A corner for freedom

The question is whether Singapore's proposed ``Speaker's Corner'' will be a forum for political dissent in a country where the People's Action Party has not only held power for long but also missed no opportunity to make itself as inclusive as possible. P. S. SURYANARAYANA reports.

AS A city-state with an international profile surpassing its small size, Singapore is beginning to reinvent itself, of course with its characteristic zeal for social stability and economic dynamism as also political circumspection.

Until a few months ago, the defining political ethos in the city- state remained rooted in the saga of the ``The Singapore Story'' as narrated by the country's living legend, Mr. Lee Kuan Yew, and the deeds of ``Lee's lieutenants''. While this political orientation seemed to have served Singapore well at the macro- level, Mr. Lee's unique contribution to its evolution as a strong State with a mind of its own has given it an immense confidence to explore fresh avenues of self-expression at this dawn of a new century.

The present Prime Minister, Mr. Goh Chok Tong, has played a major role in consolidating the gains of an economically-successful state by leading it out of a recent downturn that was traced to the regional financial crisis.

Not surprisingly in these circumstances and armed with the lessons in social order learnt under Mr. Lee's leadership and continuing guidance, the Singapore Government, known for its eternal vigil, has now proposed the creation of political space for its ordinary citizens. A ``Speakers' Corner'' will be carved out at Hong Lim Park in August this year on the line of the celebrated one in London's Hyde Park. The obvious differences between the British model and the Singaporean ``Speakers' Corner'' are, of course, not lost on either the Government or the people.

Mr. Goh's move has created a groundswell of interest among Singaporeans. The prime ground rule is that the intending speakers should first produce their identity cards or passports at a nearby police station to prove their citizenship before proceeding to express themselves on any subject in any of the official languages - English, Chinese, Malay and Tamil. The police, it is said, need not be informed of the theme of any speech. No speaker will be exempted from the laws of the land insofar as speech content and personal conduct are concerned. The most important restriction is that no one will be allowed to spark racial or religious hatred in the name of free speech.

While the stated taboos are unexceptionable in any multi-racial society, such rules tend to have an exceptional resonance in a place that evolved from a straits settlement to a plenipotentiary state in a regional melting pot. Foreign observers have often wondered why Singapore, known for its commitment to a free and competitive marketplace, should be so much more circumspect about liberalised or free-for-all politics.

Arguments about the broad-spectrum Asian ``values'' and their perceived differentiation from Western political mores, besides the focus on maintaining social order, have sometimes been heard in defence of the Singapore model as it has evolved so far. But the question now is whether the prospective ``Speakers' Corner'' will be a forum for political dissent in a country where the People's Action Party (PAP) has not only held power for long but also missed no opportunity to make itself as inclusive of all social groups as deemed possible.

While there has been, as a result, no potentially divisive politics sustained by race or religion as the bedrock of one or other party, the PAP's style and reach are also seen to have limited the space available for the emergence and growth of viable alternative. The challenge before political dissenters, whose number in the public domain is conspicuously minuscule, is to measure up to the agenda already set by the PAP.

For the PAP, of course, a valid dictum of political commonsense is that it need not strain itself to create an opposition for it. The question of leadership succession within the party - the possible passing of reins by Mr. Goh to Mr. Lee's son sometime in the future - is being addressed in a professional manner in line with Singapore's penchant for ``managing political change'' - a term used by academics to describe the emergence of an elected presidency with defined powers.

It is in this milieu that three suggestions made by ordinary Singaporeans themselves may determine the future course of politics. The ``Speakers' Corner'' can become a playground of ideas that might make political dissent credible. Linked to this ``marketplace of ideas'' is the possibility of extending the ``Corner'' to the internet. The third but not the least idea - indicated to foreign correspondents by Mr. James Gomez, a Singaporean author on ``self-censorship'' in his country - is the possibility of a dotcom party.

Internationally, Mr. Richard Rosecrance, a proponent of the rise of the ``virtual state'', and several others think Singapore, given its capacity to make its presence felt in the emerging knowledge-based global economy, can become a major player in this century. The idea of ``managing political change'' at home can be attractive to Singapore in this context.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Previous : O' Jerusalem!
Next     : Medieval canons