The detention without trial of journalists and lawyers during the 1970s is the focus of this concluding chapter of Amnesty International's report on Singapore, published in 1980.
(V) Professions in Singapore
Journalists
Amnesty International has been concerned for many years that journalists, newspaper editors and publishers who have been critical of government policy have been detained without trial in Singapore under the ISA. The best known case is that of Said Zahari, a former editor of Utusan Melayu, the leading Malay-language paper in Singapore in the early 1960s, who was detained for nearly 16 years without trial under the ISA and then spent another nine months in exile on the island of Pulau Ubin before his final release in August 1979.
The Singapore Government has consistently sought to curb press freedom in the Republic in a number of ways. In 1971, for instance, Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew publicly forced an American bank in Singapore to foreclose on a newspaper, the Singapore Herald, which had been critical of the Government. Through the Printing Presses Ordinance every printing press in Singapore requires an annual licence from the Government, and the same is true for newspaper publisher. Moreover, through the Essential Information (Control of Publications and Safeguarding of Information) Regulations, the Government decides what is fit to print. The Government used this in 1969, for example, to prevent public discussion in the press of the Government decision to abolish trial by jury for capital offences. Under Section 20 of the ISA, the Minister of Home Affairs is also empowered to prohibit any publication, inter alia, which he qualifies as 'prejudicial to the national interest, public order, or security of Singapore'.
These instruments together with the frequent detention of journalists under the ISA have secured for Singapore an almost uncritical press. Thus, when detainee Chan Hock Hua died of cancer in March 1978, no newspaper in the Republic was willing to carry an obituary notice from his family.
The most draconian crackdown on the press occurred in May 1971, when in the space of a few weeks the Government detained four members of the staff of the Chinese-language newspaper Nanyang Siang Pau, including its editor, Shamsuddin Tung, and its former manager Lee Mau Seng, deported the editor of a new English-language daily, the Singapore Herald and closed down both the Herald and the Eastern Sun. The four staff members of Nanyang Siang Pau were accused of glamourizing the 'communist way of life', despite the fact that two of them had a long history of supporting the virulently anti-communist Kuomintang.
Despite these arrests, the Nanyang Siang Pau continued to publish and in January 1973 its managing director, Lee Eu Seng, was also arrested and detained under the ISA. The four senior members of staff arrested in 1971 were all released by the end of 1973 after making 'confessions' to secure their freedom. Lee Eu Seng himself was detained for five years without trial under the ISA before his release on 1 February 1978.
The former chief editor of the newspaper, Nanyang Siang Pau, Shamsuddin Tung, was rearrested in December 1976 during general elections in which he was a candidate for the United Front party. He was again detained under the ISA, allegedly exploiting communal issues, and remained in detention until 22 January 1979. As well as imposing on him the usual stringent conditions forced on an ex-detainee, the Government in October 1978 deprived Shamsuddin Tung of his Singapore citizenship under the Banishment Ordinance, thus making him a stateless person.
Further arrests of journalists took place in 1976-77 following the forced withdrawal of Singapore's People's Action Party (PAP) from the Socialist International. In June 1976, Hussein Jahidin and Azmi Mahmud of the Berita Harian Singapore were detained under the ISA. Within a short period both made 'confessions' that had attempted to slant their news in their journal in a manner critical of the Government. Their arrest was followed in February 1977 by that of Arun Senkuttuvan, Singapore correspondent of the Economist and the Financial Times. Some weeks later the arrest took place of the correspondent of the Far Eastern Economic Review in Singapore, Ho Kwon Ping.
Both journalists made televized 'confessions' within a month of their detention acknowledging government accusations that they had sought to defame the Government of Singapore by their reports. The editors of both the Financial Times and the Far Eastern Economic Review issued categorical statements that there was no cause for suspicion that the journalists had written in a slanted fashion and placing the 'confessions' in the context of continuous interrogation and the prospect of indefinite detention under the ISA. Both men were released on 29 April 1977. Arun Senkuttuvan was deprived of his citizenship while in detention.
The Legal Profession
The position of the judiciary and the legal profession generally in Singapore has been gravely undermined by the Government's use of its wide provisions for preventive detention. Those lawyers who have been active in defending political detainees have exposed themselves to harassment and the Government has not hesitated to include lawyers among its political detainees.
T T Rajah, a distinguished member of the Singapore Bar was imprisoned without trial under the ISA from June 1974 to December 1975. Since his release he has been hindered from the free practice of his profession as a result of restrictions imposed on him by the Government; in particular, he has been barred from taking any work in connection with political detainees under the ISA. Another lawyer, G Raman, who had also been active in assisting political detainees and had criticized the Government's human rights violations, was arrested under the ISA in February 1977 and detained until February 1978. On his release Mr Raman was barred from returning to the legal profession for two years and is, like T T Rajah, forbidden indefinitely to represent political detainees.
Lawyers who have sought to interview clients who are political detainees have frequently found themselves requested by security authorities to specify in advance those matters which they wish to discuss with their clients. When interviews do take place between lawyers and their clients these communications are never private but in fact take place via monitored telephone calls through a glass partition. During the initial 30 days' interrogation that all political detainees are subjected to, they are invariably refused access to a lawyer. In Amnesty International's experience, this greatly increases the likelihood of ill-treatment and torture of detainees.
- Amnesty International (1980)
---------------------------------------------------------------
THE AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL REPORT
Political detention in Singapore : Prisoner case histories
The ISA as a political tool
Life in Singapore's political prisons
Surviving long-term detention without trial
Detention of journalists and lawyers under the ISA
Sunday, March 18, 2007
Saturday, March 10, 2007
Surviving long-term detention without trial
In this fourth instalment of a report published in 1980 by Amnesty International, survivors of long-term political detention in Singapore recalled debilitating prison conditions, hunger strikes, physical torture and the death of one detainee shortly after release.
(IV) Long term detention
Since May 1970 almost all long-term political prisoners in the Republic of Singapore have been detained in the Moon Crescent Detention Centre, a purpose-built political wing of Changi Prison, the main prison in the country. As we noted political detainees are frequently kept in solitary confinement for anything up to six months, either at Whitley Road Holding Centre or at other undisclosed Special Branch Holding Centres. Once a detainee is served with a detention order under Section 8 of the Internal Security Act, he is almost invariably transferred to the Moon Crescent Detention Centre.
The number of detainees currently held at Moon Crescent is at least 50. They are kept in isolated units of three to six men with no contact between the various units. Each small block of cells is surrounded by high walls, and exercise yards are very small. The cells themselves are also small, with very poor ventilation. There is no window. The cell door, which consists of bars only, opens into the corridor which is walled to the ceilings. Hence there is no through ventilation. Detainees are not allowed to have watches, clocks or calendars in their cells.
Prisoners are allowed to receive visitors once a week and to send one letter a week. Each prison visit lasts half-an-hour. Detainee and relative are separated from each other by a thick soundproof glass partition and can communicate with each other only by telephone. Prison warders are present throughout the visit and monitor the conversation. Visits are terminated abruptly if any mention is made of prison conditions. Prisoners are allowed out of their cells only between the hours of 6.30 to 10am, 12 noon to 2pm and 4pm to 7pm. Thus prisoners are confined in their cells for 15 and a half hours a day. Food is poor and only a limited supplement is allowed from families.
Prisoners at Moon Crescent Detention Centre have extremely limited access to lawyers. In part this is a reflection of the harassment of those members of the Singapore Bar who have been courageous enough to defend political prisoners, but it is also due to restrictions in force at Moon Crescent. The lawyer usually has to state specifically the purpose of the his visit, which is always under strict supervision by the Special Branch. Not even a passing mention of conditions of detention is allowed. Frequently requests by prisoners for visits by their lawyer are turned down or ignored by the prison authorities, and letters sent by detainees to their legal advisers often never reach their destination.
From time to time prisoners at Moon Crescent Detention Centre have protested over their conditions. In particular, two long hunger strikes took place in 1971 and 1978. In both cases the prison authorities responded with considerable brutality. In addition, the prisoners have traditionally staged a 36-hour hunger strike on 2 February every year to commemorate the anniversary of 'Operation Coldstore' on 2 February 1963. Two of the detainees arrested on that day - Dr Poh Soo Kai and Ho Piao - are still detained at Moon Crescent.
The hunger strike in 1970-71 arose over an attempt by the authorities to force the prisoners to do work, which the prisoners themselves rejected categorically on the grounds that they were political detainees. The hunger strike started on 16 December 1970. After it had been in progress for five days, the authorities started force-feeding a number of the detainees, including female prisoners. Several of the female detainees at Moon Crescent at the time made sworn complaints of ill-treatment afterwards before a magistrate. Those who made complaints were Law Leh Moi, Sim Teong Hiok, Wong Kui Inn, Toh Siew Tim, Liu Ah Kiang, Lee Yuen Tueng, Goh Peng Hua and Ng Noi Kee.
There have been occasions when prisoners have staged hunger strikes individually against injustices inflicted on them. For example in June 1972 Lim Hock Koon, younger brother of Dr Lim Hock Siew, staged a hunger strike in protest against a 'confession' allegedly made by him which the Government placed in several newspapers without his compliance.
In the last two years conditions at Moon Crescent Detention Centre have deteriorated considerably and the prisoners have staged several protests against the authorities' actions. Amnesty International has long been gravely concerned about the inadequacy of medical conditions at Moon Crescent and this concern has been increased by the death in March 1978 of Chan Hock Hua, a long-term prisoner at Moon Crescent, only 20 days after his release from prison.
Chan Hock Hua was arrested on 17 February 1971. He was initially detained at Whitley Road Holding Centre but was transferred to the top floor of the Central Police Station where he was kept under solitary confinement for two years. During long periods of interrogation at these two interrogation centres, he was frequently beaten and several times immersed in cold water. As a result of this treatment, he also complained in later years of severe rheumatism. In 1973 he was transferred to Moon Crescent.
During the next four years and more at Moon Crescent, Chan Hock Hua suffered frequently from ill-health, so much so that other prisoners complained about the inadequacy of the medical treatment he was receiving and urged the authorities to consider his early release on humaitarian grounds. In early 1978 his health deteriorated rapidly and caused considerable unease amongst his fellow-prisoners. As a result of their protests, on 13 March 1978 Chan Hock Hua was transferred from Moon Crescent to Singapore General Hospital. According to the doctors there, Chan was suffering from carcinoma hepatitis (cancer of the liver), and a few days later he was discharged from hospital because of the incurable nature of his illness. On 25 March, Chan's family took him to a private hospital, but the following day he died from his illness.
The tragic case of Chan Hock Hua illustrates in a striking way the serious shortcomings of medical attention at Moon Crescent. Moreover, Chan's family have repeatedly alleged that he was suffering in fact not from cancer of the liver but from a lacerated liver caused by beatings he had received in the early years of his detention.
The death of Chan Hock Hua caused considerable unrest amongst the detainees at Moon Crescent and led to a hunger strike on 30 March 1978. Some weeks later, in May, the prison authorities announced new regulations that further limited prison rations and restricted what prisoners could receive from their families. The official reason given by the authorities for restricting the supply of food that could be brought by relatives was that the measure was being implemented to prevent jealousies among detainees by equalizing the amount allowed in for each detainee. The prison authorities had also taken to closing up the little openings at the top of the walls of the tiny cells. The reason given for blocking up this minimal source of light and ventilation was that they wanted to prevent rain from getting in through these openings. These measures rendered conditions at Moon Crescent even more oppressive. The prisoners protested at these new measures by staging sit-down protests after each family visit. Two one-day hunger strikes also took place on 6 June and 17 July to emphasize the prisoners' discontent that the authorities were not even willing to discuss the new regulations. As a punishment for these strikes, family visits were curtalied completely and several prisoners moved to the punishment wing of Changi Prison. The punishment wing at Changi Prison is above the prison bakery and ovens, and groups of prisoners from Moon Crescent were kept in solitary confinement cells here for up to five days at a time. Among the detainees transferred there were Lee Tse Tong (detained since October 1963) and Pang Hee Fat. Two prisoners, Chai Chong and Chow Tien Pao, were beaten by three warders, whom they identified as Mak Tse Wah, C P Lim and Tan Kah Beng.
In August 1978 a dozen prisoners from Moon Cresecent were transferred to Whitley Road Holding Centre, where they were placed in solitary confinement and interrogated over long periods. Among those transferred were Chieu Tuan Sin. A number of them were also beaten. Among those assaulted were Chng Min Oh, Ho Koon Kiang, Chong Ming Jee and a female detainee, Cheng Nui. Two of the detainees, Chng Ming Jee and Ho Koon Kiang, began a hunger strike which resulted in their being hospitalized after 20 days and force-fed.
The prisoners transferred to Whitley Road Holding Centre were asked to sign statements, in return for which they were promised conditional release. Both Chng Min Oh and Ho Koon Kiang repeatedly refused to do this. During interrogation they were beaten, and Chng Min Oh had a bowl of urine poured over his head. Both men were kept in solitary confinement and were not allowed to leave their cells to wash or go to the toilet. They were interrogated for long periods in air-conditioned rooms. It was as a result of this treatment that they began their hunger strike.
For over a month during the hunger strike the families of Chng Min Oh and Ho Koon Kiang were denied visits. Chng Min Oh has experienced severe difficulties with hearing as a result of beatings he received at Whitley Road and was later transferred to Changi Prison Hospital. Chng Min Oh and Ho Koon Kiang were transferred back to Moon Cresecent Detention Centre only on 21 November 1978.
The inadequacy of medical conditions at Moon Cresecent in 1978 was further higlighted by the case of Lim Hock Koon. The younger brother of Dr Lim Hock Siew (detained since 1963), Lim Hock Koon has been detained without trial since 1971 under the ISA. In May 1978 he was found to be suffering from chronic high blood pressure. Six months later Lim Hock Koon suffered a stroke resulting in partial paralysis of his body. He has since been transferred to Changi Prison Hospital. Requests by his family that he be moved to an outside hospital for adequate treatment have been ignored. Moreover, Amnesty International has received information that even in hospital Lim Hock Koon has been subjected to renewed interrrogation and pressure to consider making a confession and recantation of his political views.
In late December 1978, another group of detainees at Moon Cresecent were transferred to the Whitley Road Holding Centre. Amnesty International received information that they were held in solitary confinement and were physically assaulted during interrogation. Amongst those transferred to Whitley Road was Ho Piao. For five months, until May 1979, Ho Piao was kept in solitary confinement at Whitley Road and subjected to repeated beatings, dousings with cold water and prolonged interrogation in an air-conditioned room. In a statement to his lawyer on 11 May 1979 at the Moon Cresecent Detention Centre, Ho Piao described his interrogation as follows:
Release of long-term detainees
The release of long-term detainees is governed by Section 10 of the Internal Security Act, which states that a detention order may be suspended at any time by decision of the Minister of Home Affairs. The Minister is also empowered to impose conditions on a released detainee, such as directing that he live as a specified residence, prohibiting overseas travel, requiring the ex-detainee to notify his movements to the police, prohibiting any participation in politics, and imposing a curfew on the ex-detainee.
In addition to the restrictions on released political prisoners authorized by Section 10 of the ISA, it is also common practice for the Singapore authorities to impose two other conditions: 1) that the ex-detainee not speak of conditions during his imprisonment; 2) that he become a member of the Ex-Detainees Association, a government-sponsored front organization consisting of former political prisoners who have made 'confessions' or recanted their political views.
In practice, not all these conditions are imposed on every released political prisoner. However, all former political detainees are denied the full restoration of their civil rights and are forced to live under very stringent conditions. Thus, for example, Shamsuddin Tung, former editor of the newspaper Nanyang Siang Pau, was released from detention on 22 January 1979. Under the conditions of his release, he may not leave Singapore, move his residence, or take part in political or public activities, and he is prohibited from associating with any former political prisoner except members of the Ex-Detainees Association. As we have noted earlier, the last restriction has been used by the Singapore authorities to prevent lawyers who have been imprisoned from defending or representing persons detained under the Internal Security Act.
On 8 November 1978 the Singapore Government 'conditionally released' from Moon Crescent Detention Centre two of its longest term political detainees, Dr Lim Hock Siew and Said Zahari, both of whom had spent nearly 16 years in prison without trial under the ISA. In addition to the restrictions mentioned above, the two men were exiled to two offshore islands, Dr Lim Hock Siew to Pulau Tekong and Said Zahari to Pulau Ubin. On 22 August 1979 Said Zahari was freed from his condition of exile and has been allowed to return to his home in Singapore. Dr Lim Hock Siew remains exiled on the island of Pulau Tekong, and Amnesty International continues to work for his full and unconditional release.
- Amnesty International (1980)
-----------------------------------------------------
THE AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL REPORT
Political detention in Singapore : Prisoner case histories
The ISA as a political tool
Life in Singapore's political prisons
Surviving long-term detention without trial
Detention of journalists and lawyers under the ISA
(IV) Long term detention
Since May 1970 almost all long-term political prisoners in the Republic of Singapore have been detained in the Moon Crescent Detention Centre, a purpose-built political wing of Changi Prison, the main prison in the country. As we noted political detainees are frequently kept in solitary confinement for anything up to six months, either at Whitley Road Holding Centre or at other undisclosed Special Branch Holding Centres. Once a detainee is served with a detention order under Section 8 of the Internal Security Act, he is almost invariably transferred to the Moon Crescent Detention Centre.The number of detainees currently held at Moon Crescent is at least 50. They are kept in isolated units of three to six men with no contact between the various units. Each small block of cells is surrounded by high walls, and exercise yards are very small. The cells themselves are also small, with very poor ventilation. There is no window. The cell door, which consists of bars only, opens into the corridor which is walled to the ceilings. Hence there is no through ventilation. Detainees are not allowed to have watches, clocks or calendars in their cells.
Prisoners are allowed to receive visitors once a week and to send one letter a week. Each prison visit lasts half-an-hour. Detainee and relative are separated from each other by a thick soundproof glass partition and can communicate with each other only by telephone. Prison warders are present throughout the visit and monitor the conversation. Visits are terminated abruptly if any mention is made of prison conditions. Prisoners are allowed out of their cells only between the hours of 6.30 to 10am, 12 noon to 2pm and 4pm to 7pm. Thus prisoners are confined in their cells for 15 and a half hours a day. Food is poor and only a limited supplement is allowed from families.
Prisoners at Moon Crescent Detention Centre have extremely limited access to lawyers. In part this is a reflection of the harassment of those members of the Singapore Bar who have been courageous enough to defend political prisoners, but it is also due to restrictions in force at Moon Crescent. The lawyer usually has to state specifically the purpose of the his visit, which is always under strict supervision by the Special Branch. Not even a passing mention of conditions of detention is allowed. Frequently requests by prisoners for visits by their lawyer are turned down or ignored by the prison authorities, and letters sent by detainees to their legal advisers often never reach their destination.
From time to time prisoners at Moon Crescent Detention Centre have protested over their conditions. In particular, two long hunger strikes took place in 1971 and 1978. In both cases the prison authorities responded with considerable brutality. In addition, the prisoners have traditionally staged a 36-hour hunger strike on 2 February every year to commemorate the anniversary of 'Operation Coldstore' on 2 February 1963. Two of the detainees arrested on that day - Dr Poh Soo Kai and Ho Piao - are still detained at Moon Crescent.
The hunger strike in 1970-71 arose over an attempt by the authorities to force the prisoners to do work, which the prisoners themselves rejected categorically on the grounds that they were political detainees. The hunger strike started on 16 December 1970. After it had been in progress for five days, the authorities started force-feeding a number of the detainees, including female prisoners. Several of the female detainees at Moon Crescent at the time made sworn complaints of ill-treatment afterwards before a magistrate. Those who made complaints were Law Leh Moi, Sim Teong Hiok, Wong Kui Inn, Toh Siew Tim, Liu Ah Kiang, Lee Yuen Tueng, Goh Peng Hua and Ng Noi Kee.
There have been occasions when prisoners have staged hunger strikes individually against injustices inflicted on them. For example in June 1972 Lim Hock Koon, younger brother of Dr Lim Hock Siew, staged a hunger strike in protest against a 'confession' allegedly made by him which the Government placed in several newspapers without his compliance.
In the last two years conditions at Moon Crescent Detention Centre have deteriorated considerably and the prisoners have staged several protests against the authorities' actions. Amnesty International has long been gravely concerned about the inadequacy of medical conditions at Moon Crescent and this concern has been increased by the death in March 1978 of Chan Hock Hua, a long-term prisoner at Moon Crescent, only 20 days after his release from prison.
Chan Hock Hua was arrested on 17 February 1971. He was initially detained at Whitley Road Holding Centre but was transferred to the top floor of the Central Police Station where he was kept under solitary confinement for two years. During long periods of interrogation at these two interrogation centres, he was frequently beaten and several times immersed in cold water. As a result of this treatment, he also complained in later years of severe rheumatism. In 1973 he was transferred to Moon Crescent.
During the next four years and more at Moon Crescent, Chan Hock Hua suffered frequently from ill-health, so much so that other prisoners complained about the inadequacy of the medical treatment he was receiving and urged the authorities to consider his early release on humaitarian grounds. In early 1978 his health deteriorated rapidly and caused considerable unease amongst his fellow-prisoners. As a result of their protests, on 13 March 1978 Chan Hock Hua was transferred from Moon Crescent to Singapore General Hospital. According to the doctors there, Chan was suffering from carcinoma hepatitis (cancer of the liver), and a few days later he was discharged from hospital because of the incurable nature of his illness. On 25 March, Chan's family took him to a private hospital, but the following day he died from his illness.
The tragic case of Chan Hock Hua illustrates in a striking way the serious shortcomings of medical attention at Moon Crescent. Moreover, Chan's family have repeatedly alleged that he was suffering in fact not from cancer of the liver but from a lacerated liver caused by beatings he had received in the early years of his detention.
The death of Chan Hock Hua caused considerable unrest amongst the detainees at Moon Crescent and led to a hunger strike on 30 March 1978. Some weeks later, in May, the prison authorities announced new regulations that further limited prison rations and restricted what prisoners could receive from their families. The official reason given by the authorities for restricting the supply of food that could be brought by relatives was that the measure was being implemented to prevent jealousies among detainees by equalizing the amount allowed in for each detainee. The prison authorities had also taken to closing up the little openings at the top of the walls of the tiny cells. The reason given for blocking up this minimal source of light and ventilation was that they wanted to prevent rain from getting in through these openings. These measures rendered conditions at Moon Crescent even more oppressive. The prisoners protested at these new measures by staging sit-down protests after each family visit. Two one-day hunger strikes also took place on 6 June and 17 July to emphasize the prisoners' discontent that the authorities were not even willing to discuss the new regulations. As a punishment for these strikes, family visits were curtalied completely and several prisoners moved to the punishment wing of Changi Prison. The punishment wing at Changi Prison is above the prison bakery and ovens, and groups of prisoners from Moon Crescent were kept in solitary confinement cells here for up to five days at a time. Among the detainees transferred there were Lee Tse Tong (detained since October 1963) and Pang Hee Fat. Two prisoners, Chai Chong and Chow Tien Pao, were beaten by three warders, whom they identified as Mak Tse Wah, C P Lim and Tan Kah Beng.
In August 1978 a dozen prisoners from Moon Cresecent were transferred to Whitley Road Holding Centre, where they were placed in solitary confinement and interrogated over long periods. Among those transferred were Chieu Tuan Sin. A number of them were also beaten. Among those assaulted were Chng Min Oh, Ho Koon Kiang, Chong Ming Jee and a female detainee, Cheng Nui. Two of the detainees, Chng Ming Jee and Ho Koon Kiang, began a hunger strike which resulted in their being hospitalized after 20 days and force-fed.
The prisoners transferred to Whitley Road Holding Centre were asked to sign statements, in return for which they were promised conditional release. Both Chng Min Oh and Ho Koon Kiang repeatedly refused to do this. During interrogation they were beaten, and Chng Min Oh had a bowl of urine poured over his head. Both men were kept in solitary confinement and were not allowed to leave their cells to wash or go to the toilet. They were interrogated for long periods in air-conditioned rooms. It was as a result of this treatment that they began their hunger strike.
For over a month during the hunger strike the families of Chng Min Oh and Ho Koon Kiang were denied visits. Chng Min Oh has experienced severe difficulties with hearing as a result of beatings he received at Whitley Road and was later transferred to Changi Prison Hospital. Chng Min Oh and Ho Koon Kiang were transferred back to Moon Cresecent Detention Centre only on 21 November 1978.
The inadequacy of medical conditions at Moon Cresecent in 1978 was further higlighted by the case of Lim Hock Koon. The younger brother of Dr Lim Hock Siew (detained since 1963), Lim Hock Koon has been detained without trial since 1971 under the ISA. In May 1978 he was found to be suffering from chronic high blood pressure. Six months later Lim Hock Koon suffered a stroke resulting in partial paralysis of his body. He has since been transferred to Changi Prison Hospital. Requests by his family that he be moved to an outside hospital for adequate treatment have been ignored. Moreover, Amnesty International has received information that even in hospital Lim Hock Koon has been subjected to renewed interrrogation and pressure to consider making a confession and recantation of his political views.
In late December 1978, another group of detainees at Moon Cresecent were transferred to the Whitley Road Holding Centre. Amnesty International received information that they were held in solitary confinement and were physically assaulted during interrogation. Amongst those transferred to Whitley Road was Ho Piao. For five months, until May 1979, Ho Piao was kept in solitary confinement at Whitley Road and subjected to repeated beatings, dousings with cold water and prolonged interrogation in an air-conditioned room. In a statement to his lawyer on 11 May 1979 at the Moon Cresecent Detention Centre, Ho Piao described his interrogation as follows:
'I was transferred from Moon Cresecent Prison to Whitley Holding Centre on 27 December 1978. The authorities forbade me from bringing along my personal effects and books. This is an abnormal measure. They took me by car from the clinic to an office, from there to an interrogation room, No. C9, and finally to room E4.
For the following few days, they interrogated me continuously and put me under solitary confinment. It was like being locked in a zoo. There was a small metal cap in the door, and the prison warders occasionally kept me under surveillance through the hole covered by the metal cap. This practice wholly contravenes the position of the 'International Law Committee' (translation) on solitary confinement.
On 8 April 1979, I was taken to an underground cubicle, C9, where they switched on the air-conditioner to full blast and directed the cold blast at my body. There were four people - I would recognized them. They handcuffed my hands behind my back, removed my clothes, and poured cold water over my body. I was numb. According to my calculation, they poured water over my body 46 times. The main person was Liu (translation). I was shivering and could not talk.
After eight hours, another batch came to torture me. I would recognize them. One of the four is Quan Tek Kee (translation) who is the main person.
This time they poured water over me for 18 times. After Quan left, another batch tortured me in the same manner. This time they poured cold water on me 132 times. Although I do not know the name of the chief in this batch, I would recognized him. He slapped me and one of them slapped me four times.
This whole day I was tied to a wooden chair. They pulled my hair, pressed my nose and poured water through my nose and mouth. They pressed my throat and hit my lower abdomen three times until I suffered spasmodic pain. They then tightened their grip on my hands, and pressed their fists against my abdomen until I could hardly breathe. My body was in pain, I could neither eat nor drink. They hit my ribs with their knuckles and one of them applied a karate chop to my chest. One of them threw me on the floor. They then poured water over me and hit my head.
They said, "This is how we treat animals. For the last 16 years, you did not get such treatment. This is an introductory gesture."
Their torture made my body feel like a corpse. I could not move. They pulled me up from the floor and tied me to the chair. Another group came to torture me. I would recognize them. They used the same method. They poured water over me 64 times. This torture went on for four days. I lost count of the number of times they poured water over me. My body was drenched and shivering. They shouted in my ears and prized open my eyes. I did not sleep or eat or drink for four days.
Not long after, a person came and introduced himself as director of the Political Bureau. He wanted me to accept the conditions proposed by the authorities on 17 January 1977. Of their three conditions, the main one stipulated that I could not involve myself in nor support the activities of the Communist United Front.
I would not forgo my political beliefs, and would resolutely wait for the change of the government policies towards myself and my friends.
Before long, an officer came and lifted my chin with his shoe. I would recognize him. Another person used a plastic cup to hit my forehead. The pain in my abdomen was beyond description, and it became numb and hard. There was a pain in my chest. One of the officers said, "This man is strange, when we poured water over him, he did not shiver. But when we stopped, he started to shiver.' During the process, he struck me continuously.
Two officers came to interrogate me. I vomited continuously. I felt my abdomen and chest burning. Occasionally I moaned. I felt that I was being carried away. When I awoke, I was on the bed in a prison room, E8. My body was in pain, my limbs were numb. I wanted to shit. I banged on the door and the warder opened it.'
Release of long-term detainees
The release of long-term detainees is governed by Section 10 of the Internal Security Act, which states that a detention order may be suspended at any time by decision of the Minister of Home Affairs. The Minister is also empowered to impose conditions on a released detainee, such as directing that he live as a specified residence, prohibiting overseas travel, requiring the ex-detainee to notify his movements to the police, prohibiting any participation in politics, and imposing a curfew on the ex-detainee.
In addition to the restrictions on released political prisoners authorized by Section 10 of the ISA, it is also common practice for the Singapore authorities to impose two other conditions: 1) that the ex-detainee not speak of conditions during his imprisonment; 2) that he become a member of the Ex-Detainees Association, a government-sponsored front organization consisting of former political prisoners who have made 'confessions' or recanted their political views.
In practice, not all these conditions are imposed on every released political prisoner. However, all former political detainees are denied the full restoration of their civil rights and are forced to live under very stringent conditions. Thus, for example, Shamsuddin Tung, former editor of the newspaper Nanyang Siang Pau, was released from detention on 22 January 1979. Under the conditions of his release, he may not leave Singapore, move his residence, or take part in political or public activities, and he is prohibited from associating with any former political prisoner except members of the Ex-Detainees Association. As we have noted earlier, the last restriction has been used by the Singapore authorities to prevent lawyers who have been imprisoned from defending or representing persons detained under the Internal Security Act.
On 8 November 1978 the Singapore Government 'conditionally released' from Moon Crescent Detention Centre two of its longest term political detainees, Dr Lim Hock Siew and Said Zahari, both of whom had spent nearly 16 years in prison without trial under the ISA. In addition to the restrictions mentioned above, the two men were exiled to two offshore islands, Dr Lim Hock Siew to Pulau Tekong and Said Zahari to Pulau Ubin. On 22 August 1979 Said Zahari was freed from his condition of exile and has been allowed to return to his home in Singapore. Dr Lim Hock Siew remains exiled on the island of Pulau Tekong, and Amnesty International continues to work for his full and unconditional release.
- Amnesty International (1980)
-----------------------------------------------------
THE AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL REPORT
Political detention in Singapore : Prisoner case histories
The ISA as a political tool
Life in Singapore's political prisons
Surviving long-term detention without trial
Detention of journalists and lawyers under the ISA
Thursday, March 01, 2007
Life in Singapore's political prisons
Officially opened on 20 Mar 2002, the ISD Heritage Centre, which took three years to build, showcases the operational history of the Internal Security Department (ISD). The Centre was built as a training facility for ISD officers as well as others in the law enforcement and security community in the public service. Solitary confinement, beatings, electric shocks and threats to families - we're not talking about prisons in North Korea, or Abu Ghraib, but in Singapore's Whitley Road Detention Centre (same location as picture above) where such methods to extract confessions and recantations were allegedly used against political detainees during the 1970s, as documented by Amnesty International in a report published in 1980.
(lll) Methods of arrest, detention and interrogation
Through its Internal Security Act, the Government of the Republic of Singapore is endowed with extraordinary powers of arbitrary arrest and detention. These powers have been used extensively to detain students, workers, doctors, trade unionists, lawyers and journalists.
Arrest take place in nearly all cases late at night or early in the morning. The detained person is taken in a Black Maria to a Special Branch Holding Centre where he is kept in solitary confinement for 30 days' interrogation. The van might spend several hours circling the city before entering the interrogation centre through an underground entrance. The main Special Branch Interrogation Centre in Singapore is the Whitley Road Holding Centre. There are however other undisclosed Special Branch Centres. In most cases the interrogated person does not know where he is being held. Throughout the 30 days' interrogation the prisoner is not allowed access to a lawyer and in most cases is forbidden visits from his family contrary to the provisions of the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners. Indeed, frequently the family is not even informed of the arrest. The only human contact the detainee enjoys is with his interrogators. It is a matter of routine that all prisoners undergoing interrogation are denied such elementary necessities as spectacles, watch, soap, comb and towel.
On arrival at the centre the arrested person is forced to change into criminal prisoner's clothing and then taken directly to his cell, or in some cases, to the interrogation room. The cells are walled rooms, often underground, approximately 5' by 7' by 10' high with no windows and completely inadequate ventilation. Many ex-detainees complain of their cells being infested with mosquitoes. There are no blankets, mattress or pillows in the cell and the bed consists of a concrete coffin-like block, sometimes covered with wooden planks. Those prisoners who have been provided with blankets and mattress at a later stage of their detention complain of them being insect-infested and urine stained.
The lighting too is designed to increase the prisoner's discomfort. In most cases there is only a single 5-watt bulb kept burning 24 hours a day, so dim, in the words of one ex-detainee that 'I could barely see the lines on my hands'. In other cases a neon light is kept burning 24 hours a day in the cell. No reading material is allowed and detainees are forbidden to write to their relatives during interrogation. Even singing and speaking is forbidden in the cells. The sense of isolation and deprivation felt by the prisoner is enhanced by the Singapore Government's policy of recruiting Gurkha mercenary troops from Nepal as guards at both the Whitley Road Holding Centre and at the Moon Crescent Detention Centre. The Gurkhas speak neither Chinese, the first language of most of the detainees, nor Malay, and speak little English.
During the 30 days a detained person is held under Section 74, his routine alternates between long spells spent in solitary confinement and rigorous interrogation that may continue for as long as 72 hours, and in a few cases even longer. The interrogation is carried out by teams of interrogators who subject the detainee to a constant and merciless cross-examination that in many cases has led to mental breakdown and/or the ritual 'confession' sought by the Government. Amnesty International has established that prisoners have been subjected to serious ill-treatment and torture during this period.
The interrogation room is usually air-conditioned to a temperature of 50 degrees Fahrenheit and even higher in the hot and humid underground cells. 'X' is an ex-detainee interviewed by Amnesty International who was subjected to 72 hours' continuous interrogation after her arrest in 1977:
'The cold was indescribable. The Special Branch officers wore woollen jumpers and thick jackets. I thought I would never stop shivering. Indeed at one point I thought my heart was going to burst. By the third day, my lips had become very cracked with the cold. My watch had been taken away and I had no idea what time of day or night it was. It was like being in a nightmare. The worst thing was not knowing what would happen next.'
'I had a feeling after a while of extreme exhaustion. You were deprived of everything. Prisoners are forbidden to sing or talk in their cells. I tried to remember poems that I had learned at school and scolded myself that I could remember so few. It is the complete lack of contact with anything or anybody in the outside world that is so unbearable. I remember distinctly one unforgettable incident that I am sure kept me going during my detention. I had called the guard to ask to go to the toilet, and for some reason was taken to a different one from the usual one, which involved walking through a courtyard. As we walked through it, I could see that it was late evening and suddenly a leaf from a rain-tree blew onto the path. I remember thinking it was some kind of God-send and feeling so grateful that here was something from outside prison. I picked it up and kept it with me for the remainder of my time there. I can never convey how much that one thing meant.'
The complete isolation and deprivation that solitary confinement necessarily entail, combined with the long periods of interrogation, have an extremely debilitating effect on many prisoners. 'X' remembers again:
'The hours in the cell are very long. After a while, even the interrogation is something to look forward to because it at least breaks the monotony. It is a real effort to try and occupy your mind all the time. One tries to think of family and friends, and of songs and poems and of episodes in one's life, but after a while even this becomes difficult and pointless. There are moments when you think you will never have a creative thought about anything again.'
Other prisoners, particularly those from working class backgrounds, have been subjected to physical torture during interrogation. Beatings are all too common and a much used method of obtaining information is to continually douse the prisoner in cold water while he is being questioned in the air-conditioned interrogation room. In recent years, electric shock treatment has also been employed to torture prisoners, including female detainees. Prisoners in the Moon Crescent Detention Centre have from time to time been removed to Whitley Road Holding Centre for interrogation, where they have been subjected to ill-treatment and torture.
One case that has come to the attention of Amnesty International is that of Chai Chong, at the time of his arrest in 1976 an engineering graduate from the Singapore Polytechnic. During his interrogation at Whitley Road Holding Centre, Chai Chong was tortured by electric shock treatment as well as beaten several times. On other occasions he had filthy rags forced into his mouth and red ants placed on his mattress.
Conditions at Whitley Road Holding Centre have always been grim. The width of the cells in which the detainees are kept is only the span of a man's arms. The bed is little more than a cement block with, at best, some planks on top of it. Prisoners are allowed out of their cells for half-an-hour a day to go to the toilet and to wash.
Another detainee known to Amnesty International is Tan Kim Chong who was arrested on 9 April 1977. At the time of his arrest he was a worker in a textile factory. In clear breach of Section 74 of the ISA he was detained at Whitley Road Holding Centre in solitary confinement until 22 June 1977, more than two-and-a-half months after his arrest, before finally being moved to Moon Crescent Detention Centre. During interrogation he was frequently beaten and as a result lost several teeth. Yet another detainee arrested in 1976, Chieu Tuan Sin, also lost several teeth from beatings received during interrogation.
Ho Khoon Khoong, a political prisoner arrested in August 1976 and a construction worker by occupation, was likewise severely beaten during interrogation. He was several times doused in cold water and also had his genital organs beaten.
Pang Hee Fat, a detainee arrested in 1967, had his jaw broken as a result of beatings. He was released in 1973 but was rearrested on 14 July 1976, and was badly assaulted and ill-treated during his subsequent interrogation. He was questioned for periods of up to 12 hours at one time by a group of seven to eight Special Branch officers who assaulted him on numerous occasions. As a result he suffered bruises and vomited badly. Because of his ill-treatment he tried to commit suicide by banging his head against the cell wall. During one interrogation session at Whitley Road, Pang Hee Fat's wife, Wong Kui Inn, also a detainee, was brought in to see her husband being beaten. Wong Kui Inn was herself badly treated during interrogation and was subjected to dousing in cold water and electric shocks.
Some prisoners, as we have already indicated, have spent extremely long periods in solitary confinement. The lawyer, T T Rajah, was arrested on 20 June 1974 and spent the next six months in solitary confinement. He was taken from his home at 4 am by police car to the Central Police Station and placed in a cell. For the first 24 hours he received no food and although he is diabetic, his medication was taken away from him. The following day he was taken to Whitley Road Holding Centre where he was held in solitary confinement until December 1974. His cell measured only 6' x 8' x 12'. Ventilation was poor and there were no toilet facilities. He was not allowed to shower for the first ten days of his imprisonment there nor was he allowed exercise for the first months of his imprisonment. Periods of six months in solitary confinement after arrest are not unusual. Another known case is that of Chang Min Oh arrested on 3 August 1970. At the time of his arrest an active trade unionist and Chairman of the Goldsmiths' Association, Chng Min Oh, like T T Rajah, was imprisoned in solitary confinement at Whitley Road.
Solitary confinement and physical and psychological torture are not the only rigours that political prisoners in Singapore are forced to undergo. Threats are also made regarding prisoners' families and in a number of cases the wives of political detainees have been taken into custody. One example is the circumstances surrounding the arrest of Dr Poh Soo Kai.
Dr Poh Soo Kai is a former leader of the Barisan Sosialis (Socialist Front) who was detained without trial for ten years under the ISA, from 1963 to 1973. On 4 June 1976 he was rearrested by the Singapore Special Branch. His recorded statement follows:
'I left my house on 4.6.76 morning and as I was about to enter my car, a Chinese man who had parked his car sounded his horn. Another Chinese man came, showed me his warrant card and told me I was under arrest. No reasons were given and I did not ask for reasons. I had assumed that they were arresting me because of the publicity given in the papers about me in connection with the expulsion of the PAP from the Socialist International.
Then my house was searched. There was a large number of men who searched the place. They seized some articles from the house including letters, journals etc.
Then I was taken to the clinic. There a search was made and they took away some magazines including 'Problems of Communism' which is an American State Department publication. I was taken by car from the clinic blindfolded. I was taken for an approximately 10-minute drive and then taken to a cell. I did not know where it was.
I was left alone for the rest of the day after I had been interrogated for about two hours.
Early next morning I was awakened about 6.00 am and after a wash I was subjected to day-long interrogation until midnight. My interrogators worked in three shifts. The room was air-conditioned and the cold was quite uncomfortable. This routine had been a daily affair.
They have taken away my watch, my spectacles and I am not given reading materials.'
On 3 July 1976, after four weeks' interrogation from 8 am to 12 midnight, Dr Poh Soo Kai was served with a detention order alleging he supported 'Communist Front activities' and was transferred to Moon Crescent Detention Centre, where he remains in detention. Throughout his four weeks' interrogation Dr Poh Soo Kai was denied access to a lawyer. Dr Poh Soo Kai has now spent 14 of the last 17 years in prison without trial.
On 19 February 1977 Dr Poh Soo Kai's wife, Grace Poh, was also arrested by the Special Branch and taken blindfolded to the Whitley Road Holding Centre. Mrs Poh was detained in solitary confinement for 27 days at Whitley Road before being released. During this period she was questioned and interrogated, for long periods of several days in one session, by teams of Special Branch officers in air-conditioned rooms. At the same time Dr Poh Soo Kai, who was being held at Moon Crescent Detention Centre, was informed of his wife's arrest and detention. This was done in such a manner as to cause Dr Poh great distress and concern for his wife's fate with the aim of obtaining a 'confession' from him and a recantation of his political views. Mrs Poh, for her part, had never been active in politics. Her arrest was not publicly reported by the Government.
Such practices are not unusual in Singapore. We have already cited the case of detainee Pang Hee Fat, who was beaten in the presence of his wife Wong Kui Inn. Similar cases have also come to the attention of Amnesty International. In March 1977 Francis Khoo, a Singapore lawyer who had defended one of the accused in the Tan Wah Piow trial, left Singapore after the Special Branch had arrested four lawyers, all of whom, like Francis Khoo, had been active in human rights work. After he left the Republic, his wife, Dr Ang Swee Chai, was arrested at her hospital by ten Special Branch officers and subjected to rigorous interrogation at Whitley Road Holding Centre. She was later released and allowed to join her husband in England.
The Singapore security police, the Special Branch, have combined a number of the above techniques - physical and psychological torture, solitary confinement and threats to families - to obtain 'confessions' and 'recantations' from prisoners in recent years. Amnesty International believes the responsibility for proving the guilt of any individual lies with the Government, in accordance with generally accepted legal procedures. The use of these 'confessions', obtained by methods described above, can in no way be accepted as justification for preventive detention.
The Singapore Government has in recent years established as a virtual precondition for release that a 'confession' be made by the detainee, often though the Government-controlled media. These 'confessions' purport to supplement and justify the accusations and allegations the Government has made against the detainee, including statements relating to supposed illegal and subversive activities. The 'confessions' often implicate detainees' friends and associates, are are used by the Singapore Government as a pretext to arrest these people. Moreover they are used by the Government to justify its widespread use of preventive detention under the Internal Security Act.
In May 1976 the Singapore Government announced that it had arrested some 50 'communist suspects' since January that year. This announcement coincided with a 'confession' of involvement in alleged underground communist activities made on Singapore television by Madam Goh Lay Kuan, a well-known ballet teacher. The 'confession' of Madam Goh was used by the Singapore Government to justify its contention of a 'communist threat' to the island republic.
This 'confession' was made only days before the Socialist International was due to meet in London to discuss accusations from other member parties that Singapore was violating human rights by detaining political prisoners without trial.
After Singapore's People's Action Party (PAP) withdrew from the Socialist International, more arrests and 'confessions' followed. Many of those arrested were journalists, others were lawyers, students and businessmen. They were detained under the ISA until they agreed to make public confessions. During the televised proceedings, they stated that they were members of Communist or Marxist groupings and had worked against the best interests of the Republic but were now willing to denounce their past beliefs and actions. They were then cross-examined by Government selected inquisitors.
Such 'confessions' must be seen in the context of the threat of lifetime in detention without trial, the pressures of solitary confinement, physical and psychological torture and in some cases threats to families. It is in this context that one must evaluate 'confessions' made by well-known journalists of prominent newspapers such as the Financial Times (London) and the Far Eastern Economic Review, which we will examine in part five.
- Amnesty International (1980)
-----------------------------------------------------
THE AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL REPORT
Political detention in Singapore : Prisoner case histories
The ISA as a political tool
Life in Singapore's political prisons
Surviving long-term detention without trial
Detention of journalists and lawyers under the ISA
Friday, February 23, 2007
The ISA as a political tool
The second instalment of a five part excerpt from an Amnesty International report, first published in 1980.
(ll) A political background to the use of the ISA
Since 1959 Singapore has been governed by the People's Action Party (PAP) led by the Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew. The People's Action Party, founded in 1954, was a broad-based political party espousing a socialist program with backing from the mass of largely Chinese-speaking unionized labour in Singapore, but also from the English-educated Singapore Chinese intelligentsia. This coalition was however always fragile and tensions occurred between the two wings of the party, particularly as the British, who were responsible for internal security until 1963, did not hesitate to detain without trial the more militant and left-wing nationalists within the PAP. In 1959 the PAP won the general elections and Lee Kuan Yew became Prime Minister.
Two years later, in 1961, the left-wing of the People's Action Party, led by Lim Chin Siong, broke away, and established its own party, the Barisan Sosialis (Socialist Front). The Singapore government has repeatedly alleged that those who broke away were pro-communist but it is of interest to note that 80% of the PAP membership are estimated to have left the party at this time.* Soon after the split an agreement was announced, in August 1961, for the future merger of Singapore and Malaya. The Barisan Sosialis opposed merger and sought to test its strength in elections to be held in 1963.
( * ref. Pang Cheng Lian, Singapore's People's Action Party, Oxford University Press, Singapore 1971, pp 14-15; T J S George, Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore, Andre Deutsch, 1973, London, pp 62-63)
On the morning of 2 February 1963, however, the Singapore security authorities arrested 133 persons who were active in the anti-government opposition and who opposed merger with Malaya. Among those arrested were leaders of the Barisan Sosialis including Lim Chin Siong and Dr Lim Hock Siew as well as newspaper editors, trade unionists and university students. Despite this the Barisan was still able to obtain 33.5% of the votes in the 1963 elections, against the PAP's 46.9%.
Singapore's participation in the Federation of Malaysia was shortlived, as indeed the Barisan Sosialis leaders predicted, and in August 1965 Singapore left the Federation to become an independent republic. The Barisan leaders and other opposition figures arrested in 'Operation Coldstore' were however to remain in detention without trial under the Internal Security Act for many years to come. The Barisan leader, Lim Chin Siong, was released in 1969, after spending many years in solitary confinement. Reportedly administered drugs which intensified depression, Lim Chin Siong left prison and went into exile in England.
Whilst the bulk of the 'Coldstore' detainees were released in the late 60s and early 1970s, five men remained in prison in 1978 who had been arrested in 1963. The five were Dr Lim Hock Siew, Dr Poh Soo Kai, Lee Tse Tong, Ho Piao and Said Zahari. All five have consistently refused to make the ritual 'confession' that the Singapore government insists upon as a precondition of their release. One of the five, Dr Poh Soo Kai, was released in November 1973 only to be rearrested in June 1976. Two others however, Dr Lim Hock Siew and Said Zahari, former editor of the Malay-language newspaper, Utusan Melayu, were unexpectedly conditionally released on 18 November 1978 and exiled respectively to the offshore islands of Pulau Tekong Besar and Pulau Ubin. In August 1979 Said Zahari was released unconditionally and allowed to return to his home in Singapore. Meanwhile, Dr Poh Soo Kai, Ho Piao and Lee Tse Tong remain incarcerated in Moon Crescent Detention Centre.
Following the establishment of an independent Republic of Singapore on 9 August 1965 Singapore embarked upon an ambitious program of economic development which has brought considerable benefits and achievements to the country. It is internationally recognized that living standards in Singapore are second to Japan in Asia. The Republic's housing and welfare policies have likewise gained widespread international praise. At the same time however advances on the social side have been accompanied by rigorous internal political repression that has led not only to the virtual elimination of opposition political parties but also the emasculation of any critical thought in the newspapers, trade unions, universities and legal profession.
The People's Action Party, which has now governed the country for twenty years, has not faced any effective political challenge since the Barisan Sosialis' defeat in the 1963 elections. With the Barisan Sosialis enfeebled by the detention and exile of its leaders, no other political party has emerged to take its place. In the last three general elections the PAP has captured all the seats in the Singapore parliament.
The PAP government has rigorously harassed all dissent and any potential opposition grouping in Singapore. One of the chief instruments of this policy has been the Internal Security Act. From 1963 to the early 1970s the number of political prisoners in Singapore fluctuated between a maximum of 250 and a minimum of 70. In the years 1963-1965, arrests far exceeded releases, whereas in the late 1960s this pattern was reversed. New waves if arrests occurred in 1970 and in the period 1974-1976.
The approach to preventive detention adopted the Government of Singapore is both selective and sophisticated. When the Government has felt that it faced growing criticism among certain circles, it has often reacted by arresting prominent individuals in those fields. A variety of techniques are then employed to extract 'confessions' designed primarily to discredit those individuals. A number of illustrative cases may be cited.
T T Rajah is a well-known Singapore lawyer who was active for many years as one of the few members of the local Bar willing to defend political prisoners. In particularly, T T Rajah was prominent in the defence of political prisoners at Moon Crescent who went on hunger strike in 1970-1971. The detainees had been told by the authorities that they had to work, but the prisoners rejected this on the grounds that it was incompatible with their status as political prisoners. Several of them were beaten and they were force-fed with their hands tied behind their backs. T T Rajah was not allowed access to them and he therefore brought court proceedings by way of mandamus and took out summonses against individual Special Branch and prison officials who had allegedly beaten prisoners. It was the first time ever that such summonses had been issued. However soon after the court proceedings began disciplinary proceedings were brought against T T Rajah by the Attorney-General on the grounds of contempt of court. Several months later, on 20 June 1974, T T Rajah was arrested and detained for eighteen months without his charge or trial under the Internal Security Act. Following his release on 12 December 1975 he has been prevented from having any professional contact with political prisoners as one of the conditions of his release.
It is not surprising, given the facts in the T T Rajah case, that the Singapore Bar Association, unlike its counter-part in neighbouring Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines, has not been vocal in the defence of human rights. Likewise the arrest and harassment of many newspaper publishers, editors and editors such as Lee Eu Seng, Lee Mau Seng, Shamsuddin Tung, Arun Senkuttuvan and Ho Kwon Ping has succeeded in achieving the Government's aim of purging the press of critical voices.
The Singapore Government has also tried to ensure that the universities not become centres of dissent. Until 1978, students wishing to enter university in Singapore were required to pass a political vetting procedure in order to obtain a 'suitability certificate'. Successive generations of Singapore student leaders have found themselves subjected to the rigours of imprisonment. Tan Kim Oh, a Nanyang University student who was one of the leading opponents of the introduction of these procedures, has been detained under the Internal Security Act since 1966. In 1974, Tan Wah Piow, President of the University of Singapore Students' Union, was sentenced to one year's imprisonment on rioting charges. In April 1979, Tan Teng Lim, a lecturer, and eight other past and present members of the Singapore Chinese Society were arrested. All except Tan were reported released in June 1979 after they had admitted involvement in pro-communist activities and 'recanted'. Tan Teng Lim, too, 'confessed' to links with the Marxist-Leninist faction of the Communist Party of Malaya but continued to be held in detention after his 'confession'.
In short, the very groups that have been forthright in public criticism of human rights violations in other Southeast Asian countries - the legal and journalistic professions, the churches and universities - have in the case of Singapore been reduced to the role of acquiescent observers.
Arrests in 1976/1977 of persons who had been critical of government policy regarding human rights has had the added effect of further intimidating public opinion in this field. In May 1976 the Government announced that 50 alleged communist suspects had been arrested in recent months. The announcement was made only days before the Socialist International was to meet in London to discuss a motion by the Dutch Labour Party that the People's Action Party should be expelled. When the Dutch Social Democrats refused to withdraw their motion, the PAP announced its departure from the Socialist International. More arrests followed in Singapore of persons alleged to be supporting the 'Eurocommunist plot' against the Republic. Foremost amongst those arrested was Dr Poh Soo Kai, a former Barisan Sosialis leader who had already spent ten years in prison without trial from 1963 to 1973.
The following year, 1977, saw further arrests connected with the PAP's withdrawal from the Socialist International. These started with that of G Raman, one of the few Singapore lawyers who had taken up the cases of political detainees. In a 'confession' made within days of his arrest, Mr Raman implicated many others in alleged plots against the Government including Dr Poh Soo Kai. Other arrests followed. 'Confessions' were made by a number of those detained, but it should be noted that none of these 'confessions' contained any substantive evidence of a 'communist conspiracy'. Indeed, an allegation made in G Raman's 'confession' that Dr Poh Soo Kai had helped an alleged terrorist, was later withdrawn. Nevertheless, Dr Poh Soo Kai remains in detention held without charge or trial.
- Amnesty International (1980)
__________________________________
THE AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL REPORT
Political detention in Singapore : Prisoner case histories
The ISA as a political tool
Life in Singapore's political prisons
Surviving long-term detention without trial
Detention of journalists and lawyers under the ISA
(ll) A political background to the use of the ISA
Since 1959 Singapore has been governed by the People's Action Party (PAP) led by the Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew. The People's Action Party, founded in 1954, was a broad-based political party espousing a socialist program with backing from the mass of largely Chinese-speaking unionized labour in Singapore, but also from the English-educated Singapore Chinese intelligentsia. This coalition was however always fragile and tensions occurred between the two wings of the party, particularly as the British, who were responsible for internal security until 1963, did not hesitate to detain without trial the more militant and left-wing nationalists within the PAP. In 1959 the PAP won the general elections and Lee Kuan Yew became Prime Minister.
Two years later, in 1961, the left-wing of the People's Action Party, led by Lim Chin Siong, broke away, and established its own party, the Barisan Sosialis (Socialist Front). The Singapore government has repeatedly alleged that those who broke away were pro-communist but it is of interest to note that 80% of the PAP membership are estimated to have left the party at this time.* Soon after the split an agreement was announced, in August 1961, for the future merger of Singapore and Malaya. The Barisan Sosialis opposed merger and sought to test its strength in elections to be held in 1963.( * ref. Pang Cheng Lian, Singapore's People's Action Party, Oxford University Press, Singapore 1971, pp 14-15; T J S George, Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore, Andre Deutsch, 1973, London, pp 62-63)
On the morning of 2 February 1963, however, the Singapore security authorities arrested 133 persons who were active in the anti-government opposition and who opposed merger with Malaya. Among those arrested were leaders of the Barisan Sosialis including Lim Chin Siong and Dr Lim Hock Siew as well as newspaper editors, trade unionists and university students. Despite this the Barisan was still able to obtain 33.5% of the votes in the 1963 elections, against the PAP's 46.9%.
Singapore's participation in the Federation of Malaysia was shortlived, as indeed the Barisan Sosialis leaders predicted, and in August 1965 Singapore left the Federation to become an independent republic. The Barisan leaders and other opposition figures arrested in 'Operation Coldstore' were however to remain in detention without trial under the Internal Security Act for many years to come. The Barisan leader, Lim Chin Siong, was released in 1969, after spending many years in solitary confinement. Reportedly administered drugs which intensified depression, Lim Chin Siong left prison and went into exile in England.
Whilst the bulk of the 'Coldstore' detainees were released in the late 60s and early 1970s, five men remained in prison in 1978 who had been arrested in 1963. The five were Dr Lim Hock Siew, Dr Poh Soo Kai, Lee Tse Tong, Ho Piao and Said Zahari. All five have consistently refused to make the ritual 'confession' that the Singapore government insists upon as a precondition of their release. One of the five, Dr Poh Soo Kai, was released in November 1973 only to be rearrested in June 1976. Two others however, Dr Lim Hock Siew and Said Zahari, former editor of the Malay-language newspaper, Utusan Melayu, were unexpectedly conditionally released on 18 November 1978 and exiled respectively to the offshore islands of Pulau Tekong Besar and Pulau Ubin. In August 1979 Said Zahari was released unconditionally and allowed to return to his home in Singapore. Meanwhile, Dr Poh Soo Kai, Ho Piao and Lee Tse Tong remain incarcerated in Moon Crescent Detention Centre.
Following the establishment of an independent Republic of Singapore on 9 August 1965 Singapore embarked upon an ambitious program of economic development which has brought considerable benefits and achievements to the country. It is internationally recognized that living standards in Singapore are second to Japan in Asia. The Republic's housing and welfare policies have likewise gained widespread international praise. At the same time however advances on the social side have been accompanied by rigorous internal political repression that has led not only to the virtual elimination of opposition political parties but also the emasculation of any critical thought in the newspapers, trade unions, universities and legal profession.
The People's Action Party, which has now governed the country for twenty years, has not faced any effective political challenge since the Barisan Sosialis' defeat in the 1963 elections. With the Barisan Sosialis enfeebled by the detention and exile of its leaders, no other political party has emerged to take its place. In the last three general elections the PAP has captured all the seats in the Singapore parliament.
The PAP government has rigorously harassed all dissent and any potential opposition grouping in Singapore. One of the chief instruments of this policy has been the Internal Security Act. From 1963 to the early 1970s the number of political prisoners in Singapore fluctuated between a maximum of 250 and a minimum of 70. In the years 1963-1965, arrests far exceeded releases, whereas in the late 1960s this pattern was reversed. New waves if arrests occurred in 1970 and in the period 1974-1976.
The approach to preventive detention adopted the Government of Singapore is both selective and sophisticated. When the Government has felt that it faced growing criticism among certain circles, it has often reacted by arresting prominent individuals in those fields. A variety of techniques are then employed to extract 'confessions' designed primarily to discredit those individuals. A number of illustrative cases may be cited.
T T Rajah is a well-known Singapore lawyer who was active for many years as one of the few members of the local Bar willing to defend political prisoners. In particularly, T T Rajah was prominent in the defence of political prisoners at Moon Crescent who went on hunger strike in 1970-1971. The detainees had been told by the authorities that they had to work, but the prisoners rejected this on the grounds that it was incompatible with their status as political prisoners. Several of them were beaten and they were force-fed with their hands tied behind their backs. T T Rajah was not allowed access to them and he therefore brought court proceedings by way of mandamus and took out summonses against individual Special Branch and prison officials who had allegedly beaten prisoners. It was the first time ever that such summonses had been issued. However soon after the court proceedings began disciplinary proceedings were brought against T T Rajah by the Attorney-General on the grounds of contempt of court. Several months later, on 20 June 1974, T T Rajah was arrested and detained for eighteen months without his charge or trial under the Internal Security Act. Following his release on 12 December 1975 he has been prevented from having any professional contact with political prisoners as one of the conditions of his release.
It is not surprising, given the facts in the T T Rajah case, that the Singapore Bar Association, unlike its counter-part in neighbouring Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines, has not been vocal in the defence of human rights. Likewise the arrest and harassment of many newspaper publishers, editors and editors such as Lee Eu Seng, Lee Mau Seng, Shamsuddin Tung, Arun Senkuttuvan and Ho Kwon Ping has succeeded in achieving the Government's aim of purging the press of critical voices.
The Singapore Government has also tried to ensure that the universities not become centres of dissent. Until 1978, students wishing to enter university in Singapore were required to pass a political vetting procedure in order to obtain a 'suitability certificate'. Successive generations of Singapore student leaders have found themselves subjected to the rigours of imprisonment. Tan Kim Oh, a Nanyang University student who was one of the leading opponents of the introduction of these procedures, has been detained under the Internal Security Act since 1966. In 1974, Tan Wah Piow, President of the University of Singapore Students' Union, was sentenced to one year's imprisonment on rioting charges. In April 1979, Tan Teng Lim, a lecturer, and eight other past and present members of the Singapore Chinese Society were arrested. All except Tan were reported released in June 1979 after they had admitted involvement in pro-communist activities and 'recanted'. Tan Teng Lim, too, 'confessed' to links with the Marxist-Leninist faction of the Communist Party of Malaya but continued to be held in detention after his 'confession'.
In short, the very groups that have been forthright in public criticism of human rights violations in other Southeast Asian countries - the legal and journalistic professions, the churches and universities - have in the case of Singapore been reduced to the role of acquiescent observers.
Arrests in 1976/1977 of persons who had been critical of government policy regarding human rights has had the added effect of further intimidating public opinion in this field. In May 1976 the Government announced that 50 alleged communist suspects had been arrested in recent months. The announcement was made only days before the Socialist International was to meet in London to discuss a motion by the Dutch Labour Party that the People's Action Party should be expelled. When the Dutch Social Democrats refused to withdraw their motion, the PAP announced its departure from the Socialist International. More arrests followed in Singapore of persons alleged to be supporting the 'Eurocommunist plot' against the Republic. Foremost amongst those arrested was Dr Poh Soo Kai, a former Barisan Sosialis leader who had already spent ten years in prison without trial from 1963 to 1973.
The following year, 1977, saw further arrests connected with the PAP's withdrawal from the Socialist International. These started with that of G Raman, one of the few Singapore lawyers who had taken up the cases of political detainees. In a 'confession' made within days of his arrest, Mr Raman implicated many others in alleged plots against the Government including Dr Poh Soo Kai. Other arrests followed. 'Confessions' were made by a number of those detained, but it should be noted that none of these 'confessions' contained any substantive evidence of a 'communist conspiracy'. Indeed, an allegation made in G Raman's 'confession' that Dr Poh Soo Kai had helped an alleged terrorist, was later withdrawn. Nevertheless, Dr Poh Soo Kai remains in detention held without charge or trial.
- Amnesty International (1980)
__________________________________
THE AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL REPORT
Political detention in Singapore : Prisoner case histories
The ISA as a political tool
Life in Singapore's political prisons
Surviving long-term detention without trial
Detention of journalists and lawyers under the ISA
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Toronto-Singapore Film Festival
Go to http://www.tsff.org/
Some enterprising Singaporeans in Toronto have started a film festival to showcase Singaporean works there. And I don't think they are doing it on the behest of any government initiative. Just read the synopses of these two films (I swear I have no hand in the writings).
.jpg)
Speakers Cornered
North American Premiere
2006 : 27 minutes, English and Mandarin (English Subtitles)
Directed by Martyn See
Shot over several days in September 2006, when Singapore hosted the World Bank and International Monetary Fund Annual Meetings, Speakers Cornered captures the thwarted attempts of nonviolence activists to protest peacefully at Speakers' Corner, a park designated for those with the urge to mount their soapboxes - though, as per the Singaporean way, not without first securing police blessing. In Martyn See's latest film, the park's legendary status as a white elephant without clothes is cast in cold hard stone. Living up to its title, its seventeen chapters reveal that to be shackled in Singapore is no metaphor. Stunning and yet strangely amusing, the litany of oppressions catalogued in Speakers Cornered are nothing if not an embarrassment to Singapore. Singapore's authorities have seen the events that unfolded that week. Why shouldn't anyone else?
Zahari's 17 Years
North American Premiere
2006 : 49 minutes, English and Mandarin (English Subtitles)
Directed by Martyn See
Martyn See's second film, 78-year-old self-exiled journalist, poet and author Said Zahari reflects candidly on his seventeen years in detention without trial - the first time a Singaporean has spoken about the experience on film. In 1963, two years before Singapore's independence, security police detained about a hundred opposition leaders, political activists and trade unionists for alleged leftist and communist activities. The new leader of an opposition party at the time, Said was convinced that his arrest was temporary, given the backdrop of Singapore's turbulent struggle for sovereignty. He was wrong, forces having conspired against him. Look out for Lee Kuan Yew in a verbal cameo as a "political coward" whose founding father status Said categorically denounces. A trenchant and humbling encounter, Zahari's 17 Years is also one of the program's most poignant films.
------------------------------------------------------
According to its website, there will be apreview highlights of the 1st Toronto-Singapore Film Festival in Singapore on Friday, February 23, 2007 (9pm) and
Saturday, February 24, 2007 (7pm)
Venue: Pitch Black, 63 Haji Lane (Singapore)
Tickets: S$8
Call Pitch Black at 63923457 or email crew@pitchblack.com.
Tickets will also be sold at the door. Hurry, seating is limited!
Filmmakers will be in attendance on both nights.
Some enterprising Singaporeans in Toronto have started a film festival to showcase Singaporean works there. And I don't think they are doing it on the behest of any government initiative. Just read the synopses of these two films (I swear I have no hand in the writings).
.jpg)
Speakers Cornered North American Premiere
2006 : 27 minutes, English and Mandarin (English Subtitles)
Directed by Martyn See
Shot over several days in September 2006, when Singapore hosted the World Bank and International Monetary Fund Annual Meetings, Speakers Cornered captures the thwarted attempts of nonviolence activists to protest peacefully at Speakers' Corner, a park designated for those with the urge to mount their soapboxes - though, as per the Singaporean way, not without first securing police blessing. In Martyn See's latest film, the park's legendary status as a white elephant without clothes is cast in cold hard stone. Living up to its title, its seventeen chapters reveal that to be shackled in Singapore is no metaphor. Stunning and yet strangely amusing, the litany of oppressions catalogued in Speakers Cornered are nothing if not an embarrassment to Singapore. Singapore's authorities have seen the events that unfolded that week. Why shouldn't anyone else?
Zahari's 17 Years North American Premiere
2006 : 49 minutes, English and Mandarin (English Subtitles)
Directed by Martyn See
Martyn See's second film, 78-year-old self-exiled journalist, poet and author Said Zahari reflects candidly on his seventeen years in detention without trial - the first time a Singaporean has spoken about the experience on film. In 1963, two years before Singapore's independence, security police detained about a hundred opposition leaders, political activists and trade unionists for alleged leftist and communist activities. The new leader of an opposition party at the time, Said was convinced that his arrest was temporary, given the backdrop of Singapore's turbulent struggle for sovereignty. He was wrong, forces having conspired against him. Look out for Lee Kuan Yew in a verbal cameo as a "political coward" whose founding father status Said categorically denounces. A trenchant and humbling encounter, Zahari's 17 Years is also one of the program's most poignant films.
------------------------------------------------------
According to its website, there will be a
Saturday, February 24, 2007 (7pm)
Venue: Pitch Black, 63 Haji Lane (Singapore)
Tickets: S$8
Call Pitch Black at 63923457 or email crew@pitchblack.com.
Tickets will also be sold at the door. Hurry, seating is limited!
Filmmakers will be in attendance on both nights.
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Political detention in Singapore : Prisoner case histories
Last week marked the closure of yet another untold chapter in Singapore's dark history of arbitrary detentions without trial. Ho Toon Chin, alias Ho Piao, a former detainee under the Internal Security Act (ISA), passed away last Tuesday in London from a stroke at the age of 70. Almost exactly 44 years ago to that day, Ho was arrested along with over a hundred activists, unionists and student leaders in a security swoop codenamed Operation Coldstore. Obstensibly touted as an anti-Communist sting, the mass arrests effectively decimated the entire leadership of the political opposition, particularly of the Barisan Sosialis, a breakaway faction of the ruling People's Ruling Party.
Ho was eventually released - 18 years later - making him the second longest-held political prisoner after Chia Thye Poh. Others who were detained for 17 years or more include Dr Lim Hock Siew, Lee Tse Tong, Said Zahari and Dr Poh Soo Kai.
Despite a recent assurance, no doubt a well-intentioned one, by a media academic that the ISA is unlikely to be used against political dissidents, the existence of the Act itself casts a long shadow of fear among Singaporeans. Today, very little information is publicly made available about past detentions. Even the website of the Internal Security Department omits any mention of Operation Coldstore, Operation Spectrum or any such politically-motivated arrests carried out over the years. Only two ex-detainees, Said Zahari and Francis Seow, have written autobiographies.
Upon further enquiries, however, I have manage to unearth a rare and rather comprehensive report, published in 1980, by an Amnesty International Mission to Singapore. As the report is 60 pages long and only available on hard copy, I will attempt to reproduce major excerpts of it here, in five parts.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Report of an Amnesty International Mission to Singapore30 November to 5 December 1978
ISBN : 0 86210 002 X
First published January 1980Published by Amnesty International Publications
Part l : Introduction and a Selection of Prisoner Case Histories
This report is based on the findings of an Amnesty International mission which visited the Republic of Singapore from 30 November to 5 December 1978. The delegation consisted of an American lawyer who is a member of the National Advisory Council of Amnesty International's United States Section, Thomas C Jones, and a member of Amnesty International's Asia Research Department, Michael C Williams. This was the first official Amnesty International delegation to the country, but the organization has been concerned for many years with serious human rights violations in Singapore.
The focus of Amnesty International's concern regarding human rights violations in the Republic of Singapore since its independence in 1963 has been the widespread use made by the Government of the powers of detention without trial invested in it by the Internal Security Act (ISA) and the Banishment Act. Derived from the British colonial legislation, the two Acts have been used over the years to systematically curb dissent in Singapore.
Under the ISA and the Banishment Act, detained persons have no recourse to legal safeguards nor any opportunity to question the allegations and accusations levelled against them by the authorities. Furthermore, detainees can be imprisoned indefinitely under the ISA which allows for detention orders to be renewed at the discretion of the Minister of Home Affairs.
At least three men - Dr Lim Hock Siew (now exiled on the island of Pulau Tekong Besar), Ho Piao and Lee Tse Tong (both detained at Moon Crescent Detention Centre) - have been in detention without trial for 17 years, ie throughout the whole period of the existence of an independent Singapore and are now among the longest term political prisoners in the world. On 18 November 1978, Dr Lim Hock Siew and Said Zahari (former newspaper editor and poet) were conditionally released and sent into exile to the islands of Pulau Tekong Besar and Pulau Ubin respectively. In August 1979 Said Zahari was unconditionally released. Ho Piao remains imprisoned however. Amnesty International estimates that there are at least 50 persons are presently detained under the ISA at Moon Crescent Detention Centre while an unknown number of persons are detained at the Whitley Road Holding Centre, the main Special Branch interrogation centre in Singapore.
Although the number of persons held in preventive detention may seem small in comparison with many Asian countries, the Singapore authorities have used preventive detention ever since independence on a selective basis as a means of repressing and discouraging legitimate, non-violent opposition in Singapore. When the Government has felt that it faced growing criticism from influential circles, such as lawyers, journalists or students, it has often reacted by arresting and harassing individual prominent in those fields, and so reduced them to the role of acquiescent observers.
Amnesty International believes that the Singapore Government has employed a variety of techniques to induce mental and spiritual collapse, including the denial of medication to persons suffering from diabetes and epilepsy, with the aim of extracting self-incriminating statements which can be potrayed as 'confessions'. It is common practice in Singapore for the authorities to have broadcast on television interviews with or statements from political prisoners purporting to be 'confessions'. Such televised interrogations are, in the view of Amnesty International, never a substitute for fair, open trial. The practice of imputing guilt by such means, through media controlled by the Government instead of establishing the validity of evidence through normal legal procedures, violates elementary rules of law.
The attitude of the Government of the Republic of Singapore to direct approaches from Amnesty International has been generally unresponsive. In advance of the mission of November-December 1978, Amnesty International wrote to the Government of Singapore on 9 October 1978 requesting that its delegates meet the Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, and the Minister of Home Affairs, Mr Chua Sian Chin. Moreover, while they were in Singapore, the delegates made efforts to contact the Office of the Prime Minister and the office of the Minister of Home Affairs. The Singapore authorities refused all contact with the Amnesty International delegation. Requests to visit detention facilities and interview prisoners were also denied.
In February 1976, Amnesty International published a Briefing Paper on Singapore, a second edition of which was published in January 1978. In an interview shortly after the publication of the second edition, Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew did not deny either that self-incriminating statements were required of detainees as a condition for their release or that extreme pressure was exerted in the process of obtaining such statements. Referring to five long-term detainees mentioned by name in the Briefing Paper, Mr Lee said they 'can walk out of detention at any time - and the others, too - by signing a simple undertaking that they will not in future, either directly or indirectly, help the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) or any of its auxiliary organizations to overthrow the constitutionally-elected Government of Singapore'. Later in the same interview, Mr Lee acknowledged: 'all interrogations must wear down resistance of (detainees) by sustained psychological pressure, including physical fatigue, to get them to give leads to the next links in a well-established underground movement'. (Far Eastern Economic Review, 24.2.78)
The Singapore Government has repeatedly justified its use of preventive detention under the ISA and the Banishment Act by referring to alleged security threats to the Republic, in particular from the illegal Malayan Communist Party (MCP).
The MCP staged an insurrection against the British colonial government in 1948, commonly referred to as 'The Emergency'. This insurrection persisted for many years but came to an end after 1960. Singapore itself, since its independence in 1963, has faced no serious internal social unrest, apart from racial disturbances in 1964 and, to the knowledge of Amnesty International, none of those presently detained under the ISA was arrested in connection with these disturbances.
The Government of Singapore has kept in preventive detention individuals whose connection or links with terrorism or the Malayan Communist Party has been asserted but has never been proven in an open court. The Singapore Government has resorted to wide powers of detention under the ISA without a State of Emergency being in force. Detainees have been subjected to physical and psychological ill-treatment, including torture.
A selection of prisoner case histories (1980)
Ho Piao (Ho Toon Chin)
Ho Piao was arrested on 2 February 1963 in 'Operation Coldstore'. At that time, he was Secretary of the now banned National Seamen's Union. He is the only 'Operation Coldstore' detainee to have been held continuously since 1963 and remains in prison today.
In 1967, the release of Ho Piao and four other detainees was ordered by the High Court after they made a successful application for a writ of habeas corpus. The five were immediately rearrested.
During his detention, Ho Piao has undergone long periods of solitary confinement and has been subjected to a rigorous interrogation including beatings. In 1970-1971 he took part in a 100-day hunger strike in protest against attempts by the authorities to compel political prisoners to undertake forced labour. In August 1978, he was one of 12 prisoners removed from the Moon Crescent Detention Centre to the Whitley Road Holding Centre. He was placed in solitary confinement, broken only by long periods of interrogation. On April 1979 he was taken to an underground cubicle where he was tortured for four days. When he subsequently refused to accept the conditions offered by the authorities for his release, he was again beaten. He was moved to Changi Prison Hospital for treatment of injuries sustained during this period.
Lee Tse Tong
Lee Tse Tong was arrested on 8 October 1963. He was held under the Internal Security Act until November 1967. In that month, he was released after bringing a successful application for a writ of habeas corpus but was immediately rearrested under the ISA. He was then deprived of his citizenship on the grounds that he had no proof that he was Singapore-born. In February 1968, he was served with a Banishment Order and transferred to Queenstown Remand Prison 'awaiting deportation'. Since 1975, when the Banishment Order was dropped, Lee has been held under the Internal Security Act. He has now been imprisoned without trial for more than 16 years.
A former secretary of the now banned Singapore Busworkers' Union, Lee Tse Tong was elected to the Singapore Assembly for the Barisan Sosialis in the elections of 1963. His case has been taken up by the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU). At its conference in Caracas in 1979 the IPU passed a resolution urging the Singapore Government 'to release Mr Lee Tse Tong immediately and unconditionally'.
Dr Lim Hock Siew
Dr Lim Hock Siew was arrested on 2 February 1963 in 'Operation Coldstore'. The former Secretary-General of the Barisan Sosialis, Dr Lim was exiled to the island of Pulau Tekong in November 1978. Amnesty International continues to regard him as a prisoner of conscience.
In the course of his detention, Dr Lim has been at various times offered both release and exile outside Singapore. In 1972, he was offered release on condition that he made a statement saying he would give up politics and support 'parliamentary democracy'. He refused on the grounds that such a statement was self-contradictory.
In 1967, Dr Lim and four others successfully applied for a writ of habeas corpus. The High Court granted the writ and ordered the release on the technical ground that the detainees' detention orders had not been signed by the President. The five were immediately rearrested under the Internal Security Act. Dr Lim was held in Moon Crescent Detention Centre until his 'release' to Pulau Tekong.
Chia Thye Poh
Chia Thye Poh was arrested under the Internal Security Act on 30 October 1966 shortly after resigning from the Singapore Parliament together with his fellow Barisan Sosialis MPs in protest against government-imposed restrictions on the opposition. In July 1966, Chia had been convicted for publishing a 'seditious article' in the Barisan's Chinese-language newspaper, Chern Sien Pau, of which he was editor. In the same month, he was arrested with 25 others and charged with unlawful assembly for his participation in a demonstration against the United State involvement in Vietnam.
Chia was closely associated with the Chinese Schools' movement in his student days. As an undergraduate he was vice-chairman of the Student Union at Nanyang University where he was subsequently appointed as assistant lecturer.
He is detained in the Moon Crescent Detention Centre.
Chng Min Oh
Chng Min Oh was arrested on 3 August 1970. He was Chairman of the Goldsmiths Employees Union. He was held in solitary confinement for the first six months of his detention. In August 1978, he was transferred to Whitley Road Holding Centre for interrogation. While undergoing interrogation at Whitley Road, he was assaulted and forced to pour his urine over himself. In protest at these conditions, he went on a hunger strike. By late September 1979, he had lost 40 pounds in weight and both he and Ho Koon Kiang, another prisoner who had been subjected to similar treatment, were transferred to Changi Prison Hospital. Chng Min Oh later complained of multiple injuries including damaged ears resulting in a loss of hearing. In November 1978, Chng was returned to the Moon Crescent Detention Centre.
Tan Kim Oh
Tan Kim Oh was arrested on 4 July 1966 and charged with unlawful assembly for engaging in a demonstration against United States involvement in Vietnam. He was subsequently held under the Internal Security Act.
A student at the Nanyang University, he was one of the leading opponents of the introduction of 'suitability certificates' issued by the Government and required by all students wishing to gain entry to university.
Chua Kee Seng
Chua Kee Seng was arrested on 27 October 1966 and initially detained under the Internal Security Act. Although he claimed to have been born in Singapore in 1933, he was unable to produce a birth certificate. In February 1968 he was deprived of his Singapore citizenship and in August of that year was served with a Banishment Order. From 1968 to 1976, he was held in Queenstown Remand Prison 'awaiting deportation'. In June 1976, the Banishment Order was dropped and Chua was once again served with a detention order under the Internal Security Act.
At the time of his arrest, Chua Kee Seng was Assistant Secretary of the now-proscribed Singapore Commercial House and Factory Employees Union. He had also held various posts at local branch level in the Barisan Sosialis. He is believed to have been arrested for participating in protests against the Trade Union (Amendment) Act.
Lim Hock Koon
Lim Hock Koon, the younger brother of Dr Lim Hock Siew, was arrested in January 1971. At the time of his arrest, the authorities said he had been on the 'wanted list' since 1954 when he had been a leader of student demonstrations against obligatory military service. In 1961, the Singapore Prime Minister referred to him as a 'very high and important' member of the Malayan Communist Party.
Lim Hock Koon was held in solitary confinement for the first two-and-a-half months of his detention. In February 1972, after being transferred to the Central Police Station lock-up, he began a hunger strike in protest against his conditions of detention. Already suffering from stomach ulcers, he experienced severe kidney pains as a result of the hunger strike. The state of his health continues to give rise for concern. In February 1979, he was reported to be suffering from chronically high blood pressure and to have suffered a stroke which had left him paralysed down one side.
Dr Poh Soo Kai
Dr Poh Soo Kai was one of 133 persons opposed to the terms of Singapore's joining the Federation of Malaysia who were arrested on 2 February 1963 in 'Operation Coldstore'. At the time, he was Assistant Secretary General of the opposition Barisan Sosialis. He was released in December 1973, but was rearrested in June 1976 and is currently held in the Moon Crescent Detention Centre.
After his release in 1973, Dr Poh returned to the practice of medicine but at the same time continued to be outspoken in his criticism of the Government. He attacked the Government for curtailing the application of the rule of law and detaining political prisoners without charge or trial. His rearrest came shortly after the withdrawal of the ruling People's Action Party from the Socialist International. At a meeting of the Socialist International in London in May 1976, the Dutch Labour Party had demanded the expulsion of the PAP for, among other things, violating human rights by detaining political prisoners without trial. A Ministry of Home Affairs statement issued after his rearrest contained the allegation that 'Dr Poh has actively helped pro-communist elements, had established links for collaboration with similarly-minded groups abroad, and was preparing the ground for the revival of Communist United Front activities in Singapore.'
The Government also alleged that he had advised 'student agitators' and had supplied medicine to a communist activist said to have been injured by his own bomb while trying to assassinate a local factory manager. This latter allegation was based on a statement made by a political detainee which was later retracted.
In February 1977, Dr Poh's wife, Grace Poh, was detained for 27 days during which she was held in solitary confinement and subjected to a series of round-the-clock interrogations for periods of up to three days.
Chong Ming Jee
Chong Ming Jee was arrested in July 1966 probably for participating in the opposition to the Trade Union (Amendment) Act. An active trade unionist who had held the position of Organizing Secretary in the left-wing trade union federation, SATU (Singapore Amalgamated Trade Union), he was a worker in the Jurong Shipyard at the time of his arrest.
Chong Ming Jee was detained under the Internal Security Act and, after three months of initial interrogation at the Whitley Road Holding Centre, he was held at Moon Crescent Detention Centre until 1970. In that year, Chong, who was born in Malaysia, was served with a Banishment Order and transferred to Queenstown Remand Prison. After five years in Queenstown, he was again served with a detention order under the Internal Security Act and reurned to Moon Crescent. Chong was one of several prisoners transferred to the Whitley Road Holding Centre in August 1978 after engaging in a hunger strike. While there, he was beaten by guards and Special Branch officers.
Wong Kui Inn
Wong Kui Inn was arrested in July 1976. In a 'confession', she said she had acted as a courier passing medicine from Dr Poh Soo Kai to a Malayan Communist Party cadre. During her interrogation, she was subjected to torture with electric shocks and the repeated pouring of cold water over her body. Her husband, Pang Hee Fatt, was also arrested in July 1976. During his interrogation, Wong Kui Inn was brought in to see him and he was beaten in front of her.
_______________________________________
THE AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL REPORT
Political detention in Singapore : Prisoner case histories
The ISA as a political tool
Life in Singapore's political prisons
Surviving long-term detention without trial
Detention of journalists and lawyers under the ISA
Ho was eventually released - 18 years later - making him the second longest-held political prisoner after Chia Thye Poh. Others who were detained for 17 years or more include Dr Lim Hock Siew, Lee Tse Tong, Said Zahari and Dr Poh Soo Kai.
Despite a recent assurance, no doubt a well-intentioned one, by a media academic that the ISA is unlikely to be used against political dissidents, the existence of the Act itself casts a long shadow of fear among Singaporeans. Today, very little information is publicly made available about past detentions. Even the website of the Internal Security Department omits any mention of Operation Coldstore, Operation Spectrum or any such politically-motivated arrests carried out over the years. Only two ex-detainees, Said Zahari and Francis Seow, have written autobiographies.
Upon further enquiries, however, I have manage to unearth a rare and rather comprehensive report, published in 1980, by an Amnesty International Mission to Singapore. As the report is 60 pages long and only available on hard copy, I will attempt to reproduce major excerpts of it here, in five parts.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Report of an Amnesty International Mission to Singapore30 November to 5 December 1978
ISBN : 0 86210 002 X
First published January 1980Published by Amnesty International Publications
Part l : Introduction and a Selection of Prisoner Case Histories
This report is based on the findings of an Amnesty International mission which visited the Republic of Singapore from 30 November to 5 December 1978. The delegation consisted of an American lawyer who is a member of the National Advisory Council of Amnesty International's United States Section, Thomas C Jones, and a member of Amnesty International's Asia Research Department, Michael C Williams. This was the first official Amnesty International delegation to the country, but the organization has been concerned for many years with serious human rights violations in Singapore.
The focus of Amnesty International's concern regarding human rights violations in the Republic of Singapore since its independence in 1963 has been the widespread use made by the Government of the powers of detention without trial invested in it by the Internal Security Act (ISA) and the Banishment Act. Derived from the British colonial legislation, the two Acts have been used over the years to systematically curb dissent in Singapore.
Under the ISA and the Banishment Act, detained persons have no recourse to legal safeguards nor any opportunity to question the allegations and accusations levelled against them by the authorities. Furthermore, detainees can be imprisoned indefinitely under the ISA which allows for detention orders to be renewed at the discretion of the Minister of Home Affairs.
At least three men - Dr Lim Hock Siew (now exiled on the island of Pulau Tekong Besar), Ho Piao and Lee Tse Tong (both detained at Moon Crescent Detention Centre) - have been in detention without trial for 17 years, ie throughout the whole period of the existence of an independent Singapore and are now among the longest term political prisoners in the world. On 18 November 1978, Dr Lim Hock Siew and Said Zahari (former newspaper editor and poet) were conditionally released and sent into exile to the islands of Pulau Tekong Besar and Pulau Ubin respectively. In August 1979 Said Zahari was unconditionally released. Ho Piao remains imprisoned however. Amnesty International estimates that there are at least 50 persons are presently detained under the ISA at Moon Crescent Detention Centre while an unknown number of persons are detained at the Whitley Road Holding Centre, the main Special Branch interrogation centre in Singapore.
Although the number of persons held in preventive detention may seem small in comparison with many Asian countries, the Singapore authorities have used preventive detention ever since independence on a selective basis as a means of repressing and discouraging legitimate, non-violent opposition in Singapore. When the Government has felt that it faced growing criticism from influential circles, such as lawyers, journalists or students, it has often reacted by arresting and harassing individual prominent in those fields, and so reduced them to the role of acquiescent observers.
Amnesty International believes that the Singapore Government has employed a variety of techniques to induce mental and spiritual collapse, including the denial of medication to persons suffering from diabetes and epilepsy, with the aim of extracting self-incriminating statements which can be potrayed as 'confessions'. It is common practice in Singapore for the authorities to have broadcast on television interviews with or statements from political prisoners purporting to be 'confessions'. Such televised interrogations are, in the view of Amnesty International, never a substitute for fair, open trial. The practice of imputing guilt by such means, through media controlled by the Government instead of establishing the validity of evidence through normal legal procedures, violates elementary rules of law.
The attitude of the Government of the Republic of Singapore to direct approaches from Amnesty International has been generally unresponsive. In advance of the mission of November-December 1978, Amnesty International wrote to the Government of Singapore on 9 October 1978 requesting that its delegates meet the Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, and the Minister of Home Affairs, Mr Chua Sian Chin. Moreover, while they were in Singapore, the delegates made efforts to contact the Office of the Prime Minister and the office of the Minister of Home Affairs. The Singapore authorities refused all contact with the Amnesty International delegation. Requests to visit detention facilities and interview prisoners were also denied.
In February 1976, Amnesty International published a Briefing Paper on Singapore, a second edition of which was published in January 1978. In an interview shortly after the publication of the second edition, Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew did not deny either that self-incriminating statements were required of detainees as a condition for their release or that extreme pressure was exerted in the process of obtaining such statements. Referring to five long-term detainees mentioned by name in the Briefing Paper, Mr Lee said they 'can walk out of detention at any time - and the others, too - by signing a simple undertaking that they will not in future, either directly or indirectly, help the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) or any of its auxiliary organizations to overthrow the constitutionally-elected Government of Singapore'. Later in the same interview, Mr Lee acknowledged: 'all interrogations must wear down resistance of (detainees) by sustained psychological pressure, including physical fatigue, to get them to give leads to the next links in a well-established underground movement'. (Far Eastern Economic Review, 24.2.78)
The Singapore Government has repeatedly justified its use of preventive detention under the ISA and the Banishment Act by referring to alleged security threats to the Republic, in particular from the illegal Malayan Communist Party (MCP).
The MCP staged an insurrection against the British colonial government in 1948, commonly referred to as 'The Emergency'. This insurrection persisted for many years but came to an end after 1960. Singapore itself, since its independence in 1963, has faced no serious internal social unrest, apart from racial disturbances in 1964 and, to the knowledge of Amnesty International, none of those presently detained under the ISA was arrested in connection with these disturbances.
The Government of Singapore has kept in preventive detention individuals whose connection or links with terrorism or the Malayan Communist Party has been asserted but has never been proven in an open court. The Singapore Government has resorted to wide powers of detention under the ISA without a State of Emergency being in force. Detainees have been subjected to physical and psychological ill-treatment, including torture.
A selection of prisoner case histories (1980)
Ho Piao (Ho Toon Chin)
Ho Piao was arrested on 2 February 1963 in 'Operation Coldstore'. At that time, he was Secretary of the now banned National Seamen's Union. He is the only 'Operation Coldstore' detainee to have been held continuously since 1963 and remains in prison today.
In 1967, the release of Ho Piao and four other detainees was ordered by the High Court after they made a successful application for a writ of habeas corpus. The five were immediately rearrested.
During his detention, Ho Piao has undergone long periods of solitary confinement and has been subjected to a rigorous interrogation including beatings. In 1970-1971 he took part in a 100-day hunger strike in protest against attempts by the authorities to compel political prisoners to undertake forced labour. In August 1978, he was one of 12 prisoners removed from the Moon Crescent Detention Centre to the Whitley Road Holding Centre. He was placed in solitary confinement, broken only by long periods of interrogation. On April 1979 he was taken to an underground cubicle where he was tortured for four days. When he subsequently refused to accept the conditions offered by the authorities for his release, he was again beaten. He was moved to Changi Prison Hospital for treatment of injuries sustained during this period.
Lee Tse Tong
Lee Tse Tong was arrested on 8 October 1963. He was held under the Internal Security Act until November 1967. In that month, he was released after bringing a successful application for a writ of habeas corpus but was immediately rearrested under the ISA. He was then deprived of his citizenship on the grounds that he had no proof that he was Singapore-born. In February 1968, he was served with a Banishment Order and transferred to Queenstown Remand Prison 'awaiting deportation'. Since 1975, when the Banishment Order was dropped, Lee has been held under the Internal Security Act. He has now been imprisoned without trial for more than 16 years.
A former secretary of the now banned Singapore Busworkers' Union, Lee Tse Tong was elected to the Singapore Assembly for the Barisan Sosialis in the elections of 1963. His case has been taken up by the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU). At its conference in Caracas in 1979 the IPU passed a resolution urging the Singapore Government 'to release Mr Lee Tse Tong immediately and unconditionally'.
Dr Lim Hock Siew
Dr Lim Hock Siew was arrested on 2 February 1963 in 'Operation Coldstore'. The former Secretary-General of the Barisan Sosialis, Dr Lim was exiled to the island of Pulau Tekong in November 1978. Amnesty International continues to regard him as a prisoner of conscience.
In the course of his detention, Dr Lim has been at various times offered both release and exile outside Singapore. In 1972, he was offered release on condition that he made a statement saying he would give up politics and support 'parliamentary democracy'. He refused on the grounds that such a statement was self-contradictory.
In 1967, Dr Lim and four others successfully applied for a writ of habeas corpus. The High Court granted the writ and ordered the release on the technical ground that the detainees' detention orders had not been signed by the President. The five were immediately rearrested under the Internal Security Act. Dr Lim was held in Moon Crescent Detention Centre until his 'release' to Pulau Tekong.
Chia Thye Poh
Chia Thye Poh was arrested under the Internal Security Act on 30 October 1966 shortly after resigning from the Singapore Parliament together with his fellow Barisan Sosialis MPs in protest against government-imposed restrictions on the opposition. In July 1966, Chia had been convicted for publishing a 'seditious article' in the Barisan's Chinese-language newspaper, Chern Sien Pau, of which he was editor. In the same month, he was arrested with 25 others and charged with unlawful assembly for his participation in a demonstration against the United State involvement in Vietnam.
Chia was closely associated with the Chinese Schools' movement in his student days. As an undergraduate he was vice-chairman of the Student Union at Nanyang University where he was subsequently appointed as assistant lecturer.
He is detained in the Moon Crescent Detention Centre.
Chng Min Oh
Chng Min Oh was arrested on 3 August 1970. He was Chairman of the Goldsmiths Employees Union. He was held in solitary confinement for the first six months of his detention. In August 1978, he was transferred to Whitley Road Holding Centre for interrogation. While undergoing interrogation at Whitley Road, he was assaulted and forced to pour his urine over himself. In protest at these conditions, he went on a hunger strike. By late September 1979, he had lost 40 pounds in weight and both he and Ho Koon Kiang, another prisoner who had been subjected to similar treatment, were transferred to Changi Prison Hospital. Chng Min Oh later complained of multiple injuries including damaged ears resulting in a loss of hearing. In November 1978, Chng was returned to the Moon Crescent Detention Centre.
Tan Kim Oh
Tan Kim Oh was arrested on 4 July 1966 and charged with unlawful assembly for engaging in a demonstration against United States involvement in Vietnam. He was subsequently held under the Internal Security Act.
A student at the Nanyang University, he was one of the leading opponents of the introduction of 'suitability certificates' issued by the Government and required by all students wishing to gain entry to university.
Chua Kee Seng
Chua Kee Seng was arrested on 27 October 1966 and initially detained under the Internal Security Act. Although he claimed to have been born in Singapore in 1933, he was unable to produce a birth certificate. In February 1968 he was deprived of his Singapore citizenship and in August of that year was served with a Banishment Order. From 1968 to 1976, he was held in Queenstown Remand Prison 'awaiting deportation'. In June 1976, the Banishment Order was dropped and Chua was once again served with a detention order under the Internal Security Act.
At the time of his arrest, Chua Kee Seng was Assistant Secretary of the now-proscribed Singapore Commercial House and Factory Employees Union. He had also held various posts at local branch level in the Barisan Sosialis. He is believed to have been arrested for participating in protests against the Trade Union (Amendment) Act.
Lim Hock Koon
Lim Hock Koon, the younger brother of Dr Lim Hock Siew, was arrested in January 1971. At the time of his arrest, the authorities said he had been on the 'wanted list' since 1954 when he had been a leader of student demonstrations against obligatory military service. In 1961, the Singapore Prime Minister referred to him as a 'very high and important' member of the Malayan Communist Party.
Lim Hock Koon was held in solitary confinement for the first two-and-a-half months of his detention. In February 1972, after being transferred to the Central Police Station lock-up, he began a hunger strike in protest against his conditions of detention. Already suffering from stomach ulcers, he experienced severe kidney pains as a result of the hunger strike. The state of his health continues to give rise for concern. In February 1979, he was reported to be suffering from chronically high blood pressure and to have suffered a stroke which had left him paralysed down one side.
Dr Poh Soo Kai
Dr Poh Soo Kai was one of 133 persons opposed to the terms of Singapore's joining the Federation of Malaysia who were arrested on 2 February 1963 in 'Operation Coldstore'. At the time, he was Assistant Secretary General of the opposition Barisan Sosialis. He was released in December 1973, but was rearrested in June 1976 and is currently held in the Moon Crescent Detention Centre.
After his release in 1973, Dr Poh returned to the practice of medicine but at the same time continued to be outspoken in his criticism of the Government. He attacked the Government for curtailing the application of the rule of law and detaining political prisoners without charge or trial. His rearrest came shortly after the withdrawal of the ruling People's Action Party from the Socialist International. At a meeting of the Socialist International in London in May 1976, the Dutch Labour Party had demanded the expulsion of the PAP for, among other things, violating human rights by detaining political prisoners without trial. A Ministry of Home Affairs statement issued after his rearrest contained the allegation that 'Dr Poh has actively helped pro-communist elements, had established links for collaboration with similarly-minded groups abroad, and was preparing the ground for the revival of Communist United Front activities in Singapore.'
The Government also alleged that he had advised 'student agitators' and had supplied medicine to a communist activist said to have been injured by his own bomb while trying to assassinate a local factory manager. This latter allegation was based on a statement made by a political detainee which was later retracted.
In February 1977, Dr Poh's wife, Grace Poh, was detained for 27 days during which she was held in solitary confinement and subjected to a series of round-the-clock interrogations for periods of up to three days.
Chong Ming Jee
Chong Ming Jee was arrested in July 1966 probably for participating in the opposition to the Trade Union (Amendment) Act. An active trade unionist who had held the position of Organizing Secretary in the left-wing trade union federation, SATU (Singapore Amalgamated Trade Union), he was a worker in the Jurong Shipyard at the time of his arrest.
Chong Ming Jee was detained under the Internal Security Act and, after three months of initial interrogation at the Whitley Road Holding Centre, he was held at Moon Crescent Detention Centre until 1970. In that year, Chong, who was born in Malaysia, was served with a Banishment Order and transferred to Queenstown Remand Prison. After five years in Queenstown, he was again served with a detention order under the Internal Security Act and reurned to Moon Crescent. Chong was one of several prisoners transferred to the Whitley Road Holding Centre in August 1978 after engaging in a hunger strike. While there, he was beaten by guards and Special Branch officers.
Wong Kui Inn
Wong Kui Inn was arrested in July 1976. In a 'confession', she said she had acted as a courier passing medicine from Dr Poh Soo Kai to a Malayan Communist Party cadre. During her interrogation, she was subjected to torture with electric shocks and the repeated pouring of cold water over her body. Her husband, Pang Hee Fatt, was also arrested in July 1976. During his interrogation, Wong Kui Inn was brought in to see him and he was beaten in front of her.
_______________________________________
THE AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL REPORT
Political detention in Singapore : Prisoner case histories
The ISA as a political tool
Life in Singapore's political prisons
Surviving long-term detention without trial
Detention of journalists and lawyers under the ISA
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)