Dhanabalan left Cabinet due to differences with government over “Operation Spectrum”
September 6, 2009 by admin
Filed under Top News
Leave a comment
From our Correspondent
Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong revealed in his interviews for the SPH publication “Men in White: The Untold Stories of the PAP” that former National Development Minister S Dhanabalan left the Cabinet in 1992 because he was not comfortable with the way the PAP had dealt with the “Marxist Conspiracy” in 1987.
“At that time, given the information, he was not fully comfortable with the action we took…he felt uncomfortable and thought there could be more of such episodes in the future…he’d better leave the Cabinet. I respected him for his view,” Mr Goh said.
Mr Dhanabalan said his reason for quitting some 12 years later, was one of conviction:
“My philosophy is one where I need to have complete conviction about some key policies and if I have differences, it doesn’t mean I am against the group……but I have to try and live with myself if I have some disagreements on some things,’ he said.
On May 21st 1987, 22 young social workers, lawyers, businessmen, theatre practitioners and other professionals were detained without trial under the internal security law and accused of “being members of a dangerous Marxist conspiracy bent on subverting the PAP ruled government by force, and replacing it with a Marxist state.” A second wave of arrests took place on June 20th the same year.
The operation was dubbed “Operation Spectrum” and was carried out by the Singapore’s Internal Security Department (ISD) using the Internal Security Act (ISA) which allows for detention without trial. This marked the last time that the ISA would be used against politicians and activists.
Singapore’s former Solicitor-General Francis Seow was also detained by the ISD for two months after he turned up at the detention center to speak to a detainee who had sought his legal assistance. Seow was later released and allowed to leave for the United States where he now lives.
Though the detainees were protrayed as staunch Marxists and a confession trial was screened on TV (which they later retracted), many Singaporeans remained sceptical about the government’s case including some senior figures within the establishment itself.
The present Attorney-General Mr Walter Woon said in an interview to the Straits Times in 1991: “As far as I am concerned, the government’s case is still not proven. I would not say those fellows were Red, not from the stuff they presented…I think a lot of people have this scepticism.”
Even Finance Minister Mr Tharman was unconvinced: “Although I had no access to state intelligence, from what I knew of them, most were social activists but not out to subvert the system,” he told the Straits Times in 2001.
The arbitrary arrests and detentions of 22 harmless civilians had dealt a blow to the PAP government’s international reputation. From then on, the ISA was used only sparingly against suspected terrorists. No opposition politician was ever arrested under the ISA again.
The Internal Security Act was a colonial relic introduced by the British in both Malaya and Singapore in 1948 as part of the “Emergency Regulations” to contain the Communist insurgency.
In 1960, the Emergency was declared over, but the Internal Security Act was passed in its place with much of the same power. On its separation from Malaysia in 1965, Singapore retained the ISA.
The ISA was first used by Singapore in 1963 to arrest 117 opposition party and labor union leaders suspected to be communists under “Operation Coldstore”, some of whom were detained for up to 32 years.
On 1 August 2009, a massive anti-ISA protest participated by 20,000 people took place in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia to call for the end of the law.
As a result of constant political pressure exerted by the opposition, NGOs and the Malaysian Bar, the Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak is forced to make a promise that he will “review” the law upon taking office in March this year.
In Singapore, most Singaporeans remain ignorant of the implications of the ISA or even its existence.
The ISA is an obsolete, unnecessary and repressive law which has no place in a modern democracy like Singapore. It should be repealed and an “Anti-terrorism” act introduced in its place to deal specifically with terrorists.
As the escape of Mas Selamat Kasteri has demonstrated, the ISD is not quite equipped to tackle terrorism and should be replaced by a highly specialized, trained and experienced “anti-terrorism department” instead to ensure that no Singaporean will ever be arrested and detained under the ISA again.
September 6, 2009 by admin
Filed under Top News
Leave a comment
From our Correspondent
Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong revealed in his interviews for the SPH publication “Men in White: The Untold Stories of the PAP” that former National Development Minister S Dhanabalan left the Cabinet in 1992 because he was not comfortable with the way the PAP had dealt with the “Marxist Conspiracy” in 1987.
“At that time, given the information, he was not fully comfortable with the action we took…he felt uncomfortable and thought there could be more of such episodes in the future…he’d better leave the Cabinet. I respected him for his view,” Mr Goh said.
Mr Dhanabalan said his reason for quitting some 12 years later, was one of conviction:
“My philosophy is one where I need to have complete conviction about some key policies and if I have differences, it doesn’t mean I am against the group……but I have to try and live with myself if I have some disagreements on some things,’ he said.
On May 21st 1987, 22 young social workers, lawyers, businessmen, theatre practitioners and other professionals were detained without trial under the internal security law and accused of “being members of a dangerous Marxist conspiracy bent on subverting the PAP ruled government by force, and replacing it with a Marxist state.” A second wave of arrests took place on June 20th the same year.
The operation was dubbed “Operation Spectrum” and was carried out by the Singapore’s Internal Security Department (ISD) using the Internal Security Act (ISA) which allows for detention without trial. This marked the last time that the ISA would be used against politicians and activists.
Singapore’s former Solicitor-General Francis Seow was also detained by the ISD for two months after he turned up at the detention center to speak to a detainee who had sought his legal assistance. Seow was later released and allowed to leave for the United States where he now lives.
Though the detainees were protrayed as staunch Marxists and a confession trial was screened on TV (which they later retracted), many Singaporeans remained sceptical about the government’s case including some senior figures within the establishment itself.
The present Attorney-General Mr Walter Woon said in an interview to the Straits Times in 1991: “As far as I am concerned, the government’s case is still not proven. I would not say those fellows were Red, not from the stuff they presented…I think a lot of people have this scepticism.”
Even Finance Minister Mr Tharman was unconvinced: “Although I had no access to state intelligence, from what I knew of them, most were social activists but not out to subvert the system,” he told the Straits Times in 2001.
The arbitrary arrests and detentions of 22 harmless civilians had dealt a blow to the PAP government’s international reputation. From then on, the ISA was used only sparingly against suspected terrorists. No opposition politician was ever arrested under the ISA again.
The Internal Security Act was a colonial relic introduced by the British in both Malaya and Singapore in 1948 as part of the “Emergency Regulations” to contain the Communist insurgency.
In 1960, the Emergency was declared over, but the Internal Security Act was passed in its place with much of the same power. On its separation from Malaysia in 1965, Singapore retained the ISA.
The ISA was first used by Singapore in 1963 to arrest 117 opposition party and labor union leaders suspected to be communists under “Operation Coldstore”, some of whom were detained for up to 32 years.
On 1 August 2009, a massive anti-ISA protest participated by 20,000 people took place in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia to call for the end of the law.
As a result of constant political pressure exerted by the opposition, NGOs and the Malaysian Bar, the Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak is forced to make a promise that he will “review” the law upon taking office in March this year.
In Singapore, most Singaporeans remain ignorant of the implications of the ISA or even its existence.
The ISA is an obsolete, unnecessary and repressive law which has no place in a modern democracy like Singapore. It should be repealed and an “Anti-terrorism” act introduced in its place to deal specifically with terrorists.
As the escape of Mas Selamat Kasteri has demonstrated, the ISD is not quite equipped to tackle terrorism and should be replaced by a highly specialized, trained and experienced “anti-terrorism department” instead to ensure that no Singaporean will ever be arrested and detained under the ISA again.
