~ By Ghui ~

The concept of human rights sits uncomfortably with Singaporeans. As a country, we have oft been accused of being economical with press freedom, freedom of speech and the like. These allegations have no doubt caused Singaporeans to become defensive, both at a governmental level and at an ordinary citizen level. So ready to deflect any perceived criticisms we are that we often employ the “strike first” approach. It doesn’t matter if what’s being said is objectively reasonable or if it is warranted. If it is from a foreign source, we immediately disregard it as “foreign intervention”. In so doing, we limit ourselves, lock ourselves in with “small country syndrome” and conflate the concept of human rights with a misplaced idea of nationalism and “Asian values”.

The Oslo Freedom Forum (OFF)

The OFF is a conference about human rights. It aims to bring together world leaders including former heads of state, winners of the Nobel Peace Prize and prisoners of conscience as well as a selection of authors, together with business, political, media, technology and cultural leaders from both Norway and internationally.

I understand that Dr. Chee Soon Juan has been invited to attend this forum but permission for him to travel to Norway has been denied on the grounds that he is a bankrupt individual. This is despite the fact that the OFF has undertaken to pay for all of Dr. Chee’s travel expenses ("Human rights group writes open letter to PM Lee", Yahoo News, 25 Apr 2012).

Perhaps the government is worried that Dr. Chee would escape but in all honesty, he could have done so a long time ago if he were so inclined.

I may not agree with all of Dr. Chee’s views but at the end of the day, I see it as an honour for a Singaporean to be invited to such a conference with all expenses paid.

Singapore wishes to be an internationally recognised city. Would it not be a privilege which would enhance Singapore’s image on the international stage if a Singaporean is invited to be a part of a conference that would involve some of the world’s most famous names?

Fair Comment does not equate to Foreign Intervention

Some commentators have alluded to the fact that it is yet again the West trying to stir trouble in Singapore. These commentators have gone on to suggest that the OFF could have invited anyone else but they chose to invite Dr. Chee because they knew that he would not be permitted to travel and that this refusal could then be used as a further opportunity to lambast Singapore.

With all due respect, this presents itself as very flawed logic. The OFF is a gathering of so many individuals and has a far more global outlook and reach than Singapore. Surely, they have better things to do than to plot on how to find a way to criticise Singapore?

The real reason why they invited Dr. Chee is far simpler than the grandiose subterfuge that has been imagined by some. The OFF invited Dr. Chee because they feel that he embodies human rights and to a large extent, I can see why they think that.

Whether Dr. Chee’s views are right or wrong is not the point. The point is that he was willing to speak his mind when many people would not have. Perhaps he was needlessly antagonistic but again, that is a separate issue altogether.

Dr. Chee spoke out, was deemed defamatory and made bankrupt in the process. People have speculated that the defamation suits were but a means to discredit a dissenting force. But again, that is a topic for another day. Rightly or wrongly, Dr. Chee has inherited the mantle of “poster child for what not to do in politics” from JBJ and by so doing, is perceived as a martyr for freedom of speech, a subset of human rights.

I digress but let’s not miss the forest for the trees. The OFF is not about trying to tell other sovereign nations what to do. It is simply a conference about human rights with attendees who are involved in its proliferation. Dr. Chee’s invitation is not an endorsement of his political views. It is merely acknowledgement that he has spoken about human rights numerous times. It is not an affront to Singapore that he has been invited and we should not take it as such.

Even if Singapore is criticised, so what? If it is a preposterous accusation, we can simply ignore it or state our side of the story. If there is truth in the allegation, then, we should take heed and reflect. Hitting out like a hedgehog with its spines out only serves to make us impervious to development.

Many countries get criticised. Singapore is not alone in this and should not take objective comment so personally.

Dr. Chee was not invited as a representative of Singapore

On the Huffington Post website, a Mr Jeffrey Tas commented, “As far as I know and in my opinion, there are worse infringements of "human rights" in for example Middle East, China, India, as well as in parts of Africa… I support Singapore's decision not to grant Dr. Chee leave, because in as so far as the actions of Dr. Chee go, he does not represent Singapore, he does not represent the general Singaporean, and he does not give a fair assessment of Singapore and how the system works.”

With all due respect to Mr Tas, this is a misunderstanding of the OFF’s objectives. The OFF is a human rights forum. It does not purport to seek views from candidates as representatives of their sovereign states. Dr. Chee was invited in his personal capacity and not as a representative of Singapore. As such, whether or not he represents Singapore is not relevant.

Besides, should we be using “worst” countries as a benchmark?

I would urge the Public Trustee’s Office to grant Dr. Chee leave to attend the conference. The risk of his escape would be negligible. Nor would they have to worry about Dr. Chee’s expenses.

Granting him leave to attend this conference can have the twin effects of not only increasing Singapore’s standing in the world of intellectual discourse but will also dispel the notion among Singaporeans that our government cannot accept dissenting views.

______________________________________________

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

妇女指单位有问题 投诉没人理! 建屋局等单位澄清

妇女在社媒上投诉单位出现漏水及污水、发出恶臭现象,向建屋发展局投诉后没有下文,当局昨日强调“绝无此事”。 建屋局指出,该妇女自2015年首次就有关现象进行投诉,当局也到现场展开多次调查。“调查显示,排污系统或其他部位并没有任何瑕疵,不可能导致单位内出现恶臭……新加坡公用事业局(PUB)也到单位进行水质检测,结果显示水可以安全饮用。” 杰拉尔丁(Geraldine Tang)女士是于本月4日在脸书上帖文,指在其邻居使用厕所后,她所居住的私人组屋(DBSS)内就充满了恶臭。 她在帖文内附上了单位照片,包括一间浴室,指该浴室“近乎24小时又臭又热……五年来的上下楼层的高温、虫子和湿气已经严重将它损坏” 。 在杰拉尔丁的长篇帖文中,她投诉在邻居打开空调或热水器时,她家的卧室的地板就会变得“又冷又湿”,而且自来水内的细菌也引起了她的皮肤问题。 据建屋局和公用事业局指出,杰拉尔丁女士曾经在之前的两件住家做出类似投诉。而目前,她居住在勿洛蓄水池湾一带的百丽湾。 建屋局在脸书发帖指出,当局已就有关投诉展开调查,所有的配件和材料都是正确的。“负责杰拉尔丁女士住家的室内空气素质调查专家指出,因为室内门窗处于关闭状况,导致通风不良以及室内高温高湿。” “我们还察觉到,室内地板和墙壁都被多个清洁化学品清理和消毒过。专家指出,室内微生物的生长可能是因通风不良和长期过度清洗所致。” “但是,该名女士没有听从专家建议,让单位通风。” 建屋局建议居民不要使用过量自来水清洗单位,应该使用湿布擦拭墙壁上的污垢污渍,在清理地板后打开窗户,保持通风。…

MNC’s foreign hiring manager relocates from HK to SG and proceeds to replace SG PMET with HK lady

Recently, a Singaporean PMET working for Refinitiv Asia (the Financial & Risk…

Royal Air Force Aerobatic Team set to perform flypast at Marina Bay on 18 Oct after earlier postponement

The Royal Air Force Aerobatic Team or Red Arrows have successfully arrived…

【选举】先驱单选区 国民团结党让路前进党

据《今日报》报导,国民团结党放弃攻打先驱单选区,让路给新加坡前进党。 早前,前进党秘书长陈清木医生,证实该党将角逐的选区包括西海岸、蔡厝港、丹戎巴葛等集选区,以及丰加北、玛丽蒙(Marymount)、先驱、杨厝港和哥本峇鲁等单选区。 据知,国民团结党仍有意角逐淡滨尼和三巴旺集选区。国民团结党秘书长黄俊宏(Spencer Ng)将领军到三巴旺集选区竞选。党主席冯展良(Reno Fong)则会领军出战淡滨尼。 在2015年大选,黄俊宏也曾领军出战三巴旺集选区,对垒现任基础建设统筹部长兼交通部长许文远团队。不过仅得票27.72票。冯展良团队出战淡滨尼集选区,对垒由现任副总理兼财政部长王瑞杰领军的团队,得票27.93票败北。 事实上过去国民团结党也曾攻打先驱和麦波申单选区,不过个别得票率仅23.65和0.82巴仙。第13届国会的先驱和麦波申议员分别是符致镜和陈佩玲。 不过,今日(25日)人民之声也发文,表示有意角逐惹兰勿刹集选区、白沙–榜鹅集选区、先驱、蒙巴登单选区和榜鵝西区单选区。为此尚未知该党是否会与前进党协商,由谁上阵先驱单选区。