On Tuesday (17 September), Singaporean historian Dr Thum Ping Tjin took to his Facebook to state that the country’s laws are created to be extremely broad in order to “effectively make all public expression of any opinion illegal”.

His post was referring to an incident involving Mohammad Nafiz Kamarudin who was disallowed by the Yellow Ribbon Project Singapore from participating in the Prison Run 2019 on Sunday (15 September) because he appeared at the event wearing an anti-death penalty T-shirt.
The T-shirt had “2nd chances means not killing them” printed on the front, and “#antideathpenalty” printed on the back.
“So they did not allow me to run, despite being clear on their site that runners can use any other tops than their official t-shirt. First they told me I need to change my bib. Now they want to police me on what to wear,” Mr Nafiz wrote in a Facebook post.
As such, he said that he will not participate in the event but will run parallel with them.
In an earlier post, Mr Nafiz highlighted that the organiser contacted him last week to request him to change his bib as the message written on it “is not in line with the cause”. At first, the organiser didn’t have any problem when they printed the same anti-death penalty slogan on his bib, instead of his name. However, they later changed their mind and asked him to change his bib with one that bears his name.
Mr Nafiz told TOC that after rejecting the request from different staff from the organisation to change his bib, he finally agreed to do it as he planned to wear a T-shirt with the same message on the day.
After exchanging his bib, a staff even told him that he can appear at the race with any T-shirt of his choice. But, he was still denied the permission to participate in the race.
In fact, a police report was made against him and his wife, who also attended the race adorning the same T-shirt, due to Sunday’s incident.
In a press statement released on Tuesday (17 September), the Singapore Police Force (SPF) did not identify the couple but stated that they are “investigating a 38-year-old Singaporean man and a 30-year-old Singaporean woman for offences under the Public Order Act.”
The statement added, “It is a criminal offence under the Public Order Act to take part in a public assembly or procession without a police permit. Investigations against the duo are ongoing.”
Mr Nafiz went through a two-hour interview at Bedok Police Station yesterday and his wife will be going for her interview today.
When Mr Nafiz went in for his police interview yesterday, New Naratif editor-in-chief Kirsten Han told that she was “almost not allowed into the police station”.
Mentioning this in a Facebook post, Ms Han said that her team was told at the police station’s registration gate that the Investigation Officer (IO) instructed that no one should be allowed in.
“I asked what authority they had to disallow a citizen from sitting in the waiting room of the police station, but didn’t get an answer. We called but couldn’t get connected to the IO. But they did eventually give me a visitor’s pass,” she wrote.

Dr Thum’s view on the matter

Referring to this whole saga, Dr Thum who is also the managing director of New Naratif, said that this incident is “an example of how systemic oppression works in Singapore.”
“First, self-censorship: you are pressured to voluntarily not express your opinion. Then, marginalisation: if you refuse to self-censor, you are excluded and made invisible. Third, intimidation: if you insist on being visible, Singapore laws are so broad as to effectively make all public expression of any opinion illegal,” he wrote.
He added that based on this way, oppression can be excused under “rule of law”.
Although Dr Thum opines that Mr Nafiz will most likely no face prosecution as it “would cross a line and make the authoritarianism too clear-cut”, but he feels that the bigger problem here is the fear and intimidation that is being disseminated to the wider population so that they don’t utter an opinion that is different from the government officials.
“And the crucial aspect – the real tragedy – is that all this happens not because of a directive from those in power, but merely out of fear and caution by those in middle management,” he said.
He continued, “Authoritarianism today is far more sophisticated than jack-booted thugs. It’s boring, bureaucratic, and administrative.”

Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

高官不满报导 《海时》政治编辑被调职? 华伦澄清乃编采室重组

《雅虎新闻》揭露,《海峡时报》政治组编辑李雪盈(译音),疑似遭高官不满其部分政治新闻报导,而在今年八月被调任财经组。 《雅虎新闻》是根据《海时》内部职员披露消息,指在一则誌期7月20日的公司内部电邮,指出李雪盈在今年8月调任财经组,其职责包括“在《周日时报》和《海时》等平台,生产原创和具影响力的新闻内容。” 《海时》总编辑华伦斐迪南斯,则在同一电邮宣布将组成新加坡新闻组。该编采组将涵盖所有本地的政治、经济和生活新闻,以“促进跨平台的紧密合作”。 目前,新加坡新闻组是由执行编辑Sumiko Tan领军。 在10月29日的一则电邮,《海时》职员则被告知,资深助理编辑Paul Jacob受委为副新闻编辑(政治),他将负责政治和国外新闻的编采工作。不过,政治组编辑至今仍悬空。 《雅虎新闻》收到两名《海时》职员(其中一名已离职)透露消息,指总编华伦是在今年7月中旬,告知政治新闻组,有关李雪盈的调任消息。 据内部消息称,李雪盈的调任原因,可能是基于高官不满她在今年5月6日的一则报导:《王乙康:没有文凭也可当总理》(“A PM without a…

滨海湾金沙德士站打架 三男扰乱治安罪成被罚款

三男一女在滨海湾金沙外开架,扭打、过肩摔、扯破衣一一上演,三名男子被控上庭,各别被罚款2000元至2500元。 三名被告分别为来自马来西亚的Gan Eng Guan(50岁)、Sew Chong Yew(27岁)以及我国男子Stanislaus Low Ming Loong(27岁)。 今年2月22日凌晨2时许,三人涉及在滨海湾金沙德士站打架,被控滋事打架扰乱治安罪,两名马国男子被各被罚款2000元,而本地男子则被罚款2500元。 据法庭文件指出,两名马国男子在我国一家水果摊工作,他们是在离开金沙赌场时,和狮城男子及其女友为了搭德士起纠纷,而开始打架的。 当时本地男子和女友排在马国男子前面,都在等待德士。然而当轮到本地男子时,蓝色德士却没有停车载客,因此本地男子就想要登上后来的红色德士。排在后面的马国男子当时也想要登上该辆德士,因此吵了起来。…

Retired banker suggests that the proposed expected long-term real returns on government assets to be approved by Parliament instead of the President

On Facebook today (9 October), retired banker Chris Kuan shared a Straits…