publichouse.sg

By Angela Oon

The recent case of Nizam Ismail and his resignation from the AMP got me thinking, again, about the kind of single-identity politics that keep getting shoved down our throats. It's the you-are-your-affiliation card.

The crazy idea is that if you are a member of any organisation, you then wear that organisation's hat wherever you go and whatever you do. You are no longer a private individual. Nor can you even be an individual who wears multiple hats.

This idea is illogical and absurd. We all know that.

In our lives, we wear many hats. We are fathers, employees, friends, daughters, heads of corporations, Sunday school teachers, charity workers and so on. We find ourselves in different positions at different points in time. We all understand how that works.

By Zakaria Hassan

Mr Nizam Ismail, a Director of the Association of Muslim Professionals (AMP) and Chairman of the Board of the Centre for Research on Malay and Islamic Affairs (RIMA) recently resigned in protest from the organisation he has served for at least 15 years.

The protest was to do, according to Nizam, with the State’s alleged threat to withdraw funding from AMP and RIMA should he continue with his criticisms of the State despite these activities being done in his personal capacity. So, what can one make of this latest controversy? What is it that is good, bad and ugly about this episode?

“The electronic recording of interrogations… is the single best reform available to stem the tide of false confessions.” – The Innocence Project.

The allegations by two former SMRT drivers, He Jun Ling and Liu Xiangying, of police abuse have been in the news since a video interview of them was published online in January.

The Ministry for Home Affairs, which said it has since conducted an internal investigation into the allegations, issued a statement on 20 April refuting the drivers’ claims.

The drivers’ had alleged that they were “slapped, punched and threatened by police officers while in custody.”

On 8 March 2013, Workers’ Party Member of Parliament, Ms Sylvia Lim, repeated her calls for the police to video record the statements given by accused persons in custody. This, she said, would “ensure that the person in custody gave his statement voluntarily and that the words in the statement fell from the accused’s own lips and were not force-fed."

In the first case of its kind in Singapore, 21-year-old local blogger, Han Hui Hui, applies to the High Court for a declaration that the Council for Private Education (CPE), a statutory body, is not entitled to bring any defamation action against her. Her counsel, human rights lawyer M Ravi, is arguing that the freedom of speech and expression, enshrined in article 14 of the Singapore Constitution, protects citizens from any defamation proceedings by the government and public bodies.

The right to sue for defamation is reserved only for individuals and private entities.

The CPE had threatened Han with defamation proceedings by way of letter of demand through their lawyers, following two emails they received from the latter which they regarded as defamatory.

Han now seeks protection against this threat via the constitution and the ordinary laws of the land.

More updates to follow.