| SINGAPORE Republic of Singapore Republic of Singapore Joined United Nations: 21 September 1965 Human Rights as assured by their constitution Click here Updated 04/15/10 |
| CAPITAL |
| POPULATION |
| CHIEF OF STATE |
| SELECTION PROCESS |
Singapore
4,657,542 (July 2009 est.)
Sellapan Ramanathan
President since 1 September 1999
President since 1 September 1999
President elected by popular vote for six-year term; last
appointed 17 August 2005. Sellapan Rama (S. R.) NATHAN
appointed president in August 2005 after Presidential Elections
Committee disqualified three other would-be candidates;
scheduled election not held
Next scheduled election: August 2011
appointed 17 August 2005. Sellapan Rama (S. R.) NATHAN
appointed president in August 2005 after Presidential Elections
Committee disqualified three other would-be candidates;
scheduled election not held
Next scheduled election: August 2011
HEAD OF GOVERNMENT
SELECTION PROCESS
Lee Hsien Loong
Prime Minister since 12 August 2004
Prime Minister since 12 August 2004
Following legislative elections, leader of majority party or leader
of majority coalition is usually appointed prime minister by
president
of majority coalition is usually appointed prime minister by
president
| DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS |
| ETHNIC GROUPS |
Chinese 76.8%, Malay 13.9%, Indian 7.9%, other 1.4% (2000 census)
| RELIGIONS |
Buddhist 42.5%, Muslim 14.9%, Taoist 8.5%, Hindu 4%, Catholic 4.8%, other Christian 9.8%, other 0.7%, none 14.8%
(2000 census)
(2000 census)
| GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE |
Parliamentary Republic with no administrative divisions; Legal system is a based on English common law; has not accepted
compulsory ICJ jurisdiction
Executive: president elected by popular vote for six-year term; last appointed 17 August 2005 - see note (next election to be held
by August 2011); following legislative elections, leader of majority party or leader of majority coalition is usually appointed prime
minister by president; deputy prime ministers appointed by president
election results: Sellapan Rama (S. R.) NATHAN appointed president in August 2005 after Presidential Elections Committee
disqualified three other would-be candidates; scheduled election not held
Legislative: unicameral Parliament (84 seats; members elected by popular vote to serve five-year terms); note - in addition,
there are up to nine nominated members; the losing opposition candidate who came closest to winning a seat may be
appointed as a "nonconstituency" member
elections: last held on 6 May 2006 (next to be held by 2011)
Judicial: Supreme Court (chief justice is appointed by the president with the advice of the prime minister, other judges are
appointed by the president with the advice of the chief justice); Court of Appeals
compulsory ICJ jurisdiction
Executive: president elected by popular vote for six-year term; last appointed 17 August 2005 - see note (next election to be held
by August 2011); following legislative elections, leader of majority party or leader of majority coalition is usually appointed prime
minister by president; deputy prime ministers appointed by president
election results: Sellapan Rama (S. R.) NATHAN appointed president in August 2005 after Presidential Elections Committee
disqualified three other would-be candidates; scheduled election not held
Legislative: unicameral Parliament (84 seats; members elected by popular vote to serve five-year terms); note - in addition,
there are up to nine nominated members; the losing opposition candidate who came closest to winning a seat may be
appointed as a "nonconstituency" member
elections: last held on 6 May 2006 (next to be held by 2011)
Judicial: Supreme Court (chief justice is appointed by the president with the advice of the prime minister, other judges are
appointed by the president with the advice of the chief justice); Court of Appeals
| LANGUAGES |
Mandarin 35%, English 23%, Malay 14.1%, Hokkien 11.4%, Cantonese 5.7%, Teochew 4.9%, Tamil 3.2%, other
Chinese dialects 1.8%, other 0.9% (2000 census)
Chinese dialects 1.8%, other 0.9% (2000 census)
| BRIEF HISTORY |
| ECONOMIC OVERVIEW |
Singapore has a highly developed and successful free-market economy. It enjoys a remarkably open and corruption-free
environment, stable prices, and a per capita GDP higher than that of most developed countries. The economy depends
heavily on exports, particularly in consumer electronics, information technology products, pharmaceuticals, and on a growing
financial services sector. Real GDP growth averaged 6.8% between 2004 and 2008, but contracted 2.1% in 2009 as a
result of the global financial crisis. The economy has begun to rebound in 2010 and the government predicts growth of 3-5%
for the year. Over the longer term, the government hopes to establish a new growth path that focuses on raising productivity
growth, which has sunk to 1% per year in the last decade. Singapore has attracted major investments in pharmaceuticals and
medical technology production and will continue efforts to establish Singapore as Southeast Asia's financial and high-tech
hub.
Source: CIA World Factbook (select Singapore)
environment, stable prices, and a per capita GDP higher than that of most developed countries. The economy depends
heavily on exports, particularly in consumer electronics, information technology products, pharmaceuticals, and on a growing
financial services sector. Real GDP growth averaged 6.8% between 2004 and 2008, but contracted 2.1% in 2009 as a
result of the global financial crisis. The economy has begun to rebound in 2010 and the government predicts growth of 3-5%
for the year. Over the longer term, the government hopes to establish a new growth path that focuses on raising productivity
growth, which has sunk to 1% per year in the last decade. Singapore has attracted major investments in pharmaceuticals and
medical technology production and will continue efforts to establish Singapore as Southeast Asia's financial and high-tech
hub.
Source: CIA World Factbook (select Singapore)
| POLITICAL CLIMATE |
Western democracies consider the form of government in Singapore to be closer to authoritarianism rather than true
democracy and could be considered an illiberal democracy or procedural democracy. Singapore has what its government
considers to be a highly successful and transparent market economy. Some people have labelled Singapore a social
democracy, although the PAP has consistently rejected the notion of being socialist. However, some of PAP's policies do
contain certain aspects of socialism, which includes government-owned public housing constituting the majority of real estate
and the dominance of government controlled companies in the local economy. The Housing Development Board oversees a
large-scale public housing programme and education in Singapore is a rigorous compulsory public education system, and the
dominance of government-controlled companies in the local economy. Although dominant in its activities, the government
has a clean, corruption-free image. Singapore has consistently been rated as the least-corrupt country in Asia and amongst
the top ten cleanest in the world by Transparency International. Although Singapore's laws are inherited from British and
British Indian laws, including many elements of English common law, the PAP has also consistently rejected liberal
democratic values, which it typifies as Western and states that there should not be a 'one-size-fits-all' solution to a
democracy. Laws restricting the freedom of speech are justified by claims that they are intended to prohibit speech that may
breed ill will or cause disharmony within Singapore's multiracial, multi-religious society. For example, in September 2005,
three bloggers were convicted of sedition for posting racist remarks targeting minorities. Some offences can lead to heavy
fines or caning and there are laws which allow capital punishment in Singapore for first-degree murder and drug trafficking.
Amnesty International has criticised Singapore for having "possibly the highest execution rate in the world" per capita. The
Singapore Government responded by asserting it had the right as a sovereign state to impose the death penalty for serious
offences. Most recently, the PAP has relaxed some of its socially conservative policies and encouraged entrepreneurship.
Wikipedia: Politics of Singapore
democracy and could be considered an illiberal democracy or procedural democracy. Singapore has what its government
considers to be a highly successful and transparent market economy. Some people have labelled Singapore a social
democracy, although the PAP has consistently rejected the notion of being socialist. However, some of PAP's policies do
contain certain aspects of socialism, which includes government-owned public housing constituting the majority of real estate
and the dominance of government controlled companies in the local economy. The Housing Development Board oversees a
large-scale public housing programme and education in Singapore is a rigorous compulsory public education system, and the
dominance of government-controlled companies in the local economy. Although dominant in its activities, the government
has a clean, corruption-free image. Singapore has consistently been rated as the least-corrupt country in Asia and amongst
the top ten cleanest in the world by Transparency International. Although Singapore's laws are inherited from British and
British Indian laws, including many elements of English common law, the PAP has also consistently rejected liberal
democratic values, which it typifies as Western and states that there should not be a 'one-size-fits-all' solution to a
democracy. Laws restricting the freedom of speech are justified by claims that they are intended to prohibit speech that may
breed ill will or cause disharmony within Singapore's multiracial, multi-religious society. For example, in September 2005,
three bloggers were convicted of sedition for posting racist remarks targeting minorities. Some offences can lead to heavy
fines or caning and there are laws which allow capital punishment in Singapore for first-degree murder and drug trafficking.
Amnesty International has criticised Singapore for having "possibly the highest execution rate in the world" per capita. The
Singapore Government responded by asserting it had the right as a sovereign state to impose the death penalty for serious
offences. Most recently, the PAP has relaxed some of its socially conservative policies and encouraged entrepreneurship.
Wikipedia: Politics of Singapore
| INTERNATIONAL DISPUTES |
Disputes persist with Malaysia over deliveries of fresh water to Singapore, Singapore's extensive land reclamation works,
bridge construction, and maritime boundaries in the Johor and Singapore Straits; in November 2007, the ICJ will hold public
hearings as a consequence of the Memorials and Countermemorials filed by the parties in 2003 and 2005 over sovereignty
of Pedra Branca Island/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge; Indonesia and Singapore continue to work on
finalization of their 1973 maritime boundary agreement by defining unresolved areas north of Indonesia's Batam Island;
piracy remains a problem in the Malacca Strait
bridge construction, and maritime boundaries in the Johor and Singapore Straits; in November 2007, the ICJ will hold public
hearings as a consequence of the Memorials and Countermemorials filed by the parties in 2003 and 2005 over sovereignty
of Pedra Branca Island/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge; Indonesia and Singapore continue to work on
finalization of their 1973 maritime boundary agreement by defining unresolved areas north of Indonesia's Batam Island;
piracy remains a problem in the Malacca Strait
| REFUGEES AND INTERNALLY DISPLACED PERSONS (IDP) |
None reported.
| ILLICIT DRUGS |
Drug abuse limited because of aggressive law enforcement efforts; as a transportation and financial services hub, Singapore
is vulnerable, despite strict laws and enforcement, as a venue for money laundering
is vulnerable, despite strict laws and enforcement, as a venue for money laundering
| HUMAN RIGHTS STATEMENTS, ANALYSIS AND CRITIQUES |
2009 Human Rights Report: Singapore
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
2009 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
March 11, 2010
Singapore is a parliamentary republic in which the People's Action Party (PAP), in power since 1959, overwhelmingly
dominates politics. The population was approximately five million, with nonresident foreign workers accounting for one
quarter of the total. Opposition parties exist, and the 2006 parliamentary elections were generally fair and free of tampering;
however, the PAP placed formidable obstacles in the path of political opponents. Civilian authorities generally maintained
effective control of the security forces.
The government has broad powers to limit citizens' rights and handicap political opposition, which it used. Caning is an
allowable punishment for numerous offenses. The following human rights problems also were reported:
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
2009 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
March 11, 2010
Singapore is a parliamentary republic in which the People's Action Party (PAP), in power since 1959, overwhelmingly
dominates politics. The population was approximately five million, with nonresident foreign workers accounting for one
quarter of the total. Opposition parties exist, and the 2006 parliamentary elections were generally fair and free of tampering;
however, the PAP placed formidable obstacles in the path of political opponents. Civilian authorities generally maintained
effective control of the security forces.
The government has broad powers to limit citizens' rights and handicap political opposition, which it used. Caning is an
allowable punishment for numerous offenses. The following human rights problems also were reported:
- preventive detention,
- infringement of citizens' privacy rights,
- restriction of speech and press freedom and the practice of self-censorship by journalists,
- restriction of freedoms of assembly and association,
- limited restriction of freedom of religion,
- trafficking in persons.
10 August 2007
Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women
Thirty-ninth session
23 July-10 August 2007
Concluding comments of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women: Singapore
Introduction
2. The Committee expresses its appreciation to the State party for its third periodic report, which follows the Committee’s
guidelines for the preparation of periodic reports and takes into account some of the Committee’s previous concluding
comments. The Committee notes, however, that the report does not contain sufficient statistical data disaggregated by sex in
all areas covered by the Convention.
3. The Committee commends the State party for its extensive written replies to the list of issues and questions raised by the
pre-session working group and for the oral presentation and further clarifications offered in response to questions posed
orally by Committee members. It expresses its appreciation for the frank and constructive dialogue held between the
delegation and the members of the Committee, which provided further insights into the situation of women in Singapore.
Positive aspects
6. The Committee commends the State party for its efforts to ensure implementation of the Convention through establishing
the Women’s Desk within the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sport and the Inter-Ministry Committee on
CEDAW, the cooperation with tripartite committees and women’s organizations, and the development of a number of
guidelines in areas such as gender stereotyping in the media and fair employment practices.
7. The Committee welcomes the various efforts made by the State party to combat domestic violence, including through the
establishment of Family Violence Dialogue Group, which brings together representatives from different ministries, courts,
prisons, social services and women’s organizations. The Committee also commends the State party for the introduction of
counselling orders which provide for mandatory counselling for perpetrators and victims.
Principal areas of concern and recommendations
10. While recalling the State party’s obligation to systematically and continuously implement all the provisions of the
Convention, the Committee views the concerns and recommendations identified in the present concluding comments as
requiring the State party’s priority attention between now and the submission of the next periodic report. Consequently, the
Committee calls upon the State party to focus on those areas in its implementation activities and to report on action taken
and results achieved in its next periodic report. It calls on the State party to submit the present concluding comments to all
relevant ministries and to Parliament so as to ensure their full implementation.
11. The Committee reiterates its deep concern about the State party’s general reservations to articles 2 and 16 and its
reservation to article 11, paragraph 1, of the Convention. The Committee draws the attention of the State party to the fact
that it considers reservations to articles 2 and 16 to be contrary to the object and purpose of the Convention.
Click here to read more »
Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women
Thirty-ninth session
23 July-10 August 2007
Concluding comments of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women: Singapore
Introduction
2. The Committee expresses its appreciation to the State party for its third periodic report, which follows the Committee’s
guidelines for the preparation of periodic reports and takes into account some of the Committee’s previous concluding
comments. The Committee notes, however, that the report does not contain sufficient statistical data disaggregated by sex in
all areas covered by the Convention.
3. The Committee commends the State party for its extensive written replies to the list of issues and questions raised by the
pre-session working group and for the oral presentation and further clarifications offered in response to questions posed
orally by Committee members. It expresses its appreciation for the frank and constructive dialogue held between the
delegation and the members of the Committee, which provided further insights into the situation of women in Singapore.
Positive aspects
6. The Committee commends the State party for its efforts to ensure implementation of the Convention through establishing
the Women’s Desk within the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sport and the Inter-Ministry Committee on
CEDAW, the cooperation with tripartite committees and women’s organizations, and the development of a number of
guidelines in areas such as gender stereotyping in the media and fair employment practices.
7. The Committee welcomes the various efforts made by the State party to combat domestic violence, including through the
establishment of Family Violence Dialogue Group, which brings together representatives from different ministries, courts,
prisons, social services and women’s organizations. The Committee also commends the State party for the introduction of
counselling orders which provide for mandatory counselling for perpetrators and victims.
Principal areas of concern and recommendations
10. While recalling the State party’s obligation to systematically and continuously implement all the provisions of the
Convention, the Committee views the concerns and recommendations identified in the present concluding comments as
requiring the State party’s priority attention between now and the submission of the next periodic report. Consequently, the
Committee calls upon the State party to focus on those areas in its implementation activities and to report on action taken
and results achieved in its next periodic report. It calls on the State party to submit the present concluding comments to all
relevant ministries and to Parliament so as to ensure their full implementation.
11. The Committee reiterates its deep concern about the State party’s general reservations to articles 2 and 16 and its
reservation to article 11, paragraph 1, of the Convention. The Committee draws the attention of the State party to the fact
that it considers reservations to articles 2 and 16 to be contrary to the object and purpose of the Convention.
Click here to read more »
FREEDOM IN THE WORLD REPORT- 2009
Political Rights Score: 5
Civil Liberties Score: 4
Status: Partly Free
Trend Arrow
Singapore received a downward trend arrow due to the politically motivated handling of defamation cases, which cast
doubt on judicial independence.
Overview
As part of a broader legal crackdown on government critics in 2008, opposition politician Chee Soon Juan was ordered to pay
roughly US$400,000 in defamation damages to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his father, former prime minister Lee Kuan
Yew. Another vocal critic of the government, Gopalan Nair, received a three-month jail sentence for insulting two judges on his
blog.
In 2007 and 2008, Lee continued to pursue his economic agenda while using the legal system and other tools to keep the opposition
in check. The government also maintained that racial sensitivities and the threat of Islamist terrorism justified draconian restrictions
on freedoms of speech and assembly. Such rules were repeatedly used to silence criticism of the authorities.
In September 2007, Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) leader Chee Soon Juan was convicted for trying to travel to a 2006 World
Movement for Democracy conference without a permit. He stood trial again in October 2008, marking his eighth trial since 1992,
this time for defamation and allegedly participating in an illegal gathering. Chee, a lawyer by training, represented himself due to the
absence of lawyers willing to take his case. The High Court subsequently ordered Chee, his sister, and his political party to pay
S$610,000 (US$420,000) in defamation damages to the prime minister and his father. The ruling appeared likely to force the SDP
into bankruptcy. Chee had already been forced into bankruptcy in 2006 by a US$300,000 ruling against him for defaming former
prime ministers Goh and Lee.
Separately, longtime opposition politician J. B. Jeyaretnam died in September. He had been disqualified from Parliament in 2001
after being ordered to pay libel damages for criticizing PAP officials and had refused to pay until June 2007. He had subsequently
initiated plans to form a new Democratic Reform Party.
Singapore is not an electoral democracy. The country is governed through a parliamentary system, and elections are free from
irregularities and vote rigging, but the ruling PAP dominates the political process. The prime minister retains control over the
Elections Department, and the country lacks a structurally independent election authority. Opposition campaigns are hamstrung by
a ban on political films and television programs, the threat of libel suits, strict regulations on political associations, and the PAP’s
influence on the media and the courts.
Click here to read more »
Political Rights Score: 5
Civil Liberties Score: 4
Status: Partly Free
Trend Arrow
Singapore received a downward trend arrow due to the politically motivated handling of defamation cases, which cast
doubt on judicial independence.
Overview
As part of a broader legal crackdown on government critics in 2008, opposition politician Chee Soon Juan was ordered to pay
roughly US$400,000 in defamation damages to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his father, former prime minister Lee Kuan
Yew. Another vocal critic of the government, Gopalan Nair, received a three-month jail sentence for insulting two judges on his
blog.
In 2007 and 2008, Lee continued to pursue his economic agenda while using the legal system and other tools to keep the opposition
in check. The government also maintained that racial sensitivities and the threat of Islamist terrorism justified draconian restrictions
on freedoms of speech and assembly. Such rules were repeatedly used to silence criticism of the authorities.
In September 2007, Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) leader Chee Soon Juan was convicted for trying to travel to a 2006 World
Movement for Democracy conference without a permit. He stood trial again in October 2008, marking his eighth trial since 1992,
this time for defamation and allegedly participating in an illegal gathering. Chee, a lawyer by training, represented himself due to the
absence of lawyers willing to take his case. The High Court subsequently ordered Chee, his sister, and his political party to pay
S$610,000 (US$420,000) in defamation damages to the prime minister and his father. The ruling appeared likely to force the SDP
into bankruptcy. Chee had already been forced into bankruptcy in 2006 by a US$300,000 ruling against him for defaming former
prime ministers Goh and Lee.
Separately, longtime opposition politician J. B. Jeyaretnam died in September. He had been disqualified from Parliament in 2001
after being ordered to pay libel damages for criticizing PAP officials and had refused to pay until June 2007. He had subsequently
initiated plans to form a new Democratic Reform Party.
Singapore is not an electoral democracy. The country is governed through a parliamentary system, and elections are free from
irregularities and vote rigging, but the ruling PAP dominates the political process. The prime minister retains control over the
Elections Department, and the country lacks a structurally independent election authority. Opposition campaigns are hamstrung by
a ban on political films and television programs, the threat of libel suits, strict regulations on political associations, and the PAP’s
influence on the media and the courts.
Click here to read more »
Singapore: Stay of execution for Yong Vui Kong
09 December 2009
URGENT ACTION
Yong Vui Kong has received a stay of execution, after lawyers argued that his earlier withdrawal of an appeal was void due to his
poor mental health. His appeal will now be heard by the Court of Appeal early in 2010: if it is unsuccessful, he may then be
executed.
On 2 December the High Court postponed his 4 December execution to allow the Court of Appeal time to hearan application for a
stay. On 8 December the Court of Appeal ruled that Yong Vui Kong's appeal should be heard, nullifying an earlier withdrawal of his
appeal.
Yong Vui Kong's lawyers argued that the earlier withdrawal was due to his poor mental state after 20 months of "isolation." The
Court accepted that Yong had withdrawn his appeal under “misapprehension” and allowed him to file an appeal against the
conviction and death sentence. The Appeal hearing could be held as early as January 2010, and if it is unsuccessful he may then be
executed.
His lawyers are appealing on the grounds that the mandatory death sentence for drug-trafficking, which is set out in the Misuse of
Drugs Act, is unconstitutional, and that his case should therefore be referred back to the trial judge.
The President of Singapore rejected Yong Vui Kong's petition for clemency on 1 December.
PLEASE WRITE IMMEDIATELY in English, Mandarin or your own language:
*Urging the president to reconsider Yong Vui Kong's clemency petition and commute his death sentence;
*Expressing concern that because the death penalty is mandatory for drug-trafficking offences, the court that sentenced Yong
Vui Kong to death had no discretion to sentence him to an alternative punishment;
*Calling on the president to introduce a moratorium on executions, with a view to complete abolition of the death penalty.
Additional Information
At least one person is known to have been hanged in Singapore so far in 2009, and at least three sentenced to death; in 2008, at
least one person was hanged and five sentenced to death. The authorities do not release any information about the use of the death
penalty in the country, however, and the true figures are likely to be higher. The government has always maintained that the death
penalty is not a human rights issue, and consistently lobbied other nations against the abolition of the death penalty.
All capital cases are tried by the High Court; convicted prisoners can appeal, and if they are unsuccessful they can apply to the
president for clemency. President Nathan, who has been in power since 1999, is not known to have granted clemency to any
condemned prisoner.
Click here to read more »
09 December 2009
URGENT ACTION
Yong Vui Kong has received a stay of execution, after lawyers argued that his earlier withdrawal of an appeal was void due to his
poor mental health. His appeal will now be heard by the Court of Appeal early in 2010: if it is unsuccessful, he may then be
executed.
On 2 December the High Court postponed his 4 December execution to allow the Court of Appeal time to hearan application for a
stay. On 8 December the Court of Appeal ruled that Yong Vui Kong's appeal should be heard, nullifying an earlier withdrawal of his
appeal.
Yong Vui Kong's lawyers argued that the earlier withdrawal was due to his poor mental state after 20 months of "isolation." The
Court accepted that Yong had withdrawn his appeal under “misapprehension” and allowed him to file an appeal against the
conviction and death sentence. The Appeal hearing could be held as early as January 2010, and if it is unsuccessful he may then be
executed.
His lawyers are appealing on the grounds that the mandatory death sentence for drug-trafficking, which is set out in the Misuse of
Drugs Act, is unconstitutional, and that his case should therefore be referred back to the trial judge.
The President of Singapore rejected Yong Vui Kong's petition for clemency on 1 December.
PLEASE WRITE IMMEDIATELY in English, Mandarin or your own language:
*Urging the president to reconsider Yong Vui Kong's clemency petition and commute his death sentence;
*Expressing concern that because the death penalty is mandatory for drug-trafficking offences, the court that sentenced Yong
Vui Kong to death had no discretion to sentence him to an alternative punishment;
*Calling on the president to introduce a moratorium on executions, with a view to complete abolition of the death penalty.
Additional Information
At least one person is known to have been hanged in Singapore so far in 2009, and at least three sentenced to death; in 2008, at
least one person was hanged and five sentenced to death. The authorities do not release any information about the use of the death
penalty in the country, however, and the true figures are likely to be higher. The government has always maintained that the death
penalty is not a human rights issue, and consistently lobbied other nations against the abolition of the death penalty.
All capital cases are tried by the High Court; convicted prisoners can appeal, and if they are unsuccessful they can apply to the
president for clemency. President Nathan, who has been in power since 1999, is not known to have granted clemency to any
condemned prisoner.
Click here to read more »
Singapore: ‘Textbook Example” of Repressive State
Recent Convictions of Democracy Activists Show Intolerance Towards Pluralism
January 20, 2010
(New York) - As Singapore begins to emerge from the international financial crisis and focuses on elections that are likely to be
held later this year, the government should act to improve its poor human rights record, Human Rights Watch said in its World
Report 2010, released today.
The 612-page report, the organization's 20th annual review of human rights practices around the globe, summarizes major human
rights trends in more than 90 nations and territories worldwide. Its chapter on Singapore says the government fails to meet human
rights standards in a number of critical areas, including freedom of expression, association, and assembly. While Singapore has
touted its prowess as a leading economic nation in Southeast Asia, it continues to falter in respecting the rights of its own
population, Human Rights Watch said
"Singapore remains the textbook example of a politically repressive state," said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human
Rights Watch. "Individuals who want to criticize or challenge the ruling party's hold on power can expect to face a life of
harassment, lawsuits, and even prison."
Freedom to express views publicly continues to be largely limited to the tiny Speaker's Corner in the city-state, while any
procession or assembly for a "cause-related activity" must have prior police approval under the Public Order Act of 2009.
Draconian laws such as the Internal Security Act (ISA), Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act (CLA), Misuse of Drugs Act
(MDA), and Undesirable Publications Act remain available to the government to muzzle peaceful critics. In December 2009, three
long-time government critics-Dr. Chee Soon Juan, Chee Siok Chin, and Gandhi Ambalam-were convicted of distributing flyers
critical of the government. After refusing to pay fines, all three were sentenced to short prison terms.
But appearance-conscious Singapore sometimes forgoes criminal prosecution in favor of other forms of harassment, such as
defamation suits seeking punitive damages that snagged the Wall Street Journal and the Far Eastern Economic Review, restrictions
on publication licenses under the longstanding Newspaper and Printing Presses Acts, and enforcement actions limiting rights.
Click here to read more »
Recent Convictions of Democracy Activists Show Intolerance Towards Pluralism
January 20, 2010
(New York) - As Singapore begins to emerge from the international financial crisis and focuses on elections that are likely to be
held later this year, the government should act to improve its poor human rights record, Human Rights Watch said in its World
Report 2010, released today.
The 612-page report, the organization's 20th annual review of human rights practices around the globe, summarizes major human
rights trends in more than 90 nations and territories worldwide. Its chapter on Singapore says the government fails to meet human
rights standards in a number of critical areas, including freedom of expression, association, and assembly. While Singapore has
touted its prowess as a leading economic nation in Southeast Asia, it continues to falter in respecting the rights of its own
population, Human Rights Watch said
"Singapore remains the textbook example of a politically repressive state," said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human
Rights Watch. "Individuals who want to criticize or challenge the ruling party's hold on power can expect to face a life of
harassment, lawsuits, and even prison."
Freedom to express views publicly continues to be largely limited to the tiny Speaker's Corner in the city-state, while any
procession or assembly for a "cause-related activity" must have prior police approval under the Public Order Act of 2009.
Draconian laws such as the Internal Security Act (ISA), Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act (CLA), Misuse of Drugs Act
(MDA), and Undesirable Publications Act remain available to the government to muzzle peaceful critics. In December 2009, three
long-time government critics-Dr. Chee Soon Juan, Chee Siok Chin, and Gandhi Ambalam-were convicted of distributing flyers
critical of the government. After refusing to pay fines, all three were sentenced to short prison terms.
But appearance-conscious Singapore sometimes forgoes criminal prosecution in favor of other forms of harassment, such as
defamation suits seeking punitive damages that snagged the Wall Street Journal and the Far Eastern Economic Review, restrictions
on publication licenses under the longstanding Newspaper and Printing Presses Acts, and enforcement actions limiting rights.
Click here to read more »
STATEMENT BY MR TAN ENG TAT, DELEGATE, PERMANENT MISSION OF SINGAPORE TO THE UNITED NATIONS,
ON AGENDA ITEM 69: PROMOTION AND PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS, THIRD COMMITTEE, TUESDAY, 27
OCTOBER 2009
Mr Chairman,
3 We do not live in a perfect world. It is precisely because we live in an imperfect world that we are mindful of the fact that
making progress on human rights will require accommodation and understanding of differing national conditions. The diversity of
the UN's membership is a political reality that cannot be wished away. While diversity is no defence for violations of human rights,
neither should we overlook this reality in our pursuit of a better world for all. This is why my delegation believes that instead of
using words that divide rather than unite, or engage in posturing instead of persuading, an approach of humility and
accommodation might help all of us find common cause in this issue.
4 Every country's political and social arrangements are unique because of its own historical and cultural context. Because of this, it
is inevitable that there are differing notions of human rights. Sometimes, even within a country itself, there are also differing views
over human rights issues such as those involving the rights of the unborn and the treatment of migrant labour.
5 It is our belief that economic development is the necessary foundation of any political system that claims to advance human
dignity, and that order and stability are essential for development. After all, it would be a cruel joke for a government to indulge in
pompous claims of respecting human rights, when the basic human needs of its own people are not even met.
6 For Singapore, we also believe that the exercise of rights must be balanced with the shouldering of responsibilities. We place
equal importance on the protection of societal rights, not just individual rights. At the same time, the decision as to where the
balance between rights and responsibilities is struck will depend on each country and its own stage of development. Similarly, as
my country continues its own path of development, we do not seek to impose our views on others, as we are fully aware of our
respective national circumstances.
7 We need to remind ourselves that the purpose of the Third Committee is to work for the general welfare of mankind, and not to
score debating points or produce resolutions that people only pay lip service to. On very difficult issues, we should work with one
another to try to expand consensus. It is our belief that only through the recognition of the rich diversity of mankind and
accommodation of different views can we facilitate the free interaction of all ideas from which the international consensus on
human rights can be deepened and expanded. A pragmatic approach to human rights is one that tries to build on what common
ground that we can agree upon, while agreeing to disagree if we must. Only then can we make real progress in the cause of human
rights.
Click here to read more »
ON AGENDA ITEM 69: PROMOTION AND PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS, THIRD COMMITTEE, TUESDAY, 27
OCTOBER 2009
Mr Chairman,
3 We do not live in a perfect world. It is precisely because we live in an imperfect world that we are mindful of the fact that
making progress on human rights will require accommodation and understanding of differing national conditions. The diversity of
the UN's membership is a political reality that cannot be wished away. While diversity is no defence for violations of human rights,
neither should we overlook this reality in our pursuit of a better world for all. This is why my delegation believes that instead of
using words that divide rather than unite, or engage in posturing instead of persuading, an approach of humility and
accommodation might help all of us find common cause in this issue.
4 Every country's political and social arrangements are unique because of its own historical and cultural context. Because of this, it
is inevitable that there are differing notions of human rights. Sometimes, even within a country itself, there are also differing views
over human rights issues such as those involving the rights of the unborn and the treatment of migrant labour.
5 It is our belief that economic development is the necessary foundation of any political system that claims to advance human
dignity, and that order and stability are essential for development. After all, it would be a cruel joke for a government to indulge in
pompous claims of respecting human rights, when the basic human needs of its own people are not even met.
6 For Singapore, we also believe that the exercise of rights must be balanced with the shouldering of responsibilities. We place
equal importance on the protection of societal rights, not just individual rights. At the same time, the decision as to where the
balance between rights and responsibilities is struck will depend on each country and its own stage of development. Similarly, as
my country continues its own path of development, we do not seek to impose our views on others, as we are fully aware of our
respective national circumstances.
7 We need to remind ourselves that the purpose of the Third Committee is to work for the general welfare of mankind, and not to
score debating points or produce resolutions that people only pay lip service to. On very difficult issues, we should work with one
another to try to expand consensus. It is our belief that only through the recognition of the rich diversity of mankind and
accommodation of different views can we facilitate the free interaction of all ideas from which the international consensus on
human rights can be deepened and expanded. A pragmatic approach to human rights is one that tries to build on what common
ground that we can agree upon, while agreeing to disagree if we must. Only then can we make real progress in the cause of human
rights.
Click here to read more »
Singaporeans For Democracy gazetted as political association
Posted: 03 February 2010
SINGAPORE : The Registry of Political Donations has gazetted the society Singaporeans For Democracy (SFD) as a Political
Association under the Political Donations Act, with immediate effect.
The SFD, which is led by former Workers' Party member Dr James Gomez, was informed in writing on Wednesday.
The registry said the SFD's goals are in line with the objective to safeguard the integrity of Singapore's political process.
It noted that the SFD had stated clearly in its constitution that its objectives relate mainly to politics in Singapore.
First, it pledged to advocate for political and legislative reform in line with the principles embedded in the Singapore National Pledge
"to build a democratic society, based on justice and equality".
Second, it said it would campaign for democracy-related issues at the national, regional and international levels.
It also stated that it would foster a multi-partisan civil and political platform - that includes individuals, non-governmental
organisations and political parties - to promote democracy, both locally and abroad.
The SFD also pledged to apply the use of new media tools for organisational decision-making processes, information dissemination,
networking, mobilisation and advocacy to promote democracy.
Click here to read more »
Posted: 03 February 2010
SINGAPORE : The Registry of Political Donations has gazetted the society Singaporeans For Democracy (SFD) as a Political
Association under the Political Donations Act, with immediate effect.
The SFD, which is led by former Workers' Party member Dr James Gomez, was informed in writing on Wednesday.
The registry said the SFD's goals are in line with the objective to safeguard the integrity of Singapore's political process.
It noted that the SFD had stated clearly in its constitution that its objectives relate mainly to politics in Singapore.
First, it pledged to advocate for political and legislative reform in line with the principles embedded in the Singapore National Pledge
"to build a democratic society, based on justice and equality".
Second, it said it would campaign for democracy-related issues at the national, regional and international levels.
It also stated that it would foster a multi-partisan civil and political platform - that includes individuals, non-governmental
organisations and political parties - to promote democracy, both locally and abroad.
The SFD also pledged to apply the use of new media tools for organisational decision-making processes, information dissemination,
networking, mobilisation and advocacy to promote democracy.
Click here to read more »
Time for an Ombudsman in Singapore
September 23, 2008
Why?
It is not difficult to morally justify the establishment of an Ombudsman. An Ombudsman provides a public service by undertaking
independent investigations into complaints that government departments, statutory boards and other government-related institutions
have not acted properly or fairly.
An Ombudsman with a well-defined role and clear mechanisms for action can be beneficial.
Role of an Ombudsman
An Ombudsman may investigate complaints about the unfair administrative decisions or actions of a public agency, including delay,
rudeness, negligence, arbitrariness, oppressive behaviour, or unlawfulness.
An Ombudsman may investigate complaints from individuals or groups of people. An Ombudsman has the discretion to decide
which complaints are to be investigated and which are not.
An Ombudsman does not have the power to make decisions that are binding on the government. Rather, the Ombudsman makes
recommendations for change, as supported by a thorough investigation of the complaint. A crucial element of the Ombudsman is
its independence from the executive or administrative branch of government.
Whenever possible, one should try to resolve complaints directly with the public agency in question before turning to the
Ombudsman. When all reasonable attempts have failed, the Ombudsman may be able to help:
1. secure the names of the people one is dealing with;
2. keep track of their responses and keep copies of all relevant papers and letters;
3. ask how and why the decision was made;
4. find out if there is a review or appeal process, and pursue that process where possible.
Click here to read more »
September 23, 2008
Why?
It is not difficult to morally justify the establishment of an Ombudsman. An Ombudsman provides a public service by undertaking
independent investigations into complaints that government departments, statutory boards and other government-related institutions
have not acted properly or fairly.
An Ombudsman with a well-defined role and clear mechanisms for action can be beneficial.
Role of an Ombudsman
An Ombudsman may investigate complaints about the unfair administrative decisions or actions of a public agency, including delay,
rudeness, negligence, arbitrariness, oppressive behaviour, or unlawfulness.
An Ombudsman may investigate complaints from individuals or groups of people. An Ombudsman has the discretion to decide
which complaints are to be investigated and which are not.
An Ombudsman does not have the power to make decisions that are binding on the government. Rather, the Ombudsman makes
recommendations for change, as supported by a thorough investigation of the complaint. A crucial element of the Ombudsman is
its independence from the executive or administrative branch of government.
Whenever possible, one should try to resolve complaints directly with the public agency in question before turning to the
Ombudsman. When all reasonable attempts have failed, the Ombudsman may be able to help:
1. secure the names of the people one is dealing with;
2. keep track of their responses and keep copies of all relevant papers and letters;
3. ask how and why the decision was made;
4. find out if there is a review or appeal process, and pursue that process where possible.
Click here to read more »
The earliest written record of Singapore was a Chinese account from the third century, describing the island of Pu Luo
Chung. This itself is transliterated from the Malay name "Pulau Ujong", or "island at the end" (of the Malay peninsula). The
Sejarah Melayu (Malay Annals) contains a tale of a prince of Srivijaya, Sri Tri Buana (also known as Sang Nila Utama),
who landed on the island during the 13th century. Catching sight of a strange creature which he thought was a lion, he found
a settlement called Singapura, which means "Lion City" in Sanskrit. In 1320, the Mongol Empire sent a trade mission to a
place called Long Yamen (or Dragon's Tooth Strait), which is believed to be Keppel Harbour, at the southern part of the
island. The Chinese traveler Wang Dayuan, visiting the island around 1330, described a small settlement called Dan Ma Xi
(from Malay Tamasik) with Malay and Chinese residents. The Nagarakretagama, a Javanese epic poem written in 1365,
also referred to a settlement on the island called Temasek (Sea Town). Recent excavations in Fort Canning found evidences
indicating that Singapore was an important port in the 14th century. In the 1390s, Srivijayan prince Parameswara fled to
Temasek after being deposed by the Majapahit Empire. He ruled the island for several years, before being forced to Melaka
where he founded the Sultanate of Malacca. Singapore became an important trading port of the Malacca Sultanate and later
the Sultanate of Johor. In 1613, Portuguese raiders burnt down the settlement at the mouth of Singapore River and the
island sank into obscurity. Between the 16th and 19th centuries, the Malay archipelago was gradually taken over by the
European colonial powers, beginning with the arrival of the Portuguese at Malacca in 1509. The early dominance of the
Portuguese was challenged during the 17th century by the Dutch, who came to control most of the ports in the region. The
Dutch established a monopoly over trade within the archipelago, particularly in spices, then the region's most important
product. Other colonial powers, including the British, were limited to a relatively minor presence. In 1818, Sir Thomas
Stamford Raffles was appointed as the Lieutenant Governor of the British colony at Bencoolen. He was determined that
British should replace the Dutch as the dominant power in the archipelago, since the trade route between China and British
India, which had become vitally important with the institution of the opium trade with China, passed through the archipelago.
Raffles arrived in Singapore on 29 January 1819 and soon recognised the island as a natural choice for the new port. It lay
at the southern tip of the Malay peninsula, near the Straits of Malacca, and possessed a natural deep harbour, fresh water
supplies, and timber for repairing ships. Raffles found a small Malay settlement at the mouth of the Singapore River, headed
by Temenggong Abdu'r Rahman. The island was nominally ruled by the Sultan of Johor, Tengku Rahman, who was
controlled by the Dutch and the Bugis. A formal treaty was signed on 6 February 1819 and modern Singapore was born.
Raffles returned to Bencoolen soon after the signing of the treaty and left Major William Farquhar in charge of the new
settlement, with some artillery and a small regiment of Indian soldiers. As news of a free port spread across the archipelago,
Bugis, Peranakan Chinese, and Arab traders flocked to the island, seeking to circumvent the Dutch trade restrictions. The
population reached the 10,000 mark in 1825, and with a trade volume of $22 million, Singapore surpassed the long-
established port of Penang.Raffles returned to Singapore in 1822 and became critical of many of Farquhar's decisions,
despite Farquhar's success in leading the settlement through its difficult early years. In order to generate much-needed
revenue, Farquhar had resorted to selling licenses for gambling and the sale of opium, which Raffles saw as social evils. The
status of Singapore as a British possession was cemented by the Anglo-Dutch Treaty of 1824, which carved up the Malay
archipelago between the two colonial powers with the area north of the Straits of Malacca, including Singapore, falling under
British's sphere of influence. By 1880, over 1.5 million tons of goods were passing through Singapore each year, with
around 80% of the cargo transported by steamships.[12] The main commercial activity was entrepôt trade which flourished
under no taxation and little Restriction. The British government agreed to establish the Straits Settlements as a separate
Crown Colony on 1 April 1867.The immigrant Chinese population in Singapore donated generously to Tongmenghui, which
organised the 1911 Xinhai Revolution that led to the establishment of the Republic of China. Singapore was not much
affected by World War I (1914–18), as the conflict did not spread to Southeast Asia. Singapore, renamed Syonan-to
(Shōnan-tō, "Light of the South Island" in Japanese), was occupied by the Japanese from 1942 to 1945.The failure of
Britain to defend Singapore had destroyed its credibility as infallible ruler in the eyes of Singaporeans. On 1 April 1946, the
Straits Settlements was dissolved and Singapore became a separate Crown Colony with a civil administration headed by a
Governor. On 16 September 1963, Malaya, Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak were formally merged and Malaysia was
formed. Numerous racial riots resulted and curfews were frequently imposed to restore order. The most notorious riots
were the 1964 Race Riots that first took place on Prophet Muhammad's birthday on 21 July with twenty three people killed
and hundreds injured. On 9 August 1965, Singapore declared its independence and became a sovereign, independent
nation. Singapore joined the United Nations on 21 September 1965 and the Commonwealth in October that year. During
the 1980s, Singapore began to upgrade its industries to higher-technology industries. The Constitution was amended in 1991
to provide for an Elected President who has veto power in the use of national reserves and appointments to public office.In
the early years of 2000s, Singapore went through some of its most serious post-independence crises, including the SARS
outbreak in 2003 and the threat of terrorism. The general election of 2006 was a landmark election because of the
prominent use of the internet and blogging to cover and comment on the election, circumventing the official media.
Sources: Wikipedia History of Singapore
Chung. This itself is transliterated from the Malay name "Pulau Ujong", or "island at the end" (of the Malay peninsula). The
Sejarah Melayu (Malay Annals) contains a tale of a prince of Srivijaya, Sri Tri Buana (also known as Sang Nila Utama),
who landed on the island during the 13th century. Catching sight of a strange creature which he thought was a lion, he found
a settlement called Singapura, which means "Lion City" in Sanskrit. In 1320, the Mongol Empire sent a trade mission to a
place called Long Yamen (or Dragon's Tooth Strait), which is believed to be Keppel Harbour, at the southern part of the
island. The Chinese traveler Wang Dayuan, visiting the island around 1330, described a small settlement called Dan Ma Xi
(from Malay Tamasik) with Malay and Chinese residents. The Nagarakretagama, a Javanese epic poem written in 1365,
also referred to a settlement on the island called Temasek (Sea Town). Recent excavations in Fort Canning found evidences
indicating that Singapore was an important port in the 14th century. In the 1390s, Srivijayan prince Parameswara fled to
Temasek after being deposed by the Majapahit Empire. He ruled the island for several years, before being forced to Melaka
where he founded the Sultanate of Malacca. Singapore became an important trading port of the Malacca Sultanate and later
the Sultanate of Johor. In 1613, Portuguese raiders burnt down the settlement at the mouth of Singapore River and the
island sank into obscurity. Between the 16th and 19th centuries, the Malay archipelago was gradually taken over by the
European colonial powers, beginning with the arrival of the Portuguese at Malacca in 1509. The early dominance of the
Portuguese was challenged during the 17th century by the Dutch, who came to control most of the ports in the region. The
Dutch established a monopoly over trade within the archipelago, particularly in spices, then the region's most important
product. Other colonial powers, including the British, were limited to a relatively minor presence. In 1818, Sir Thomas
Stamford Raffles was appointed as the Lieutenant Governor of the British colony at Bencoolen. He was determined that
British should replace the Dutch as the dominant power in the archipelago, since the trade route between China and British
India, which had become vitally important with the institution of the opium trade with China, passed through the archipelago.
Raffles arrived in Singapore on 29 January 1819 and soon recognised the island as a natural choice for the new port. It lay
at the southern tip of the Malay peninsula, near the Straits of Malacca, and possessed a natural deep harbour, fresh water
supplies, and timber for repairing ships. Raffles found a small Malay settlement at the mouth of the Singapore River, headed
by Temenggong Abdu'r Rahman. The island was nominally ruled by the Sultan of Johor, Tengku Rahman, who was
controlled by the Dutch and the Bugis. A formal treaty was signed on 6 February 1819 and modern Singapore was born.
Raffles returned to Bencoolen soon after the signing of the treaty and left Major William Farquhar in charge of the new
settlement, with some artillery and a small regiment of Indian soldiers. As news of a free port spread across the archipelago,
Bugis, Peranakan Chinese, and Arab traders flocked to the island, seeking to circumvent the Dutch trade restrictions. The
population reached the 10,000 mark in 1825, and with a trade volume of $22 million, Singapore surpassed the long-
established port of Penang.Raffles returned to Singapore in 1822 and became critical of many of Farquhar's decisions,
despite Farquhar's success in leading the settlement through its difficult early years. In order to generate much-needed
revenue, Farquhar had resorted to selling licenses for gambling and the sale of opium, which Raffles saw as social evils. The
status of Singapore as a British possession was cemented by the Anglo-Dutch Treaty of 1824, which carved up the Malay
archipelago between the two colonial powers with the area north of the Straits of Malacca, including Singapore, falling under
British's sphere of influence. By 1880, over 1.5 million tons of goods were passing through Singapore each year, with
around 80% of the cargo transported by steamships.[12] The main commercial activity was entrepôt trade which flourished
under no taxation and little Restriction. The British government agreed to establish the Straits Settlements as a separate
Crown Colony on 1 April 1867.The immigrant Chinese population in Singapore donated generously to Tongmenghui, which
organised the 1911 Xinhai Revolution that led to the establishment of the Republic of China. Singapore was not much
affected by World War I (1914–18), as the conflict did not spread to Southeast Asia. Singapore, renamed Syonan-to
(Shōnan-tō, "Light of the South Island" in Japanese), was occupied by the Japanese from 1942 to 1945.The failure of
Britain to defend Singapore had destroyed its credibility as infallible ruler in the eyes of Singaporeans. On 1 April 1946, the
Straits Settlements was dissolved and Singapore became a separate Crown Colony with a civil administration headed by a
Governor. On 16 September 1963, Malaya, Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak were formally merged and Malaysia was
formed. Numerous racial riots resulted and curfews were frequently imposed to restore order. The most notorious riots
were the 1964 Race Riots that first took place on Prophet Muhammad's birthday on 21 July with twenty three people killed
and hundreds injured. On 9 August 1965, Singapore declared its independence and became a sovereign, independent
nation. Singapore joined the United Nations on 21 September 1965 and the Commonwealth in October that year. During
the 1980s, Singapore began to upgrade its industries to higher-technology industries. The Constitution was amended in 1991
to provide for an Elected President who has veto power in the use of national reserves and appointments to public office.In
the early years of 2000s, Singapore went through some of its most serious post-independence crises, including the SARS
outbreak in 2003 and the threat of terrorism. The general election of 2006 was a landmark election because of the
prominent use of the internet and blogging to cover and comment on the election, circumventing the official media.
Sources: Wikipedia History of Singapore
Click on map for larger view
Click on flag for Country Report
| TRAFFICKING ON PERSONS |
None reported.
Goh Chok Tong and
Shunmugam Jayakumar
Senior Minister
since 12 August 2004 and
1 April 2009
Shunmugam Jayakumar
Senior Minister
since 12 August 2004 and
1 April 2009
Lee Kuan
Minister Mentor
since 12 August 2004
Minister Mentor
since 12 August 2004
Wong Kan Seng and
Teo Chee Hean
Deputy Prime Ministers
since 1 September 2005 and 1 April 2009
Teo Chee Hean
Deputy Prime Ministers
since 1 September 2005 and 1 April 2009
