According to Malaysia’s leading internet newspaper Malaysiakini, prominent Singaporean law lecturer Kevin Tan Y L was barred by the Malaysian police from speaking at a forum in Petaling Jaya in a public forum organized by Malaysian Chinese online daily Merdeka Review.
The other speakers are law professor Shad Saleem Faruqi and disposed Perak menteri besar Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin.
Mr Tan graduated with LLB (Hons) from the Faculty of Law of the National University of Singapore in 1986 and subsequently obtained his LLM (Masters of Law) and JSD (Doctor in the Science of Law) at Yale Law School.
From 1986 to 2000, he taught at the NUS Law Faculty, specializing in Constitutional and Administrative Law, Law and Government, Law and Society and International Human Rights after which he left to set up his own consultancy.
He was supposed to be one of three speakers at the forum titled ‘Wither the Constitution: Lessons to be learnt from the Perak crisis’.
Merdeka Review said on its website that they were told to apply for clearance from the Malaysian Professional Centre (Ikhtisa) before their foreign guest is allowed to speak at the event.
However, when one of its staff went to the Immigration Department headquarters yesterday, they were informed that it would take seven days to process the permit.
When interviewed by Merdeka Review, the law lecturer is visibly upset that he was forbidden to speak on technical grounds. He said he had delivered talks in Malaysia several times before without any problems.
“If this is the situation, who would want to come and lecture in Malaysia in the future? Maybe they are afraid that my speech would put Malaysia in bad light,” he added.
The northern Malaysian state of Perak was won by the opposition Pakatan Rakyat coalition in the 2008 elections with a slim majority of only three seats in the state assembly.
The Perak’s constitutional crisis was triggered in March this year when three Pakatan lawmakers left the coalition and became “Barisan-friendly” independent MPs.
As a result, Barisan seized control of the state with the approval of the Sultan of Perak and installed its own candidate Mohamad Zambry as the Mentri Besar.
The tactic employed by the Malaysian police is not new. The Singapore government frequently used the police to stop foreigners from speaking on political issues in Singapore on the grounds that they have no right to “interfere” in Singapore politics.
Yet, foreigners such as PRs are allowed to write in to the Straits Times Forum to express their support and gratitude to the Singapore government.
It is strange that Mr Tan would travel so frequently to speak in Malaysia on constitutional matters and politics when he is virtually unheard of in Singapore.
With due respect to Perak, Singapore has a worse “constitutional crisis” at hand if that is the correct term to use.
Since independence, the ruling PAP had amended the Singapore constitution countless of times to suit its own partisan interests and to entrench itself in power.
The Singapore Law Society is muzzled by an archaic law which prevents them from speaking up on constitutional and legislative matters unless their opinion is specifically sought after by the government.
Mr Kevin Tan should devote his time and energy to educate the legal fraternity and ordinary citizens in Singapore on the “constitutional crisis” we are facing instead of poking his nose into the affairs of a neighboring country.
After all, as a Singaporean, he should serve his nation first rather than Malaysia. What does he hope to achieve anyway by offering his expert opinion on the Perak’s constitutional crisis?
Furthermore, the Malaysian Bar Association has a fierce independent streak and dares to challenge the government on constitutional and legislative matters.
The Malaysians do not need a Singapore lawyer to speak up for them. Mr Kevin Tan is better off lecturing in Singapore to increase the political awareness of its apathetic citizenry.
Article from Temasek Review
The other speakers are law professor Shad Saleem Faruqi and disposed Perak menteri besar Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin.
Mr Tan graduated with LLB (Hons) from the Faculty of Law of the National University of Singapore in 1986 and subsequently obtained his LLM (Masters of Law) and JSD (Doctor in the Science of Law) at Yale Law School.
From 1986 to 2000, he taught at the NUS Law Faculty, specializing in Constitutional and Administrative Law, Law and Government, Law and Society and International Human Rights after which he left to set up his own consultancy.
He was supposed to be one of three speakers at the forum titled ‘Wither the Constitution: Lessons to be learnt from the Perak crisis’.
Merdeka Review said on its website that they were told to apply for clearance from the Malaysian Professional Centre (Ikhtisa) before their foreign guest is allowed to speak at the event.
However, when one of its staff went to the Immigration Department headquarters yesterday, they were informed that it would take seven days to process the permit.
When interviewed by Merdeka Review, the law lecturer is visibly upset that he was forbidden to speak on technical grounds. He said he had delivered talks in Malaysia several times before without any problems.
“If this is the situation, who would want to come and lecture in Malaysia in the future? Maybe they are afraid that my speech would put Malaysia in bad light,” he added.
The northern Malaysian state of Perak was won by the opposition Pakatan Rakyat coalition in the 2008 elections with a slim majority of only three seats in the state assembly.
The Perak’s constitutional crisis was triggered in March this year when three Pakatan lawmakers left the coalition and became “Barisan-friendly” independent MPs.
As a result, Barisan seized control of the state with the approval of the Sultan of Perak and installed its own candidate Mohamad Zambry as the Mentri Besar.
The tactic employed by the Malaysian police is not new. The Singapore government frequently used the police to stop foreigners from speaking on political issues in Singapore on the grounds that they have no right to “interfere” in Singapore politics.
Yet, foreigners such as PRs are allowed to write in to the Straits Times Forum to express their support and gratitude to the Singapore government.
It is strange that Mr Tan would travel so frequently to speak in Malaysia on constitutional matters and politics when he is virtually unheard of in Singapore.
With due respect to Perak, Singapore has a worse “constitutional crisis” at hand if that is the correct term to use.
Since independence, the ruling PAP had amended the Singapore constitution countless of times to suit its own partisan interests and to entrench itself in power.
The Singapore Law Society is muzzled by an archaic law which prevents them from speaking up on constitutional and legislative matters unless their opinion is specifically sought after by the government.
Mr Kevin Tan should devote his time and energy to educate the legal fraternity and ordinary citizens in Singapore on the “constitutional crisis” we are facing instead of poking his nose into the affairs of a neighboring country.
After all, as a Singaporean, he should serve his nation first rather than Malaysia. What does he hope to achieve anyway by offering his expert opinion on the Perak’s constitutional crisis?
Furthermore, the Malaysian Bar Association has a fierce independent streak and dares to challenge the government on constitutional and legislative matters.
The Malaysians do not need a Singapore lawyer to speak up for them. Mr Kevin Tan is better off lecturing in Singapore to increase the political awareness of its apathetic citizenry.
Article from Temasek Review
