The past few weeks have seen the sensational public demolition of one of Singapore’s most prominent human rights’ activists, Dr Chee Soon Juan. Singaporeans have also witnessed the arrest of an idiosyncratic ex-Worker’s Party member, Mr Gopalan Nair.

Lost amidst the storm of dust raised by the media’s caricatures of these colourful characters is the cause they are fighting for. There is an implicit linking of the term “human rights” with the drama of the players on the field of battle: if their standard bearers fall, so falls the flag of human rights, guilty by association.

One of the most important principles of democracy is that we are free to disagree with someone else’s point of view, but we should be ready to defend his right to put that view forward.

Many Singaporeans seem to have lost sight of that principle, ready to let Gopalan Nair be punished for his pugnacious blog entries, and satisfied to see the confrontational Dr Chee Soon Juan defamed repeatedly as a mental patient for practising a brand of politics that does not fit into the political mainstream.

We at TOC believe in playing the ball, not the man. We are committed to keeping our focus on matters of principle, and will fight for these individuals’ right to speech even though we might disagree with what they say.

We also believe that human rights discourse is broader than the issue of civil and political rights. We believe it is important to start a dialogue of understanding the full spectrum of human rights, be they gender rights, socio-economic rights, labour rights or civil and political rights. Through this, we can better understand the position of the individual situated in relation to his many roles in society, and hopefully draw conclusions that empower ordinary individuals.

In that spirit, TOC is dedicating this week’s articles to highlighting human rights issues from a full range of perspectives, and also to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights this year.

Below is a video of Eleanor Roosevelt’s speech at the United Nations in 1948 where the Declaration was presented.

We hope you enjoy our focus.

Choo Zheng Xi

On behalf of TOC



Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

People’s Voice meets residents of Mountbatten SMC and Jalan Besar GRC on Sunday morning

On Sunday morning (28 June), the People’s Voice (PV) visited the residents…

强制国民加入终身护保计划 网民抗议政府独断不为人设想

《终身护保和长期护理法案》于9月2日在国会通过,1980年或之后出生的国人必须在明年开始强制支付有关保单,这让网民表示难以接受,因为政府并没有征询国民的意见,也质疑政府如有能力负担得起国际生奖助学金,也理应能承担国民保险的赔付额。 终身护保计划(CareShield Life)每年保费分别为男性260元和女性253元,并且必须投保至67岁。若投保者遭受严重残疾,凡是需要护理,将会在每月获得至少600元的赔偿。 有民众反映每月600元赔付根本不足,卫生部长颜金勇表示,长期护理是共同责任,民众也可购买其他私人保单作为补足。 乐龄健保索赔,仅占总保费四巴仙 强制性加入终身护保计划旨在逐步取代人们可选择投保的乐龄健保(ElderShield),并且保护国人在面对严重残疾时,仍有一些生活费。乐龄健保于2002年开始实施,让面临严重残疾者可在5至6年期间,每月获得400元。 去年媒体报导曾指出,130万公民参与乐龄健保,缴纳超过33亿元保费,但是至今只支付了1亿3300万元的索赔,仅占所收保费的四巴仙,可能还剩下约32亿元和基金所获利息。 对此,网民表示难以了解,为何需要强制国民投保终身护保计划。 有者则质疑在乐龄健保的大笔收入资金,但是只要微薄的支出,而且想知道终身护保计划是否也会有类似做法,从国人处收取大笔资金并赚取利息,却仅对真正有需要者支付微薄的索赔。 负担得起国际生奖助学金,却不能承担国民索赔? 有一名网友特别指出,新加坡政府有能力为外国学生,每年提供提供约2亿3800万元的奖学金和学费津贴。但是,却无力为民承担约1亿3300万元的乐龄健保索赔?“总感觉哪里不对。” 其实在上个月(8月5日)工人党非选区议员贝理安(Leon…

Revised Fees for Vehicle Entry Permit and Goods Vehicle Permit with effect from 1 August 2014

The Land Transport Authority (LTA) has announced that from 1 August 2014…

80% of Singaporeans want to pay more to essential workers in cleaning and security industries

A survey by The Straits Times and consumer research firm Milieu Insight…