今天

抑制政治自由白皮书:徐顺全个案

21/02/10

作者/来源:.Robert Amsterdam (3-11-2009) http://www.robertamsterdam.com
新加坡文献馆译

自1959年人民行动党取得新加坡自治政权以来,在每次大选中都持续控制国会。政府在已经近乎完全垄断政治工具的格局上,还要进一步通过立法与强制施行违宪的法规,去妨碍新加坡宪法赋予人民的权力保障。

在一个缺乏独立自主性的屈从司法体系和一个政府控制的沉默新闻媒体,以及不间断诽谤控诉威胁的情况下政治自由受到了压抑。

新近的一项立法是公共秩序4月2009年法令,强化了执政的人民行动党对反对党的进一步管制。

o 在公共秩序法令下,全体人民包括反对党党员和反对党国会议员,在进行公开演说之前,必需事先申请许可准证。异议者鲜少能够获得准证。

o 在公共秩序法令下,任何群众集会都必需在事前先向政府取得批准。反对党的集会很少能够获得政府批准。行政规划否决任何的公众集会,除非是在规范的演说角落举行。

o 在诽谤法令下,政府控诉所有的 – 包括国内外媒体和反对党成员 – 对政策与行动提出批判的言论者。

o 在内部安全法令下,政府可以肆意的逮捕,和无限期拘禁任何被认为会危害治安的人。

o 在新闻印刷出版法令下,政府严禁个人拥有报馆除非事先得到政府同意。

这一种现实状况足以让国际特赦组织,世界银行,自由组织,国际律师公会,亚洲改革与民主联盟,记者保护委员会等等机构去批评政府违反了人权。

徐顺全个案

徐顺全博士在1962年出生。在佐治亚大学获得神经心理学的哲学博士后,回返新加坡到国立新加坡大学任教。

1992年,他加入新加坡民主党,引发了相当的哄动因为他是首位学术人员从国家管辖的大学公然出来挑战政府。在加入新加坡民主党的不久之后,徐博士被控不正当使用研究经费,并且遭系主任解雇。这名系主任是人民行动党的国会议员。

徐博士否认这项罪名,并指出他之所以被解雇是因为有政治动机。为此,他背负诽谤之罪,并被罚款与赔偿共35万美元。除了1993年被大学的系主任指控诽谤之外,徐博士也在随后遭人民行动党的三名总理控诉诽谤。

除此之外,徐博士也遭遇到:

o 国会责怪徐顺全在美国时并没有行使他在新加坡无法享有的言论自由权力。

o 徐顺全因为撰写了一篇有关医疗费用的文章而遭受到国会的罚款处分。

o 徐顺全因为在大众场所推销他的著作 – 勇于改革-有关亚洲反对党的奋斗故事 – 而遭受罚款处分。

o 重复多次因为没有获得政府准证情况下在大庭广众场所发表言论。

o 徐顺全因为企图参加一项国际民主论坛而被判入狱。

徐博士正面对多项在进行中的审讯,等待审判的案件和警方的调查。

对徐顺全博士的政治自由的侵犯,吸引了来自大赦国际,人权观察,国际律师协会,人权第一,和律师人权委员会等国际社会的谴责。

备注:这是白皮书的主要内容,次要部分省略。全文请上线:http://www.robertamsterdam.com/2009.Nov05.Repression_of_political_freedoms_in_Singapore.CheeSoonJuan.pdf

WHITE PAPER ON THE REPRESSION OF POLITICAL FREEDOMS IN SINGAPORE•THE CASE OF OPPOSITION LEADER DR CHEE SOON JUAN

Ever since Singapore gained internal self-government in 1959, it has been ruled by the PAP which has won control of Parliament in every election. The government has solidified its near monopoly on the political apparatus of the state by perverting the rights’ guarantees of the Constitution of Singapore through the passage and arbitrary enforcement of unconstitutional domestic laws.

The absence of independence in a compliant judiciary and a media silenced through state ownership and the ever-present threat of defamation and libel suits has created a climate for the suppression of political freedoms.

Recent legislative developments with the enactment in April 2009 of the Public Order Act have consolidated further the authority of the ruling PAP over the political opposition.

· Under the Public Order Act, all citizens, including members of the political opposition and opposition Members of Parliament, must apply for permits before speaking in public. Permits are rarely given to critics of the government.
· Under the Public Order Act, government authorization is required before any public assembly. Opposition rallies are rarely authorized. The operative presumption is against public expression of any kind, the only exception being a designed ‘Speakers’ Corner’.
· Under the Defamation Act, the government sues all – including the domestic and foreign press and members of the political opposition – who criticize its policies and actions.
· Under the Internal Security Act, the government may arbitrarily arrest and
indefinitely detain any person it suspects of endangering public security.
· Under the Newspaper Printing and Presses Act, the government forbids private ownership of newspaper companies unless permission is granted.

This state of affairs has warranted international criticism for the violations of human rights from Amnesty International, the World Bank, Freedom House, the International Bar Association, the Alliance for Reform and Democracy in Asia, and the Committee to Protect Journalists, among others.

III THE CASE OF DR CHEE SOON JUAN

Dr Chee was born in 1962. After receiving a PhD in neuropsychology from the University of Georgia, he returned home to Singapore to teach at the National University of Singapore. In 1992 he joined the SDP, attracting considerable attention as the first academic from the state-run university openly to challenge the government. Shortly after joining the SDP, Dr Chee was charged with an alleged misuse of research funds and was fired by the head of his department at the National University of Singapore. The department head was a PAP Member of Parliament.

Dr Chee denied the charges, asserting his firing was politically motivated. For this, he was held liable for defamation and for costs and damages of US$350,000. In addition to the 1993 defamation suit by the head of his university department, Dr Chee has been taken to court in subsequent defamation proceedings by all three of Singapore’s PAP prime ministers.

In addition, Dr Chee has been:
· censured by Parliament for failing to exercise his freedom of expression in the United States despite not having any such freedom in Singapore;
· fined by Parliament over an article he wrote on healthcare costs;
· fined for selling his second book – To Be Free: Stories About Asia’s Struggle Against Oppression – in public;
· repeatedly prosecuted for speaking in public without a permit; and
· jailed for attempting to attend an international democracy conference.
Dr Chee also faces a barrage of ongoing trials, cases awaiting trial, and police investigations.

The violation of Dr Chee’s political freedoms has attracted international condemnation from Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the International Bar Association, Human Rights First, and the Lawyers’ Committee for Human Rights, among others.

---

分类题材: 政治_politics ,

《新加坡文献馆》