By Kumaran Pillai and Cheong Yaoming –

In 1987, a group of civil activists were arrested in relation to an alleged plot to overthrow the government through violent means and to bring about social revolution through Marxist inspired practices. Till today, the 16 of those who were detained without trial claim that they were innocent and have committed no crime against the state. Yet, the government is steadfast in their claim that these individuals were indeed conspirators and their intention was to "subvert Singapore's political and social order using communist united front tactics.”

TOC has previously published many articles on the ISA (including a full feature week in 2009) and shall continue to do so in the future. The ISA is seen as an archaic, outdated, outmoded, and a ‘sharp instrument.’ While some perceive that the ISA is even more relevant today than in the past (given the threat of terrorism related activities in the region) there are  those who believe that ISA can be ‘misused’ for the political ends of any sitting government.

Some political observers say that the Marxists arrest of 1987 had a chilling effect on Singapore’s socio-political scene. People voluntarily withdrew from political activities and they traded political freedom to economic progress.  Singapore did exceptionally well, economically, through the late 80’s and the 90’s. But, with an economy that is under pressure and because of the effects of globalisation, inflation, demographic changes and the growing wealth gap there is  an increasing awareness that speaking up freely could at least be a beginning to solving these problems,  to allow the best ideas a better chance of being aired.

 With that in mind, I spoke to Tan Tee Seng, a former ISA (Internal Security Act) detainee. He spoke about the circumstances surrounding his detention, his political persuasions (then and now) and whether the ISA is still relevant in today’s political climate.

KP

Tell us more about yourself in 1987 and what were you doing back then?

TS:

I was a 28 years old Marketing Executive with a publishing and design company as well as a specialist in publishing technology. I was in the midst of the preparation for my wedding. All invitations were already sent out and our big day was just a few days away.

 

 

KP:

The newspaper reports labelled you as a Marxist and said that you wanted to use violent means to overthrow the government of the day. What is your reaction to that?

TS:

Consider the following facts:

(1) I was supposed to be a “conspirator” of a conspiracy which I did not know existed. My activities were all open and I was involved in legitimate organisations that existed.

(2) I did not know many of the people that were detained.

(3) I was not personally acquainted with Tan Wah Piow, the alleged master mind. I finally got acquainted with Tan Wah Piow in 2002 some 15 years later.

(4) I was in solitary confinement for first six weeks of my detention and did not have any clue of the “network” published by the government. When I first got a glance of the newspaper clipping during my lawyer’s visit, I almost fell off my chair. By then I was already served with a detention order – indefinite detention without trial. During my detention, I was constantly reminded by ISD officers of Chia Thai Poh, who was still languishing in detention after more than two decades of imprisonment without trial. My release and freedom lied in the hands of a small group of people – it was not for what I did, it was for what they thought I did! I wanted to get out.

 

 

KP:

How were you arrested and where were you at the time of arrest?

TS:

I was arrested at our matrimonial home, a flat in Serangoon Central. I remember watching Miss Universe contest with my young fiancée till early in the morning and went to bed only at about 2 am. They came at 4ish in the morning. Before I unlocked the gate of my house, they showed me an Immigration Officer’s ID and told me that they were looking for illegal immigrants.

When I unlocked the gate, the officers then identified that they were from ISD and I was under arrest. They handcuffed me and pushed me into one of my room while they proceed to search the house. I was not allowed to see what they did; this was upsetting because I wouldn’t know if they had planted anything in my house. I was not given a list of what they had taken. The search took about 2 hours and I knew that because I noticed the first light of the day was already coming through. I was blind folded before I stepped out of the house; my fiancée was detained as well. We were then led by two agents on each side into a car, presumably unmarked.

 

 

KP:

What was going through your mind when you were in detention?

TS:

I was confused and tried to search for the reason for what was happening. I thought I was very careful and had put a ten-foot pole between my activism and what I considered subversive. The initial interrogation was over a continuous period of more than 65 hours. I practically collapsed and was dragged to the cell by two Gurkhas. I was concerned of the impact of my detention on my family and my friends.

   

KP:

Can you share with us what happened during the interrogation?

TS:

I was brought to the basement of Whitley Detention Centre, stripped of all clothing and forced to wear prison garb with no footwear. The interrogation took place in a dark cold room 10 feet by 8 feet (about the size of a standard HDB flat room). The air con was turned on full blast and I was interrogated continuously by 2 teams of 3 people (1 investigating officer and 2 ISD officers) on rotating shifts. I was confused and disoriented by their continual harassment to admit because I was not sure what I was admitting to and if they even had evidence to support the charges against me!

At one point during the interrogation the ISD Deputy Director entered the room and asked the team if I was cooperating. Suddenly, he threw a full blooded slap to my face before anyone could answer him. Despite the physical abuse, the worst aspect of the interrogation was the mental torture – “We can lock you up indefinitely and throw away the key”. I was afraid I would remained imprisoned till I die and never get to see my loved ones.

 

 

KP:

What followed next? What was the first thing you did after you were released?

TS:

After the exhausting 65 hours interrogation, I was put in solitary confinement for 6 weeks. The cell had barely enough ventilation and only one small fluorescent light that was turned on 24/7 so that I would have no sense of time. I had to bang the door and ask the guards permission to use the toilet. They did provide me 3 square meals daily and 20 minutes of ‘outdoor time’. For “outdoor time”, they just brought me to a bigger room than my cell with an air-well to see outside.

I was allowed my first family visit after 2 weeks in solitary confinement. After I was released, I went back to work almost immediately but was placed under restriction orders.

 

 

KP:

Now, you have been asking for a full investigation into your arrests and detention. How is your progress on that front?

TS:

ISA is a bad law and it has strangled the political development of this country. Look at countries in the region such as South Korea, Taiwan, Philippines and Indonesia. They have undergone political reformation and we are witnessing now is an active citizenry in place of dictatorship. The young people are striding ahead confidently. Here in Singapore we are still stuck in political divisiveness carried forward from the politics practiced some 50 years ago. ISA is a divisive law and it has no place in modern society.

It is more important that we abolish the law than conducting any inquiry at this stage. With the abolishment of the ISA, the country can then move on. Another important step is to embrace political diversity and allow all our political exiles (from abroad) to come back to rebuild their lives in Singapore. I am optimistic, I believe that I will live to see the change because all we need is the political will from the ruling elites and if that is not forthcoming, then civil societies of Singapore with increased political awareness of Singaporeans of the current political repression and with the a politically awaken citizenry, the government of the day shall be persuaded towards a more liberal democracy – ISA will have to go!

I agreed to this interview because I want Singapore to move forward, not settle political scores or personal vendettas. After the Operation Spectrum incident, civil society shut down in fear of not knowing what the OB markers were. It took a whole generation to find their voice and active citizenry was reborn. I don’t want history to repeat itself. The government cannot see all the problems from their perspective and they certainly cannot provide all the solutions. This is the gap only active citizenry can fill.

 

 

KP:

Thank you for this interview and I wish you all the best in your endeavours.

TS:

You too!

A session themed "That We May Dream Again – Remembering the 1987 “Marxist Conspiracy” will be held on 3pm to 7pm | Saturday 2 June 2012 | Speakers’ Corner, Hong Lim Park.

Kumaran Pillai is the Chief Editor of The Online Citizen. Cheong Yaoming is the Interim Executive Editor of The Online Citizen

You May Also Like

Lam Pin Min informs that doctors do not need to inform patients of all possible side effect of a drug or treatment

Senior Minister of State for Health Lam Pin Min said that doctors…

拉维被指帖文涉诽谤尚穆根 今早面控下月6日审前会议

因被指控脸书帖文涉诽谤内政部长尚穆根,律师拉维今早(16日)出庭面控。 事缘拉维在11月6日,在脸书称本地资深律师尤金.图莱辛甘(Eugene Thuraisingam),于2017年告诉他,内政暨律政部长尚穆根自称能对大法官梅达顺“施加影响”,而且还能“发号施令控制梅达顺”(“calls the shot and controlls (sic) Sundaresh Menon)。 对此尤金致函尚穆根澄清,拉维的言论不属实,尚穆根也未曾告知他上述言论。 上月7日,新加坡警方发文告,证实接到检控官援引刑事程序第16(2)项,指示警方依刑事诽谤罪名调查本地律师拉维。…

第三季公积金存款利率 年满55岁退休存款最高可享6巴仙

中央公积金局今日(22日)公布今年第三季度(7月1日至9月30日)公积金存款利率。年满55岁或以上会员,首3万元存款最高可享有6巴仙利率,至于接下来的3万元则享有最高5巴仙利率。 此外,上述会员群体首三万元累积存款,可续享额外2巴仙利率(以普通户头的两万元为限);普通户头最高年利率维持在3.5巴仙。特别户头和保健储蓄户头,最高年利率5巴仙。 至于未满55岁者,首六万元累积存款可持续享有额外1巴仙利率(以普通户头两万元为限);普通户头的最高年利率维持在3.5巴仙,特别户头和保健储蓄户头最高年利率,则高达5巴仙。 至于第三季度建屋局房屋贷款年利率,则维持在2.6巴仙。 当局称给予会员额外利率,乃是为了增强会员们的退休存款。  

探讨异议课程遭耶鲁-国大学院腰斩 亚菲言:异议就是说不的艺术

“如果我们就连腾出空间去倾听那些说不的人,也做不到,那么民主已死。” 据报导,耶鲁—国大学院临时取消一门名为《新加坡的异议与抵抗》的课程。有关课程将由新加坡知名剧作家亚菲言(Alfian Sa’at),与参与学生探讨本土的公民抗命模式。 有关课程原本计划在本月27日至10月5日进行,结果在开课前两周就被喊停。耶鲁—国大学院校长陈大荣教授,则在受询时向媒体解释,课程“未批判性地接触多元观点,这对于探讨围绕在异议周边的政治、社会和伦理议题,去做作妥当的学术检视是需要的”。 他续指,有关课程建议的活动和选取的讲员,也有损该校不把政党政治利益带入校园的承诺。 他也指出一些活动建议包括“可能使学生面临违法风险、或面对法律责任的元素”。 课程原本由本地剧作家亚菲言和课程经理Tan Yock Theng负责。 亚菲言对于本地时政课题向来有话直说,他著作的诗歌、剧作和短片等,也常触碰诸如政治、性别和族群等议题。 课程活动之一,包括观看独立制片人苏德祥制作“光谱行动”纪录片《1987解开阴谋》(1987: Untracing…