Archive Article: Singapore 25th July 98
December 23, 2008

Singapore has a lot going for it. It is a success story of economic development, even with the current Asian crisis. But it is a pity that it has such a poor human rights record. It is very interesting to compare the social indicators of Singapore and Britain, such as the rate of literacy and the level of income. In most instances, Singapore is a more “developed” country than its former colonial master. Britain seems, by contrast, more of a Third World country.

But Singapore has such a poor record on civil and political rights. This has been highlighted in the last few days by the case involving the leader of the Workers’ Party, JB Jeyaretnam, a human rights lawyer and a critic of the some of the policies of the Singapore Government.

Australian lawyer Stuart Littlemore QC has been in Singapore as an observer for the International Commission of Jurists to monitor the legal tribulations of Mr Jeyaretnam. The Prime Minister, Goh Chok Tong, brought an action against Mr Jeyaretnam for his comments at an election rally. The trial judge found in favour of the Prime Minister and ordered that about $20,000 be paid to the Prime Minister and that Mr Jeyaretnam should pay 60 per cent of the Prime Minister’s legal costs.

Both people appealed to the Court of Appeal. Mr Jeyaretnam said that his words were not defamatory, while the Prime Minister said that he had not won enough money.

The Court of Appeal has now ruled in the Prime Minister’s favour and increased the money that Mr Jeyaretnam has to pay from about $20,000 to about $100,000 and that he has to pay all the Prime Minister’s legal costs.

What are the lessons to be drawn from all this? First, the Prime Minister is obviously very sensitive to any criticism. The free flow of political debate which we in Australia take for granted is not tolerated in Singapore.

Second, Mr Jeyaretnam is now facing bankruptcy. There are another 10 cases against him to go. A bankrupted politician cannot sit in the Singapore Parliament. Therefore, as the International Commission of Jurists has pointed out, it seems that an intention of the litigation against Mr Jeyaretnam is to use defamation suits as a political tactic to silence critical views and to curb opposition activity.

Third, there must also be some unease about the legal system. The International Commission of Jurists has noted that no Government politician has ever lost a defamation action in the courts, and that their damages, on average, have been ten times those awarded in such cases to ordinary citizens. Finally, continued economic development depends partly on the free flow of ideas. Politicians should be encouraging debate and not stifling it.

I first visited Singapore in 1973,. The Royal Navy had pulled and there was some pessimism about the country’s future because of the loss of the naval work. After all, Singapore has few natural resources – even its water has to be imported from Malaysia.

But there has been a wonderful economic turnaround and now Singapore is performing better than its former colonial master. It is a pity that it has not done more to protect civil and political rights.

BROADCAST ON FRIDAY JULY 24 1998 ON RADIO 2GB’S “BRIAN WILSHIRE PROGRAMME” AT 9 PM, AND ON JULY 26 1998 ON “SUNDAY NIGHT LIVE” AT 10.30 PM.