MYANMAR

Parliament of Singapore · 22 October 2007

Official Report, 22 October 2007, Vol 83, Issue 14 · Open in the reader (summaries, search, filters)

MYANMAR:

(On-campus activities and removal of T-shirts from persons protesting against regime):

* 11. *Ms Eunice Elizabeth Olsen asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether the Ministry deployed its officers to film students organising on-campus activities highlighting the plight of the people in Myanmar; and (b) whether such activities constitute a security threat.

12.

Mr Siew Kum Hong asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs whether the Police had asked persons wearing T-shirts protesting against the Myanmar regime to take them off and, if so, what was the rationale for doing so.

Mr Speaker: Yes.

Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Sir, these incidents took place at a time when the Myanmese here were reacting to events back in Myanmar, where the situation was very tense. Emotions were running high amongst the Myanmese community living here at what they perceived as injustice being done to their countrymen back home. Indeed, at the time when these incidents occurred, the situation in Myanmar was deteriorating rapidly. Anticipating that this would further fuel the strong sentiments already gripping the emotions of Myanmese nationals here in Singapore, Police decided to take extra precautions to prevent any breaches of law and order.

It was in this context that Police received information that Myanmese nationals might assemble to stage a protest and deployed officers to patrol areas where Myanmese nationals normally congregated. This included the Peninsula Plaza where the incidents relating to the T-shirts took place in the afternoon of 29th September along Coleman Street.

Sir, there were two instances when Police officers spotted persons wearing T-shirts with words relating to the Myanmar situation. One T-shirt had the message 'Stop the bloodshed in Myanmar' printed on the front and back. The other T-shirt had the words 'Help Burma' on the front and 'Help Myanmar' on the back. They wanted to find out more about the intentions of these persons, in particular, if they were members of an organised group which might cause trouble and create a public order situation. Hence, the Police requested that they proceed to a police station to be interviewed. Police did not engage them in a prolonged interview on the spot as this might attract undue attention and precipitate an incident. Police also advised that they consider taking off their T-shirts, as Police's assessment was that the messages on the T-shirts might stir strong emotions on the part of others who read it, thus leading to a public order situation.

I agree that the Police were perhaps being overly-cautious but let me give the assurance that the officers did not intend to embarrass or offend the persons wearing the T-shirts. Looking back, their actions were probably an over-reaction. But given the tense situation prevailing then, and the possibility of trouble-makers exploiting the situation at that particular location which is known as a congregating point for Myanmese, the Police officers' assessment, at that time, that the T-shirt with its emotive words could lead to trouble can be understood and was not totally unjustified. This is because dynamics of group behaviour is often not entirely rational and can be stirred by emotive slogans and exploited by others for their own cause.

Sir, I take this opportunity to advise those who seek to express their sentiments on the Myanmar situation to do so in a lawful manner.

As for the incident referred to by Ms Olsen, that occurred at a vigil organised by students at the Singapore Management University (SMU) on 4th October this year in support of the plight of the people in Myanmar. As explained earlier, given the strong sentiments and the volatile Myanmese situation at the time, Police acted in good faith and assessed that it was necessary to monitor seemingly minor but related events to ensure that such activities did not escalate into public order situations. When the Police do this, its officers would typically be equipped with video cameras for the purpose of recording, primarily to aid investigations later should the situation degenerate and persons present commit offences.

Sir, here again let me give the assurance that such videotaping is not meant to intimidate persons attending the event, but rather to aid investigation should offences be committed. Indeed, these recordings will assist the Police if offences are committed to investigate and discern between those who violate the law and the rest who are innocent of any wrong-doing.

Mr Siew Kum Hong: Sir, I have three supplementary questions. I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State:

(1) How many persons were wearing the T-shirts in question?

(2) What was the power under which the Police had exercised their right to ask the persons wearing the T-shirts to return to the police station for an interview?

(3) Has the Police ever encountered a situation where the wearing of T-shirts as a form of protest had resulted in law-and-order issues and, if so, what sort of issues were they?

Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Sir, let me take the third question first.

Sir, the context is important. Like I have explained, the situation was tense on that weekend. It was a Saturday, and the situation was boiling over in Myanmar and also in terms of the Myanmese community in Singapore. We knew that they were gathering at different points. Ordinarily, Police would not ask people to take off their T-shirts. But in that context, in that situation, the Police officers involved thought that was the right thing to do. But having said this, let me say that it was only this team of officers who did it. It was a judgment that they made. Like I have said, they probably over-reacted, because there were also other officers who met other Myanmese nationals who were wearing T-shirts who did not ask them to take off their T-shirts.

The other question is what powers they had to ask them to go back to the station. Well, that was a request. In fact, if the Myanmese nationals had said they did not want to go back, then the Police would not have taken them back. But in the circumstances, because the Police wanted to find out their intentions, if they had interviewed them on the spot, that may be worse because that may attract attention and cause emotions to run, they asked, "Can you follow me back to the station?" One of them followed them back, and the other one went later on to the police station.

Ms Eunice Elizabeth Olsen (Nominated Member): Sir, I have two supplementary questions for the Senior Minister of State. I would like to ask whether it serves Singapore's interests as a nation to subject its youths and their spontaneous display of solidarity with their neighbours in Myanmar to such monitoring by the Ministry's officers and whether such actions by his Ministry send a detrimental signal to our youths and damage the values that we are trying to inculcate in our youths and impair their interests in the world, the region and the country.

Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Sir, I think it is in order for Singaporeans to express their concerns in legal ways, as many have done over that period. But, again, like I have said, the context is important, ie, the situation prevailing in Singapore then. So Police officers went to the spot, videotaped the event, and the reason I have explained why, ie, not to intimidate the students but should there be subsequent offences, then we can discern the wrongdoer from those who are not. Indeed, Sir, police forces all over the world now use video recorders. Some are static, some are mobile. In fact, in London, we hear of the Bobbies now having video-recorders on their helmets. So it is not something extraordinary. No ill intentions are meant. This is just to aid Police in investigations and, basically, in fact, to help innocent parties. The basic message, therefore, is that if you are innocent and are not out to break the law, there should be no fear.

Source: Singapore Parliament Official Report (Hansard) for 22 October 2007. Republished on SGParliament.