Term 1 Society Issues- Should demonstrations be allowed at Speakers' Corner?

Reference
Title of Article: Protests may be allowed at Speakers' Corner
Author: Li XueYing
Title of Newspaper: The Straits Times
Date: 29 February 2008

Personal Response
As a child, I seldom got the chance to speak up about any concerns I have, and was taught to follow instructions without questioning them. That was the case until I grew older and was deemed to be ‘matured’.

Similarly, the Government of Singapore is considering easing the rules of use of the Speakers’ Corner in Hong Lim Park to allow for more political activities like demonstrations. This was said by Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng in response to Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) Eunice Olsen’s urge for more space in public expression. I am particularly interested, because of the common thought that Singapore has very limited space for public expression. So is this really for the better good of Singapore?

In the past, outdoor demonstrations have been banned because of the violent riots in the 1960s, which lead to many deaths, injuries and damage to property. However, I believe that the society now is different, with people having a generally more accommodative way of speaking with higher mutual tolerance and respect for the different groups of people. Thus they should be given a chance to publicly express their views.

However, we must agree that not everyone is the same and especially in a multi-religious society like ours, the rule of secular law must be well-balanced with social expression, and bundled with an increased amount of individual accountability for actions, in order for more public expression to be given.

Nevertheless, some civil society activists have considered the possible change as an improvement for Singapore, “which has been criticized as being extremely limited in space for public expression” as said by Think Centre President Sinapan Samydorai. It has also been claimed to be one of the causes why about 1,000 Singaporeans every year give up their citizenship- the inability to “meaningfully identify – beyond monetary terms – with the notion of belonging to a First World nation” as said by NMP Eunice Olsen.

Then again, you might say that more freedom of expression is worrying due to the potential of a ‘peaceful’ demonstration turning aggressive and violent, more so with extremists being able to take advantage of this, possibly hurting the stability in Singapore. Furthermore, this move might also seem to be unnecessary since current avenues for feedback, like through email and the MPs’ Meet-the-People sessions, are considered sufficient to some.

I, however, must point out that demonstrations are different from simply allowing the government to know by informing them. Demonstrations exhibit a higher level of resolve and capture more attention. We must also keep in mind that demonstrations do not only consist of political statements; it is also a platform to cry out for help for those who are genuinely in need. Moreover, with proper management by the government, ‘peaceful’ demonstrations need not turn chaotic.

So, let us hope for the best and that Singaporeans are ‘matured’ enough for greater freedom of speech (if it is granted), and not allow the riots from the 1960s to repeat itself ever again.

(499 words)