By Terry Xu

MARUAH had to change the venue for its public forum “Foreign Workers, Justice and Fairness” that was held yesterday on Dec 23rd, at extremely short notice.

The venue was originally set to be at the hall on the second floor of Ananda Bhavan Restaurant at Syed Alwi Road (opposite Mustafa Centre). The NGO had already paid for the venue and the publicity posters were released on Thursday with the venue stated in the poster.

On MURUAH’s facebook status, they said that they received a call from the restaurant’s management on the evening of 21st of December to inform them that the police had called them to ask about the event, and spoken to them about the foreign workers in their employment.

The NGO then contacted the police to inform that the event was legal and ask that the police to contact them to seek any clarifications needed, as they did not want the restaurant to be caught in between. The NGO also informed the management of the restaurant of the event’s programme so as to assure them that everything was proper.

However, the restaurant then sent a SMS stating that ‘after consulting the police and advice from the Board’, the restaurant decided to cancel the booking and would refund the money paid.

MARUAH issued this statement over the incident:

[spacer style=”1″ icon=”none”]

“MARUAH registers our protest over this blatant harassment by the government against lawful and legitimate civil society activities. Through this forum, we are seeking to build bridges in the community, to ask for equal access to justice for all and to deepen our understanding of the issues faced by foreign workers. This discussion is necessary and important to our society.

So we are disappointed at these tactics employed by the police. We sympathise with the management of Ananda Bhavan Restaurant. They have clearly been unsettled by the call from the police.

But there was no need for the police to contact the restaurant and subject them to unwarranted fear and anxiety. MARUAH is open, above-board, and easily contactable. The police could and should have contacted us, as organisers of the event, to ask any questions and seek any clarifications they might have. To date, we have still not heard from the police.

We appreciate the concerns that the police may have, and would have done our part to address any concerns that they may have had, if they had only contacted us. But civil society has a right, even a moral duty, to organise such events, and the government has to respect and protect this right, not take steps to undermine our legitimate exercise of our lawful rights.

MARUAH regrets that we have no choice but to say that the approach adopted through the police was unnecessarily restrictive and oppressive, and has only served to reduce the common space for Singaporeans to speak up and play an active role in society.”

[spacer style=”1″ icon=”none”]

TODAY reported on this incident saying,

“The police have explained that their concern about “a potential law and order issue” was what prompted them to “seek more information” from a restaurant in Little India at Syed Alwi Road that was to have been the venue for a public forum on issues relating to the Dec 8 riot.

The Ananda Bhavan Restaurant owner’s cancellation of the booking was of his own volition, while he also claimed that the forum’s organisers had “misrepresented the nature of the event”, a police spokesman added.”

While Straits Times reported on its online version of the newspaper saying,

“Human rights group Maruah had misrepresented the nature of a foreign worker rights forum to the owner of a venue they intended to use for the event, the police said on Monday.

In a media statement, the police said they were informed of this by the owner of the Ananda Bhavan restaurant in Little India.

The owner then cancelled the booking for the event “of his own volition”, the authorities added.”

Though it is understandable that the police are doing what they are supposed to do to ensure the security of the country, especially at this moment of heightened tension due to the recent incident at Little India. But it is still bewildering that the police choose to contact the management of the restaurant to clarify on their concerns over the issues of law and order instead of the event organisers themselves.

To simply push the decision of cancelling the booking of the event as being the sole discretion of the restaurant owner is irresponsible and say that the restaurant owner have claimed that the forum’s organisers had misrepresented the nature of the event is outrageous.

Straits Times report that Ananda Bhavan chief executive Viren Ettikan’s decision was reached after the police visited them and mentioned the need for stability in the neighbourhood after the Dec 9 riot.

“He thought the event was “for some charitable cause, or a discussion.” “Now the police are trying their best to ensure things are stable, we should as a business, ensure that everything is smooth, not add to any such things,” he said on Monday.” – Straits Times

How is it possible to misrepresent the nature of an event where a group of people sitting together listening to people speaking? Under what category would the event organisers have told the restaurant this forum to be, that would have been misrepresented the actual event to the management for the money collected in the first place? What misrepresentation would spur the restaurant to cancel the event last minute? Or they think that this might be something that be illegal since the police called to ask about the event?

What the restaurant owner might not have expected is not the nature of the event but likely the intervention of the police.

The article was updated with information from ST. 

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

好妈妈不幸车祸亡 捐器官遗爱人间

本月12日晚间8点半,在裕廊西园景路和永光路的交界处发生一起不幸车祸,一名52岁的妇女胡清琴过马路时遭罗厘撞飞,尽管送院抢救,但医生于14日下午宣布脑死,家人只能忍痛拔管。 胡清琴也是本地知名气球艺术师,甚至也曾被邀到总理住处布置气球;2012年,还参与全球最大型气球造型挑战,成功打破健力士世界纪录。 据本地英语媒体《新报》报导,原来胡清琴的儿子通过了O水平考试,为了给儿子意外惊喜,于是胡清琴在下班回家路上,买了儿子最喜欢吃的寿司准备为儿子庆祝,却不料这份寿司再也无法亲手送到儿子手上。 儿子发现妈妈晚餐时间了还未归家,便打给妈妈,孰不知接电话的却是医生,并告知妈妈已在医院。 胡清琴生前是一名幼教,喜欢手工艺,后来学习了制作气球造型,最终成为气球艺术师。不仅如此,她本着活到老学到老精神,离逝前两个月还报读了烹饪课程。 家属决定,把胡清琴的眼角膜、肝和肾捐出,遗爱人间,让她的善良能延续下去。

Singapore businesses embrace digital tax payments spearheaded by DBS, IRAS

Based on the reports on Monday (17 Feb), Singapore announced that 20…

成基层领袖  孩子获推荐入良校? 迈杰思幼园急回收误导信函

家长成为居委会自愿者,可换取孩子升学小学推荐信?一则发自亮阁区迈杰思幼儿园校方,鼓励家长注册成为自愿者的信函引起误会和混淆,有关当局已发文告澄清,并回收误导性信函。 本月27日,在题为《申请成为河谷林居民委员会自愿者》的信函,亮阁区迈杰思幼儿园,告知学生家长/监护人。他们将获优先权,申请成为河谷居民委员会的基层领袖。 “这将使您获得升学本区小学,例如河谷林小学的升学推荐信。” 该信函称,该校积极响应河谷林居民委员会许多活动,家长可在这些活动扮演领导角色,获得活跃基层领袖的地位。信中也鼓励家长积极参与和主办至少两项主要活动,以期能成为活跃基层领袖。 “我们的目的是协助家长减轻一年级入学的压力。同时回馈社会,促进邻里合作和团队精神。”信函呼吁有兴趣的家长,可在8月2日前签署和提交注册表格到该校。 网民:自愿者获特权,偏离服务宗旨 本地社媒“爱新加坡”在其粉丝专页公开此信函,大多网民皆不认同“争取成为居委基层领袖,获小学推荐信”的安排,认为此举扭曲了真诚为社区服务的精神。 河谷林居民委员会立即在脸书澄清,该信函是在该居委会完全不知情的情况下,由校方发出。 居委会表示,虽然迈杰思鼓励家长积极参与社区的立意虽好,但很遗憾,信中提及的资讯不恰当也不准确。 “我们已照会迈杰思校方,对方也对此事致歉,并同意回收有关信函。”在帖文中居委会,也附上了来自迈杰思校方的澄清书。 迈杰思:信函未咨询居委会和总部 这封誌期29日的澄清信,是以亮阁区迈杰思幼儿园首席执行员王瑞连(译音)名义发出,表示前述信函,乃由该校发出,未曾咨询居委会和迈杰思总部的意见。“信中内容不正确也不符事实。”…

四鸡蛋进口商不符执照条规 自20日起将被禁止从马国进口鸡蛋

本地鸡蛋进口商因不符合执照条规,自本月20日起,被禁止从马来西亚进口鸡蛋。 食品局在去年四月推出新条规,要求进口商制定业务持续计划,如从主要来源国以外的国家进口至少15巴仙的鸡蛋等,以确保本地鸡蛋来源多元化。 四家进口商分别是明记蛋庄、合成贸易、优良蛋业和Green-Tech蛋工业。 而该四家进口商却没有按照条规,致力于落实相关计划要求,因此被禁止从主要来源进口鸡蛋,但他们仍能够从其他受认证的来源进口鸡蛋。 根据食品局表示,共有四家鸡蛋进口商不符合执照条规,而该四家进口商所进口的鸡蛋占我国总供应量的三成左右,但仍有另外32家鸡蛋进口商仍正常运作,加上本地农场的产量,能够满足公众的需求量,因此无需囤积或抢购鸡蛋。