Regarding Dr. Silviu Ionescu

Although I have been keeping track of the case, I have however been reluctant to publicly comment on the case involving Dr. Silviu Ionescu who was until recently a Romanian envoy to Singapore and is said to be involved in a hit-and-run accident. My reluctance was due to it, while there were signs pointing to his involvment, not been confirmed that Dr. Ionescu was the driver of the car involved in the hit-and-run accident.

However, now that it has been confirmed that Dr. Ionescu was indeed the driver of the car involved in the hit-and-run accident, it is my sincere hope that he does not get away scot-free because of his diplomatic immunity. It will be a grave injustice if Dr. Ionescu manages to get away scot-free because he got diplomatic immunity.

Read more »

The Ridge editorial board vs NUSSU Exco?

For the past few days, although I am no loyal fan of it, I have been wondering why The Ridge (a NUS student publication) has yet to release a new issue in the current semester.

The answer, it seems, according to this statement released by The Ridge's Chief Editor is the NUSSU Exco's decision to cancel the publication of the January issue of The Ridge, "citing the late publication date of the issue as the reason".

In fact, reading the Chief Editor's statement in its entirety, it would appear to me that there exist a few long-standing contentious issues between The Ridge's editorial board and the NUSSU Exco. The Chief Editor's decision to release his statement in such a public sphere indicates, to me, that the decision by the NUSSU Exco to cancel the publication of the January issue is perhaps the straw that broke the camel's back for The Ridge editorial board.

Of course, so far, we only have one side of the story as provided by The Ridge's editorial board. It remains to be seen if the NUSSU Exco will provide its side of this story.

"Why censor when you can regulate?"

What follows below is a translation of an opinion piece published in 《联合早报》/Lianhe Zaobao last Sunday (17/1/2010) regarding censorship in Singapore:

"Why censor when you can regulate?"

Every ten years, Singapore will establish a Censorship Review Committee "to review and update censorship objectives and principles to meet the long-term interests of our society". However, it is not stated clearly on the Committee's official website whose interests or what interests are being met. Recently, the Committee has again begun work.

Read more »

Shark Fin Soup -- "When the buying stops, the killing can too"

Kings of Freedom at Bedok Reservoir Park -- 09012010

Speech of Foreign Minister George Yeo at the unveiling ceremony of "The Kings of Freedom"

Dr. James Gomez at JBJ memorial event -- A case of selective reporting?

Yesterday, a memorial event was held at the Speakers' Corner for the late Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam (JBJ), in conjunction with what would have been Jeyaretnam's eighty-fourth birthday.

At the memorial event, several speakers spoke, one of whom was Dr. James Gomez. Towards the end of his speech, Dr. Gomez updated the audience that he is no longer a member of the Workers' Party (WP) and that he and others have applied to form a new political association.

However, today, local news reports found in the mainstream media seem to focus more on Dr. Gomez no longer being a WP member and the trouble he got into during the 2006 General Election, instead of the JBJ memorial event which he was speaking at. Although the news reports did mention that Dr. Gomez revealed his lapsed status as a WP member in a speech he made at the JBJ memorial event, it was most evident, especially from how they were titled, that the news reports were more concerned about Dr. Gomez's lapsed status as a WP member. One would easily miss the mention in the news reports that there was a JBJ memorial event if one read them too quickly.

Contrast this with The Online Citizen's (TOC) coverage of the JBJ memorial event (see above). TOC not only provided a report of the happenings at the event but also the full speeches of three of the speakers who spoke at the event.

It is also rather interesting how the news reports did not make any mention of Dr. Gomez's application to form a new political association in Singapore, especially when this was mentioned in the same speech in which he revealed that he is no longer a WP member.

As "Alice" would put it, "curiouser and curiouser!"

P.S.

In his speech, Dr. Gomez also mentioned the following:

My first direct contact with JBJ was in 1988 when as President, of the Philosophy Society and a first year undergraduate at NUS, I invited him to speak on Political Freedoms in Singapore on campus – it was 21 years ago. NUS had a set of bureaucratic procedures that had to be negotiated if you wanted to invite opposition figures to speak on campus. These bureaucratic processes do not make inviting opposition parties representatives onto campus easy.

At the same time, the main challenge was staff members and fellow undergraduates who practiced self-censorship and tried to undermine or withdraw support when inviting opposition figures on to campus to speak. Nevertheless the few of us involved in the organization of this talk succeeded, and JBJ spoke to a full house at Lecture Theatre 11 and the talk was reported on the front page of the NUS student union newspaper.

I find the above interesting as I cannot help but wonder if, today, any head of a student society in NUS or any other local educational institution will invite an opposition party leader to speak at an event. (cf. the "Men in White" forum organised by the NUSPSSoc and the question made by a NUSPA member at a recent event co-organised by TOC and Talk Politics All Night Long)