Connect with us

Current Affairs

AWARE elects new Board

Published

12 years ago

on

PRESS RELEASE

On May 26, 2012, AWARE members elected the organisation’s 28th Board. The nine elected members, along with one co-opted member, will serve a two-year term, effective immediately.

 

From left: Immediate Past President Nicole Tan, Treasurer Zeng Li Hui, Board Member Margaret Thomas, Board Member Teo You Yenn, President Winifred Loh, Vice-President Lindy Ong, Vice-Treasurer Faeza Sirajudin, Board Member Wong Pei Chi (co-opted), and Board Member Jasmine Ng. The Secretary is Sunita Venkataraman (not pictured).

President

WINIFRED LOH

An AWARE member for 11 years, Winifred served as Vice-President in 2006/07 and was a member of the Executive Committee in 2004/05 and 2005/06.

A HR practitioner, she believes that diversity and inclusiveness are key ingredients for team success, and that gender is an important factor when it comes to ensuring this diversity. Her corporate leadership roles have given her experience in areas such as stakeholder engagement, strategic planning, and performance management.

As President, she hopes to continue to influence positive changes in government policy and programmes by being the voice for gender equality in Singapore, and help to groom the next generation of women leaders for AWARE.

 

Vice-President
LINDY ONG

An education entrepreneur, Lindy has previously served as an AWARE Board Member, Honorary Secretary and as a member of the Education Sub-Committee. In 2011, she chaired the judging panel for the inaugural AWARE Awards, which celebrates champions of gender equality in Singapore.

As an AWARE member for the past 14 years, she champions AWARE’s ideals in both her personal and professional life, making sure that her work as an entrepreneur embraces gender equality.

Treasurer
ZENG LI HUI

An AWARE member for four years, Li Hui served as the Vice-Treasurer in 2011. She has six years of experience as an external auditor with Ernst & Young, and is familiar with financial reporting standards and the internal control matters of an organisation.

She hopes to assist in the management of AWARE’s accounts, and help ensure that the organisation is in a healthy financial position to continue assisting women who are in need of help.

Vice-Treasurer
FAEZA SIRAJUDIN

As an AWARE member for three years, Faeza has volunteered as a Helpliner, Befriender and contributed to AWARE’s Sexual Assault Befrienders Service.

As a Board Member, she would like to contribute more to the organisation’s efforts. “I am familiar with so many of the various minority communities in Singapore and I think I have insight into the needs and voices of women who are rarely seen or heard,” says Faeza.

She also handles her company’s finances and is familiar with accounting and auditing processes, which will be relevant in her role as Vice-Treasurer.

Secretary
SUNITA VENKATARAMAN

An AWARE member for four years, Sunita served as Board Member from 2010 to 2012, and has also contributed to the Helpline, AWARE’s 2009 micro-financing proposal, Budget recommendations, and AWARE’s governance and policies. She has 20 years of market research experience in the commercial sector, and strong connections in the corporate market research industry.

As Secretary, she hopes to contribute actively to the governance of AWARE and bring her experience in the corporate sector, as well as her experience of serving on the previous Board, to enabling a smooth transition. “AWARE is in a very strong position currently, both with the media as well as policy-makers,” says Sunita. “I look forward to the new board being able to strengthen this, and to further the cause of gender equality in Singapore.”

Board Member
TEO YOU YENN

An AWARE member for eight years, You Yenn has contributed to AWARE’s Beyond Babies Sub-Committee and helped to develop the History Of Feminism part of AWARE’s Gender Core Curriculum. She also served as Board Member from 2010 to 2012.

In her work as a sociologist, gender differentiation and inequalities have a prominent place. Her research and publications deal with how gender inequalities are reproduced by state policies, and she emphasises the importance of approaching scholarship with a gendered lens in her teaching.

As a Board Member over these past two years, she has advised on research, written op-eds and letters, and presented at AWARE’s Roundtable Discussions and forum events. “I hope I can continue to contribute in these areas,” says You Yenn. “I bring to AWARE my research, teaching and writing expertise. In the past two years, I have learnt a great deal about strategies for advocacy and communicating with a broader public. I hope to contribute to the process we have started of bringing about even greater rigour to our research programme.”

Board Member
MARGARET THOMAS

An AWARE member for 27 years, Margaret has served on five previous Executive Comittees and the 2010-2012 Board. A veteran journalist, she has been involved in media coverage of women’s issues and social/political matters.

With her extensive experience of AWARE and its advocacy agenda, she hopes to continue providing guidance and support as AWARE professionalises and pursues its goals in a changing social and political environment in Singapore.

Board Member
JASMINE NG KIN KIA

An AWARE member for three years, Jasmine contributed to the video team at the 2009 AWARE EOGM, videos for AWARE’s fundraiser concert in 2010, and the volunteer appreciation video shown at AWARE’s 25th Anniversary conference and fundraiser in 2011.

As a Board Member, she hopes to contribute her work experience in the media industry, twinned with her deepening commitment for civil society growth in Singapore, to help strategise and grow AWARE’s impact. “I am aware that there will be much to learn, and look forward to picking up much from the AWARE Board, executive staff and volunteer body, and to work together to be much larger than the sum of its parts,” says Jasmine.

She also hopes to help further strengthen links with the media and arts community in Singapore, particularly with young women practitioners.

Board Member
WONG PEI CHI

Pei Chi has been an AWARE member for three years. She is a key member of the No To Rape campaign, and won the inaugural AWARE Young Wonder award along with fellow team member Jolene Tan in 2011.

As part of the No To Rape campaign, she has communicated with parties who have an interest in marital rape and the related issues, such as Members of Parliament, government officials, social workers, community leaders, the media, and university groups.

She has also been part of the campaign team’s collective strategy planning, decision-making and research efforts. These include: Explaining the current provisions, why these are inadequate, the consequences for affected people, and questioning embedded narratives on gender roles in marriage and heterosexual relationships which are used to justify the retention of marital rape immunity.

The No To Rape campaign has strengthened her commitment to values of consent, anti-violence and bodily autonomy. As an AWARE Board Member, she hopes to deepen her participation in advocacy for gender equality in Singapore.

Immediate Past President
NICOLE TAN

An AWARE member for 15 years, corporate lawyer Nicole served as President from 2010 to 2012, and has also served as Assistant Secretary, Chair of the Legal Sub-Committee, and a member of the Professionalisation Sub-Committee.

“It has been an honour and privilege to serve as President during such a pivotal period of AWARE’s growth. I thank the volunteers and staff for their unstinting dedication. Their self-sacrifice and passion is commendable,” says Nicole. “AWARE has brought a gendered perspective to discussions on various issues on the national level, and I very much look forward to working with the new Board to help take the organisation even further.”

 

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Current Affairs

Reforming Singapore’s defamation laws: Preventing legal weapons against free speech

Opinion: The tragic suicide of Geno Ong, linked to the financial stress from a defamation lawsuit, raises a critical issue: Singapore’s defamation laws need reform. These laws must not be weaponized to silence individuals.

Published

6 days ago

on

9 September 2024

By

by Alexandar Chia

This week, we hear the tragic story of the suicide of Geno Ong, with Ong citing the financial stress from the defamation lawsuit against her by Raymond Ng and Iris Koh.

Regardless of who’s right and who’s wrong, this Koh/Ng vs Ong affair raises a wider question at play – the issue of Singapore’s defamation laws and how it needs to be tightened.

Why is this needed? This is because defamation suits cannot be weaponised the way they have been in Singapore law. It cannot be used to threaten people into “shutting up”.

Article 14(2)(a) of the Constitution may permit laws to be passed to restrict free speech in the area of defamation, but it does not remove the fact that Article 14(1)(a) is still law, and it permits freedom of speech.

As such, although Article 14(2)(a) allows restrictions to be placed on freedom of speech with regard to the issue of defamation, it must not be to the extent where Article 14(1)(a)’s rights and liberties are not curtailed completely or heavily infringed on.

Sadly, that is the case with regard to precedence in defamation suits.

Let’s have a look at the defamation suit then-PM Goh Chok Tong filed against Dr Chee Soon Juan after GE 2001 for questions Dr Chee asked publicly about a $17 billion loan made to Suharto.

If we look at point 12 of the above link, in the “lawyer’s letter” sent to Dr Chee, Goh’s case of himself being defamed centred on lines Dr Chee used in his question, such as “you can run but you can’t hide”, and “did he not tell you about the $17 billion loan”?

In the West, such lines of questioning are easily understood at worse as hyperbolically figurative expressions with the gist of the meaning behind such questioning on why the loan to Suharto was made.

Unfortunately, Singapore’s defamation laws saw Dr Chee’s actions of imputing ill motives on Goh, when in the West, it is expected of incumbents to take the kind of questions Dr Chee asked, and such questions asked of incumbent office holders are not uncommon.

And the law permits pretty flimsy reasons such as “withdrawal of allegations” to be used as a deciding factor if a statement is defamatory or not – this is as per points 66-69 of the judgement.

This is not to imply or impute ill intent on Singapore courts. Rather, it shows how defamation laws in Singapore needs to be tightened, to ensure that a possible future scenario where it is weaponised as a “shut-up tool”, occurs.

These are how I suggest it is to be done –

  1. The law has to make mandatory, that for a case to go into a full lawsuit, there has to be a 3-round exchange of talking points and two attempts at legal mediation.
  2. Summary judgment should be banned from defamation suits, unless if one party fails to adduce evidence or a defence.
  3. A statement is to be proven false, hence, defamatory, if there is strictly material along with circumstantial evidence showing that the statement is false. Apologies and related should not be used as main determinants, given how many of these statements are made in the heat of the moment, from the natural feelings of threat and intimidation from a defamation suit.
  4. A question should only be considered defamatory if it has been repeated, after material facts of evidence are produced showing, beyond reasonable doubt, that the message behind the question, is “not so”, and if there is a directly mentioned subject in the question. For example, if an Opposition MP, Mr A, was found to be poisoned with a banned substance, and I ask openly on how Mr A got access to that substance, given that its banned, I can’t be found to have “defamed the government” with the question as 1) the government was not mentioned directly and 2) if the government has not produced material evidence that they indeed had no role in the poisoning affair, if they were directly mentioned.
  5. Damages should be tiered, with these tiers coded into the Defamation Act – the highest quantum of damages (i.e. those of a six-figured nature) is only to be reserved if the subject of defamation lost any form of office, revenue or position, or directly quantifiable public standing, or was subjected to criminal action, because of the act of defamation. If none of such occur, the maximum amount of damages a plaintiff in a defamation can claim is a 4-figure amount capped at $2000. This will prevent rich and powerful figures from using defamation suits and 6-figure damages to intimidate their questioners and detractors.
  6. All defendants of defamation suit should be allowed full access to legal aid schemes.

Again, this piece does not suggest bad-faith malpractice by the courts in Singapore. Rather, it is to suggest how to tighten up defamation laws to avoid it being used as the silencing hatchet.

Continue Reading

Current Affairs

Man arrested for alleged housebreaking and theft of mobile phones in Yishun

A 23-year-old man was arrested for allegedly breaking into a Yishun Ring Road rental flat and stealing eight mobile phones worth S$3,400 from five tenants. The Singapore Police responded swiftly on 1 September, identifying and apprehending the suspect on the same day. The man has been charged with housebreaking, which carries a potential 10-year jail term.

Published

2 weeks ago

on

3 September 2024

By

SINGAPORE: A 23-year-old man has been arrested for allegedly breaking into a rental flat along Yishun Ring Road and stealing eight mobile phones from five tenants.

The incident occurred in the early hours on Sunday (1 September), according to a statement from the Singapore Police Force.

The authorities reported that they received a call for assistance at around 5 a.m. on that day.

Officers from the Woodlands Police Division quickly responded and, through ground enquiries and police camera footage, were able to identify and apprehend the suspect on the same day.

The stolen mobile phones, with an estimated total value of approximately S$3,400, were recovered hidden under a nearby bin.

The suspect was charged in court on Monday with housebreaking with the intent to commit theft.

If convicted, he could face a jail term of up to 10 years and a fine.

In light of this incident, the police have advised property owners to take precautions to prevent similar crimes.

They recommend securing all doors, windows, and other openings with good quality grilles and padlocks when leaving premises unattended, even for short periods.

The installation of burglar alarms, motion sensor lights, and CCTV cameras to cover access points is also advised. Additionally, residents are urged to avoid keeping large sums of cash and valuables in their homes.

The investigation is ongoing.

Last month, police disclosed that a recent uptick in housebreaking incidents in private residential estates across Singapore has been traced to foreign syndicates, primarily involving Chinese nationals.

Preliminary investigations indicate that these syndicates operate in small groups, targeting homes by scaling perimeter walls or fences.

The suspects are believed to be transient travelers who enter Singapore on Social Visit Passes, typically just a day or two before committing the crimes.

Before this recent surge in break-ins, housebreaking cases were on the decline, with 59 reported in the first half of this year compared to 70 during the same period last year.

However, between 1 June and 4 August 2024, there were 10 reported housebreaking incidents, predominantly in private estates around the Rail Corridor and Bukit Timah Road.

The SPF has intensified efforts to engage residents near high-risk areas by distributing crime prevention advisories, erecting alert signs, and training them to patrol their neighborhoods, leading to an increase in reports of suspicious activity.

Continue Reading

Trending