One Nation Under the Films Act Join the campaign to raise awareness about a law that criminalizes everyone in Singapore who has in his or her possession a copy of a film that has not been licensed by the authorities. And this includes video images stored in mobile phones.The Films Act is an archaic piece of legislation written in 1981. We are calling for a repeal, or at the very least, a complete review of the statute.Click here to join________________________________________Sections of the Films Act you should know aboutSECTION 12Films made in Singapore to be deposited in approved warehouse12. —(1) The owner of any film made in Singapore shall, within 7 days after the making of the film, deposit the film in a warehouse approved for this purpose by the Board.(2) Any person who fails to deposit the film in accordance with subsection (1) shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $5,000.SECTION 14Submission of films for censorship14. —(1) Every film in the possession of any person shall be submitted to the Board without any alteration or excision for the purpose of censorship at the owner’s risk and expense and at such time and place as the Board may appoint.(2) During the course of censorship, the Board may in its discretion exclude any person from the place where the film is being exhibited.SECTION 15Prohibition and approval of films for exhibition15. —(1) After the submission of a film for the purpose of censorship, the Board may —(a) approve the film for exhibition without alteration or excision;(b) prohibit the exhibition of the film; or(c) approve the film for exhibition with such alterations or excisions as it may require.SECTION 21Penalty for possession, exhibition or distribution of uncensored films21. —(1) Any person who —(a) has in his possession;(b) exhibits or distributes; or(c) reproduces,any film without a valid certificate, approving the exhibition of the film, shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction —(i) in respect of an offence under paragraph (a), to a fine of not less than $100 for each such film that he had in his possession (but not to exceed in the aggregate $20,000); and(ii) in respect of an offence under paragraph (b) or (c), to a fine of not less than $500 for each such film he had exhibited, distributed or reproduced, as the case may be (but not to exceed in the aggregate $40,000) or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to both.[10/98]SECTION 22Advertisement of films for exhibition prohibited unless approved by Board22. —(1) No person shall advertise or cause to be advertised the exhibition or distribution of any film unless the advertisement has been approved by the Board.(2) Any person who advertises or causes to be advertised any film where the advertisement in respect of the film has not been approved by the Board under subsection (1) shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $5,000.SECTION 23Search for unauthorised films and arrest of persons23. —(1) Whenever a Deputy or an Assistant Commissioner of Police or an Assistant Superintendent of Police is satisfied upon written information and after any further inquiry which he may think necessary that any film —(a) which has not been —(i) deposited in an approved warehouse as required by section 12 or 13;(ii) returned to the Board as required by section 14 (4); or(iii) approved for exhibition under section 15 or 26 (4);(b) in respect of which the certificate issued therefor has ceased to be valid under section 20; or(c) which has been altered in any way after a certificate in respect of the film was issued,has been or is being exhibited or kept in any place, he may issue a warrant directed to any police officer to enter and search that place and seize the film and to take into custody any person reasonably believed to be guilty of an offence by reason of failure to deposit or to return the film or by reason of such possession or exhibition.[10/98](2) A Deputy or an Assistant Commissioner of Police or an Assistant Superintendent of Police may without warrant, with such assistance and by such force as is necessary, by night or by day, himself do what he may authorise any police officer to do under subsection (1) in either of the following cases:(a) if he has personal knowledge of such facts as satisfy him that there are sufficient grounds for a search;(b) if he receives information orally in such circumstances that the object of a search would in his opinion be defeated by the delay necessary for reducing the information to writing except that the name and address of the person giving the information is known to or ascertained by him before he acts upon the information.SECTION 30Possession of obscene films30. —(1) Any person who has in his possession any obscene film shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine of not less than $500 for each such film he had in his possession (but not to exceed in the aggregate $20,000) or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to both.SECTION 33Making, distribution and exhibition of party political films33. Any person who —(a) imports any party political film;(b) makes or reproduces any party political film;(c) distributes, or has in his possession for the purposes of distributing, to any other person any party political film; or(d) exhibits, or has in his possession for the purposes of exhibiting, to any other person any party political film,knowing or having reasonable cause to believe the film to be a party political film shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $100,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years.SECTION 34Search and seizure of unlawful films34. —(1) Any Deputy or Assistant Commissioner of Police, Assistant Superintendent of Police or any Censor, Deputy or Assistant Censor or Inspector of Films, if satisfied upon written information and after such further inquiry as he thinks necessary that any person has in his possession any obscene film or party political film, may without warrant, with such assistance and by such force as is necessary, by night or by day, enter and search any place where he has reason to believe the film is kept, seize the film and any equipment used in the exhibition, making or reproduction of the film and take into custody any person reasonably believed to be in possession thereof.SECTION 35Minister may prohibit possession or distribution of any film35. —(1) Notwithstanding the provisions of this Act if the Minister is of the opinion that the possession or distribution of any film would be contrary to the public interest, he may, in his discretion, by order published in the Gazette prohibit the possession or distribution of that film by any person.(2) Any person who has in his possession or who distributes any film the possession or distribution of which has been prohibited under subsection (1) shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $10,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years or to both, and the film shall be destroyed or otherwise disposed of as the Minister thinks fit.SECTION 40Exemptions40. —(1) This Act shall not apply to —(a) any film sponsored by the Government;(b) any film, not being an obscene film or a party political film or any feature, commercial, documentary or overseas television serial film, which is made by an individual and is not intended for distribution or public exhibition; and(c) any film reproduced from local television programmes and is not intended for distribution or public exhibition.[10/98](2) The Minister may, subject to such conditions as he thinks fit, exempt any person or class of persons or any film or class of films from all or any of the provisions of this Act.(3) An exemption granted under this section may be withdrawn at any time.________________________________________INTERPRETATIONS"film" means —(a) any cinematograph film;(b) any video recording, including a video recording that is designed for use wholly or principally as a game;(c) any other material record or thing on which is recorded or stored for immediate or future retrieval any information that, by the use of any computer or electronic device, is capable of being reproduced or displayed as wholly or partly visual moving pictures,and includes any part of a film, and any copy or part of a copy of the whole or any part of a film;------------------------------------------"obscene" , in relation to a film, means a film the effect of which or (where the film comprises 2 or more distinct parts or items) the effect of any one of its parts or items is, if taken as a whole, such as to tend to deprave or corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to see or hear the film;-------------------------------------------"party political film" means a film —(a) which is an advertisement made by or on behalf of any political party in Singapore or any body whose objects relate wholly or mainly to politics in Singapore, or any branch of such party or body; or(b) which is made by any person and directed towards any political end in Singapore;(2) For the purposes of this Act, a film is directed towards a political end in Singapore if the film —(a) contains wholly or partly any matter which is intended or likely to affect voting in any election or national referendum in Singapore; or(b) contains wholly or partly either partisan or biased references to or comments on any political matter, including but not limited to any of the following:(i) an election or a national referendum in Singapore;(ii) a candidate or group of candidates in an election;(iii) an issue submitted or otherwise before electors in an election or a national referendum in Singapore;(iv) the Government or a previous Government or the opposition to the Government or previous Government;(v) a Member of Parliament;(vi) a current policy of the Government or an issue of public controversy in Singapore; or(vii) a political party in Singapore or any body whose objects relate wholly or mainly to politics in Singapore, or any branch of such party or body.[10/98](3) For the avoidance of doubt, any film which is made solely for the purpose of —(a) reporting of current events; or(b) informing or educating persons on the procedures and polling times for any election or national referendum in Singapore,is not a party political film. Partisan political films please, we're the PAP Three years ago, I was placed under police investagation for making Singapore Rebel. I had to surrender all my tapes and camera and was subjected to gruelling interviews by the police - all for making a "party political film", as alleged by the complainant, the Media Development Authority (MDA).Some of my friends and acquaintances were also called up by the police for interviews, as the Singapore Gestapo combed through my phone records without my knowledge. I have publicly stated, even to the local press, that I hope to be the first and last person to be formally investigated for making a political film in Singapore.Today, I can safely lay claim to that title.The ruling People's Action Party will be making and posting their videos on their website. That's great news. But then someone should tell them to submit all their videos to the Board of Film Censors, as required by the Films Act. Otherwise, the censors are not averse to physically seizing films, as they did with One Nation Under Lee. Or are some parties in Singapore more above the law than others?For the record, Singapore Rebel and Zahari's 17 Years are still officially banned in Singapore. Possession of any such copies are liable to prosecution. But yes, I do have copies, and I will resubmit both videos to the censors very soon.And lest anyone is duped into believing that Singapore is opening up beacuse of the easing of political films, please be reminded that the Act banning such films was passed in 1998. With the latest ruling, we're really no better than we were prior to 1998. It's two steps back, one step forward. Again, if you still need further confirmation, ask him, and them.PAP aims to click with young Revamped website to feature party's videos in bid to connect with IT-savvy voters By Goh Chin LianSTRAITS TIMESSingaporeans can now go online to watch short videos of People's Action Party (PAP) MPs at events on the party's revamped website that was launched yesterday.It is a new way to reach out to young and IT-savvy voters, said party chairman Lim Boon Heng last night.'New media is facilitating change. Our party is gearing up our resources to harness this new platform,' he told 1,500 activists and unionists at the PAP's awards ceremony.'It will change some of the things that we do at our branches.'For instance, at each of the 84 branches, two or three party activists will now report on events, and put up slideshows and video footage on the party website.'Since the new media is reaching out to more and more people, not just the young but also some of the older ones who have got into IT, the party should use it as a medium for reaching out to people,' Mr Lim told reporters later.His comments follow recent moves to ease the ban on party political videos. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong indicated at this year's National Day Rally that he was in favour of relaxing existing rules.A government-appointed advisory council on new media issues is expected to make known its recommendations.Once the new rules are clear, Mr Lim said the party will ensure that its branches abide by them. Currently, the videos on its website are more like slideshows.Some MPs like Mrs Josephine Teo plan to do more than videos. Her Toa Payoh East branch intends to set up an account on social networking site Facebook for residents to communicate with her and with one another.That is because traditional ways of outreach are not as effective with the young.Read the rest here. "I have lost everything but I have no regrets" Oh the foes will rise With the sleep in their eyes And they'll jerk from their beds and think they're dreamin' But they'll pinch themselves and squeal And know that it's for real The hour that the ship comes in. Then they'll raise their hands Sayin' we'll meet all your demands But we'll shout from the bow your days are numbered And like Pharaoh's tribe They'll be drownded in the tide And like Goliath, they'll be conqueredLyrics by Bob DylanPerformed by Marcus Carl Franklin****************************************An excerpt of the introduction to Make It Right For Singaporepublished in 2000by Joshua Benjamin JeyaretnamI have, as a result of going into politics, lost everything. I have no bank account to speak of and do not own any property in Singapore nor hold any stocks or shares in any company. My practice has suffered as a result of my entering into politics way back in 1971. I drive a car but it is one that my son has lent me. I count it as the Grace of providence that I have not been detained and made to spend long years in prison like Mr Chia Thia Poh who spent 23 years in prison and often in solitary confinement.This book is my humble presentation to the people who in any democratic society are the final judges of what is good for the society they live in. The speeches have one constant theme running through them. That in any democratic society it is the members of the society - the people - who matter.That they should determine collectively the good of the society and not have it determined for them by anyone above them, however benevolent. That the society as a whole should take responsibility for its affairs and participate in the making of decisions that affect them.That power belongs to the people and the government only exercises powers delegated to it by the people.That the people are the masters and not the government which is only a servant of the people.That if this does not obtain in any society it ceases to be a democratic society and the people are reduced to being slaves in their own country. Slaves have no say in what their master ordains for them.It follows that in every democratic society, the individual matters, however lowly he may be. The dustman is as much entitled to his dignity and the rights to preserve that dignity as the highest person in the land is.These rights which have been termed human rights are inalienable and no person should be deprived of them even in the supposed interest of the community. It is a blot on the community even if one person is deprived of his rights. It is only by protecting the rights of every single individual that the community as a whole is protected.The rights are those that are necessary to the full development of the individual's dignity as a human being. The rights to housing, education, medical care, food and clothing. Besides these material rights, are those inalienable rights but no less important. The right to liberty, freedom from arbitrary arrest, to think, to speak his mind, to associate with his fellow beings in speaking together, to move freely and the right to live his life without fear under the law.To know what the law to which he has agreed through his elected representatives prohibits him from doing and to live his life fully without transgressing the law. That he can only be deprived of any of his rights after it has been proven to him that he had broken his contract with his fellow members of society.Deprive a human being of these inalienable rights and you make him less than a human being however well off he may be materially. A person loses his dignity if he is not allowed to think and give utterance to his thoughts whether alone or in the company of others. I am a passionate believer in all these. We are at the highest level of creation when we have taken on the image of God.The speeches scan the period from June 1997 to November 1999. Although a full Parliament was in place in January, Parliament did not meet until the end of May. The government functioned without Parliament. In a parliamentary democracy government takes its authority from Parliament but in Singapore the government was constituted and exercised power before Parliament was sworn in. This was also the position after the 1988 and 1991 elections..The right to justice is an integral part of human rights. Indeed it is justice that protects and safeguards human rights. I am concerned at some unhealthy trends in Singapore in the administration of criminal justice - the part of justice which protects human liberty and freedom. It is a concern that many lawyers in Singapore share.It is my hope that Singaporeans may find some inspiration in my speeches. Although, as I said, I have lost everything. I have no regrets. My reward has been the esteem I have met everywhere I go in Singapore and that is something no amount of money can buy.I thank God that he has given me the health and strength to render such service as I have tried to from 1971.- J.B. Jeyaretnam (1926 - 2008) JB Jeyaretnam - Singapore's Martyr At the funeral parlour this afternoon, Kenneth Jeyaretnam related to us how despite warnings from doctors about his father's heart condition, JBJ kept putting off medical treatment until such a time when he could finish his immediate task.And what was this task that was so urgent? He had been toiling in court to bring the Singapore Government to bear for not holding a by-election after a PAP MP had passed away recently.He didn't have to do this, nor did he have to form a new political party, or to revive his law practice. At the age of 82, he should have long retired, as both of his sons are successful professionals.Even to his last day, he battled for justice, for accountability, for a free Singapore. He gave away his life, literally, to the pursuit of genuine democracy in Singapore.Martyn See Tong Ming1 Oct 2008 Short film on elderly poor rated NC16 Nation Builders, a 14 minute documentary featuring scenes of the elderly poor ekeing out a living in Singapore, has been rated NC16 by the Board of Film Censors. I had submitted the film in July and it was cleared by the censors last week. No mention is made in the certificate (YN03947004) on why the film has been deemed unsuitable for viewers under the age of 16. A fee of $10.80 is payable upon every film you submit to the censors (even though the Films Act requires ALL films to be authorised by the BFC). I was told to write in to the Board to request for an explanation for the rating.Watch the entire video here and form your own conclusions as to why the Singapore Government does not want their under 16s to watch this film in a public screening.And oh , read this too.From hospital, Lee Kuan Yew asks rich to help poor"Unlike Kim Jong Il who says he is well but has not appeared, I thought I'd better say hello to you and to your guests and apologise for not being able to join you." - MM Lee Kuan YewThe censors' clearance of Nation Builders follows the approval of six other films, made by director Ho Choon Hiong, which documented a recent spate of political protests in Singapore.They are rated as follows.1. Human rights torch relay by Falungong in Singapore (M18)Youtube link hereRelated article : Singapore Welcomes the Global Human Rights Torch Relay2. BURMESE SAYS NO. (NC16)Youtube link hereRelated article : Myanmar nationals protest constitution in Singapore3. Burmese staged peaceful demonstration in Singapore (PG)Youtube link here.Related article : Activists Defy Protest Ban At ASEAN Summit In Singapore4. NUS international students Vigil Walk (PG)Youtube link hereRelated article : Protest Singapore Style; 3 Marchers, 19 Media, 1000 Police5. Singaporean started 5 days fasting against ISA on Hindraf 5 (PG)Youtube link hereRelated article : Palay ends hunger strike for Hindraf five6. Morning May day Montage (PG)Youtube link hereRelated article : Report on SDP's Walking for WorkersSix short political films first passed by Singapore censorsSingapore - Six short films documenting political activities in Singapore have been approved by Singapore censors, the first since the easing of an outright ban last month, media reports said on Saturday. The films produced by Ho Choon Hiong, 33, focus on street demonstrations, protests and fasting."It is an encouraging sign," The Straights Times quoted Ho as saying of the Board of Film Censors (BFC) nod.Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said last month that the ban could be relaxed. He said during the National Day Rally address that factual footage, documentaries and recordings of live events would be okayed.Still off-limits are the making or distribution of party political films, including ads by parties or other political organizations or footage distorted to create a slanted impression.Among the topics of films that received the go-ahead are a protest against the Beijing Olympics by members of the Falungong sect in the city-state, protests by Myanmar nationals and a Singaporean fasting outside the Malaysian High Commission in protest against the detention of Malaysian Hindu rights activists, the report said. Political films across the causeway Malaysia's premier showcase of human rights films will travel to Johor Bahru this weekend. It will be the closest location by which Singaporeans can watch One Nation Under Lee in a public space. Director Seelan Palay will be present at the post-screening Q&A session.Venue : Tropical InnAddress : 15, Jalan Gereja, Johor BahruDates : 12 to 14 Sept 2008Time : 11am til 10pmAdmission is FREEOne Nation Under Lee will screen on Saturday at 4.30pm.Other highlights include :War on Democracy : John Pilger's latest film uses CIA files and archive footage to demonstrate how the United States had undermined democracy in Latin America, replacing them with dictators such as Chile's General Pinochet.Promised Paradise : Jakarta-based puppeteer and troubadour Agus Nur Amal travels to Bali to call to account the people who were responsible for the bomb attack on a nightclub there on 12 October 2002. This film is officially banned in Indonesia, but shown to rapturous appluase at last week's screening in Kuala Lumpur.A Human Request : When the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted I December 1948, eight states abstained form voting arguing that certain articles were not acceptable in their cultures.Pecah Lobang : Pecah Lobang explores what it’s like to be a Muslim transsexual sex worker in Malaysia. Crossdressing is a crime under the Syariah court system for Muslims and the penalties are severe. But it wasn’t always so. A finalist of FFF's award.Pilihanraya Umum Malaysia ke-12 : Is elections in Malaysia free and fair? This documentary makes the case that citizens need to be educated on their voting rights. A finalist of FFF's award.Who Speaks for Me? : This documentary explores the issue of free expression in Malaysia in the aftermath of local rapper Namewee's controversial Negaraku-ku video. Winner of this year's FFF's "Most Outstanding Human Rights Film". Watch the interview of the three finalists here.Queer Cinema : Three films exploring homosexual relationships, including Amir Muhammad's Pang Yau.Click here for complete list of films and schedules. Pro-govt press interviews renegade filmmakers The interview below was conducted some two months ago, before the recent announcement by PM Lee on relaxing the ban on political films. What was Straits Times' hidden agenda? Perhaps it's a way to profile us for the Internal Security Department dossiers. Perhaps ST has vested interest to see political films relaxed for their own RazorTV. Perhaps they want to score some brownies in international press freedom rankings. Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps. Oh, whatever.Film-makers on the fringe Before the PM announced recently that the ban on political films was likely to be eased, they were already documenting scenes of S'pore politics and producing controversial films that flirted with the law. Meet the intrepid trio who believe they are rebels with a cause. -STSun, Sep 07, 2008The Straits TimesBy Sue-Ann Chia, political correspondentWHEN the death knell sounded on a 10-year-old law that imposes a total ban on political films two weeks ago, film-maker Martyn See cheered.The move marked the biggest effort in 20 years by the Government to loosen its hold on political expression here, declared the 39-year-old.As a mischievous tribute, he pulled together 100 films on local politics, compiling them on his blog a week after Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said in his Aug 17 National Day Rally speech that an outright ban on political films was no longer sensible.The 100 short clips - 'films' is too formal a term to describe them - are the work of assorted groups and individuals, most with a decidedly anti-establishment stance.They include two by Mr See which did not make the censor's cut. One is on Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) chief Chee Soon Juan and the other on former political detainee Said Zahari.He plans to re-submit them to the Board of Film Censors once the ban on political films is formally eased - likely early next year - just to test the new system.He wants to do so because the prospective change comes with caveats: Films which are partisan or give a distorted and slanted impression will still be off-limits.His own view is that there should be no caveats. 'If it is not sheer stupidity to continue enforcing bans on these films when they can be viewed at a click of a mouse, I don't know what is,' he wrote on his blog.How did he come to be such a fighter against Section 33 of the Films Act, which bans party political films?Political awakeningATTRIBUTE it to a second political awakening that came in the wake of the 2001 general election.He had had a first awakening back in the mid-1990s, when a photocopy of a banned book came his way.The book was To Catch A Tartar, written by former solicitor-general Francis Seow, describing his detention under the Internal Security Act in the late 1980s.'My eyes were opened to the darker side of the PAP's history,' he says.'I read it from cover to cover. I felt...frightened, depressed and angry at the same time.'His hitherto placid political outlook changed then, but it was only later - after the November 2001 election - that he was really roused into action.What caught his attention was Dr Chee Soon Juan heckling then prime minister Goh Chok Tong about an alleged loan to former Indonesian president Suharto.'Chee Soon Juan got hammered very badly. I wondered, is this guy as bad as the media made him out to be? So I decided to check him out myself,' he says.A few months later, in 2002, he asked to meet Dr Chee.For the next two years, he 'interviewed' the SDP leader regularly, visited him at his home and his office, and observed him when he staged public protests - filming all the while.He had reams of footage but no film, until Mr Lee Hsien Loong was sworn in as Prime Minister in 2004.Mr Lee's inauguration speech, promising the opening up of civil society, inspired him to compile his shots into a 28-minute film which he titled Singapore Rebel.He submitted it for screening at a film festival. But the film never made it past the censors.It was deemed 'party political', and banned under Section 33 of the Films Act.He was questioned four times over 15 months by the police and even had his video camera seized.'They dropped the investigation a couple of months after the 2006 general election. I guess they wanted to watch if I would participate in the election,' he says.He never did. But he continued to produce politically incorrect films.Singapore RebelMR SEE titled his directorial debut Singapore Rebel. Although about Dr Chee, it sums up Mr See himself - someone bent on capturing alternative politics on celluloid.He began his film-making career nearly 20 years ago, right after national service, learning the ropes of video editing in production houses. Along the way, he became a freelance video editor, working for renowned local directors such as Mr Eric Khoo and Mr Jack Neo.He spends 90 per cent of his time doing such work to 'pay the bills', but the remaining 10 per cent is now consumed by his passion - making films on local political issues.While being questioned by the police over Singapore Rebel, he produced another film, on former political detainee Said Zahari. This was also banned.His latest, on Dr Chee and the protests he staged during the IMF-World Bank meetings in 2006, however made the cut. Speakers' Cornered was given an NC-16 rating and screened at the Substation on July 26 this year.Despite the overwhelmingly pro-opposition - especially pro-SDP - angles in his films, he insists he is not an opposition supporter or sympathiser.He says: 'I fill a vacuum created by the media when they don't cover opposition politicians or political dissidents. I consider myself a citizen journalist, not a Michael Moore type of film-maker.'Asked why he bothers to submit his films for classification when he can upload them on YouTube, he deadpans that the law requires it.The more compelling reason is that he wants to push the envelope in the area of political expression.'Who better to do that than me,' he says, 'since I'm already over the OB markers. I want more film-makers who want to document the political scenes to emerge.'In this, he has found a following of sorts.Mr Ho Choon Hiong, 33, first heard about Mr See when Singapore Rebel was banned three years ago.He was among a group of 12 film-makers who wrote to the Government then, asking for greater clarity as to what constituted a party political film.The incident led to him meeting Mr See.Their subsequent exchanges emboldened him to capture on celluloid assorted scenes of political activism in Singapore.Unlike Mr See, he was introduced to politics early by his father, who used to be a student activist at Chinese High School in the 1960s.Like Mr See, however, his political interest was stoked by the 2001 polls and Dr Chee.After meeting Mr See, he produced a plethora of very short films, on topics ranging from the 2006 election to protests by Myanmar nationals in Singapore. He sent six to the film censors for classification in May.'I have to take a few steps and hope to be undeterred more and more,' says the film studies graduate from Ngee Ann Polytechnic.'I want to put my own perception of truth out.'So far, his 'films' have been ignored by the authorities.A prolific activistNOT so for Mr Seelan Palay, 24, another amateur film-maker.He had his film, One Nation Under Lee, seized by officials from the Board of Film Censors as it was being screened in a hotel recently.The reason: It had not been passed by the censors.His first effort - detractors panned it as a slide show rather than a film - it portrayed Singapore as lacking in press and political freedom, and tightly controlled by Mr Lee Kuan Yew.Point out that One Nation Under Lee is decidedly one-sided - it takes potshots at the Government while hailing Dr Chee as a hero - and he insists he has no political agenda.He isn't politicised by anyone either, he insists.'I learnt everything from reading, out of personal interest,' says the activist.CITIZEN JOURNALIST'I fill a vacuum created by the media when they don't cover opposition politicians or political dissidents. I consider myself a citizen journalist, not a Michael Moore type of film-maker.'-- Film-maker Martyn See He has been involved at various times with the Vegetarian Society, the Animal Concerns Research & Education Society, and the now defunct SG Human Rights Group.Earlier this year he attended rallies by Hindu protesters in Kuala Lumpur, and upon his return to Singapore, decided to mount a one-man protest fast outside the Malaysian High Commission.He also takes part in protest actions organised by the SDP occasionally.He is not a troublemaker, he insists. He is just doing what he believes in.Nothing to fearWHAT keeps the trio going?'Our conscience pricks us,' says Mr Ho. He sees it as his duty to document what he believes gets sidelined by the mainstream media.The trio use the same counter when you point out that their version of 'truth' sometimes takes an extreme slant. Others have noted that it was the publicity over the banning of some of their films, rather than the quality of the films themselves, that made the public more keen to view them.But they are not perturbed.For Mr See, his mission is simple.'I live by the Singapore Pledge. I live by the Constitution that guarantees freedom of expression, association and assembly,' he says.And he aims to guard these freedoms by showing that there is nothing to fear.The other two, less articulate about their aims, appear to go with the flow as acolytes of Mr See, enjoying the thrill of defiance every once in a while.They are all drawn to Dr Chee, whom they see as championing freedom of expression and provoking the Government with his illegal public protests.Still, they say, they have no intention of joining the SDP or any political party. Ironically, they fear being hemmed in by party discipline.Mr Palay, for instance, will tell you that he supports the SDP's cause but has no wish to sign on as a member.Have they made an impact on the political scene? They believe so, pointing to more local film-makers who remain anonymous but, like them, upload political-type films on YouTube.They also claim some credit for the Government's decision to consider lifting the ban on political films.It was, they say, the banning of Mr See's Singapore Rebel that sparked a debate on the relevance of the Films Act.Future filmsFOR now, the three men have film ideas that they hope will see the light of day.Mr Palay wants to do a film on the unspoken rule limiting use of dialects in films.Mr Ho is aiming to do documentaries on two women: Dr Chee's wife, and his own long-lost Malaysian nanny whom he is still trying to locate.As for Mr See, he has two targets too. One is the reclusive former political detainee Chia Thye Poh. The other is Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew.In the latter film, he wants to trace the People's Action Party's formation and rise to the pinnacle of power in Singapore.Why do a film on the PAP when its story has been told so many times before? 'It is a compelling story,' he says.So are they really rebels with a cause?Says Mr See: 'There's definitely a purpose to what we're doing. I see it as lessening the climate of fear here.'I want more film-makers like me to emerge, wanting to document the political scenes in Singapore.'This article was first published in The Straits Times on Sep 5, 2008. Top 100 Political Videos (that are likely to be banned in Singapore) The following videos are ranked arbitrarily according to their strength of message and likelihood of being banned by the Singapore censors. The list will be continually updated.Also visit Singapore Viewer for more videosObituary of a ban: Political films may get a new life by Lin Junjie News : Singapore to ease ban on political films next yearSingapore to amend law banning political films: report_____________________________________________________________________________1. One Nation Under Lee 20082. The Maid Trade - Singapore 20083. Zahari's 17 Years 20074. Anti-death penalty forum 20055. Hitler And ERP Woes (Singapore) 20086. NS Song 20077. Singapore bans "Zahari's 17 Years" 20078. Singapore - Time For Change 20089. Lee Kuan Yew: World-renowned statesman and race realist 200810. Malay and Proud of It.. 200711. Money No Enough 3 200812. Riot police vs four silent protesters in Singapore 200613. Singapore Police Abduction (Part 1) and (Part 2) 200714. Censors seize film One Nation Under Lee, Part 1 and Part 215. Message of defiance from Singapore activists 200716. Singapore Rebel 200517. Nation Builders 200718. Singapore - Broken Promises 200819. NS for Singaporeans, Jobs& Scholarships for Foreigners 200820. Fixing The Opposition 200821. Shine for Singapore Song 晴空万里 200822. Said Zahari's book launch 200723. Poor in singapore can't afford food 200824. SDP Consumer Day protest - the Arrival, the Protest, the Arrest, part 2 200825. The Police State 200826. SDP World Consumer Rights Day March and Protest Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3 200827. Singapore - Stand up for change 200828. PAP is the enemy - know your enemy 200729. Charged for speaking in public without a permit 200730. CSJ on Minister Pay Hike Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3 200731. A Singaporean Singapore 200832. Burmese staged peaceful demonstration in Singapore 200733. Free Burma, Free Singapore 200734. Protest Outside Burmese Embassy in Singapore 200735. Petition-signing at Burmese embassy in Singapore 200736. Lee Kuan Yew 200737. SDP members arrested outside the Istana, Singapore 200738. Singapore Police video-taping protestors at Burma Embassy 200739. Kudos to Lee Kuan Yew, for finally succeeding in making a little girl cry! 200840. The Shameless LIAR- IBA letter & Report - LKY 2008 41. Cowards - the father - LKY 200842. Cowards - the son - LHL 200843. Dick Lee sings We Are Singapore! 200744. Chee Soon Juan's WFDA address 200745. Chee Soon Juan addresses SDP cadres Part 1 and Part 2 200746. This Old Man 200747. The Mas Selamat Story 200848. Human Rights Day: Singapore Lawyers petition to Law Society 200749. Singapore's extraordinary government 200750. Homeless and poor in Singapore 200751. The Singapore government welcomes you to emigrate to Singapore to replace its rebellious locals! 200852. Flame of Democracy 200753. Is Chee Soon Juan A Psychopath Or Freedom Fighter? 200854. Capital punishment in Singapore 200855. REPEAL 377A SINGAPORE! 200756. Banned Conference In Singapore: Part 1 and Part 2 200757. SDP Election Reform Forum (Dr Chee) - Part 1, 2, 3 200858. Mas Selamat Kastari - Toilet escape Video. 200859. Mee Siam Mai Hum MTV 200660. Lee Kuan Yew's PAP will be remembered forever! 人民行动党 - 百世留名！ 200861. SGHR celebrates Human Rights Day at speakers corner 200762. The Importance of Being Elite 200663. The Chees vs The Lees 200864. SG Human Rights petition for Burma to ASEAN 200765. BURMESE SAYS NO 200866. WE LIVE IN SINGAPURA the MTV version 200667. CSJ's Message From Prison 200668. Chee Soon Juan prison release 200769. Chee Soon Juan's Release from Prison, June 2008 200870. NUS International Students Vigil Walk 200771. Chee Soon Juan at SDP rally 5th May Part 1 200672. Dr Chee at Rally 2006 Woodlands 200673. 搬金八辆 (Moving 8 Lorry-loads of Gold) 200874. Seelan Palay's 5 Day hunger strike, part 1, part 2, montage 200875. Human Rights Torch Relay in Singapore 200876. SDP Tak Boleh Tahan Campaign! May Day, Interviews Part 1 , Part 2 , Part 3 , Part 4 200877. SDP's Tak Boleh Tahan Event Toa Payoh Lorong 1 200878. Tak Boleh Tahan press statement by Chia Ti Lik 200879. Umbrella at policemen / George Bush in NUS 200780. Tribute Video To Mr. JBJ - True Singapore Hero 200781. Reform Party Inauguration Dinner, Opposition show of unity, Speech 200882. Burmese in Myanmar Embassy in Singapore Song, Part 1, Part 2 200883. The Singapore Shame 200884. May Day Message from SDP Chair 200885. Kawanku by Namewee 200786. A video in support of Singapore's Ministry of Education (MOE)'s Civics and Moral Education (CME) and National Education (NE) curriculum 200887. Handphone-shot election rally videos 200688. Workers' Party 50th Anniversary/GE 2006 200789. Burma On My Mind - Human Rights Day 200790. SG IMF - Democracy's "愛拼才會贏" 200691. SDP 916 march anniversary 200792. JBJ forms Reform Party Part 1 and Part 2, Q&A, Part 1 and Part 2 200893. MAY DAY WALK 200794. Singapore Democratic Party letter to Malaysian Government 200895. SG Freedom Walkers 200696. WP Rally MTV 200697. The SinkApoor Pledges by Singapore's ministers, minions, NTUC, police, 66.6% citizens and youth. 200898. A made-in-Singapore movie to celebrate Singapore National Day 200899. Who is the Emperor of Singapore? 谁是新加坡皇帝？2008100. How much more will Singaporeans have to bear? 2007 Oops, we were too restrictive : PM Lee PM Lee filming the audience in the auditorium with a mobile phone. The candid camera moment held a serious point - anyone can now be an amateur film-maker. -- ST'The overall thrust of all these changes is to liberalise our society, to widen the space for expression and participation. We encourage more citizens to engage in debate, to participate in building our shared future. And we will progressively open up our system even more.'- PM Lee Hsien Loong, National Day Rally speech 2008In his annual National Day rally speech last night, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced a triad of policy changes aimed at loosening up political space in Singapore. Firstly, public demonstrations and protests will be allowed at Speakers' Corner in Hong Lim Park. Secondly, political podcasts and videocasts will be allowed during General Elections. Thirdly, the law banning political films will be partially lifted. For political films, he outlined it like this - "partisan stuff" and "slanted" videos remain outlawed, while "factual footage, documentaries and recordings of live events" will be allowed. In other words, videos such as this may still be illegal while this may get the green light. Others such as this, this and this will fall in the grey zones.In anticipation of the PM's announcements, the Straits Times rang me up yesterday to seek my views. I told them that I fully welcome the changes, that it was the biggest stride taken by the Government to loosen up political expression in the last 20 years (including the opening up of Speakers' Corner in 1999 and the waiving of police permits for indoor functions in 2004), that it was step in the right direction in meeting my dual objectives - lessening the climate of fear and a total review of the Films Act, and that the changes were brought about by the recent actions of activists and filmmakers who had pushed the envelope.The ST journalist also told me that some of those interviewed before me remained skeptical about such promises. I assume that many will adopt a wait-and-see attitude, and that others will speculate about the hidden traps. I shall not waste time mulling over either. Since the debate over the Films Act began with my film Singapore Rebel, I will seek to end it by re-submitting Rebel and Zahari's 17 Years, both officially banned, to the censors for re-appraisal. If it is not sheer stupidity to continue enforcing bans on these films when they are viewable at a click of a mouse, I don't know what is.______________________________________________Yes to factual footageBy Sue-Ann Chia & Jeremy Au YongMIDWAY through his National Day Rally address, the Prime Minister fished out a mobile phone and proceeded to film the audience before him in the auditorium.Behind him, on a giant screen, the audience saw themselves featured on the web page of the Prime Minister's Office - live.'There you are, simple as that. I've just made our first non-political video,' he said to laughter from the audience.Mr Lee's candid camera moment held a serious point. Anyone can now be an amateur film-maker, capturing politics on film, and people will do so.'So, we've got to allow political videos but with some safeguards,' he said. 'An outright ban is no longer sensible.'Thanks to new media technologies, people can easily make videos and upload them on the Internet.'This is how people communicate on the Web in daily life. They make videos, they pass clips around,' Mr Lee said in his National Day Rally speech on Sunday.What will now make the cut with the censors: factual footage, documentaries and recordings of live events.But some things still won't pass. 'If you make a political commercial so that it's purely made-up material, partisan stuff, footage distorted to create a slanted impression, I think those should still be off-limits,' he said.'In between what is ok and what is not ok, there will be grey areas. But I think we can deal with this.'Political films will be dealt with in ways similar to non-political films, with censorship and film classification standards, he said, with a panel to decide whether or not a political film would pass.'The overriding consideration is to preserve the integrity, quality, and honesty of our political discourse,' he said.Political films were banned 10 years ago, two years after Singapore Democratic Party chief Chee Soon Juan applied for a licence to sell a video-tape on the SDP.Section 33 of the Films Act disallows the making, reproduction, distribution and screening of 'party political films'. Such films are defined as those favouring a political party or pushing a political end.Mr Lee said political films were banned for a reason.'Politics is a serious affair. We want voters to consider issues rationally, coolly...and think through decisions which affect your future and make a considered judgement,' he said.'And our worry is that films are an emotive medium. The impact of seeing something on a film is quite different from reading something in cold print.'It hits you viscerally. It engages your emotions before your thinking processes can kick in, and if you are watching it in a crowd, (it is) even more powerful.'Then, passions can get stirred up and people can get carried away.'The promise of some political films being allowed was cheered by film-maker Martyn See, who had two of his films banned in recent years.'This is by far the most obvious relaxation of political space in Singapore in the past 20 years. It will lessen the climate of fear,' he said.But Senior Research Fellow Tan Tarn How from the Institute of Policy Studies preferred there to be no conditions imposed.'It doesn't make sense to assume that most people are most of the time not smart enough to tell the good from the bad, and truth from falsehood,' he said.Still, film-maker Tan Pin Pin is happy with the progress.'A gesture has been made, and I guess it's a positive thing. This is the start of a long journey, towards less frenetic governance,' she said.---------------------------------BETTER ENGAGEMENT'PAP welcomes the liberalisation announced by the Prime Minister. This will increase the opportunities for Singaporeans to give their views and allow political parties to better engage cyber-citizens. PAP will operate responsibly within the new and expanded boundaries to inform, educate and reach out to younger voters through various platforms. Overall, our goal is to create a conducive environment, whether online or within the general public, for political issues to be discussed seriously and productively, to help find solutions for challenges that Singapore faces.'- Education Minister Ng Eng Hen, PAP organising secretary (special duties and new media)NO FAVOUR GRANTED, JUST A RIGHT'The Prime Minister is hoping that Singaporeans will go on their bended knees to thank him for these concessions. He seems to forget that the right to make political films or the right to hold demonstrations are part and parcel of human rights.'- JB Jeyaretnam, Reform PartyRead also :Political videos on Net? Speakers' Corner: protests okSingapore to ease bans on political filmsSingapore To Allow More Freedom Of ExpresionSingapore PM says ban on outdoor protests should ease One Nation Under Lee to premiere in Malaysia One Nation Under Lee, seized by Singapore censors during a private screening this year, will make its official premiere in Malaysia's Freedom Film Festival in Kuala Lumpur. Directed by local artist/activist Seelan Palay, the 45 minute documentary will then proceed to make its rounds in Johor, Sarawak and Penang. Three months after its seizure, the Board of Film Censors has yet to certify the film, which means it is effectively prohibited from public screening in Singapore.Previous Singaporean works screened in FFF included Martyn See's Singapore Rebel, Zahari's 17 Years and Speakers Cornered, Tan Pin Pin's Singapore Gaga and Moving House, and Asia Witness Production's I Love Malaya.Film : One Nation Under LeeDir : Seelan PalayDate : Saturday 6 Sept 2008Time : 4.30 pmVenue : Central Market Annexe, Kuala LumpurClick here for the full program of Freedom Film Festival. Democracy, Justice, Equality, Peace, Progress Choice quotes from Singapore's political leaders.On DEMOCRACY"If you believe in democracy, you must believe in it unconditionally. If you believe that men should be free, then, they should have the right of free association, of free speech, of free publication. Then, no law should permit those democratic processes to be set at nought."- Lee Kuan Yew as an opposition leader, April 27, 1955"If we are to survive as a free democracy, then we must be prepared, in principle, to concede to our enemies - even those who do not subscribe to our views - as much constitutional rights as you concede yourself."- Opposition leader Lee Kuan Yew, Legislative Assembly Debates, Sept 21, 1955 "Anybody who decides to take me on needs to put on knuckle-dusters. If you think you can hurt me more than I can hurt you, try. There is no way you can govern a Chinese society."- Lee Kuan Yew, The Man and His Ideas, 1997"If I were in authority in Singapore indefinitely without having to ask those who are governed whether they like what is being done, then I would not have the slightest doubt that I could govern much more effectively in their interests." - Lee Kuan Yew, 1962"You're talking about Rwanda or Bangladesh, or Cambodia, or the Philippines. They've got democracy, according to Freedom House. But have you got a civilised life to lead? People want economic development first and foremost. The leaders may talk something else. You take a poll of any people. What is it they want? The right to write an editorial as you like? They want homes, medicine, jobs, schools."- Lee Kuan Yew, The Man and His Ideas, 1997"What are our priorities? First, the welfare, the survival of the people. Then, democratic norms and processes which from time to time we have to suspend."- Lee Kuan Yew, 1986 National Day Rally"There is nothing to forbid anybody from nailing his colours to the mast, and indeed it is the safest way to do it. Nail your colours to the mast, defend it and say,"This is my flag, this is what I believe in. I believe in open debate, arguments, persuasion, I hope to win by votes." But start manipulating innocent professional groups, cultural groups and make them support political causes, whether its freedom of the foreign press or whatever, then I say you are looking for unpleasant linkages with what has happened in the past."- Lee Kuan Yew, 1990 National Day Rally"The People's Association is a government organisation to promote government policies."- Wong Kan Seng, Straits Times, Mar 22 2003"I make no apologies that the PAP is the Government and the Government is the PAP."- Lee Kuan Yew, Petir, 1982"The ideas of individual supremacy and the right of free expression, when carried to excess, have not worked. They have made it difficult to keep America society cohesive. Asia can see it is not working.. In America itself, there is widespread crime and violence, old people feel forgotten, families are falling apart. And the media attacks the integrity and character of your leaders with impunity, drags down all those in authority and blames everyone but itself."- Lee Kuan Yew, Sept 1995"For Singapore, its test for its own democracy must be whether it fit and serve the interests of its people and conditions, and not serve some abstract ideal that the Western media thought it ought to conform to. If in 10 years, Philippines, Taiwan and Korea were better societies because they adopted the US model, Singapore would hurry to catch."- Goh Chok Tong, 1995 National Day Rally"Political reform need not go hand in hand with economic liberalisation.. I hold unconventional views about this.. I do not believe if you are a libertarian, full of diverse opinions, full of competing ideas in the market place, full of sound and fury, therefore you will succeed."- Lee Kuan Yew, 2005"I think in Singapore, we stand a chance of making the one-man-one-vote system work. With amendments as we have done, you know, like GRCs.. We need to make it work. And I believe with pragmatic adjustments, given these favourable conditions, we can have more open debate."- Lee Kuan Yew, 1990 National Day Rally"One-man-one-vote is a most difficult form of government.. Results can be erratic."- Lee Kuan Yew, Dec 19 1984"I'm not intellectually convinced that one-man-one-vote is the best. We practise it because that's what the British bequeathed us."- Lee Kuan Yew, 1994"There is nothing to prevent you from pushing your propaganda, to push your programme out to the students or with the public at large...and if you can carry the ground, if you are right, you win. That's democracy."- Lee Kuan Yew telling students to form political parties, Straits Times, Feb 1, 2005"If you are a troublemaker...it's our job to politically destroy you. Put it this way. As long as JB Jeyaretnam stands for what he stands for - a thoroughly destructive force - we will knock him. Everybody knows that in my bag I have a hatchet, and a very sharp one. You take me on, I take my hatchet, we meet in the cul-de-sac."- Lee Kuan Yew, The Man And His Ideas, 1997"I feel sanguine enough to say that there has never been a better set of conditions for open democratic politics because there is no need for unified front politics."- Lee Kuan Yew, 1990 National Day Rally"If we had considered them serious political figures, we would not have kept them politically alive for so long. We could have bankrupt them earlier."- Lee Kuan Yew on political opposition, Straits Times, Sept 14 2003"Once in a while, Think Centre says they want to go to the Speakers' Corner and they want to plant 100 flowers there, let the 100 flowers bloom...It's a signal - speak your voice, be heard.- Lee Hsien Loong, National Day Rally, 2004"I know some people want even greater freedom. But where politics is concerned, I prefer to ease up slowly rather than open up with a big bang. When Gorbachev opened up the Soviet Union with his glasnost, the Soviet Union collapsed with a big bang. We should, therefore, pump the air into the political balloon slowly. I don't intend to change my name to 'Goh Ba Chov'!"- Goh Chok Tong, 2001 National Day Rally"I am encouraged also because I see more and more people write letters to the press and sign their real names. That's a good sign, a good tendency. To run a democratic system, you must have democratic impulses in the people. There must be a cultural basis for that system. It's not just having a constitution and saying," Well, there you are, the system is democratic."- Lee Kuan Yew, 1990 National Day Rally"Now if democracy will not work for the Russians, a white Christian people, can we assume that it will naturally work with Asians?"- Lee Kuan Yew, Asahai Shimbun symposium, May 9, 1991"Our people should feel free to express diverse views, pursue unconventional ideas or simply be different."- Lee Hsien Loong, Inauguration Speech, Aug 12 2004"They say people can think for themselves? Do you honestly believe that the chap who can't pass primary six knows the consequence of his choice when he answers a question viscerally, on language, culture and religion? But we knew the consequences. We would starve, we would have race riots. We would disintegrate."- Lee Kuan Yew, The Man & His Ideas, 1997"They say, oh, let’s have multiparty politics. Let’s have different parties change and be in charge of the Government. Is it that simple? You vote in a Division Three government, not a Division One government, and the whole economy will just subside within three, four years. Finished."- Lee Kuan Yew, Today, Aug 15 2008On JUSTICE"If it is not totalitarian to arrest a man and detain him, when you cannot charge him with any offence against any written law - if that is not what we have always cried out against in Fascist states - then what is it?"- Opposition leader Lee Kuan Yew, Legislative Assembly Debates, Sept 21, 1955"These powers will not be allowed to be used against political opponents within the system who compete for the right to work the system. That is fundamental and basic or the powers will have destroyed the purpose for which they were forged."- Lee Kuan Yew speaking in Parliament on the Preservation of Public Security Act, a precursor to the ISA, Oct 14, 1959"We have over a hundred political detainees, men against whom we are unable to prove anything in a court of law. Nearly 50 of them are men who gave us a great deal of anxiety during the years of Confrontation because they were Malay extremists. Your life and this dinner would not be what it is if my colleagues and I had decided to play it according to the rules of the game."- Lee Kuan Yew speaking to the Singapore Advocates and Solicitors Society, Mar 18, 1967"We have to lock up people, without trial, whether they are communists, whether they are language chauvinists, whether they are religious extremists. If you don't do that, the country would be in ruins."- Lee Kuan Yew, 1986"The same law applies to me. Nobody has sued me for libel because I do not defame my enemies."- Lee Kuan Yew, Success Stories, 2002"Most libels, and I have taken about 30 actions, take place at election time. It has not stuck because I am prepared to go before a court, stand in the witness box and face the most aggressive of lawyers who can cross-examine me on my personal history."- Lee Kuan Yew, Straits Times, Sept 30 2002On EQUALITY"The way to build a cohesive society is to ensure that every Singaporean is treated equally, and that the rich and powerful are not favoured over ordinary Singaporeans, Mr Goh Chok Tong emphasised last night."- Straits Times, Aug 12 1991It is essential to rear a generation at the very top of society that has all the qualities needed to lead and give the people the inspiration and the drive to make it succeed. In short, the elite.. Every society tries to produce this type. The British have special schools for them: the gifted and talented are sent to Eton and Harrow."- Lee Kuan Yew, August 1966"If I tell Singaporeans - we are all equal regardless of race, language, religion, culture. Then they will say,"Look, I'm doing poorly. You are responsible." But I can show that from British times, certain groups have always done poorly, in mathematics and in science. But I'm not God, I can't change you. But I can encourage you, give you extra help to make you do, say maybe, 20% better."- Lee Kuan Yew, Success Stories, 2002"The human being is an unequal creature. That is a fact. And we start off with the proposition. All the great religions, all the great movements, all the great political ideology, say let us make the human being as equal as possible. In fact, he is not equal, never will be."- Lee Kuan Yew, from a speech during the 1960s, Success Stories"We must encourage those who earn less than $200 per month and cannot afford to nurture and educate many children never to have more than two... We will regret the time lost if we do not now take the first tentative steps towards correcting a trend which can leave our society with a large number of the physically, intellectually and culturally anaemic."- Lee Kuan Yew, 1967"There are some flaws in the assumptions made for democracy. It is assumed that all men and women are equal or should be equal. Hence, one-man-one-vote. But is equality realistic? If it is not, to insist on equality must lead to regression."- Lee Kuan Yew, Create 21 Asahi Forum Tokyo, Nov 20 1992On PEACE"Repression can only go up to a point. When it becomes too acute, the instruments of repression, namely the army and the police, have been proved time and time again in history to have turned their guns on their masters."- Opposition leader Lee Kuan Yew, Straits Times, May 5, 1959"If I have to shoot 200,000 students to save China from another 100 years of disorder, so be it." - Lee Kuan Yew evoking the ghost of Deng Xiaoping whilst endorsing the Tiananmen Square massacre, Straits Times, Aug 17, 2004"Without the elected president and if there is a freak result, within two or three years, the army would have to come in and stop it"- Lee Kuan Yew on what would happen if a profligate opposition government touched Singapore's vast monetary reserves, Straits Times, Sept 16 2006On PROGRESS"I am often accused of interfering in the private lives of citizens. Yes, if I did not, had I not done that, we wouldn't be here today. And I say without the slightest remorse, that we wouldn't be here, we would not have made economic progress, if we had not intervene on very personal matters - who your neighbour is, how you live, the noise you make, how you spit, or what language you use. We decide what is right. Never mind what people think."- Lee Kuan Yew, Straits Times, Apr 20 1987"Every Singaporean who owns a flat can double his value in today's terms within the next 15 to 20 years. In other words, in the next 20 years, we can make everybody worth twice as much, at least."- PM Lee Kuan Yew, National Day Rally, 1990"We've got to compete ourselves from now on with developed countries, not with developing countries, because we are going to compete in the developed country league."- Goh Chok Tong, 1992 National Day Rally"Earning money is not the sole objective of life or education. A community of any quality should have a whole range of skills and interests. They should paint, write, perform, visit art galleries and enjoy world-class concerts. Only then will they form a vibrant, rounded, interesting community."- Goh Chok Tong, 1999 National Day Rally"In the next decade, we need to think and act like revolutionaries. We have to innovate, not merely imitate. We will succeed not be following the footsteps of the incumbent, but by introducing new dimensions into play. We need Singaporeans who can lead the way in creating new wealth for our economy."- Goh Chok Tong, 2000 National Day Rally"New Singapore will be one of the world's finest, most liveable cities. Arts, theatres, museums, music and sports will flourish. Singapore will be a lively and exciting place.. Our city will not only have depth, but also the richness of diversity. But above all, Singapore will a home for Singaporeans."- Goh Chok Tong, 2001 National Day Rally Speakers Cornered screens in public Audience at the Substation Arts Centre during the Q&A sessionRead this blog review by Stefan S, arguably Singapore's most rabid movie buff.Speakers Cornered, passed clean by the Board of Film Censors in April, finally received its first public screening yesterday at the Substation Arts Centre. The screening was part of the Singapore Short Cuts, an annual local short film festival presented by the Substation and supported by the Singapore National Museum and the Singapore Film Commission.The 28 minute documentary capped a matinee of films that included Twogether by Victric Thng, Bedok Jetty by Boo Junfeng and Caramel / 黑默糖 by Kelvin Ke. Blank Rounds, a film about National Service, was withdrawn by its director Green Zeng due to a change in screening venue. An insider scoop has it that the yesterday's screening was originally slated to be held at the much larger National Museum Gallery Theatre, but was moved to the Substation theatre for "logistical" reasons. All tickets for the entire festival have been snapped up.Speakers Cornered is my third film. The first two, Singapore Rebel and Zahari's 17 Years, are banned by the Singapore Government. I have recently submitted Nation Builders to the censors.Meanwhile..* Raintree Pictures has gone public with their intention to make a political feature film about Singapore's independence, tentatively entitled 1965. * Jack Neo releases Money No Enough ll this week in local cinemas. It features scenes of anti-ERP street protests. Editing credits to yours truly.* There is still no word about the status of One Nation Under Lee, a film by local artist Seelan Palay which Government officials seized during its private premiere. Transcript part Vll - M. Ravi vs LKY Singapore's Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew (left) with his wife Kwa Geok Choo at the Madame Tussauds Wax Museum.Human rights lawyer and activist M. Ravi (right) with Chee Siok Chin, Chee Soon Juan, his wife and children crossing the road towards the Supreme Court outside Parliament House._____________________________________________________________________________Two months after the historic courtroom clash, reverberations are still being felt. It began with this editorial from The Wall Street Journal, then this rebuttal from Lee Kuan Yew's office, prompting another round of responses, first from Chee Soon Juan, and then the MMO again, and a final rejoinder from Chee, who also pointed out that the Lee, while under oath, had cited a non-existant letter from the International Bar Association. Then, almost on cue, the IBA releases a scathing 72-page report, accompanied by a press release, slamming the Singapore Government for its record on human rights and its lack of judicial independence. Within 24 hours, the Ministry of Law responded. But the international press seized on IBA's statement, with articles that highlighted the Minister Mentor's error in court.Links:Singapore Has an Independent JudiciaryJudging Singapore's JudiciaryRaising the barUniqueness of perfection that sits to our northSingapore’s Minister Mentor Slips Up Under OathInternational Bar Association gives Singapore dismal grade in free expression, human rights, independence of courtsRequest to reconvene is frivolous: Davinder Davinder Singh: Lee's IBA-letter reference only an “inaccuracy”__________________________________________________________________ From left : John Tan of the Singapore Democratic Party, activists Mohd Shafi'ee and Isrizal oustside the Supreme Court on the 27th of May 2008.An update: According to SDP's website, all three men are now placed under police investigation for wearing those T-shirts.___________________________________________________________________________________By request, this is the complete transcript of SDP's counsel M. Ravi's cross-examination of Lee Kuan Yew which began around 12.40 pm on the 27th of May 2008 in the Supreme Court. Judge Belinda Ang had earlier allowed an application by Lee's counsel Davinder Singh to impose a guillotine time of 2 hours for the cross-examination of both Lee Hsien Loong and Lee Kuan Yew.This transcript is significant for it contains the some key remarks by LKY, especially the ones pertaining to pursuing defamatory remarks on cyberspace as well as the "near-psychopath" utterance.Also of note :* At about noon, Lee Kuan Yew made a surprised early appearance just as the cross-examination of Lee Hsien Loong was wrapping up. This prompted his counsel Davindar Singh to make a sudden application to postpone lunch so that LKY's cross-examination can proceed immediately. Despite objections raised by the Chees and M. Ravi, Judge Belinda Ang acceded to Singh's application to skip lunch, but ordered a 10 minute break.* Ravi's cross-examination of LKY was conducted before the Chees.* Lee Hsien Loong observed the entire the cross-examination of his father from a seat near the back of the court, just in front of the public gallery.* Lee Kuan Yew drank from a flask which was placed on his table by his personal assistant, who possibly doubles up as a bodyguard. Earlier, his son drank from a ordinary plastic bottle of mineral water, possibly provided by the courts.* During CSJ's cross-examination of LKY, a middle-aged woman in the public gallery suddenly yawned aloud, attracting stares from others. Visibly embarrassed, she quietlyapologised. She is one of about a dozen elderlies, possibly members of PAP's grassroots organisation, who had been transported by coach to the court in the morning to stake their places in the queue.-------------------------------------------------------Judge : Yes, Mr Singh, call your witness.Singh : My next witness, your honour, is Mr Lee Kuan Yew.LKY : I solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm that the evidence I shall give in this court shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.Singh : Please sit down, Mr Lee.LKY : Yup.Singh : You are Lee Kuan Yew, NRIC number 0000003E, of 38, Oxley Road, Singapore?LKY : Yes.Singh : Mr Lee, in front of you, is volumes 1 and 2 of your affidavit. Could you turn to page 67 please? It's marked out.LKY : Yes.Singh : Is that your signature?LKY : Yes.Singh : Mr Lee, do you confirm that the contents of this affidavit are true and accurate?LKY : Yah.Singh : And that they represent your evidence in this court.LKY : They do.Ravi : May (inaudible) this courtroom?Judge : YesRavi : Good afternoon, Mr Lee.LKY : Good afternoon.Ravi : I won't hold you long, Mr Lee, and I hope your counsel won't object to that. Mr Lee, when did you come to know about the SDP's defamatory article?LKY : I cannot remember. All I knew was I had an email or some fax message to say that this article has appeared. Lawyers have been consulted and the lawyers have advised that this is defamatory. So I said go ahead. I don't read the New Democrat or all the other papers. I got too much on my plate. These things are brought to my attention.Ravi : Mr Lee, when it was brought to your attention, did you then read the article?LKY : Did I what?Ravi : When the defamatory context was brought to your attention by your lawyers, did you choose to read the SDP's article?LKY : No, with the message came the SDP article.Ravi : And going by your memory, would you agree that it was during the elections that or after the elections was announced that you commenced proceedings?LKY : Once I saw that article, I knew that the PAP was considering early elections at that time. I was quite convinced that this would be made an election issue. In fact, I read - I can't remember is Dr Chee or his sister - said this was going to be an election issue and they were going to bring this up so we have to have the matter thrashed out in court because otherwise it goes into the hustings - I said this, they said this - and endless arguments. But you say what you like during the election campaign. In the end, you have to come to court and prove that they are true. If they are, then the government is demolished. If you don't, then you've lost (end of audio clip) again you diminished yourself and embarrassed yourself.Ravi : Mr Lee, do you agree with the description which your counsel has given that this case is perhaps the gravest defamation that has ever been considered by Singapore court?LKY : Your honour, I don't keep track of all the cases that happened in these courts and since Mr Ravi is a qualified counsel, he knows the client leaves the description of the offence to what he thinks is proper legal language. Is not - I'm not interested in whether it's the right formulation or not. I've always believed never to be my own lawyer.Ravi : Mr Lee, I do understand the detachment to this matter and equally you are also a trained lawyer and of course taking up one's case and arguing is not something that it's not even recommended by the Law Society rules. But Mr Lee, I'm sure that if your counsel says that this is the gravest defamation that has ever been considered, you must consider that to be a gravest defamation for your counsel to make a condition that -LKY : Your honour, I have been a lawyer acting in defamation cases and I pitched my client's case in the most graphic, the most vivid and the most telling terms. That's what a good lawyer supposed to do. I once in one case against Mr Jeyaretnam. I had an eminent Q.C. representing me and another eminent Q.C. representing Mr Jeyaretnam and he waxed eloquent and quoted Shakespeare. I didn't object to it. That is the way in which a good counsel would present his client's case.Ravi : Mr Lee, I would like to give you a quote, "Never chase a lie, let it alone and it will run itself to death." Do you agree with that? That quote is from Lyman Beecher. Have you heard of that, Mr Lee?LKY : I've heard many similar such phrases and I get endless advice from Western correspondents that if I just ignore the opposition, it will just become completely meaningless. I take a contrary view. I know the mentality and the attitudes of the people in Singapore, and they know me by now that if anybody impugns the integrity of the government of which I was a Prime Minister, I am (inaudible) sued and I must demand that either the court finds that those defamatory words true in which case I'm demolished or there's a penalty.Ravi : So it is part of your political credo that very lie has to be nailed?LKY : Every lie that relates to the integrity, honour and the rectitude of the government. This government has lasted through 11 general elections from 1959 to 2006. Nobody has said that the elections was rigged, not even the SDP.Ravi : Mr Lee -LKY : I put myself before the public. My government - 7 of those general elections, I personally led the government and I know that that was only possible because we run a clean, efficient, effective, competent government that works to the benefit of people.Ravi : So any statements that is defamatory of the government - that particular lie has to be nailed?LKY : Yes, of course. No, not any particular - I said integrity, rectitude, propriety.Ravi : Do you surf the internet, Mr Lee?LKY : I do.Ravi : Have you seen any allegations of impropriety, integrity, circulating around the internet?LKY : That's cyberspace and the laws on cyberspace has not been able to capture in a appropriate way how a person should protect himself. New rules are being formed in cyberspace but everybody who reads what's on the internet knows you got to check who said it or risk his credibility. You know, you've read Malaysiakini or Malaysia Now. They say many things not said in the Malaysian press. But, is everything said there true? Some are true, some are not true.Ravi : So, if defamatory remarks that goes to the governance integrity of Singapore had been circulating on the internet, you are prepared to tolerate that?LKY : I have no choice but if anybody puts his name in print or verbally identifies himself out of court with those remarks, he's challenging my integrity, he's prepared to stand on his credibility and we will need to have it resolved.Ravi : There are quite a number of postings where people in their own names quite clearly actually challenge that, giving their particulars at that, and you have not taken any action.Singh : Your honour, we are going over old ground. When Mr Ravi was cross-examining Mr Lee Hsien Loong, we referred to his authority and his bundle of documents Gladlee (spelling) on libel which made it plain that whether or not the plaintiff had sued others who had published defamatory remarks is irrelevant.Ravi : Your honour, I'm not going into that. I'm going into the effect of the defamation. Please allow me to raise a few questions. I won't take long. I do understand the guillotine and with due respect, Mr Lee, so you would consider that Singapore can still be governed and despite the challenge to your integrity on the internet?Singh : I have said that in cyberspace, the law cannot capture the culprit.Ravi : Okay, so I take it that if the law captures, you would pursue?LKY : Yes, I would.Ravi : Okay, I'll leave it at that, Mr Lee. I won't go further than that.(pause)Ravi : Mr Lee, do you hold Dr Chee in any esteem?LKY : Sorry, do I hold?(pause)Ravi : Okay, I'll rephrase that question.(pause)Ravi : Do you consider Dr Chee as a man to be believed?LKY : I've been asked to testify as to his character. Well, let me tell you what I've said publicly and I'm prepared to say it again. Publicly - without the privilege of saying it in court that he's a liar, a cheat and altogether an unscrupulous man. And I could also add that I had several of our - my own doctors who are familiar with such conduct, people, tell me that he is near-psychopath.Ravi : Mr Lee, do you take his comments seriously?LKY : I have to because he takes it very seriously enough to tell the public to believe him. If I did not take him seriously, and he keeps on repeating this and others repeat this, at the end of the day, I and the party that I used to lead will be totally destroyed. Am I being asked to say that your client's credibility is so low that I should ignore whatever he says? Is that what you are putting to me?Chee Siok Chin : Your honour, I like to make an application for our Assistant Secretary-General John Tan. He was sitting here this morning and I don't know all of a sudden the people won't let him in to witness the rest of the proceedings. He was sitting right here this morning. Could you allow John Tan - tell them to let John Tan in?Singh : Your honour, I know nothing of this, if Mr John Tan wants to come into open court like any other member of the public and behave himself -Judge : He can sit in the public gallery.Singh : Yes, he can.Judge : We have space for him there.CSC : No, he was sitting right behind here this morning and there was no objection, nothing, and now he's supposed to sit in the public gallery knowing full well that there is no more space in the public gallery so could you just instruct -Judge : There is no announcement of Mr John Tan -CSC : I'm sorry?Judge : There is no notice to the court of Mr John Tan -CSC : Well, there was no notice to the court about who these people right behind, yesterday, when you allowed them in? So could you please allow the Assistant Secretary-General -Judge : They are secretaries of Law Club (garbled, check spelling), Miss Chee, if you must know.CSC : Now, it's an afterthought. Now after 24 hours, you tell me.Judge : Please continue, Mr Ravi.CSC : Can you allow our Assistant Secretary-General John Tan to come in?Judge : Mr Ravi, carry on.Chee Soon Juan : Even though we are asking you right now, telling who he is because we need him to help us take notes, will you allow that?(pause)CSJ : We are telling you who he is, his name is John Tan. He is the Assistant Secretary-General of SDP -Judge : Mr Joseph here taking notes for you?CSJ : We are having a few people trying to assist us in our note-taking. So please, you've already allowed people in unannounced yesterday -Judge : Provided he is here just for note-taking and nothing else, alright?CSJ : I'm sorry?Judge : Provided he is here just for note-taking. Alright, carry on Mr Ravi, please.Ravi : Mr Lee -Singh : I think we (inaudible) where we (inaudible) off, your honour, where Mr Lee is asking Mr Ravi whether it is Mr Ravi's suggestion that Dr Chee Soon Juan has absolutely no credibility?Judge : Yes, Mr Ravi?Ravi : Your honour, I am here to put my question and the plaintiff's counsel is putting questions to his counsel, through my mouth. I find that very strange but nevertheless, with due respect, I will conduct my case the way I deem it fit.(pause)Ravi : Mr Lee, in your opinion, do you think the majority of people believe what Dr Chee says?LKY : We have not done a public poll and it's not possible for us to say with certainty what percentage of the population believes him but if you go by the election results, he scored 20% of the votes in Sembawang, so obviously 20% of the people in Sembawang decided what Mr Chee and his supporters were saying in the campaign - repeatedly - that the Singapore Government is run like the NKF, that was put to the test so there's 20% in Sembawang. And that's with vigorous campaigning on the PAP side. So you cannot dismiss the effect of such repeated attempts to discredit the reputation of the leaders of the PAP.Ravi : So therefore your conclusion would be the fact that the SDP scored 20 odd per cent in the last election that the public do not attached importance to what SDP had said?LKY : Even if only 5% voted for them, we would still consider very important that the rest of the population knows what was uttered was a pack of lies.Ravi : Mr Lee, would you agree with me that a government which is so insensitive, sorry, sensitive to unfair criticisms, confrontation, slight innuendos that it feels that it must nail every lie in court, is one that lacks confidence in the intelligence of its electorate?LKY : Counsel must understand that when you spread this message across the population, unless it is challenged, that message will begin to sink home. Repeatedly, it will sink home. And we have repeatedly disprove it. That's why the PAP is up and standing. That's why I'm here and may I point out to counsel that there's a guillotine of 2 hours and the interjections by him and his two other defendants means that there are no questions of relevance to ask me and put me on the spot but are playing for time to let the time run out. My counsel knows the game. He's kept me informed. I have been a counsel myself. I know exactly what the game is. If they have imporatant devastating revelations to make, they wouldn't be allowed you to put all these irrelevant questions to me because it is time-wasting.Ravi : Mr Lee, with due respect to you, if my questions have been irrelevant, the court is there to abjudicate on those matters -LKY : You are wasting the time of the court!Ravi : Mr Lee, are you the judge here?LKY : I'm not but you are asking me for my opinion and I have to give it -Ravi : Please don't usurp the role of the judge, Mr Lee. I have been extremely respectful as you can see. I have a role to play. You must understand an unenviable one too and I don't have the privilege of a glass of water but I would definitely ask that you must answer my question. It is not up to you to make remarks about my questions and the same equality before the rule of law must apply, Mr Lee. And I will pursue my next question, Mr Lee. With due respect, Mr Lee, you must understand that you must bear with me however you disgree with me, however you feel that I may not be the counsel to be asking you the questions, if you do feel that way too, but respect that I'm also a member of the bar.LKY : May I remind counsel that he's wasting the guillotine time.Judge : Mr Ravi, please carry on.Ravi : Isn't it part of our legal system that as opposed to litigation, mediation is an option?Singh : What is the relevance of that?(LKY laughs)Judge : Disallowed. Carry on, Mr Ravi. Next question please.Ravi : Mr Lee, could you consider mediation?Singh : Sir -LKY : May I - your honour, it is so bizarre a question I will need Soloman to be revived and I don't believe Soloman can mediate between a psychopath and sane, rational people.Ravi : I see. Then all mediations must fail?LKY : No, I'm saying in this specific case, you're suggesting an absurdity.Ravi : Mr Lee, have you suffered any damage or is your integrity still intact after the defamatory statements have been uttered?LKY : I haven't carried a poll but I'm quite sure at least 80% would consider my reputation intact but I cannot say it's a 100%.Ravi : Even God can't say, Mr Lee.(pause)Ravi : Mr Lee, is it the case that you are bringing this action in your personal capacity as an individual?LKY : That's what the law requires me to do. You know that.Ravi : Are you here to defend your personal reputation or your government's reputation?LKY : As a matter of form, I'm here in my personal capacity to defend my reputation but in fact it is the reputation of the leaders of the PAP and I do not successfully pursue this action, we will suffer terrible damage. The damage is not in this court. The damage is with the standing of this government with its own people. And that is what this is all about and therefore when I appear as a plaintiff, I'm really representing the whole leadership of the PAP.Ravi : I see. So you have come to represent, to protect the reputation of the PAP and the government in this court?LKY : I have said that the law requires us to sue in our individual capacity but in actual fact, the impact of any adverse outcome is on the whole government and the PAP.Ravi : So you have come to the court to defend the entire government and the PAP, am I correct?LKY : I thought counsel understand English?Ravi : No, Mr Lee, I don't understand Greek. Mr Lee, I'm here -Singh : Your honour, that is an insulting question that's gone on the record. Mr Ravi should know that. He should also know that counsel is not permitted to insult a witness but he's chosen to do that and let it be.CSJ : Your honour, I think this objection is out of line. I think Davinder Singh is trying to -Singh : The second point -Judge : Mr Chee, you will have your turn -CSJ : Intimidate the SDP's counsel -Judge : Dr Chee, you will have your turn. Mr Singh.Singh : Your honour, the second point is that the witness has already explained twice that whilst he sues in his personal capacity, if he fails, then the entire government and leadership is affected but he is here in his personal capacity.Ravi : Mr Lee, I apologise if you have been offended by anything that I said earlier because I thought we had the latitude. Not mean to insult you when I said, you know, I won't go into that - what I said earlier - but I will pursue this question -LKY : May I suggest, your honour, that -Ravi : Your honour, I'm here to ask questions. There is no suggestion for the witness how this course or conduct of proceedings should be made and I with due respect urge the bench to have some control over this matter and the witness.Judge : Yes, please carry on, Mr Ravi.Ravi : Thank you, your honour. So you have come to the court to bring a representative action under the cover of a personal action?Singh : I object, your honour, the same question was asked -Ravi : Your honour, I won't pursue that question.Judge : Mr Ravi, that's not what the witness said. Please carry on. Next question.Ravi : I put it to you, Mr Lee, this defamation suit is a cynical abuse of the legal system to commence personal proceedings built upon a desire to protect the institutions of government. Yes or no?LKY : No!Ravi : Thank you, Mr Lee. Mr Lee, would you refer to page 42 of your affidavit?LKY : Yes.Ravi : And page 42, para 101. You say that CSJ's hatred of me and you say that 101 para A, CSC is CSJ's sister - do you follow, Mr Lee?LKY : Yes.Ravi : And is politically allied with CSJ and his cause against the government. What is Dr Chee's cause against the government?LKY : I think you should ask the person next to you.Ravi : Mr Lee, I can't be asking Mr Davindar Singh for that. Oh, I'm sorry. But I am saying that I'm asking you, that it's your affidavit, you and "his cause against the government and PAP and me". I'm asking you what is that cause against the government that you think he (inaudible)?LKY : His cause against the government is that we have been able to demolish him at every turn that he takes which was wrong and offside.Ravi : I understand my guillotine is running.LKY : Yah, helping it to run out and to save -Ravi : And thank you for accelerating it, Mr Lee. Mr Lee, you said that - are you aware that the Democrat was published February 2006?LKY : I've already answered those questions and we're covering old ground. I thought there were a great urgency to ask me powerful questions which are relevant to the reputation and would justify what they have said - that this government is run like the NKF and that we have people like either me, or the Prime Minister, or Mr Goh Chok Tong, is like a T.T. Dorai. That's the implication.Ravi : Mr Lee, you know that this is assessment of damages. I wish to ask you so many questions against the backdrop of this time, all the constraints, but I can't but since the second and the third defendents have been subject to this time, with due respect, I end my cross-examination.LKY : You've run out of questions then.Ravi : Mr Lee, please don't challenge me. It is not necessary.(pause)CSJ : Mr Lee, we get to meet at last.Continues here at Transcript part ll : CSJ vs LKY Transcript part Vl - CSC vs LHL This is the full transcript of Chee Siok Chin's cross-examination of Lee Hsien Loong. As a watcher on the public gallery, there were two things of note -* Lee Hsien Loong's eyes darted towards his counsel ever so often when an awkward question was posed.* Lee Kuan Yew was not in court during most of the exchange. He arrived and took the seat just as his son was prompted by his counsel Davindar Singh to explain an earlier answer.But first, some updates :Chee Soon Juan and Chee Siok Chin have been released from prison after serving 11 and 10 days respectively for contempt of court. Visit SDP for updates. Video here.Gopalan Nair has written his first blog entry since his arrest and detention two weeks ago.Interesting new blog - It keeps tabs on the physical and mental health of Lee Kuan Yew, and makes a pretty valid case of why his passing will be crucial to Singapore's future.------------------------------------------------------------Chee Siok Chin : Good morning, Mr Lee.Lee Hsien Loong : Good Morning.CSC : Mr Lee, I hope you do realise that Senior Counsel is making you look rather bad for objecting to almost every question that was raised by the second defendent. He is now saying that he took the decision to strike out our AEIC himself. I have that -Davindar Singh : Miss Chee should not misunderstand or misinterpret what I said -CSC : He is making you look as if you cannot hold your own in court.Singh : What I said and it's on the record -CSC : My first question to you, Mr Lee is -Singh : Is that I advised the clients -CSC : How long have you been the Prime Minister? How long have you held office as Prime Minister of Singapore?LHL : Since August 2004.CSC : So that's almost 4 years?LHL : Yes.CSC : And during these 4 years as the Prime Minister, how many defamtion suits have you filed or initiated?(Pause)Singh : Your honour, what's the relevance of that?CSC : Mr Singh, please. Let your -Singh : I do object on the basis of relevance, your honour.Judge Belinda Ang : Sustained.CSC : Would I be right to say that you've initiated 2, if not 3, defamation suits whilst in office as Prime Minister?Singh : Objection based on relevance, your honour.Judge : Sustained.CSC : As the leader of the country, Mr Lee, do you believe that it's your job is to look after the development of the people i.e. ensuring that Singaporeans are fed, that no one has to beg for a living, no left is left homeless, every child gets to have the opportunity to go to school, so on and so forth?LHL : Your honour, this is not the place to read a political manifesto.CSC : I'm asking you as the leader of the country, just try to answer yes or no. Don't try to avoid the question.Singh : Can I know, your honour, the relevance of the question?CSC : It goes into assessing Mr Lee's claim for damages because if he says that he's done -Singh : Your -CSC : Wait, sit down, I've not finished. He is going to say that he's worth so much and so much because of what he's done for the country. And so this question is very relevant when it comes to assessing the quantum of damages that he will be demanding for.Singh : It's not relevant, your honour, because it goes to specific instances. As your honour knows from the decision in Latle and Schpedel (check spelling) which went all the way to the House of Lords, you can give evidence of general reputation, good or bad, but you cannot go into specific instances.CSC : Are you allowing the question?Judge : Sustained. Disallowed.CSC : Mr Lee, you had said in your testimony yesterday that the responsibility of the Prime Minister is to know the pulse of the people in the country, and if they are unhappy. Do you agree?LHL : Yes.CSC : And do you feel that you can feel that pulse?LHL : I try my best.CSC : What do you think that pulse tells you?Singh : Relevance, your honour?Judge : Explain yourself, Miss Chee.CSC : Your honour, as the Prime Minister who says that -Judge : The relevance of your question to the assessment of damages.CSC : It is important to know the pulse of the people. It goes to show whether or not he knows what is happening on the ground -Judge : Miss -CSC : And that he is fulfilling his job, his duty, as the Prime Minister. I don't see how this is irrelevant when it comes to assessing his character, his merits, his competence, as the Prime Minister?Singh : Your honour, the people of Singapore have already voted the government in with an overwhelming majority. While it would be interesting to have a discussion with Miss Chee on these issues, the question ultimately is how does it goes into the question of assessment of damages?Judge : Question is disallowed.CSC : As the Prime Minister, as the leader of the country, do you know, can you feel it when you come up with policies and people, citizens are unhappy with these policies -Judge : Miss Chee, move on.CSC : I'm moving on. I've just asked another question - what's the irrelevance, what's the shaking of your head mean? You said that a nod doesn't mean affirmative in chambers -Judge : Irrelevant.CSC : Now you shake your head, I need to know to ask you -Judge : I've just answered you. Move on.CSC : Thank you. Mr Lee, have you been to food centres to eat?LHL : Yes.CSC : Have you seen old, blind, cripppled people selling tissue paper. Have to ever been to public toilets where you see the elderly washing the toilets. In the food centres, do you see people in their 60s, 70s, bent over, collecting dishes to eke out a living? Do you see all that?Singh : Your honour, apart from demonstrating that in Singapore, old people have the dignity of employment, that question is irrelevant to this court.CSC : Dignity of employment?Judge : Sustained.CSC : When you are in your 70s, when you are bent over, when you have to work because the government does not take care of you? Dignity?Judge : Miss Chee -CSC : You've given a whole new meaning to the word "dignity", Mr Singh.Judge : This is not the forum for those sort of questions -CSC : Perhaps you could create your own Oxford, or -Judge : Miss Chee -CSC : Davindar Singh's dictionary. Have you ever taken rides in MRTs, public transport like buses, SMRT, SBS Transit buses, Mr Lee?Singh : Objection, your honour.Judge : Sustained.CSC : Do you know what it's like for Singaporeans to squeeze like sardines, smell each other's breath in MRTs and have to wait, sometimes for a half hour, for the bus to arrive?Singh : Objection, your honour.Judge : Sustained.CSC : Do you know what it feels like? (Pause) You've read, I'm sure you have, that Singaporeans go across the causeway to buy medicine despite the promise of health care not being denied to every Singaporean, that many Singaporeans find it unaffordable, or too expensive, to get medical health-care treatment in Singapore?Singh : Your honour, again I object and I would just say that all my objections are premised on nothing but the law. My duty is to assist the court in terms of what is and is not relevant, and I would not be discharging my duty if I did not opose and attempt to waste the court's time on irrelevant matters.CSC : Is that question irrelevant?Judge : I've already said to you, Miss Chee -CSC : No, no, no, he objected it -Judge : That this courtroom is not the proper forum for the questions you have asked.CSC : He objected it but he doesn't make the decision whether it's irrelevant or not. But I've asked the question. You did not say it was sustained until I had to ask you again. Mr Singh stood up, made that objection -Judge : Question is disallowed.CSC : So do I take it that every Mr Singh objects, it is automatic that you sustain his objections?Judge : It depends on your question, Miss Chee.CSC : And so for every question I've asked has been objected to and you've upheld that -Judge : Because, like I've said, those questions are not relevant to this courtroom -CSC : But I've explained to you how relevant it is. Even if it's relevant, your honour, it seems to me that you will say that it's irrelevant. (Pause) Mr Lee, it has been reported that you are paid $3.7 million a year for your role as Prime Minister. Can you confirm that to this court?Singh : Objection.Judge : Sustained.CSC : Do you know, Mr Lee, that you are the highest paid Prime Minister in the world, 6 times more than George Bush. Your salary is equivalent to 8 leaders in the European countries, do you know that?Singh : Objection, you honour.CSC : Do you know that you are in the Guiness Book Records for the highest-paid prime minister?Singh : Objection, your honour. Your honour, it might assist Miss Chee -CSC : Then -Singh : If she looks at our written assessment on the assesssment of damages for the striking out of our affidavit, it does set out what under law is permissable as cross-examination -CSC : You have used the law -Singh : And the reason -CSC : To thwart this entire proceeding. I have a few more minutes so please sit down so that I can continue with my questions.Singh : The reason I do this is because she has a few more minutes and I don't want her to throw those minutes away.CSC : Thank you very much. Thank you for your consideration. That is the first consideration you've shown in court, albeit one that's veiled.Singh : There -CSC : So please sit down. Let me continue with my questioning.Singh : There are relevant areas that she can inquire into.CSC : Mr Lee, this trial today is about assessing damages that you will be demanding for. Tell me, how do you assess your worth? Do you assess it according to how much you are paid? How do you assess your worth?Singh arose.CSC : Let Mr Lee - he was about to open his mouth and answer it. Please, Mr Singh, you are really making your client look very bad, very very bad.Singh : Your honour, I just want to say this before the witness respond that Miss Chee may not know but the assessment of damages has nothing to do with one's salary.Judge : Yes.LHL : I leave it entirely to the court to assess how much damages is appropriate. There are principles, there are precedents and the arguments have all been made.CSC : Do you assess your own worth as a public servant? As leader of the country?Judge : Irrelevant.CSC : What are you -(Pause)CSC : Mr Lee, you had said that as Prime Minister, you lead your government based on honesty, integrity, meritocracy and competence. Am I right?LHL : Yes.CSC : Do you believe that cabinet ministers in Singapore, including yourself, have obtained their positions through meritocracy and competence?LHL : This is a system we work. We strive our best to reach the ideal. We are always trying to improve and do better.CSC : Thank you. Do you believe that you were appointed Prime Minister on your own merit, in your own competence?LHL : YesCSC : Do you think that if your father had not been the former Prime Minister of Singapore, and that's none other than Mr Lee Kuan Yew, you would still be the Prime Minister of Singapore today?LHL : It is hypothetical question but I would say yes.CSC : Well, it's very good to see the leader of the country so confident. Reassuring, really. Apart from yesterday, Mr Lee, have we ever cross roads before? Have we ever met before?LHL : No, we have not met personally but what I said about your brother Dr Chee Soon Juan applies equally to you.CSC : That would be? Would you care to repeat?LHL : That would be I do not know you as an individual personally but I know your public record, what you have done. It doesn't go back quite as far as your brother in 1992 but it's not a short record neither. It extends at least from 1997.CSC : Alright, thank you for answering with so much depth. If you do not know me on a personal basis, how did you come to make this allegation - because these are very strong words, Mr Lee, very strong words, yup? Do you agree with me? Words like "revulsion", words like "venom". "Venom" - poisonous, "deep-seated hatred", "malice" against you if you do not know me? You said yersterday that one of the reasons you had used these words were because we had unfurled this banner that says "Free Singapore from the Lees" at one of our rallies.LHL : Yes, there are many reasons and one of the other reason, this defamation case - matter came up, everybody who was involved immediately apologize and explained that they had no intention of saying these things and were not even aware that these things were said, but you and Dr Chee insisted that these statements were totally justified and that you were going to prove your case and that you were going to fight through to the bitter end so I conclude that there is a strong sentiment against me.CSC : Yes, yes , but unfortunately you have instructed your counsel to ensure that despite words "fight to the bitter end", you've instructed your counsel to ensure that that doesn't happen. Look at all that assessment of damages - all 14 - struck out, AEIC struck out, list of documents struck out, this morning imposing a guillotine which he says that he did it on his own.LHL : Well, unfortunately, there is a process for settling defamation cases. There is a due process. Each side has to make its filings and the pleadings have to show justification on basis for the defamation and if there is no basis, there is a process for them to be struck out and if they are struck out -CSC : You see, we were not given the chance to show -LHL : May I reply, your honour?CSC : That there was a basis -Judge : Yes, please continue.LHL : May I reply, your honour?CSC : That there was no chance for us to show that there was a basis -Judge : Continue, Mr Lee, continue.LHL : There's a process for dealing with pleadings and defences and for defences to be struck out and if the defence is struck out, for an appeal to be filed, in good time, against the striking out action so that the matter can be abjugated at a higher level and in this case, the striking out was ruled and long periods passed and nothing happened until long after the deadline for filing an appeal has passed and then you and your brother, and the SDP decided to file an appeal many months late -CSC : Mr Lee, I have 5 more minutes. Do not waste my time.LHL : And therefore, this is the process of the law.CSC : Alright, thank you. Obviously, you've regurgitated, vomited out everything that Mr Singh has been saying so -LHL : Your honour, these are facts on the record -CSC : Your honour, may I please go on. I have 5 more minutes. Thank you. (Pause) Is it not true that your father, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, was the Prime Minister of Singapore, he's now the Minister Mentor. You are the current Prime Minister and your wife Madam Ho Ching is the CEO of Temasek Holdings, is that true?Singh : Objection, your honour.Judge : Sustained.Singh : There's no relevance.CSC : Mr Lee, do you know the current population in Singapore? Numbers, that is. What is the current population in Singapore?Singh : What's the relevance of that, your honour?CSC : Your honour, in his affidavit it says that the New Democrat was widely circulated. I want to establish how widely circulated it is.Singh : Your honour, it's in their own documents. They said that they sold the New Democrat and circulated it to 5000 people in the heat of the elections.CSC : So what is the population of Singapore, Mr Lee?Singh : Again, your honour, I object.CSC : Your honour, are you sustaining his objection? Are you allowing me that question?Judge : Yes, allowed, Go on.CSC : Yes, allowed, Mr Lee?LHL : The population of Singapore is about 4.6 million people.CSC : 4.6 million, very good, thank you. Now if you turn with me to page 22 of volume 1 of your AEIC.LHL : Yes.CSC : Para 42. The quote there. "A Singapore Democratic Party member told CPJ that the party had sold around 5000 copies of the 10,000 copies printed" and so and so forth. "5000 copies" and you say that the population in Singapore - and it goes on to say next paragraph 43 - that "the words had therefore reach a very large segment of the public". Do your math. Mr Lee, do you have a calculator there?LHL : No, your honour.CSC : Then I'm sure your mind is astute enough to do a very simple mathematical - and work it out - what is 5000 out of 4.6 million? I'll give you sometime to do this mental sum thing, you know it's been a long time since we've subjected to that.LHL : Thank you, your honour. Your honour, the point is not the number of copies but the depth of the circulation -CSC : No, no, no, no, Mr Lee, I've asked you a question so please, just answer. If you don't know, say you don't know. If you can't work it out in your mind, just say "you can't work it out in your mind". So, my question again, so please direct Mr Lee to answer that question - what is 5, I'm sorry, what is 5000 out of 4.6 million?Singh : I'm sure Miss Chee knows it because she has calculated it. Maybe she wants to tell us what the number is -CSC : No, no, leave it. Look, don't answer Mr Lee's question. If Mr Lee cannot answer the question, let him say it for himself, Mr Singh.Singh : It's not the question of whether he can or cannot answer the question -CSC : Yes it is -Singh : It's just the question of saving time-CSC : It's just a matter of - I've asked Mr Lee a question and the question was directed to him, not to you. So kindly sit down, let Mr Lee continue -Singh : Your honour -CSC : Whether or not he knows the answer. If he doesn't know the answer, say so.Singh : Your honour, I can object to this but I don't want to because it's a number that Miss Chee knows. If she know the number, get on with it, simple as that.CSC : Mr - yes, as in -Judge : Do you know the number?CSC : Are you going to allow Mr Lee to answer that question?Judge : I haven't object to it, did I?CSC : I don't know.Judge : Yes, Mr Lee?LHL : Your honour, 5000 divided by 4.6 million is about 1 in a 1000. That counts every infant, every foreigner and all those -CSC : Foreigner? 4.6 -LHL : Yes, 4.6 million includes non-citizens.CSC : Thank you. Okay, 1 out of a thousand, that would make it 0.0001?LHL : I think you have one zero too many.CSC : So you can answer that question. 0.001% of the population. 0.001 is a "very large segment of the public?" Think. 0.001 of Singaporeans and yet the claim that the New Democrat was "widely circulated", reached a "very large segment of the public." It's very strange that 0.001 constitutes "large segment".Singh : Is that a question, your honour?CSC : Now, your AEIC - page 23, could you turn to page 23?LHL : Yes.CSC : Beside that, it says - the third line of para 44 - I'll read that out, "the words and, or their gist, were indeed widely and prominently published. they were republished in Straits Times A, Straits Times again B, Straits Times C, New Paper D and Today newspaper E. Do you think the re-publishing of these State-controlled newspapers have reached a larger segment than the New Democrat did?LHL : Your honour, paragraph 44 is quite clear. The republication was a consequence of the initial publication -CSC : Can you answer the question? Do you think it reached a wider -LHL : Yes, of course, therefore "indirectly the initial publication has caused an enormous dissemination" -CSC : Just answer the question. I don't need you to repeat, or to clarify. Answer the question - if you think that these papers - the re-published articles have reached a larger segment than the New Democrat ever did?LHL : Yes, of course, as a consequences of the publication of the New Democrat -CSC : Thank you. Let me go on to the next question -Singh : Sorry, the answer has yet to be given -CSC : He has said "yes" so thank you.Singh : Miss Chee should understand that the witness is allowed to answer the question -CSC : He has answered the question, thank you.Singh : Your honour, may I have permission for Mr Lee to complete his answer?LHL : Your honour, Miss Chee is trying to establish that she is not answerable for the subsequent publication in the Straits Times -CSC : You do not know what I'm trying to establish. Please don't claim to know -LHL : That is a matter of law the lawyers will argue -CSC : Thank you, so why bring it up when you're on the witness stand -LHL : And I think that is a matter of fact -CSC : And not as a lawyer but as a plaintiff? (Pause) Right, let me go on to the next question. Page 59 of AEIC.LHL: Yes.CSC : Paragraph 139. You have said -LHL : Sorry, 139? 140?CSC : Okay, I'm sorry. Yes, my apologies, 140. It said that "every step of the way, CSJ and CSC have attempted to use and abuse the court process to attack me for their own political ends. They did so by publishing the most outlandish statements about me. Would you care to recall what some of these "outlandish" statements or remarks were?LHL : They are listed in paragraph 141, 142 and 143 and 144 and 145 and many other paragraphs.CSC : Those are just reports, right? The newspapers -LHL : And if there's any doubt, your conduct and Dr Chee's conduct this morning leaves no doubt that -CSC : I have not asked that of you - Mr Lee, please answer the question - what were the "outlandish" remarks -Singh : Your honour, the answer -CSC : Statements that -LHL : Your honour, the answer is in my affidavit.CSC : No, it is not. Could you please tell the court what were the "outlandish" remarks that you claimed that we have made against you? Conduct, remarks - two different things. And I'm sure we all know this. I'm asking you could you quote from that - you said that it's found in 141, 142, 143 - please quote to us, to me, what some of these "outlandish" remarks that you claimed that we have made against you, please?Singh : Your honour, if this this cross-examination is to credit, the answer has already been given and as I demonstrated by the authorities yesterday, they must accept the answer. If they don't like it, they can submit on it. But the answer has already been given and your honour, the guillotine fell about 7 minutes ago, your honour. So Miss Chee should be reminded that she's well past her time.Judge : Yes, Miss Chee?CSC : Are you allowing me to continue?Judge : Question is disallowed.CSC : Mr Lee, Mr Francis Seow had said the ministers in Singapore, and that includes you, are not worth a cent that they are paid. Do you agree?Singh : I object, your honour, Mr Francis Seow doesn't have the guts to turn up in court himself so he shouldn't use the -CSC : Let us not take pot-shots -Judge : Sustained.CSC : At the person who is not in court. I'm sorry, your honour.Judge : Question disllowed.CSC : Do you sleep well at night, Mr Lee?Singh : Objection, your honour.(Pause)CSC : Do you know that as the leader of the country that your government deprives Singaporeans of much-needed welfare for the poor, the elderly and the infirm, that HDB prices are artificially inflated, and that many of us are not able to draw on our CPF savings even though we have tens of thousands of dollars in there and all this time, when Singaporeans are left rather ignored -Singh : Objection, your honour.CSC : By the government -Judge : Sustained.CSC : While you live your life as a millionaire minister?Singh : Objection, your honour. This is a classic example of the abuse that I had referred to earlier where now that your honour has given them the indulgence of a bit more time, it's been abused for the purpose of making all sorts of wild, unsubstantiated, and speculative allegations.Judge : Two minutes more, Miss Chee.CSC : I would like to pass on this report that we have here. It goes into assessing the quantum of damages because this report talks about - Well, why don't I circulate this report and we'll talk about -Singh : Your honour, I like to see a copy of the document so that I can assist the court?CSC : Certainly, I have made quite enough copies. You need a couple of minutes to digest that?Singh : No your honour, I don't need a couple of minutes to digest that. Your honour, it is completely irrelevant as your honour would see. It has to do with the issue of salaries which your honour has already ruled on. It is also a reliance on specific instance which is irrelevant. It's well past the point of liability as well, your honour, so for all those reasons I object. Your honour, I have no objection in principle of documents being produced in the course of evidence-in-chief of cross-examination but they have to be relevant and this isn't.Judge : Yes. Miss Chee, you want to demonstrate relevance?CSC : Like I said, if you look at the last paragraph of the article - for continuation, let me read a couple of paragraphs before that. Fourth paragraph, or third paragraph, rather, from the bottom. "German Chancellor Angela Merkel was named Ford's most powerful woman for the second straight year and who recently was critical of excessive executive salaries in the private sector, is paid around $318, 000" and these are U.S. dollars I believe they are talking about. "In Japan, former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said last September that he would take 30% on his salary, $355, 000, and that other ministers would give up 10% of their pay but the top of the three, by some degree, is Singapore's Premier Lee Hsien Loong, who following a controversial round of pay increases, is said to be receiving a salary of $2.05 million, which is equivalent to $3.5 million dollars by the end of next year. While the rational of the increase was, as the Hague group found in its research, the need to keep government salaries competitive, Mr Lee said that he would donate his raise to charity." Oh, by the way, have you, Mr Lee, donated your pay increase to charity?LHL : Yes, your honour.Judge : Miss Chee, that's irrelevant. The time's up.CSC : I still have one question to -Judge : Alright. Just one last question.CSC : So Mr Lee, do you agree that, as Forbes has pointed out, that you are the highest-paid leader of a country in the world.Singh : Objection, your honour.Judge : Sustained.Singh : Your honour, in re-examination, because Mr Lee was not given the opportunity to explain the answer by Miss Chee. Can you turn to your affidavit at paragraphs 42 and 43, page 22.LHL : Yup.Singh : It was suggested to you that only 5000 copies were circulated and therefore that's inconsequential. What do you have to say to that?LHL : First of all, I do not know how many people read those 5000 copies because each copy could have been circulated to many readers. Secondly, each time the same copy was sold, the same libel is being repeated and broadcasted to a crowd because this was not just a distribution from a shop but Dr Chee, Miss Chee and several others going around looping it about as broadly as possible, as loudly as possible to achieve as much impact as possible. And thirdly, similar allegations went on to the website where I have no doubt, further eyeballs would have seen them. So I think 5000 copies is not a measure of how many people read these libels. Or, the word of mouth after the article have been read, circulating in the grapevine, in the coffeeshops, poisonoulsy distorted, more and more lurid, more and more damaging, impossible to trace except in court where the truth will out.Singh : Thank you, I've no further questions, your honour.Judge : Yes, the witness is released.Singh : Thank you, Mr Lee.------------------------------------------------------------------------This concludes my series of transcripts of what I believe are the more dramatic exchanges during Lees vs Chees trial. I would upload all the audio clips if not for the fact that the audio files obtained from the High Court are broken up into dozens of 10 minute segments. Plus, they are encoded in a way which is only playable in Record Player, for which the application is included in the CD. If you wish to help re-encode all the files for upload yourself, do email me. Otherwise, SDP has been slowly uploading some of the files. Transcript part V : CSJ vs LKY "If it is not totalitarian to arrest a man and detain him, when you cannot charge him with any offence against any written law - if that is not what we have always cried out against in Fascist states - then what is it?… If we are to survive as a free democracy, then we must be prepared, in principle, to concede to our enemies - even those who do not subscribe to our views - as much constitutional rights as you concede yourself."- Opposition leader Lee Kuan Yew, Legislative Assembly Debates, Sept 21, 1955 If you believe in democracy, you must believe in it unconditionally. If you believe that men should be free, then, they should have the right of free association, of free speech, of free publication. Then, no law should permit those democratic processes to be set at nought.- Opposition leader Lee Kuan Yew, Legislative Assembly Debates, April 27, 1955 "Repression, Sir is a habit that grows. I am told it is like making love-it is always easier the second time! The first time there may be pangs of conscience, a sense of guilt. But once embarked on this course with constant repetition you get more and more brazen in the attack. All you have to do is to dissolve organizations and societies and banish and detain the key political workers in these societies. Then miraculously everything is tranquil on the surface. Then an intimidated press and the government-controlled radio together can regularly sing your praises, and slowly and steadily the people are made to forget the evil things that have already been done, or if these things are referred to again they're conveniently distorted and distorted with impunity, because there will be no opposition to contradict."- Lee Kuan Yew as an opposition PAP member speaking to David Marshall, Singapore Legislative Assembly, Debates, 4 October, 1956_________________________________________________________________The final instalment of the courtroom clash between Lee Kuan Yew and Chee Soon Juan. Transcript courtesy of yours truly. Continues from Part lV. CSJ : You had mentioned, Mr Lee, that there were two ways of gaining political power. You had said something about being not a bankrupt so that you can stand for elections and then the other method you said was through constitutional means, through -LKY : Through unconstitutional means.CSJ : The other way? No, I think you meant through constitutional means.Singh : If Dr Chee would stop talking and start listening, he would have heard that what the witness said was either do it be constitutional means, i.e through parliament by not being a bankrupt or violently, illegally.CSJ : Thank you. I appreciate your assistance on this matter. I agree. I completely agree with you, Mr Lee -LKY : May I -CSJ : That constitutional means is the way to go -Singh : No, no, no -CSJ : But the funny thing, your honour -Singh : What is the question? It's not whether it's a funny thing or not. The only thing funny with (inaudible) are the speeches coming out -CSJ : Mr Lee, Mr Lee -Singh : Your honour, can I ask for a ruling that Dr Chee (inaudible) the questions because in the last -CSJ : The constitution allows us freedom of speech, assembly and association -Judge : Dr Chee!CSJ : And you have completely butchered all that!Judge : Dr Chee, the last question, if that can be a question, is completely irrelevant as far as this court is concerned. I've already said those sort of questions are not for this courtroom. He's here to assess to the damages.CSJ : Point taken, your honour. And this is what I'm trying to derive at -Judge : Now 2.40. I've given you the indulgence. I don't know if Miss Chee wishes to ask questions. I assume you are eating into her time.CSJ : All that I'm saying right now is, your honour, Mr Lee has made this point that to gain political power there are certain rules and those rules are set in the constitution. And I'm saying that I agree with it. Those rules were not written by me. Those rules were written by the British, and which Mr Lee agreed to. Now in one of those rules there, it says citizens of Singapore are guaranteed the freedom of speech, association and assembly -Singh : What is the question?CSJ : Right now, why is Mr Lee changing those rules? Because when I begin to exercise these freedoms of speech and assembly -Singh : If that's the question, the witness will answer the question.CSJ : We get arrested. Tell us right now, are you up for a free and fair fight during elections?LKY : I do not know -CSJ : In a constitutional manner.LKY : There is nothing to hinder an opposition party in Singapore from -CSJ : I beg your pardon. There's everything that will hinder an opposition party.LKY : The SDP was doing very well under Chiam See Tong and at one time captured three seats and it became the de-facto leader. You came in and destroy the SDP -CSJ : Don't change subject, Mr Lee. Don't change the subject.LKY : As a result, because you had destroyed the standing of the SDP, the Workers' Party has become the de-facto leader of the opposition. That's an open con-(inaudible). The Workers' Party has won the elections, Mr Chiam in his personal capacity has continually and repeatedly won the elections without defaming anybody.CSJ : You see, Mr Lee, when I talk about -LKY : Low Thia Kiang has not defame anybody, not defame the government, neither has Chiam See Tong and they have won successive by-elections but you have lost successively because we have disproved to the people that you are not to be believed.CSJ : You see, Mr Lee, when I ask you about freedoms of speech, assembly-LKY : That is the whole purpose of this exchange in this court -CSJ : When I ask you about the freedoms of speech, assembly and association -LKY : We have heard all that -CSJ : I don't just mean political parties. I mean citizens of Singapore. Even a citizen of this country who is not a member of a political party has the right to freedom of speech, association and assembly -Singh : And the question is, your honour?CSJ : Would you allow these people their rights or are you going to sit there and continue to curtail their rights? Simple answer, Mr Lee, you know -Judge : Irrelevant. Disallowed. This is not the court to answer.CSJ : You are intelligent. You know what freedom of speech is. You know what freedom of assembly is.Judge : Dr Chee, I've already ruled. Please continue with the next question.CSJ : Yes, will you allow more than five people to assemble in an public area?LKY : These -Judge : Irrelevant.LKY : Your honour, these rules were in existence before the PAP took office. They have remained on our statute book, or rather in regulations under the statutes.CSJ : And you are saying that these rules before the PAP. Which was the government before the PAP? The British, I assume.LKY : No, before the -CSJ : Mr Lee, let me ask you. Was the British a colonial government?Judge : Mr Lee, it is not for you to answer that question.CSJ : He's made that point and I'm just clarifying that point. Your honour, you see, Mr Lee -Judge : I've already ruled.CSJ : Your honour, hear me out. Mr Lee makes his point that his party, his government, did not come up with these rules. I say fine. Who came up with these rules then? The British came up with these rules. The point that I want to establish is the British was an undemocratic government. Mr Lee is making my point right now that by continuing these undemocratic rules, Singapore has been governed in a very undemocratic way. And when you govern Singapore in an undemocratic way, you try to tell this court here that my reputation is A-One, you have a problem.LKY : I -CSJ : But if Mr George Bush or Mr Gordon Brown or any leader in the democratic world stands up and says, "if I can garner 80% of the votes", yes, that would be something. But not in a society where you controlled the press, and I remember, Mr Lee, whether you do or not I don't know, but when you said about the -Singh : Your honour, how long do we have to listen to this because Dr Chee is not prepared to listen -CSJ : The media, the press, being controlled to the point where they begin to be sycophants -Judge : I've taken (inaudible) of Mr Chee's conduct which I will deal with on Wednesday.Singh : Thank you, your honour.CSJ : Mr Lee, would you then respond?Judge : The witness is not required to answer. Question is totally irrelevant to the assessment of damages. I have repeated myself many times.CSJ : Mr Lee -Judge : It's 2.45.CSJ : I'm sorry?Judge : It's 2.45 now.CSJ : Mr Lee, let's continue on because this is a very important national matter.Judge : Not for this court, Dr Chee.CSJ : Your honour -Judge : (inaudible) Take it outside this courtroom. My ruling -CSJ : But, no. Hold on. Wait, wait. Your honour, Mr Lee is saying that his reputation is very important because it is national matter and in that context I'm trying to deal with. If he didn't say that his reputation is of national priority, then there is no issue. But right now, Mr Lee has made that point and Mr Lee has continued to want to defend, then let me then question him as well. (Pause) Mr Lee, you had some point said that the PAP, I take it a lot of times it is you, that said that "we have engineered elections that would make Singaporeans stupid to want to vote us out." What do you mean by that, Mr Lee?LKY : We have given Singaporeans something that we've never had before. Singapore society which is now well-educated, 20% of them in tertiary institutions, 40% of them in polytechnics, another 20% in ITE, everybody owns a home, everybody has got proper medical care and everybody is catered for and looked after. If they were not catered for and looked after, they wouldn't have voted for this government to be re-elected. It's as simple as that. The final test is not what Mr Chee says or what I say but the reality on the ground. Have we created Singapore better than 1959? When the Prime Minister goes for elections in a few years time, whether he wins or loses depends on whether the people believe they're worse off or better off. It's as simple as that. This is the acid test.CSJ : Sure, sure, but unfortunately Mr Lee, it is not as simple as that because if you're saying that the acid test is whether people feel they benefited from your system, then why is it, Mr Lee, that even you and the current Senior Minister continue to lament that Singaporeans are leaving Singapore in droves. Let me cite you a stati