Singapore
Toughening the laws
If you think opening up means less regulation, think again. By Seah Chiang Nee.
Jan 18, 2006

In recent weeks, the government has announced a series of new laws that has got people asking, "What has happened to the promise of a grater opening up of Singapore?"

Well, apparently both issues need not contradict each other, judging by the official action. Surely, you can be more open and at the same time have tougher legislation, can't you?

Remember more than a decade ago, (the then) Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong announced a serious effort to review all regulations to see what, if any, could be eradicated.

After a while, the exercise was abandoned without much being cancelled on the argument that people preferred to have it that way.

Post-British Singapore has always had the reputation of being over-regulated, a 'fine' city. Even Minister Mentor Mr. Lee Kuan Yew recently talked of the disadvantageous restraints here, "This cannot, that cannot".

So what happens? We have been having these toughter announcements within the past week or two: -

1. Violent protesters at the annual meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank in Singapore could face caning and imprisonment, a minister said.

2. The government has said that legislation to protect whistle-blowers is not necessary at present.

3. Draft dodgers to face tougher penalties. Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean told parliament that the fine would be doubled to S$10,000. The maximum jail sentence of 3 years will not go up, but the Defence Ministry will now push for a jail term for defaulters in serious cases.

4. Bus, taxi fare cheats could end up in jail. Commuters who cheat on bus and taxi fares could end up behind bars under proposed legislation to stamp out a problem that has dogged Singaporean transport operators for years.

5. Teenage schoolgirls were told by police that they might break the law if 'white elephant T-shirts (used last year to protest non-opening of the Buangkok MRTstation) that they wanted to sell to raise funds were worn 'en masse'.

(Updating: Since then Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng has apologised for the way the police overreacted to the girls' plan to sell and wear white elephant T-shirts at the opening of Buangkok Station.)

6. A new law to punish Singaporeans who have sex with under-aged girls abroad.

7. A Straits Times headline 'Getting tough on workplace safety'. Those who flout safety rules and cause accidents in the workplace will be punished severely under a new law just passed in Parliament. Fines for errant companies will more than double to $500,000 from $200,000.

Any first time visitor here would have gained the impression that Singapore is full of law-breakers, not a good sign for an aspirant world-class city.

Has it become a belief with our scholar bureaucrats that any trouble can be resolved only by the cane? Is this a good sign for the Republic's future when only punishment can make people behave?

Those who draft policy papers must have an easy time, if that is the case.

One explanation could be the government feels threatened by the hotting up of the pre-election political temperature.

It has been apparent for some time now that the 21st Century Singapore has become more divisive and less compliant to the government.

The preparations for the coming election and the little controlled Internet are not helping to bring harmony. People are devising new ways to protest or to make their unhappiness known.

Mr. Chee Soon Juan, head of the opposition Singapore Democratic party, has called for non-violent civil disobedience activities against the 'authoritarian' government.

Is this a sign that the government is cracking down on dissent? If so, will the Internet be the next target?

Meanwhile, the Asian Human Rights Commission, quoted by BBC, has singled out for creating a society where it is in effect impossible for people to enjoy individual rights enjoyed elsewhere on the continent, such as freedom of expression or assembly.

AHRC excerpts:
Meanwhile, the denial of human rights in Singapore belongs to a special category. Singapore makes it effectively impossible for people to live in an environment in which individual rights can exist.
The ruling party is also virtually the state. Freedom of assembly, freedom of expression and the capacity to assert one's rights do not exist in this environment at all.
The absolute denial of rights makes it impossible for the realisation of any of the rights enshrined in the international covenants and conventions.
In fact, the official political ideology does not recognise the validity of these covenants and conventions.