| Yawning
Bread. 3 January 2008
Seelan Palay's 5-day fast
|
|
||
Palay, a Singaporean, wants his action to be seen as "a plea for the international community to pay attention to this serious human rights issue." Instead of indefinite extra-judicial detention under the ISA, he is calling on the Malaysian government to prove whatever allegations they have made against the five "in an open court process". The Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) was behind the rally and march on 25 November 2007 that turned into confrontations with the Malaysian police. The group had called the demonstrations to protest the marginalisation of the Hindu Indian minority in Malaysia. Palay himself was in Kuala Lumpur at the march near the Petronas Twin Towers. He told me that it was peaceful, but the 20,000 marchers were blocked by the police in their attempt to reach the British High Commission. The stand-off lasted 6 hours and ended only when the police used rubber bullets and water cannons. He heard that the situation at the Batu Caves -- the leading Hindu place of worship in Malaysia -- was worse. About 1,000 people including women and children who had not been part of the rally, but were just there to pray, had been trapped in the temple compound the size of a football field. It's not clear who had locked the only gate into the compound, but people said it was the police. A large contingent of officers had massed outside. Then rubber bullets and teargas were fired into the trapped crowd who had no other exit and who naturally broke down the gate in their attempt to escape the choking gas, leading to a melée. The Malaysian government accused the Hindraf leaders of inciting rebellion and alleged that they had links with the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka, a terrorist group. On this basis, the 5 men were arrested under the ISA which empowers the government to detain people indefinitely without trial. No evidence has been revealed supporting the allegations of Tamil Tiger links, and calling the demonstrations "acts of rebellion" looks like a considerable stretch of the term. Hindraf maintains that they did not plan a violent protest march; it was the police's reaction that caused the breakdown of discipline. While Palay's fast is in response to the Malaysian government's move, unavoidably it also raises questions about Singapore. We too have an ISA and we too have from time to time detained people for years without trial. Chia Thye Poh probably has the dubious honour of being the one held for the world's longest duration without trial -- 32 years -- before his release in 1998. [2] We need to confront the question of how and when such a law is used, and what safeguards can be instituted. Or should we abolish the law altogether? * * * * * Reporters from Today newspaper and The New Paper also called by, featuring his action in their 2 January 2008 editions. Naturally, the police came by too, telling him he was likely committing an offence -- they always do -- and that if he persisted, they would "investigate". But the excuses the police reach for get more and more bizarre each time. As reported by Today,
* * * * * But people do have a right to protest peaceably -- it is part of the right to freedom of expression -- and few Singaporeans have accepted the legitimacy of the government's attempt to take that right away. A number of recent trends make it harder for the government to crack down as heavy-handedly as before. The first is the rise of the internet, allowing activists a relatively unfettered means of getting their message out. Protests need the oxygen of publicity, especially if involves just a few people. That publicity in turn acts as a watchful eye over the government's response. Interestingly, the internet is also part of the reason why Palay's action has got into the newspapers. They know they have to compete against new media for credibility. Whereas in the old days, editors may oblige their political masters' wish not to give any publicity to dissent, now, such deliberate silence won't be possible anymore. The second is the demographic trend in Singapore, with more and more foreigners living here, some of them naturalising into citizens. They have not been brought up in the Singapore climate where any kind of political outspokenness is internalised as dangerous. Also, whether naturalised or not, they remain concerned with their country of origin, and in future, any crisis there may be reflected by their speaking out here. The recent spate of demonstrations by Burmese and foreign students in Singapore over the crackdown on monks in that country are a harbinger of things to come. How can Singapore crack down on such expression without seeming to take the side of the dictators the world is condemning?
Three foreign students from the National University of Singapore expressing their feelings about the crackdown in Burma by walking up Orchard Road with candles on 19 Nov 2007, while the Asean summit was in progress at the Shangri-La Hotel. But it's not just the three students; the person took went there to film their action and upload it to YouTube -- I believe it's Ho Choon Hiong, from the voice -- was equally engaging in activism in his own way. I believe our government learnt this lesson from the public relations disaster that was the World Bank/IMF conference. If they didn't, they should have. [3] But most important of all, there is emerging a new breed of
Singaporeans that simply will not roll over. People like Seelan Palay. How
the government reacts to them will set the tone for another generation. © Yawning Bread
|
|||
|
Footnotes
Addenda None
|
|
This is Seelan Palay. He started a 5-day fast in front of
the Malaysian High Commission at Jervois Road, Singapore, on 31 December
2007 as a call for the release of the five Hindraf leaders detained by the
Kuala Lumpur government under the Internal Security Act (ISA).
