Home / News / Urgent Appeals / SINGAPORE: Five charged for holding peaceful protest in support of people in Burma
 

SINGAPORE: Five charged for holding peaceful protest in support of people in Burma

October 11, 2007

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION – URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal

12 October 2007
------------------------------------------------------
UA-295-2007: SINGAPORE: Five charged for holding peaceful protest in support of people in Burma

SINGAPORE: Denial of freedom of assembly, expression
------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information regarding the arrest of five persons who were protesting in Singapore about Burma on 8 October 2007. Four of them were holding a placard claiming the government of Singapore to stop dealing arms with the Burma. Even though they were peacefully holding the protest, they were charged.

CASE DETAILS:

At around 1:50pm on 8 October 2007, four persons came to protest in front of the Singapore Prime Minister's office to support democracy advocates in Burma. All 4 were members of opposition party, Singapore Democratic Party. Each one was holding a placard with the words "No Deals, No Arms, with the Junta" and "Free Burma".

When they were holding peaceful protest, police in plain clothes warned them to disperse but they did not follow the order. Then the police arrested them, including a 5th man who filming them and took them to two police vans parked nearby. It is reported that the police refused to confirm the location where they were going to take them despite being asked and also failed to show the reason of arrest and charges against them. It was later known that they were charged under section 5(2) of the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance Act) 2002. Then they were released on bail of SGD 1,000 (USD 680) each in the evening.

Before their arrest, at 11am on the same day, they went to meet the ambassador of Burma to Singapore, U Win Myint, for the purpose of handing over the petition of about 1,100 individuals urging the government of Burma to stop assaulting the people and allow peaceful demonstrations and protest in the country. After waiting for a long time, one staff came out to take it to the ambassador but subsequently refused to take it.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

The Speakers' Corner at Hong Lim Park is the only place in Singapore that doesn't require a permit in order for someone to demonstrate. However, speakers also have to register with the nearby police post and they are not allowed to talk about issues related to race or religion. Despite this, government-supported or government-linked organizations frequently held public marches or assemblies, yet permits are never required.

The Article 14 of the Constitution of Singapore stipulates that all citizens have the right to freedom of speech and expression, have the right to assemble peaceably and without arms, and have the right to form associations. However, in practice, those rights guaranteed under the constitution are limited by the authorities.

The AHRC has earlier forwarded an appeal of petition for Chee Soon Juan for the freedom of movement. He was not allowed to leave the country to attend a meeting. For more details, please see FA-013-2006.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write letters to the authorities below and urge them to withdraw the charges against the peaceful protestors. Please note Myanmar instead of Burma in your letter.

To support this appeal, please click here:

------------------------------------------------------

Suggested letter:

Dear __________,

SINGAPORE: Please drop charges against 5 persons who demonstrated in support of democracy in Myanmar

Name of victims:
1) Mr. Gandhi Ambalam (chairperson of Singapore Democratic Party)
2) Dr. Chee Soon Juan (secretary general of Singapore Democratic Party)
3) Mr. John Tan (assistant secretary general of Singapore Democratic Party)
4) Ms. Chee Siok Chin (a member of Central Executive Committee of Singapore Democratic Party)
5) Mr. Jeffrey George (videographer)
Date of incident: 8 October 2007
Place of incident: In front of Istana (Prime Minister's Office), Singapore
Charged at: Chapter 184, section 5(2) of the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance Act)

I am writing to voice my deep concern regarding the arrest and charges against five persons who held a peaceful protest in front of Istana (Prime Minister's Office) on 8 October 2007.

According to the information received, 4 were members of opposition party, Singapore Democratic Party. Each one was holding a placard with the words "No Deals, No Arms, with the Junta" and "Free Burma". When they were holding peaceful protest, police in plain clothes warned them to disperse but they did not follow the order. Then the police arrested them, including a 5th man who filming them and took them to two police vans parked nearby. It is reported that the police refused to confirm the location where they were going to take them despite being asked and also failed to show the reason of arrest and charges against them. It was later known that they were charged under section 5(2) of the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance Act) 2002. Then they were released on bail of SGD 1,000 (USD 680) each in the evening.

I take notice of the fact that the Article 14 of the Constitution of Singapore stipulates that all citizens have the right to freedom of speech and expression, have the right to assemble peaceably and without arms, and have the right to form associations. However, in practice, those rights guaranteed under the constitution are limited by the authorities. Therefore, I urge you to drop charges against 5 persons who demonstrated in support of democracy in Myanmar.

I draw your attention to the fact that their activities, including a signature campaign for the people of Myanmar, attempt to hand over and their protest should be welcomed by the people of Singapore. Further, under the current circumstance, there are lots of concerns of security of Singaporeans living in Myanmar so that Singaporeans corresponding is highly required.

I look forward to your prompt action in this matter.


Yours sincerely,


----------------

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1.Mr. Lee Hsien Loong
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's Office
Orchard Road
Istana
Singapore 238823
SINGAPORE
Fax: +65 6835 6621
E-mail: pmo_hq@pmo.gov.sg or lee_hsien_loong@pmo.gov.sg

2. S. R. Nathan
President
Office of the President
Istana, Orchard Road
Singapore 0922
SINGAPORE
Fax: +65 6735 3135
E-mail: S_R_Nathan@Istana.gov.sg

3. Prof. S JAYAKUMAR
Minister of Law
100 High Street #08-02
The Treasury
Singapore 179434
SINGAPORE
Tel: +65 6332 8840
Fax: +65 6332 8842
E-mail: jayakumar_s@mfa.gov.sg

4. Mr. Ambeyi Ligabo
Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection
of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
c/o J Deriviero
OHCHR-UNOG
8-14 Avenue de la Paix
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9177
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (ATTN: SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION)

Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrchk.org)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-295-2007
Issues :
Document Actions
Share |
Subscribe to our Mailing List
Follow AHRC
Extended Introduction: Urgent Appeals, theory and practice

A need for dialogue

Many people across Asia are frustrated by the widespread lack of respect for human rights in their countries.  Some may be unhappy about the limitations on the freedom of expression or restrictions on privacy, while some are affected by police brutality and military killings.  Many others are frustrated with the absence of rights on labour issues, the environment, gender and the like. 

Yet the expression of this frustration tends to stay firmly in the private sphere.  People complain among friends and family and within their social circles, but often on a low profile basis. This kind of public discourse is not usually an effective measure of the situation in a country because it is so hard to monitor. 

Though the media may cover the issues in a broad manner they rarely broadcast the private fears and anxieties of the average person.  And along with censorship – a common blight in Asia – there is also often a conscious attempt in the media to reflect a positive or at least sober mood at home, where expressions of domestic malcontent are discouraged as unfashionably unpatriotic. Talking about issues like torture is rarely encouraged in the public realm.

There may also be unwritten, possibly unconscious social taboos that stop the public reflection of private grievances.  Where authoritarian control is tight, sophisticated strategies are put into play by equally sophisticated media practices to keep complaints out of the public space, sometimes very subtly.  In other places an inner consensus is influenced by the privileged section of a society, which can control social expression of those less fortunate.  Moral and ethical qualms can also be an obstacle.

In this way, causes for complaint go unaddressed, un-discussed and unresolved and oppression in its many forms, self perpetuates.  For any action to arise out of private frustration, people need ways to get these issues into the public sphere.

Changing society

In the past bridging this gap was a formidable task; it relied on channels of public expression that required money and were therefore controlled by investors.  Printing presses were expensive, which blocked the gate to expression to anyone without money.  Except in times of revolution the media in Asia has tended to serve the well-off and sideline or misrepresent the poor.

Still, thanks to the IT revolution it is now possible to communicate with large audiences at little cost.  In this situation there is a real avenue for taking issues from private to public, regardless of the class or caste of the individual.

Practical action

The AHRC Urgent Appeals system was created to give a voice to those affected by human rights violations, and by doing so, to create a network of support and open avenues for action.  If X’s freedom of expression is denied, if Y is tortured by someone in power or if Z finds his or her labour rights abused, the incident can be swiftly and effectively broadcast and dealt with. The resulting solidarity can lead to action, resolution and change. And as more people understand their rights and follow suit, as the human rights consciousness grows, change happens faster. The Internet has become one of the human rights community’s most powerful tools.   

At the core of the Urgent Appeals Program is the recording of human rights violations at a grass roots level with objectivity, sympathy and competence. Our information is firstly gathered on the ground, close to the victim of the violation, and is then broadcast by a team of advocates, who can apply decades of experience in the field and a working knowledge of the international human rights arena. The flow of information – due to domestic restrictions – often goes from the source and out to the international community via our program, which then builds a pressure for action that steadily makes its way back to the source through his or her own government.   However these cases in bulk create a narrative – and this is most important aspect of our program. As noted by Sri Lankan human rights lawyer and director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Basil Fernando:

"The urgent appeal introduces narrative as the driving force for social change. This idea was well expressed in the film Amistad, regarding the issue of slavery. The old man in the film, former president and lawyer, states that to resolve this historical problem it is very essential to know the narrative of the people. It was on this basis that a court case is conducted later. The AHRC establishes the narrative of human rights violations through the urgent appeals. If the narrative is right, the organisation will be doing all right."

Patterns start to emerge as violations are documented across the continent, allowing us to take a more authoritative, systemic response, and to pinpoint the systems within each country that are breaking down. This way we are able to discover and explain why and how violations take place, and how they can most effectively be addressed. On this path, larger audiences have opened up to us and become involved: international NGOs and think tanks, national human rights commissions and United Nations bodies.  The program and its coordinators have become a well-used tool for the international media and for human rights education programs. All this helps pave the way for radical reforms to improve, protect and to promote human rights in the region.