This post is a response to a very lengthy article posted on Channel News Asia here.
Since Malaysia's Prime Minister Najib Razak declared that they (Malaysia) will abolish the ISA, local NGOs and political figures have also begin to adovcate / renew these calls.
It is unlikely that Malaysia will abolish the ISA. More likely, PM Najib is "doing the groundwork" before the 13th Malaysia general elections. Look at the recent Bersih protest in July this year. After talks with the King, the organisers of the rally agreed to change the street protest to the Merdeka Stadium, an indoor venue. Subsequently, the organisers were refused usage of the stadium and a permit to conduct the protest. On the evening of the protest on 9 July 2011, the police had confirmed 1,667 arrests, including 167 females and minors. Most of the arrested protesters were freed by the end of the day.
Of course the above factual information has little to do with Singapore. Yet it is precisely because of PM Najib's claim that has set off a chain reaction in Singapore. All calls to abolish the ISA from local NGOs and political figures have cited examples from the 1950s-1970s. Then, the ISA was used to detain persons suspected of agitating racial and religious discord, and persons engaged in espionage. The ISA was also controversially used in 1987 against alleged Marxist anti-state conspirators involved in several Catholic church and civil society organisations.
In recent times, the ISA has been used primarily to deter terrorism. This is where Mas Selamat and the suspected Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) terrorists come in. Here, it isunfortunately hard to disagree with pre-president Tony Tan when he said that the "ISA is a blunt instrument". If there were no ISA, do the authorities only arrest the terrorists after Yishun MRT station had been bombed? After all, a terrorist is only a terrorist when an act of terror has been committed no? Like a suicide bomber can only be labelled as such after a successful act of self-immolation. I take it that the officers at the Home Affairs and Internal Security Department have done all the necessary security checks in confirming the terrorist links before detaining those suspects.
More importantly, could 911 have been averted if the Americans had the ISA?
Singapore has come a long way since the 1950s threats of communism. In present times, the authorities cannot simply arrest anyone under the ISA for "agitating racial and religious discord, and persons engaged in espionage". While Singapore doesn't score much on human rights, it is unlikely that they will do an "Aung San Suu Kyi". Even the outspoken Dr Chee Soon Juan has never been convicted under the ISA.
So what other laws can Singapore apply to deter terrorism? I suggest that the ISA be refined instead of totally abolished. Refined so that it cannot be used to benefit one political party and for all other petty reasons. After all, I would rather the authorities come clean and say "We are keeping the ISA" instead of saying that they will abolish it (and rebrand it as another law) for the sake of gaining populist points.
As for Malaysia, let's see how much more PM Najib has to offer. Elections in Malaysia are not due till 2013. Would the ISA be repackaged as XXX version 2.0? Only time will tell.
Since Malaysia's Prime Minister Najib Razak declared that they (Malaysia) will abolish the ISA, local NGOs and political figures have also begin to adovcate / renew these calls.
It is unlikely that Malaysia will abolish the ISA. More likely, PM Najib is "doing the groundwork" before the 13th Malaysia general elections. Look at the recent Bersih protest in July this year. After talks with the King, the organisers of the rally agreed to change the street protest to the Merdeka Stadium, an indoor venue. Subsequently, the organisers were refused usage of the stadium and a permit to conduct the protest. On the evening of the protest on 9 July 2011, the police had confirmed 1,667 arrests, including 167 females and minors. Most of the arrested protesters were freed by the end of the day.
Of course the above factual information has little to do with Singapore. Yet it is precisely because of PM Najib's claim that has set off a chain reaction in Singapore. All calls to abolish the ISA from local NGOs and political figures have cited examples from the 1950s-1970s. Then, the ISA was used to detain persons suspected of agitating racial and religious discord, and persons engaged in espionage. The ISA was also controversially used in 1987 against alleged Marxist anti-state conspirators involved in several Catholic church and civil society organisations.
In recent times, the ISA has been used primarily to deter terrorism. This is where Mas Selamat and the suspected Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) terrorists come in. Here, it is
More importantly, could 911 have been averted if the Americans had the ISA?
Singapore has come a long way since the 1950s threats of communism. In present times, the authorities cannot simply arrest anyone under the ISA for "agitating racial and religious discord, and persons engaged in espionage". While Singapore doesn't score much on human rights, it is unlikely that they will do an "Aung San Suu Kyi". Even the outspoken Dr Chee Soon Juan has never been convicted under the ISA.
So what other laws can Singapore apply to deter terrorism? I suggest that the ISA be refined instead of totally abolished. Refined so that it cannot be used to benefit one political party and for all other petty reasons. After all, I would rather the authorities come clean and say "We are keeping the ISA" instead of saying that they will abolish it (and rebrand it as another law) for the sake of gaining populist points.
As for Malaysia, let's see how much more PM Najib has to offer. Elections in Malaysia are not due till 2013. Would the ISA be repackaged as XXX version 2.0? Only time will tell.
