~by: Tan Kin Lian~

I wrote a letter to the Straits Times Forum, published on 10 February 2012, giving my views about the alleged extra marital affair of Yaw Shin Leong.  (See http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/2012/02/workers-party-and-yaw-shin-leong.html)

Ms Christine Lim

Ms Christine Lim wrote a letter to express her indignation over my views. She went further to pass judgment on me as follows “One would expect a higher moral standard, deeper insight and greater wisdom from a former presidential candidate”.

I do not know her age or background but I want to tell Christine her that she is not qualified to pass judgment on other people.

To be a judge, one be fair minded, have an open mind, gather the facts and even listen to the accused party before passing a judgment. Clearly, she did not display most of these important qualities.

The alleged affair

Let us look at the alleged extra-marital affair in a wider perspective. We do not know when it was alleged to have happened and whether it was before or after Yaw Shin Leong became a Member of Parliament. We do not know who the other party is and the circumstances of her relationship with her family.

Mr. Yaw has decided not to speak on this matter for reasons that are best known to him. I can only guess that it is to protect the privacy of the members of his family and of the other family. I would consider this to be a legitimate reason.

Mr. Yaw’s own wife is the best person to judge this issue. I am encouraged by her support of her husband in this situation.

Another alleged affair

There is another allegation of an extra marital affair against another Member of Parliament that occurred a few years ago and the wife had wanted to file for divorce. This matter did not surface in the mainstream media.

If it did, I wonder if the same people would have the courage to clamor for greater transparency and accountability. It is easy to bash a person who is relatively weak but would they do the same to a powerful person?

Trust in the Workers Party

Several people have stated that this episode has eroded their trust in the Workers Party which had campaigned for greater transparency in the recent general election. They want the party to issue a clear statement on this issue.

In my view, it is not appropriate for the leaders of the Workers Party to comment on this matter. In her letter, Ms Christine Lin had said that this is a clear admission of guilt. Many people would probably have shared the same view.

If so, surely this is sufficient? Do we really need to go further?

Exemplary action

The leaders of the Workers Party had faced a difficult situation in balancing the conflicting interest of many parties and had taken a decision that I agreed with and had described as “exemplary”. 

Some Singaporeans may not agree with my use of the word “exemplary”. They are entitled to their views but it does not give them the right to attack me or pass negative judgment on my character. 

The next election

The people of Hougang will have to decide if they wish to re-elect Yaw Shin Leong at the next election, assuming that he is still invited to stand by his party.

At that time, I hope that the voters will make a decision based on a broader range of issues, including his performance as a elected Member of Parliament.

They should also consider the qualities and character of the other candidate. They should remember that some people have the power to prevent their dirty linen from being aired in public, while others do not have the same privilege.

Adultery

Some people have argued that by defending the right of Yaw Shin Leong to remain silent, I am giving a message to young people that it is all right to commit adultery. This is an unfair argument, but some people have the trait to press an argument to the unreasonable extreme.

Speaking for others

It is easy to jump on the bandwagon and bash a person who is down, especially if he is weak. I encourage Singaporeans to speak out for the people who are down and need your help. I wish to share this poem that was given to me by a friend:

First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.

And for a sense of history, do look at this explanation in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came%E2%80%A6

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

CGH says man’s cardiac arrest is unrelated to COVID-19 vaccination; Family demands explanation, second opinion

About six hours after receiving his first COVID-19 vaccination on 18 April,…

48-year-old man arrested for employment scams

In a news release by the Singapore Police Force on Friday (July…

狮城等15国签RCEP 印度忧中产品大量涌入不参与

从2013年进行首轮谈判,包括新加坡、中、日、韩等共15伙伴国,正式在周日(11月15日),签署区域全面经济伙伴关系协定(RCEP)。 我国是由贸工部长陈振声,在昨日中午代表参与以视讯方式召开的第四届RCEP峰会,并在总理李显龙见证下签署协定。 RCEP自贸区将覆盖全球约三分之一人口,占全球GDP三成,协定成员国包括亚细安10国、中国、韩国、日本、澳洲和新西兰。 总理李显龙在脸书上表示,经过八年时间RCEP终获签署,将是全球最大的自贸协定,也是本区域迈出的重要一步。当全球发展放缓、多边主义低迷,他认为RCEP将展示亚洲国家对于开放、供应链链接、更自由贸易和较紧密互赖的支持。 不过,在去年11月的谈判上,印度总理莫迪曾表示RCEP协定并未充分体现它的初衷,印度不会加入。这相信是印度担忧RCEP将对该国制造业造成冲击,特别是中国廉价商品大量涌入。 不过即便如此,李显龙仍表态希望印度能随后加入,以反映亚洲一体化新兴模式和区域合作关系。 Wrapped up a productive few days…