By Bryna Singh, The Straits Times, 27 Apr 2013
THE Government yesterday said that several advocacy groups and individuals pressing the case of two former SMRT bus drivers were exploiting the foreigners for their own political purposes.
"In the guise of protecting vulnerable foreign workers, the NGOs and individuals have in fact exploited them for their own political ends," said the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and Ministry of Manpower (MOM) in a joint statement.
"In the guise of protecting vulnerable foreign workers, the NGOs and individuals have in fact exploited them for their own political ends," said the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and Ministry of Manpower (MOM) in a joint statement.
The strongly worded statement was in reply to a statement made by the groups earlier in the day. The groups comprised Maruah, Project X and Think Centre and six individuals.
In their statement, the groups said it was "not right" for the MHA to suggest that the claims of police abuse made by Chinese nationals He Junling, 32, and Liu Xiangying, 33, were baseless.
The MHA had said last Saturday that the drivers had ample opportunities to raise their complaints either during or after investigations. The pair, who were jailed for instigating other SMRT drivers to strike last November, claimed that they were slapped, punched and threatened in custody. Both have served their time and have been deported to China.
But yesterday, the advocacy groups and individuals rejected the Government's explanations.
The driver He also sent a typed statement written in Chinese to reject the points raised by the MHA. This was sent through Workfair Singapore, a civil society group.
Driver He explained in his letter that he was not familiar with the workings of government organisations here and was alone with neither the presence of a witness nor surveillance cameras when the alleged beatings took place. He did not foresee a "good outcome" from his reporting the matter and this was why he did not consider doing so.
The driver He also sent a typed statement written in Chinese to reject the points raised by the MHA. This was sent through Workfair Singapore, a civil society group.
Driver He explained in his letter that he was not familiar with the workings of government organisations here and was alone with neither the presence of a witness nor surveillance cameras when the alleged beatings took place. He did not foresee a "good outcome" from his reporting the matter and this was why he did not consider doing so.
Last Saturday, the MHA said that the two men retracted their allegations in further statements recorded in February and March. Driver He denied this in his letter.
He further said that on two occasions when he was approached by police officers in jail, he told them that he would not be pursuing the cases of alleged abuse. "However, this did not mean those things never happened... I have never retracted my accusations," he wrote.
The statement released by advocacy groups and individuals said: "The veracity of a claim should not be dismissed simply because of the timing in which the complaint was made."
It also called for the MHA to "reveal how the drivers' statements were contradictory".
"This incident still leaves many questions unanswered," it said.
In its statement last night, the MHA and MOM said the statements from the groups and He repeat allegations the Government has already answered.
They noted that the drivers did not raise their complaints with the police or the courts. He, in fact, withdrew his allegation and then contradicted himself.
"Nevertheless the Police Internal Affairs Office did investigate their claims and found them baseless. The Attorney-General's Chambers concurred with these findings."
Yet in repeating his claims yesterday, He did not give details, said the MHA/MOM statement.
"Either he makes a police report and substantiates his allegation with evidence or the allegations must be regarded as unfounded and spurious. He cannot have it both ways - casting a smear without having to offer any proof."
Turning to the non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and individuals, the Government said that they should have "facilitated a proper investigation of He's allegations, instead of hindering the investigation while continuing to cast aspersions on the integrity of the police."
The six individuals behind the statement are: ex-Internal Security Act detainees Teo Soh Lung and Wong Souk Yee, Dr Paul Tambyah, who is on the Singapore Democratic Party's Healthcare Advisory Panel, Dr Noorashikin Abdul Rahman, vice-president of migrant workers' rights group Transient Workers Count Too, Ms Jacqueline Tan from HealthServe, a non-profit organisation concerned with migrant health issues, and one Gao Daolin.
The statement they issued together with NGOs had questioned if MOM's processes and outcomes were "justice-oriented", and suggested that the MOM has adopted a "narrowly legalistic stance", dismissing claims it defines as non-statutory.
In their joint statement last night, the ministries said: "The NGOs and individuals also continue to repeat their reckless allegations about our labour laws, unions, and the Ministry of Manpower without any basis.
"Our tripartite system could not have worked for more than 40 years now if it had been based on oppression of workers and suppression of labour rights."
The NGOs and individuals also continue to repeat their reckless allegations about our labour laws, unions, and the Ministry of Manpower without any basis. Our tripartite system could not have worked for more than 40 years now if it had been based on oppression of workers and suppression of labour rights.
In the guise of protecting vulnerable foreign workers, the NGOs and individuals have in fact exploited them for their own political ends.
- The Government's response to a group of advocacy groups and individuals pressing the case of the two SMRT bus drivers
In the guise of protecting vulnerable foreign workers, the NGOs and individuals have in fact exploited them for their own political ends.
- The Government's response to a group of advocacy groups and individuals pressing the case of the two SMRT bus drivers
* Film-maker warned over bus driver videos
Releasing of interviews with duo in bus strike in contempt of court
Releasing of interviews with duo in bus strike in contempt of court
By Walter Sim, The Straits Times, 15 Jun 2013
AN INDEPENDENT film-maker deemed to have committed contempt of court by publishing interviews with two bus drivers accused of instigating last year's strike was yesterday issued with a warning from public prosecutors.
AN INDEPENDENT film-maker deemed to have committed contempt of court by publishing interviews with two bus drivers accused of instigating last year's strike was yesterday issued with a warning from public prosecutors.
Ms Lee Seng Lynn, better known as Lynn Lee, of Lianain Films released videos of two interviews she had conducted with He Jun Ling, 32, and Liu Xiangying, 33, in a blog post titled I Have Ways To Make You Confess on Jan 28.
This publication was despite criminal proceedings being under way against the duo at the time, which Ms Lee, 40, was "aware of", said the Attorney General's Chambers (AGC) yesterday.
The pair were among four Chinese nationals being investigated for their roles in last November's strike - Singapore's first in 26 years - in which 171 drivers went absent without official leave. Both pleaded guilty on Feb 25. He was sentenced to seven weeks' jail and Liu to six weeks' jail. They have since served their time and been deported to China.
In the videos, the pair alleged that they were assaulted by police officers to extract confessions from them. These allegations were eventually found to be baseless by the Home Affairs Ministry in April.
But the videos had nonetheless caused "a real risk of prejudice" to criminal proceedings at the time. The AGC said this was because it meant that parties, such as the trial judge and witnesses, would be "improperly influenced" in making findings or giving evidence on the admissibility of statements made by He and Liu.
"These are matters that should be determined at a trial and not by publications that are made outside the court," said the AGC spokesman.
The AGC said yesterday it had completed a review into Ms Lee's conduct, and found a warning would suffice in her case, rather than initiating committal proceedings. Factors taken into consideration included the nature of the contempt committed, and the resolution of the proceedings when the drivers pleaded guilty.
Ms Lee, who is abroad, told The Straits Times yesterday that she was unable to respond in detail as she "had only just seen the letter", and was about to board a plane.
The AGC further warned the public that contempt of court, if left unchecked, "harms the public interest in the proper administration of justice".
"In appropriate instances, AGC will not hesitate to take firm action... to protect the integrity of the judiciary's role in determining the facts," the spokesman said.
But the AGC emphasised it does not target any legitimate complaints or criticism brought up to the authorities through proper channels. Said the spokesman: "Members of the public are also able to criticise or question the correctness of judicial decisions, after these have been given, so long as they do not make unfounded allegations of bias or partiality."
No comments:
Post a Comment