By Ghui

Screenshot of Mediacorp's video
Screenshot of Mediacorp’s video

“Why is that law on the books? Because it’s always been there and I think we just leave it,” adding that he had explained his decision in 2007 to retain Section 377A was PM Lee’s response when asked by a participant of the Singapore Perspective conference organised by the Institute of Policy Studies if “this old and archaic law” which discriminates against a whole group of people could be reconciled with a secular country such as Singapore.

This one answer perhaps best encapsulates the reason why people are increasingly turning to the opposition parties. People want well thought out answers and accountability from their leaders – not a dismissive and seemingly flippant reply.

It defies logic to suggest that just because something has always been there, it should remain as is. By that reasoning, Singapore should still remain a British Colony or that women should still be barred from voting or that slavery should remain in place! The list goes on but you catch my drift.

Laws are never static and have to be reassessed to suit changing viewpoints and needs. Just because he explained his decision in 2007 does not mean that his answer then suits the situation now – it being 5 years ago!

More worryingly, is this the attitude that the government is also taking towards other controversial issues such as the retention of the ISA or the death penalty?

Politicians are elected into government to lead our country. Leadership requires the desire and the ability to steer the country into the future. If something should be changed to reflect the direction a country should move towards, then opting for status quo displays a lack of willpower to genuinely engage with the people. It could also bring into question that leader’s foresight.

Perhaps PM Lee was quoted out of context and it is unfair to judge an entire party based on the statements of an individual. But when that individual is so inextricably linked to the PAP and is also the Prime Minister of Singapore, one cannot help but generalise and feel mildly disturbed.

I am personally for the repeal of Section 377A. As it is, it doesn’t serve any particular purpose. It has already been publicly stated that this Section will not be actively used to prosecute anyone. So, if that were the case, what is the point of it remaining on the statute books? Besides serving no purpose, it can have the added bane of causing confusion to many Singaporeans. Is it a crime or is it not?

Adolescence is a trying enough time for parents and teenagers alike. When you throw grappling with sexuality into the mix, you muddy the emotional trials that much more. Parents, teachers and caregivers will have to explain to children and teenagers that being gay might be a crime even though they might not get prosecuted for it? Not only is this a wishy washy answer, it also heightens the isolation that a gay teenager might feel.

This is a campaign that is gaining momentum and neither PM Lee nor the PAP can avoid taking a stand forever. In my private capacity, I want to see this law abolished for good but I recognise and respect that the majority of Singapore may not agree with me. But, I would still be heartened if the PM could take a genuine stand on the issue. Other leaders in the developed world have taken a stand so why not PM Lee? By evading a stand, this becomes even more needlessly controversial when it really is very simple – is it being applied? If the answer is no, then it is superfluous. End of.

You May Also Like

Public lambaste CPF Board for disallowing elderly man to use his CPF fund for daughter’s education

On Sunday (30 June), TOC reported a story about 60-year-old Lim Koh…

Delay on CCL due to intermittent signal interference

Singapore Mass Rapid Transit (SMRT) has asked commuters to expect for service…

【选举】民主党倡议援助失业者方案 应对后冠病时代危机

新加坡民主党指出,在该党的“重新启动RESTART”援助和重新雇佣计划下,被裁员的员工将获得临时援助金,让他们创业,扭转我国的经济结构,强化国家企业家文化。 民主党秘书长徐顺全在脸书帖文,指出该党所推出的“重启”计划,能够协助被裁退的国人,让他们能够透过该援助金重新振作,甚至创业。 他表示,该党非常关注我国的就业机会和失业率课题,并对目前的政策感到失望。 他指出,透过“重启”计划,被裁国人能够持续18个月获得原薪金的一半援助金,即即首半年提供原先工资的75巴仙,第二半年提供一半的工资,以及最后的半年提供原工资的四分一。 “若被裁员工能够找到另外九名面对同样命运的国人,他们可以透过提交可行的商业计划书,一次性领出所有援助金,作为合作企业的资本。” 该计划也会就合作企业的类型制定广泛的指南,并设立独立机构进行监督,以防遭滥用,更可以引用法定指南,让董事会和管理层承担责任。 他指出,此做法已经在意大利率先被提出,被称为马可拉法(Marcora Law),帮助被裁退的人们重新振作,并鼓励国人创业。类似的合作企业为会员所拥有和管理,将有助于新加坡市场的经济包容性和多元化。 徐顺全指出,我国在“裙带资本主义”指数中,排位偏高,是不健康且不可持续的现象。因此他希望自冠状病毒19疫情后的复苏时期,我国能够摆脱政府主导的国内经济,真正调整我国的经济结构,让私营部门取到关键作用,加强国家的企业家文化。