Connect with us

Current Affairs

Dr Thum afforded “special treatment in his representation” by the Select Committee: Workers’ Party Secretary-General Pritam Singh

Published

6 years ago

on

Local historian Dr Thum Ping Tjin received “special treatment in his representation” due to his “singling out” of the People’s Action Party (PAP) in his submission to the Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods, said Workers’ Party Secretary-General Mr Pritam Singh in response to what has been observed by several activists and members of the public as “complicit silence” on the opposition politician’s part regarding the issue.

Mr Singh, in his reply to civil rights activist and investigative journalist Ms Kirsten Han’s query on the above Facebook post regarding his stance on the purportedly deliberate “character assassination” of Dr Thum by the Select Committee itself – of which the majority comprises PAP members – and even by the mainstream media, said that while the issues raised by the Select Committee were “much more significant than PJ [Dr Thum]”, the Committee was not able to overlook Dr Thum’s specific “singling out” of the PAP in his submission.

“There was no way they were going to let that stand on the parliamentary record, unrebutted. Singling out the PAP was PJ’s prerogative, consequences included,” wrote Mr Singh.

However, Mr Singh has maintained that he does not “endorse” the mainstream media’s method in reporting the issue surrounding the Select Committee’s pedantic scrutiny of Dr Thum’s credentials, saying that it is “unhelpful” and “compromises the serious issues raised” in the Select Committee’s report.

Mr Singh subsequently alluded to the “serious issues” raised in the Select Committee’s report such as the “opening of archives” and “freedom of information,” further reiterating the view that the PAP’s singling out of Dr Thum was not personal, but rather crucial to the discussion regarding authenticity and “freedom” of information.

Ms Han, however, strongly believed that the Select Committee’s publicly humiliating treatment of Dr Thum was far from impersonal, and even “clearly fell outside of the SC’s TOR [terms of reference]” or the proper scope of the Committee’s agenda, adding that the Select Committee’s report itself was the source of the negative angle taken by the mainstream media in their news reports:

 Several other users have also disagreed with Mr Singh’s approach towards the issue:

Mr Singh reiterated the stance taken by the Select Committee in their opinion on Dr Thum’s submission, saying that “the conclusions PJ drew from his available sources, and the explanation of his decisions to exclude certain other sources, cannot support the contention that only the PAP and LKY peddled fake news with respect to Operation Cold Store.”

Dr Thum has provided his own response to the allegations hurled against him by the Select Committee in its report, citing multiple “statements from Oxford [University]” and both of his submissions to the Select Committee as a rebuttal:

In the same Facebook post dated 21 Sep, Dr Thum added that he “will respond more fully in due course”.

Several commenters have expressed their support for Dr Thum on his Facebook post:

Max Ong suggested that the PAP’s apparent intimidation of Dr Thum is typical of the ruling party’s purported silencing tactics against dissenting voices:

Dr Thum previously targeted by Law Minister K Shanmugam in six-hour hearing

Dr Thum was specifically targeted by the Select Committee in its report over his academic credentials, stating that it afforded “no weight” to his views, as he is not a “credible representor” in its view.

In a 273-page report that was released on Thursday (20 Sep), the Committee, which is chaired by Deputy Speaker of Parliament Charles Chong, alleged that Dr Thum had “misrepresented” his academic credentials, and had “provided several different descriptions of his position”.

Dr Thum’s methodology in presenting historical evidence was also criticised by the Committee for what it has perceived as cherry-picking.

A similar dispute regarding Dr Thum’s credentials took place previously in a public hearing in March that lasted for almost six hours, during which K Shanmugam had heavily scrutinised Dr Thum’s submission.

In his written submission to the Committee, Dr Thum had was accused of suggesting that the Government was the primary vector of “fake news”.

Dr Thum said: “‘Fake news’ is not a problem in Singapore — with one major exception: the People’s Action Party government has, historically, spread ‘fake news’ for narrow party-political gain.”

Citing examples of the numerous detentions sanctioned by the PAP government under the Internal Security Act, he noted: “Beginning with Operation Coldstore in 1963, (PAP) politicians have told Singaporeans that people were being detained without trial on national security grounds due to involvement with radical communist conspiracies to subvert the state,” he noted.

“Declassified documents have proven this to be a lie. Operation Coldstore was conducted for political purposes, and there was no evidence that the detainees of Operation Coldstore were involved in any conspiracy to subvert the government,” he added.

Mr Shanmugam, who is also the Law Minister, alleged during the hearing that Dr Thum had “breached a number of rules” with regard to academic historical processes, and that the academician had “fallen completely through the standard of an objective historian”.

“Your views on communism, Operation Coldstore – which you have been repeating at multiple fora – are contradicted by the most reliable evidence.

“It ignores evidence which you don’t like, you ignore and suppress what is inconvenient and in your writings, you present quite an untrue picture,” Mr Shanmugam said.

Dr Thum, however, refuted Mr Shanmugam’s approach, which he had suggested to be rigid: “I’m an academic, Mr Shanmugam – nuance is very important to the truth.”

It was also noted that the Select Committee, in their opinion on Dr Thum’s submission, had ignored the multiple recommendations made by the academic, such as increasing media literacy education amongst Singaporeans to teach the public how to become more critical and aware of the information they are exposed to, and the repeal of the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act 1974 to enable the creation of more diverse news sources in the Republic, among others.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Current Affairs

TJC issued 3rd POFMA order under Minister K Shanmugam for alleged falsehoods

The Transformative Justice Collective (TJC) was issued its third POFMA correction order on 5 October 2024 under the direction of Minister K Shanmugam for alleged falsehoods about death penalty processes. TJC has rejected the government’s claims, describing POFMA as a tool to suppress dissent.

Published

12 hours ago

on

6 October 2024

By

The Transformative Justice Collective (TJC), an advocacy group opposed to the death penalty, was issued its third Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) correction direction on 5 October 2024.

The correction was ordered by Minister for Home Affairs and Law, K Shanmugam, following TJC’s publication of what the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) alleges to be false information regarding Singapore’s death row procedures and the prosecution of drug trafficking cases.

These statements were made on TJC’s website and across its social media platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and X (formerly Twitter).

In addition to TJC, civil activist Kokila Annamalai was also issued a correction direction by the minister over posts she made on Facebook and X between 4 and 5 October 2024.

According to MHA, these posts echoed similar views on the death penalty and the legal procedures for drug-related offences, and contained statements that the ministry claims are false concerning the treatment of death row prisoners and the state’s legal responsibilities in drug trafficking cases.

MHA stated that the posts suggested the government schedules and stays executions arbitrarily, without due regard to legal processes, and that the state does not bear the burden of proving drug trafficking charges.

However, these alleged falsehoods are contested by MHA, which maintains that the government strictly follows legal procedures, scheduling executions only after all legal avenues have been exhausted, and that the state always carries the burden of proof in such cases.

In its official release, MHA emphasised, “The prosecution always bears the legal burden of proving its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and this applies to all criminal offences, including drug trafficking.”

It also pointed to an article on the government fact-checking site Factually to provide further clarification on the issues raised.

As a result of these allegations, both TJC and Annamalai are now required to post correction notices. TJC must display these corrections on its website and social media platforms, while Annamalai is required to carry similar notices on her Facebook and X posts.

TikTok has also been issued a targeted correction direction, requiring the platform to communicate the correction to all Singapore-based users who viewed the related TJC post.

In a statement following the issuance of the correction direction, TJC strongly rejected the government’s claims. The group criticised the POFMA law, calling it a “political weapon used to crush dissent,” and argued that the order was more about the exercise of state power than the pursuit of truth. “We have put up the Correction Directions not because we accept any of what the government asserts, but because of the grossly unjust terms of the POFMA law,” TJC stated.

TJC further argued that the government’s control over Singapore’s media landscape enables it to push pro-death penalty views without opposition. The group also stated that it would not engage in prolonged legal battles over the POFMA correction orders, opting to focus on its abolitionist work instead.

This marks the third time TJC has been subject to a POFMA correction direction in recent months.

The group was previously issued two orders in August 2024 for making similar statements concerning death row prisoners.

In its latest statement, MHA noted that despite being corrected previously, TJC had repeated what the ministry views as falsehoods.

MHA also criticised TJC for presenting the perspective of a convicted drug trafficker without acknowledging the harm caused to victims of drug abuse.

Annamalai, a prominent civil rights activist, is also known for her involvement in various social justice campaigns. She was charged in June 2024 for her participation in a pro-Palestinian procession near the Istana. Her posts, now subject to correction, contained information similar to those presented by TJC regarding death penalty procedures and drug-related cases.

POFMA, which was introduced in 2019, allows the government to issue correction directions when it deems falsehoods are being spread online.

Critics of the law argue that it can be used to suppress dissent, while the government asserts that it is a necessary tool for combating misinformation. The law has been frequently invoked against opposition politicians and activists.

As of October 2024, Minister K Shanmugam has issued 17 POFMA directions, more than any other minister. Shanmugam, who was instrumental in introducing POFMA, is followed by National Development Minister Desmond Lee, who has issued 10 POFMA directions.

Major media outlets, including The Straits Times, Channel News Asia, and Mothership, have covered the POFMA directions. However, as of the time of writing, none have included TJC’s response rejecting the government’s allegations.

Continue Reading

Current Affairs

Hotel Properties Limited suspends trading ahead of Ong Beng Seng’s court hearing

Hotel Properties Limited (HPL), co-founded by Mr Ong Beng Seng, has halted trading ahead of his court appearance today (4 October). The announcement was made by HPL’s company secretary at about 7.45am, citing a pending release of an announcement. Mr Ong faces one charge of abetting a public servant in obtaining gifts and another charge of obstruction of justice. He is due in court at 2.30pm.

Published

3 days ago

on

4 October 2024

By

SINGAPORE: Hotel Properties Limited (HPL), the property and hotel developer co-founded by Mr Ong Beng Seng, has requested a trading halt ahead of the Singapore tycoon’s scheduled court appearance today (4 October) afternoon.

This announcement was made by HPL’s company secretary at approximately 7.45am, stating that the halt was due to a pending release of an announcement.

Mr Ong, who serves as HPL’s managing director and controlling shareholder, faces one charge under Section 165, accused of abetting a public servant in obtaining gifts, as well as one charge of obstruction of justice.

He is set to appear in court at 2.30pm on 4 October.

Ong’s charges stem from his involvement in a high-profile corruption case linked to former Singaporean transport minister S Iswaran.

The 80-year-old businessman was named in Iswaran’s initial graft charges earlier this year.

These charges alleged that Iswaran had corruptly received valuable gifts from Ong, including tickets to the 2022 Singapore Formula 1 Grand Prix, flights, and a hotel stay in Doha.

These gifts were allegedly provided to advance Ong’s business interests, particularly in securing contracts with the Singapore Tourism Board for the Singapore GP and the ABBA Voyage virtual concert.

Although Iswaran no longer faces the original corruption charges, the prosecution amended them to lesser charges under Section 165.

Iswaran pleaded guilty on 24 September, 2024, to four counts under this section, which covered over S$400,000 worth of gifts, including flight tickets, sports event access, and luxury items like whisky and wines.

Additionally, he faced one count of obstructing justice for repaying Ong for a Doha-Singapore flight shortly before the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) became involved.

On 3 October, Iswaran was sentenced to one year in jail by presiding judge Justice Vincent Hoong.

The prosecution had sought a sentence of six to seven months for all charges, while the defence had asked for a significantly reduced sentence of no more than eight weeks.

Ong, a Malaysian national based in Singapore, was arrested by CPIB in July 2023 and released on bail shortly thereafter. Although no charges were initially filed against him, Ong’s involvement in the case intensified following Iswaran’s guilty plea.

The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) had earlier indicated that it would soon make a decision regarding Ong’s legal standing, which has now led to the current charges.

According to the statement of facts read during Iswaran’s conviction, Ong’s case came to light as part of a broader investigation into his associates, which revealed Iswaran’s use of Ong’s private jet for a flight from Singapore to Doha in December 2022.

CPIB investigators uncovered the flight manifest and seized the document.

Upon learning that the flight records had been obtained, Ong contacted Iswaran, advising him to arrange for Singapore GP to bill him for the flight.

Iswaran subsequently paid Singapore GP S$5,700 for the Doha-Singapore business class flight in May 2023, forming the basis of his obstruction of justice charge.

Mr Ong is recognised as the figure who brought Formula One to Singapore in 2008, marking the first night race in the sport’s history.

He holds the rights to the Singapore Grand Prix. Iswaran was the chairman of the F1 steering committee and acted as the chief negotiator with Singapore GP on business matters concerning the race.

 

Continue Reading

Trending