Like Tree47Likes

Singapore's steady descent into a police state

Closed Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    3,240

    Singapore's steady descent into a police state

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.zdn...nvestigations/

    Asian government given all-powerful tool of oppression hands it to the police.

    Surprise surprise
    MABinPengChau likes this.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Faroe Islands
    Posts
    2,209

    You'd be surprised, a lot of Singaporeans are in favour of this. "To aid criminal investigations" will elicit a lot of head noddings from the island's inhabitants.


  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Taiwan and HK
    Posts
    6,158
    Quote Originally Posted by GentleGeorge:
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.zdn...nvestigations/

    Asian government given all-powerful tool of oppression hands it to the police.

    Surprise surprise
    Of course, this would never happen in Hong Kong! Now, where is that Leave Home Safe app, I want to download it right away...

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    7,463

    Well, its nothing really new for Singapore, the city-state is known for its draconian laws. With its Internal Security Act, the Singapore government can arrest and detain anyone it deems as a threat, even before any crime was committed. It can ban any political parties, other organizations, ban publications it deems as "subversive" or shut down entertainment venues with the same law.

    The more recent Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act allows the government, on the order of its minister, to shut down any publication or online content it deems as "fake news". Or ban the website hosting the content entirely if need be. This law has been criticized as being used against opposition parties.

    While the Singaporean constitution does say there is protection of speech and assembly, Singapore is not a signatory of several notable international human rights treaties, the biggest one being the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). This allows Singapore to get away with such harsh laws.

    Singapore justified such human rights violating laws because at the time of its establishment in 1963 (after it was ejected from the Malay Federation), it was a poor and backward state surrounded by far bigger neighbours, some of whom were not so stable or may have potential designs on the city state. At the time, the Cold War was also going on with the Soviets and Mao backing various communist militant groups in Asia. Thus the government said it needed such draconian powers to ensure internal stability to face these foreign threats.

    Even so, today, such threats have receded. Indonesia to its south is now a stable democracy. And while Malaysia and Singapore still have occasional disputes, relations are generally stable. Threats from Islamic radical groups are also generally under control. And of course, Singapore today is far from its impoverished roots, now being a modern and advanced economy with quality of life exceding other developed countries. So its hard to justify draconian laws on security grounds.

    The only reason I see is that these laws allow the governing party, the PAP, to remain in power indefinitely without serious challenge. As any serious political challenge can be shut down quickly if the government wants to. So it all comes down to power in the end.

    Last edited by Coolboy; 05-01-2021 at 09:25 AM.
    ramelec, timonoj, R.O. and 2 others like this.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    7,463
    Quote Originally Posted by MABinPengChau:
    Of course, this would never happen in Hong Kong! Now, where is that Leave Home Safe app, I want to download it right away...
    Hong Kong now wants to copy Singapore in imposing harsh laws against political opponents. But what the Hong Kong authorities forget is that however draconian Singapore can be, the government there ultimately has to respond to its citizen concerns. There is still elections in Singapore. The Singapore government cannot ignore the demands of its people, ultimately.

    But this is not so for Hong Kong. Lam is not elected by the average HK citizen. The government does not owe its ability to govern based on people's will, but orders from Beijing. This is why many young people in HK, as shown in a new HKU-CUHK survey, do not trust the government and see it as illegitimate. The NSL may have suppress street protests at the moment (although Covid restrictions may factor more here), but it does nothing to solve the underlying problems triggering the protests in the first place.
    Last edited by Coolboy; 05-01-2021 at 09:29 AM.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    658
    Quote Originally Posted by Coolboy:
    Well, its nothing really new for Singapore, the city-state is known for its draconian laws. With its Internal Security Act, the Singapore government can arrest and detain anyone it deems as a threat, even before any crime was committed. It can ban any political parties, other organizations, ban publications it deems as "subversive" or shut down entertainment venues with the same law.

    The more recent Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act allows the government, on the order of its minister, to shut down any publication or online content it deems as "fake news". Or ban the website hosting the content entirely if need be. This law has been criticized as being used against opposition parties.

    While the Singaporean constitution does say there is protection of speech and assembly, Singapore is not a signatory of several notable international human rights treaties, the biggest one being the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). This allows Singapore to get away with such harsh laws.

    Singapore justified such human rights violating laws because at the time of its establishment in 1963 (after it was ejected from the Malay Federation), it was a poor and backward state surrounded by far bigger neighbours, some of whom were not so stable or may have potential designs on the city state. At the time, the Cold War was also going on with the Soviets and Mao backing various communist militant groups in Asia. Thus the government said it needed such draconian powers to ensure internal stability to face these foreign threats.

    Even so, today, such threats have receded. Indonesia to its south is now a stable democracy. And while Malaysia and Singapore still have occasional disputes, relations are generally stable. Threats from Islamic radical groups are also generally under control. And of course, Singapore today is far from its impoverished roots, now being a modern and advanced economy with quality of life exceding other developed countries. So its hard to justify draconian laws on security grounds.

    The only reason I see is that these laws allow the governing party, the PAP, to remain in power indefinitely without serious challenge. As any serious political challenge can be shut down quickly if the government wants to. So it all comes down to power in the end.
    With the Singapore Internal Security Act, that is why they managed to shut down the Jemaah Islamiyah from organizing a terrorist bomb plot in 2001.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,896
    Original Post Deleted
    I think you confuse cause and consequence. Restrictions reduce transmission. And it's not like anyone on this board has more than 8 friends to start with.

    Re Trace Together - it's simply the current state of police rights, not a descend into a worse situation. SP can simply access practically all data, and now there is more data. Would take an act of parliament to explicitly not allow TT data use.

    I can't say I like it, but it's just the state of affairs here. SG is a country with an all-powerful government that is becoming less and less autocratic. HK is a non-country with a government that is becoming super-autocratic and has just been granted unlimited powers - they just don't have the competency to implement them yet. Without a foreign passport I wouldn't be too keen on either, but given that I have one, it's SG by a mile.
    Mrs. Jones likes this.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Cramped island
    Posts
    5,585

    Ranting comments:

    1. there are still guys in this site that always believe it is the democracy and freedom of singapore plus the trust given by the people to the government is what makes singapore so stable and successful..

    2. honestly, does the sgp government really need this app to track the activities of the people ? This app just give one easy access to consolidated data. Activities can actually be obtained easily at finger tip. Mobile base station record, etc.etc.... we spoke about the number of CCTV covering the streets in China, but have anyone notice the number of CCTV installed everywhere in singapore.. just the flat i live in has one or two CCTV at every entree staircase/lift lobby. Just that nobody paid too much attention to it.


  9. #9

    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    3,240
    Original Post Deleted
    It never surprised me that Dominic Cummings and his buddies dreamed of creating a 'Singapore-on-Thames'

    We're realising now that he didn't mean what we thought he meant!

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,896
    Quote Originally Posted by freeier:
    1. there are still guys in this site that always believe it is the democracy and freedom of singapore plus the trust given by the people to the government is what makes singapore so stable and successful..
    I neither know who you're referring to here nor what you refer makes Singapore successful. Might want to elaborate.
    Coolboy and eightfivetwo like this.

Closed Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast