Impact of Bersih 3.0

History has repeated itself, again. Looks like PM Najib had his balls fried. He should really start planning his long vacation as the future of Barisan National appears rather bleak. BERSIH 3.0 showcased the banal Malaysian government is not simple. Today, they say apple. Tomorrow they will say durian. Next week they declare no such fruits existed. Malaysian political arena is like a cock-fighting match. Full of drama, colourful and twisted.

Summary of Bersih 3.0

On 28 April 2012, BERSIH 3.0 has met with another vile finale. Aside from the unnecessary razor wires around Dataran Square which was a banned venue, the Malaysian police had used water canons and tear gas to disperse crowds.  The Malaysian police has made a fatal mistake and caused public furore. There were contradicting reports between the Malaysian government and the Bersih organisers. Bersih organisers claimed that it was a peaceful sit-in protest until it was hijacked by agent provocateurs at Dataran Merdeka. If we were to look at how Bersih had managed to galvanise rallies in 35 countries and 85 locations,  this was indeed successful. On the other hand, the Malaysian government claimed that BERSIH 3.0 participants broke the law as they breached the barricades and attacked policemen. After every BERSIH rally, each generation, people are becoming more emboldened to challenge the police as the stand-off continues. One thing’s for sure, the opposition should stay away from influencing the outcome of electoral reform.

Era of Social Movements

                                      

Role of civic societies have made people engage, interact and involve in decision making process in public affairs with the hope that change can occur before the elections. Civic awareness in Malaysia has unquestionably influence BERSIH rally and represent a profession. Through social movements it shows there is a growing voice in public affairs and people push forward their agenda and demand political legitimacy from the Malaysian government. The mass protest worked and has been capable of galvanising massive collective action peacefully throughout the world. The main demand for BERSIH is simply to call for a clean and fair elections for the people and the country.

About 40,000 people attended the BERSIH 1.0 rally on November 10, 2007, and the number of participants for the BERSIH 2.0 rally on July 9 last year increased by 10,000 people, even after the police had sealed the city. It showed that BERSIH has enhanced its capacity to mobilise. It was reported some 80,000 participants had taken part in BERSIH 3.0 last Saturday at Dataran Merdeka alone.

BERSIH 1.0, was a flashpoint as it created an impact in subsequent rallies. The demographic made up of unanimous people from all walks of life. In BERSIH 2.0, there was an impasse between the people and the government. The Malaysian government had declared that BERSIH was illegal. Water canons and tear gas were used to disperse the crowds in 2010. In BERSIH 3.0, initially the Malaysian government appeared eager to repair the image of the government through several policy changes. Home Minister, Datuk Hishammudin had given his word that BERSIH sit-in demonstration will go on as planned as it would pose no security concern to the government.

Tattered image of Barisan National

The image of the ruling coalition have been charred after BERSIH 3.0. The Malaysian government will have to follow the people’s choice. Reluctance to electoral reform may cause a disadvantage to the ruling coalition. Electoral reform is very important in building a culture and society. So, this is how the future of the world will be. People will demand for more transparency and they will dabble into government's affairs as ultimately their lives wil be affected by these policies. Seems like Najib’s government will need to postpone the election again to a later date. 

Impact of Bersih on Singapore

The use of the social media in proletarian movements permits the public to redefine the venerable adage of strength in numbers. Most importantly, it emboldens the people to be engaged citizens, blind to distance and colour. However, many argue that "soft protest" is an anemic replica of the commitment required on the ground, along with its prospective risks. However, BERSIH have proven that online protests can be easily translated into action, thanks to the mighty digitial pen.

Cynicism towards the “old guard” is mounting, especially amongst young voters who have grown impatient at the mainstream media bias and marginalisation throughout their lives. If the demands of the younger generation are not met, they will retaliate and throw their antics around like a spoiled-brat until the authority relent or gives up. We have witnessed Arab and Malaysian Spring, Singapore’s turn has yet to come.

APEC - Showcase for POA

With APEC Leaders Week fast approaching, the showcast event for asia pacific might turn out to be a showcase for Singapore's new Public Order Act.

As a refresher, amendments to Public Order Act was passed in April 2009 in what many saw as an update to the law with APEC in mind. The new guidelines state that cause-related activities will be regulated, regardless of the number of persons involved. This is a move away from the previous definition of an illegal assembly (5 or more people).

The SDP has on numerous occasions in the past gathered in groups of 4 or even one to demonstarte the uneven application of this law. Obviously, the new definitions can be seen as a means to curb their campaigning. Lets not forget the standoff between police and the SDP during the IMF/WB meetings in Sinagpore on September 2007.

Expect more arrrests and detentions in days to follow....

SINGAPORE: With two weeks to go before heads of state gather for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit here, Singapore is wary about allowing the entry of well-organised civil groups and disruptive individuals bent on derailing the talks or championing their causes.

Two Falungong followers, a Malaysian and an Indonesian, were reportedly denied entry into Singapore at Changi Airport last week.

According to the Epoch Times, the sect's publication, the pair tried to enter the country separately on Oct 19 and Oct 22. The report also said the pair had previously made frequent trips to Singapore. Falungong, a religious sect, was banned in China in 1999 after it was accused of fanning social unrest.

Though it is not outlawed in Singapore, several of its followers here have been arrested for holding illegal assemblies.

When MediaCorp cited the Falungong example and asked if Singapore was keeping out individuals who might pose law-and-order problems, a spokeswoman from the APEC Singapore 2009 organising committee said all requests to enter the country would be treated fairly. "All sovereign nations have the prerogative to decide who cross their borders. Singapore is no exception," she said. "This is especially so in the current security climate, where we have a duty to ensure the safety and security of the public."

Security analyst Dr John Harrison from the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies was not surprised with the entry ban related to APEC. "The (Singapore) government will get a variety of information in from all sources - open and classified - from partners in the region and around the world," he
said. "It will try and mitigate threats and risks as early as possible."

Apart from the task of keeping out people with backgrounds tied to terrorism, the authorities would have their eye on individuals who could use the event to carry out violent protests, Dr Harrison said.

Three years ago, when Singapore hosted the International Monetary Fund-World Bank meeting, the authorities objected to 28 foreigners - all of whom had a history of taking part in violent protests or disruptive activities at previous meetings - from being allowed into the country.

Then, civil society organisations were allowed to protest in a small corner 0f the meeting venue at Suntec Singapore International Convention and Exhibition Centre; large-scale protests were confined to the Indonesian island of Batam.

Observers say that unlike the IMF event to which many civil society groups were
invited, APEC's broader platform is not likely to warrant the same level of involvement and, hence, numbers of activists

Tokens or Lemonade

To update on an earlier post, the clarifications on the revised use of Speakers' corner for public protests were announced yesterday (see below).

I shall not comment on the rules as they sound fine and dandy at first glance. The true test of any rule/guideline is of course the actual administration and enforcement of them.

I am however slightly disappointed with Alex Au's response**. In a CNA interview, Alex said: "I would not dignify this tokenism by organising anything there. It will have to be at a proper place like here at Raffles Place or down a major street, or nothing."

I have a great deal of respect for Alex and I understand in essense his rejection of token handouts. However his remarks do come across as being critical for criticism sake. Surely if the government were to announce a new speakers' corner in Raffles Place, one could argue "what about orchard road?".

In fact, he should have argued that there should be no restrictions on demonstration locations. Or alternately, a trade-off could be made for such freedoms (demonstrations virtually everywhere) by listing more restrictive guidelines (e.g. no effigies, placards...).

There is a saying, "When given lemons, make lemonade".


**I must however add that its very likely his comments were taken out of context, knowing how our first world press operates.

Singaporeans can demonstrate at Speakers' Corner from Sep 1
By Imelda Saad, Channel NewsAsia | Posted: 25 August 2008 1411 hrs

SINGAPORE: Banners, placards and effigies will be allowed at the Speakers' Corner when the site is opened for public demonstrations from September 1.

For Singapore citizens, there is no longer a need to apply for a police permit.

The new rules came about as the government seeks to open up the space for political engagement and activism in the country.

It is Singapore's version of London's Hyde Park. Hong Lim Park in central Singapore was designated as a site for public speaking on September 2000, but interest has waned over the years. However, with the new rules, things may change.

From September 1, Singapore citizens can organise demonstrations at the Speakers' Corner without a police permit.

All they need to do is register online at the National Parks Board website at www.nparks.gov.sg, which takes over the management of the Speakers' Corner from the Police.

Anyone who registers can immediately carry out his demonstration. Online registration begins on August 30.

Singapore Permanent Residents, though, will require a police permit to organise demonstrations.

But citizens and PRs can participate in assemblies without having to register.

Current rules for foreigners remain and they have to apply for a police permit for any activity there.

And all groups, even those that run counter to the establishment, will be allowed to demonstrate. These include gay rights groups and even the Falungong.

Other changes include self-powered amplification devices like loud hailers, which will be allowed in the area between 9am and 10.30pm. Police said the restriction is to minimise noise pollution in the area.

Activities can also be carried out at any time of the day. Currently, activities are restricted to between 7am and 7pm.

However, basic rules will still remain. Topics cannot touch on issues like race and religion. Content that promotes violence or are lewd in nature will also not be allowed.

Even with a light touch approach, there will still be some police presence at the Speaker's Corner.

Wong Hong Kuan, Director, Operations, Singapore Police Force, said: "Generally if there are no issues of concern, there won't be any overt police presence there all the time and we will manage it just like other places in Singapore."

NParks said that demonstrators are free to do what they want as long as they do not damage surrounding trees and property. There will not be any cosmetic changes to the site, even though some have asked for more benches and shelter.

Dr Leong Chee Chiew, chief operating officer, National Parks Board, said: "If we were to plant more trees, you actually have less space. So there's a trade-off."

Work is underway to build a mound, so speakers do not have to bring their own soapboxes to speak and be seen. - CNA/vm