Singapore Democrats

A great precedent has been set. Hope this will pave the way for more peaceful 'walks'. (I shouldn't use the word 'march'.)

John Ng, whom I knew on a casual basis has finally done some soul-searching and decided the case on its merits. (I pray that nothing happens to him!!)

SDP members and supporters won't know whether to laugh or cry over this acquittal.

Obviously, SDP should be euphoric that the acquittal vindicates what they have done in Sep 07. They could also rejoice that the judge has been amicable enough to interpret the law in their favour.

But I would like to remind SDP that it was let off on what seems like a technicality - the lack of a clear legal definition of "progression". Hence the judge has had to rely on a “natural and ordinary” meaning of the word.

SDP should note that this oversight (ie. lack of definition) can be easily corrected by parliament in future, although personally I think we should let it be, besides the fact it would make the government seem retributive to make the amendment at this stage.

On the other hand, SDP has reasons to be sad because the acquittal DEBUNKS their long-held and oft-repeated insinuation that the judiciary is at the beck-and-call of the ruling party. Here was a case whereby the judge has given SDP the benefit of doubt with regards to the law.

Based on its mindset, whenever judgments were proffered that were not favourable to the SDP, it would make accusations of judges being biased and beholden to the government. This mindset is embodied recent accusations made by its supporters of the type as follows:

- Shame on those lap dogs - the judges, ministers, technocrats, etc who are so educated yet have to suck up to one old
peesai miserable man.

- the ruling party has used the whole civil system like the police, army, media and justice to perpetrate the manipulation and suppression on the people

- Everyone knows kangaroos run our courts!

Now that a judge has shown clear and balanced legal mind to acquit these SDP members, the party and its supporter can no longer lay claims to persistent legal suppression. SDP can no longer deliberately breach laws and then attribute their incarceration to miscarriage of justice.

A principled judiciary is not helpful to SDP's cause since it has essentially lost one of its raison d'être to overhaul the Singapore system.

I know a sparrow does not summer make, but overall it's a sad autumn day for SDP.

Mmmm, bonus is gone...no promotion...condemned...asked to leave..

Whether this decision to acquit SDP is of a political decision, only time will tell. Based on PAP's past performance, I find an ancient proverb true - foes' gifts are no gifts, profit bring they none.

BryanT makes me laugh.

On the one hand, his rants against Chee and his lots is that they deliberately break the "Law"! And to him the Law is sacrosanct, the law cannot be wrong and it is perfect.

Now he is saying Chee only got away because of technicality -- i.e. imperfection of the law, which seemed to miss so many other Judges until now. In other words, he now seemed to acknowledge that the Law is wrong somehow and that since it is made up by the PAP, which most probably bent to its own end. But despite this Chee and gang still guilty?

Man, I wonder what's going on in that brain of his?

I applaud District Judge John Ng for your courage and righteous. Singapore will be safe and well if more top civil servants will have the same courage and righteous towards its citizen. I will pray to LORD Jesses Christ every day to bless and protect from evil man's harm for our first brave and righteous District Judge John Ng and his family. Ho..Ray.. The Sun's light has start to shine.

There is nothing to celebrate here. You look at the long-term implications of this judge's decision. First and foremost, he did NOT say it was within your constitutional right to demonstrate. This is key. This is key in that if this ruling is to be used as a reference, there is no mention of anything being a constitutional right.

When the judge says it did not interfere with the public, do you know how vague that is? It means if you try it again and one person has to weave in and out to get by your procession, you have then caused a public hinderance.

Furthermore, you better believe this is nothing more than a tool the pap will use come election time to show their "fairness" of the independence of the judiciary.

Please, you guys have to be smarter than this. Singapore politics is infantile and this is a fact. It is infantile because the political scene has never been nurtured to grow. One party rules, and one party makes the rules. While you guys celebrate, for five minutes with high fives, rest assured the pap is celebrating with the most expensive wines because your joy will fuel their existence and your smiles and congratulatory remarks will all be documented as a form of twisted proof that the government is a free one.

There is nothing to celebrate and be more tactful and seasoned then "breaking news" because you need to think of the long-term implications.

And Bryan T is exactly right. The next time you challenge laws, break them, get arrested, get charged, get jailed, and so on, the public will absolutely see the SDP in a far worse light the than the pap or straits times could ever paint. And that is because the "perception" here is that a judge was "fair." So now when the SDP gets baked and tossed in jail again, the public will also see this as "fair" and you got what you exactly deserve.

Please, politically grow up. And I have said this before, the SDP needs to have a clear line, a distinct line and must separate itself politically from its activist roles. Until Singapore politics is more mature, until the public actually cares enough to join you in the streets, you cannot and must not be a political-activist party. Yes, some of you go for it and be activists. But for the sake of Singapore, the rest of you stick to policy and politics. If you do not, you will forever be seen as a party that only breaks the law. I'm on your side, but respectfully- politically, the party or its members, or its public relations needs to grow up.

Judge......John Ng
DPP.........John Liu
Accd.......John Tan

No other name meh? How abt Tom, Dick, Harry?

Let just hope this acquittal from District Judge John Ng is not a ploy
by the system to make it look good because of late, PAP has been in the news for the wrong reason. They do it to gain back some ground.

Maybe it is all a set up by the old man.
Instruction from LKY to let the SDP members free.

On the other hand, if DJ John Ng did it on his own initiative, let see if anything will happen to him. Probably, may be transferred or demoted.

Remember Michael Khoo who acquitted JBJ in one case, MK was transferred and now worked in the Attorney's office as SC. MKhoo could have been promoted to high court judge.

Let us not be too happy yet. PAP is very cunning. Election is drawing near.
Want to look good in the citizens' eyes.
Sorry, we have enough of you for 50 years. We will try to vote you out.

SinisterMinister -
Are you saying that the Operation Coldstore and Operation Spectrum will be used again to arrest SDP members under the Internal Security Act and locked up inside the Internal Security Department to be held and detained without trial until they admit that they are wrong?

Just so everyone is clear, none of my defendants and I are bedazzled by this ruling. Our primary concern is the right to assemble peaceably without arms, not whether a casual walk constitutes a procession.

Regardless of how we won, the judge has set a precedent and effectively narrowed the definition of 'procession'. This is a good thing, for it provides some assurance that such walks can be conducted legally without a permit. But I say this with reservation, as this ruling is not binding on future decisions. It is merely persuasive.

Indeed, as BryanT says, a sparrow does not make a summer. One exception does not constitute proof of judicial independence. One man does not make an institution, unless he is LKY.

Based on the article, CSJ was imprisoned in 2007 and his supporters carried out a "procession" presumably to raise the awareness of Singaporeans to the plight of their leader sitting in Queenstown Prison. It was probably to invoke the authorities to re-enact its silly and overwrought performance in trying to stop the original 2006 traipse by the SDP gang.

Such are the rehashed techniques employed by the SDP to raise its public profile and create the perception of being suppressed and victimised. The effect to the population is diametric, but that is another story. However, this article reminded me of a statement made by Dennis Bloodworth in his book about the opposition faced by the then pubescent PAP.

Bloodworth wrote about a rhetorical question posed to him by a then Socialist Front leader from KL,"[b]how much does the PAP pay Lee Siew Choh?[/b]" Of course Dr Lee was not paid by PAP, but he was treated as God's gift to the PAP because he managed to stick to his cantankerous and vacillating ways with great consistency and managed to "frog-march the Barisan to the cliff-edge of political oblivion".

The SDP, led by Dr Chee, has a propensity to carry out street protests as part of its chosen political strategy. As seen in the article above, it does so by conducting frog-marches and public oratory to appeal to the people and attract the public to its causes and predicament. This impels one to draw a parallel to the performance by the original oafish Doc. Hence a similar rhetorical question is also apt : "[b]How much does PAP pay Chee Soon Juan?[/b]"

Of course PAP does not make any monetary offerings to the SDP, and neither would one expect SDP to accept these if offered. However, CSJ's repeated vociferous performances on the streets are incongruous to the political and social realities of Singapore. Singaporeans can be sympathetic to the judicial challenges faced by CSJ and some of his party members, and rejoice with them when they are acquitted as was the case above. But Singaporeans are not indifferent nor blind, and are able to form opinions based on what they discern.

So why the rhetoric question? SDP claims to be at the forefront of political opposition in the country. But through its confrontational ways that has created little impact on and benefit to Singaporeans' lives, the SDP has given the collective opposition group a face that that is rather uncomplimentary. In that, the PAP should be thankful to the SDP, and could have "paid" SDP for its kind service to taint the people's outlook on political opposition in the country.

I have recently made a promise to myself to not just criticise (for the good) but also make recommendations where possible.

In this case, I suggest that SDP review its strategy on engaging the government for the benefit of society. [b]A roguish approach leaves the doors shut to communication, even if one bangs very hard on them.[/b]

Got to be suspicious with the verdict. Whether or not DJ John Ng did it out of his own judgement, remains to be seen.

Let's not pop the champagne yet! Elections is near. APEC Event is near (Nov'09) where all the World Powers will attend (including President Barrack Obama). Given the kind of judiciary history in our tiny red dot, one cannot help but be suspicious of such 'upset verdict' given our judiciary records in the past especially for cases involving politics.

This bloody cunning, scheming, sly, foxy PAP regime or should I say LKY, will do everything in his power to convince the world that Singapore is run and governed 'democratically'.

This bloody sly old fox still clinging on to power despite many S'poreans on the ground cursing and swearing at him!

SDP, pls do not celebrate just yet! After APEC Event, when all is done and gone, you'll see and know who actually stood by you when you are the ones who have to face all the bloody nonsense again from this regime!

To hell with PAP! F**king incompetent bunch of bloody idiots! Damn bloody tulan!

I forgot to add another recommendation to my last post : I hope the lessons of one Doc is learn by the other Doc.

If SDP is not careful and continues to conduct its politics in a stand-offish (rhymes with "oafish") way detached from ground sentiments, the street marches that SDP carries out might well be those that "frog-march(es) the (SDP) to the cliff-edge of political oblivion".

Then the political scene in Singapore will all the more be poorer.

Yes, one sparrow does not a summer make, but a bad move might bring one to the proverbial cliff-of-oblivion....... and irrelevance.

PS. as to Kai Xiong's point about the judge having set a precedent to the definition of 'procession', my point was that the law can be easily amended to clarify its meaning. Then, it will be easier to breach this law(......what a perverse statement!).

quantum, maybe I am not understanding your message.

Coldstore made no difference to singaporeans then, and it does not now.

What I said is that politics in Singapore has not even come out of the womb yet. Believe me, I understand the connection between activism and politics, but the average joe in Singapore does not. To be frank, in Singapore activists are seen as troublemakers which makes the perception of political parties using activism as a tool troublemakers as well.

We all know the connection between activism and politics, but in infantile Singapore, people do not make the connection. In a country with seasoned politicians and a citizenry that thinks maturely and engages, they will see the connection as well. But let's be real, overwhelmingly Singaporeans just are not there politically which makes it much more daunting for them to agree with activism. This is why the two have to be separated.

To be frank, I look at the SDP and I must say I cannot see one politician? I see activists, but I see no politician. Therefore be real. What do you expect, people to vote for an activist---or a politician?

Sure you can argue activist have become politicians and activists have politically led countries. But keep in mind, for that to have happened there needed to be passionate--very passionate people who were willing to make the sacrifice at any cost. Singaporeans simply will not do so which makes activism mute.

Would Ghandi, King Jr., Lech Walesa, and others have succeeded with only 50 or so people? Would they have succeeded in Singapore? If you think they would not have succeeded (which I do not), what puts Dr. Chee on a higher pedestal to succeed?

I think Dr. Chee is a smart man, and I know in my heart he can do incredibly positive and forward moving things for Singaporeans across the board. He in my view runs circles around anything or anyone in the pap. But the problem is he is seen as an activist--not a politician.

And as I said, and as we all know, in LKY's Singapore just as in China, N. Korea, Myanmar and other choice places, activism equals troublemaker. And no matter what good you are trying to do for the people, And no matter how much they may know it, they will turn away from you because of fear for themselves, their family, and their children being labeled as troublemakers.

When I look at the SDP, I see people holding positions and titles...but I just do not see a politician in the bunch. You need a politician and Singapore needs Dr. Chee.

I don't care how many thumbs down I get because I said Singapore is immature politically--because it's true. What is also true is that the SDP is Singapore's only hope. I tell you what, in 20 years, there will only be a Singapore by name. No one here will recognize or be able to call Singapore home in the very near and fast approaching future.

The country is in reverse and perhaps in 10 years or less time, its people will be in free fall.

SinisterMinister - That acquittal could jolly well be a hint to SDP by the PAP to stay obedient for this coming election.

Nevertheless, no one should expect Dr Chee to come and rescue Singapore. Had anyone expected Lee Kuan Yew to be the one to take Singapore to what it is here now during the 1950s and 60s? Well, you can be assured that no one would be able to do so throughout that dire period of time. Singapore does not need another strongman. Dr Chee is a smart man as you said. Time will change and so will people. But if a strongman is what the majority wants, then it is their fortune to get whoever he/she will be.

The lesson here is Singaporean need to grow up and fast. There is no ready made panacea to political indifference. If Singaporean needs to suffer to understand it, then nobody can stop the process. You can call it fate if you want to. But to advocate pandering to the whims and fancies of the regime such as obeying its law, is strictly going back to square one. If there is a new law stating the need to censor every anti-government view during election time (Maybe there is already one) and if SDP follows it because it doesn’t want to break the PAP's law so as to gain the regime’s recognition and mainstream media’s good light which in return could produce favourable response from the masses, that will be a false dawn of democracy in Singapore. All SDP will gain, judging from anyone else in the Singapore opposition – 1 parliament seat only.

Likewise the shackled and tortured Burmese monks and political opponents of the Burmese military regime were made to shift stones, build roads, imprisonment etc. As a result, many died. Hardship and death don't mean they lost their heart to oppose what is wrong and therefore stay docile to avoid such adversity. It’s about standing for righteousness. I know that the righteous Burmese people will rise up again sometimes in the future. And these are only ordinary people. Burmese and Singaporean are not made any difference except in their hearts and minds. Times will change, Singapore will change because it cannot stay the same. And that is a given.

A system where one man decides every thing such as "who your neighbour is, how you live, the noise you make, how you spit, or what language you use", it's called DICTATORSHIP.

In a dictatorship, there is no such thing as "politics is separate from activism". Everything becomes simply a STRUGGLE against the autocratic regime.

People are kept in check through fear by the dictator who tries to create the facade that he is in power because "people continue to favour" him through regular elections.

But the reality is that the very elections are in themselves the biggest deception devised by the tyrant. The tyrannical regime calls the elections "politics in action" and allows one or two so-called opposition to enter a place which it calls Parliament. That's all... And the charade, euphemistically called "mandate from the people" goes on at regular intervals.

What the SDP is doing is to struggle against an authoritarian regime bent on perpetuating its stranglehold on power.

Over the years, the regime has perfected its power base through a system of patronage based on corruption, nepotism and cronyism.

So, let's not split hairs as to whether opposing the autocratic regime has to be demarcated between POLITICS and ACTIVISM and that there shouldn’t be any merging of the two.

Let's stand together irrespective of whether one calls it "activism" or "politics" in opposing an anti-people regime that is well-entrenched for half a century.

What a breath of fresh air!

Police and AG please take note! As we have said many times, it's the spirit of the law that should govern what case they prosecute, rather than trivialize the judiciary in making mountains of molehills.

Then should not this judgement call in question all those previous like cases where AG, police and judges acted like robots? Presidential "pardons" and state compensations?

PAP should go ahead and amend the law. I personally wish for MHA to write in a no-SDP clause :)

In my view, it is the fear of making the 'wrong move' that paralyses civil society. The framing is wrong. Correctness is not a dichotomy. We are [i]not[/i] walking on a tightrope. Politics is far more complex. One misstep does not kill. It will cost, but there are gains too.

As for SinisterMinister's point about politicians staying away from activism and vice versa, I do not believe such a choice exists. Members of a small society, just as employees in a small company, must necessarily wear different hats. An increase in numbers will naturally bring about specialisation. Why take on two jobs when you can concentrate on one? Why take the hit, when someone else can?

I don't buy the Staits Times. Did they report this? How detailed?

I don't remember it being reported on TV news, although guilty verdicts were faithfully and repeatedly featured in the past.

Seems also a case-in-point of abject pleasers of the power-that-be embarrassing rather than pleasing the government by their mindless conformism.

[quote]If SDP is not careful and continues to conduct its politics in a stand-offish (rhymes with "oafish") way detached from ground sentiments, the street marches that SDP carries out might well be those that "frog-march(es) the (SDP) to the cliff-edge of political oblivion".[/quote]
I think your preaching to SDP is not needed here, and will turn to oblivion very soon.

LKY's abuse of the judicial process has damaged its credibility to such an extent that not a single person that I've spoken to, not a one, believes that this verdict is anything other than a wayang. Nobody is shouting, "Three cheers, a new dawn has arisen, [i]ho say leow[/i]!". Noone is that stupid.

With liberal democrats like Obama, Hilary Clinton, and the PMs of Oz and NZ attending the APEC leaders meeting in Singapore on 14-15 Nov, the very last thing PAP wants is a verdict of $10,000 fine or 10 weeks jail in lieu. There also won't be a single blood-stained Burmese general or money launderer within 1000 miles of red dot, you'll see. Expect the unsavoury activities in Geylang to be locked down for the duration too.

Soooo very embarrassing to have your VIP guests and international media hacks (who cannot be muzzled) asking why people are in jail just for walking down the street in a self-proclaimed 'First World nation', isn't it? If I were the SDP I'd deliberately do one-man protests in the days immediately preceding the APEC season and in front of the VIPs to strain PAP's unconstitutional rule that no outdoor political activity is allowed under any conditions.

A re-run of the disastrous World Bank fiasco during APEC would be totally awesome and is what scares our tyrants most. They do learn from their miscalculations though. You didn't think the new menacing spycams at pathetic 'Speaker's Corner' were a bureaucratic bungle, did you?

APEC is a wonderful and productive time for activists to get arrested in full view of the press if they must. A low-class, heavy-handed, brutal response by thuggish police is a given in any police state.

Kangaroo judge John Ng is a lowly district magistrate and his verdict can, and likely will, be easily reversed by garmen anytime after the APEC circus has headed home. Good Samaritans the PAP most certainy are not. But the fact is he was forced into doing it. It's one tiny step for Singapore, one tiny step for its bullied peasantry.

It wouldn't have happened without SDP's "Do your worst, I am NOT afraid of you" challenge.