

Yes, but then, See's film will be shown at two film festivals (Auckland/Wellington and Los Angeles) this month. As reported by AFP,

'Singapore Rebel' has been selected to premiere in two human rights film festivals this month. The inaugural New Zealand Human Rights Film Festival and the Amnesty International Film Festival (USA) will host a series of screenings in Auckland, Wellington and West Hollywood.

Film-maker Martyn See will not attend the festivals. He is now under investigation by the Singapore police for "the making" of 'Singapore Rebel'.

* * * * *

As Yawning Bread is a commentary site, not a news site, if readers wish to update themselves on See's encounters with the police, please visit his weblog at http//singaporerebel.blogspot.com/ 

© Yawning Bread