The Foreign Donor Bogeyman

The Foreign Donor Bogeyman

Presumably because NMP Siew Kum Hong was vocal about gay rights and AWARE's stress on gender rather than women's rights per se, his political adversaries shrewdly capitalised on allegations that he and Maruah accepted foreign handouts from a Swede gentleman, Johan Skarendal. Allegations to which Siew Kum Hong angrily denied and strongly objected to. His adversaries were clever enough to open that front to ignite the government's relatively justifiable paranoia, and the police report made by the NMP indicated that he knew enough of the seriousness of the allegations. The Yahoo lawyer categorically denied that he was involved in any inappropriate or illegal funding from the Swede, and by inference as Maruah members were there as well, Maruah was also not implicated in dubious funding, closing the case.

The government's fear of foreign funding of local politicians and activists is not unique. The UK has the Political Parties, Elections and Referendum Act forcing all parties to be transparent about their donations and outlawed foreign funding. The reasons were to prevent corruption and mitigate public cynicism related to the integrity of political parties and donor influence over politicians. However, other countries are even wary of their NGOs accepting foreign donations. Turkey and Russia are such examples. To be fair and understanding the realist realities of the world, the anxiety over the hidden agenda of foreign donations to political parties and NGOs are not unfounded.

Some foreign public and private philanthropies are designed as catalysts of political change in supposedly less democratic states. The objective of funding is to spur on "democracy" and the US' National Endowment for Democracy, which Dr Chee Soon Juan was a fellow in 2004, is a common example of missionary democracy and the need to convert "ignorant heathens" for their own good. However, at the other extreme, sounding the nationalistic klaxon, less progressive governments typically raise the ghoul of foreign intervention as an excuse to choke and isolate local politicians and activists within their borders. Perhaps the tentative balance is that politicians cannot accept any kind of foreign funding while activists can accept foreign funding as long as it is not directly or indirectly engineered by a foreign government. Perhaps.

Regardless if the recent Swede's visit was an innocuous one or not, it paved the way for further questions on what foreign donations political parties and activists can accept without detonating ethical and legal powder kegs. Who else besides Siew Kum Hong and some Maruah activists did Johan Skarendal meet as part of his Singapore itinerary is not public information. Arguably in the interest of the development of a civil society without a paranoid government taking every chance to jump at shadows and curb the honest work of activists, hopefully other parties that met the Swede are not naive and also followed Maruah's example of financial integrity and independence.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.457

Email from Mr Siew Kum Hong

Email from Mr Siew Kum Hong

To: REACH

18 May 2009

Dear Sirs/Madams,

My name is Siew Kum Hong. I am currently a Nominated Member of Parliament.

Your website is currently hosting various comments that are highly defamatory of me and that are in breach of your Terms of Use, in particular, the comments suggesting or insinuating that I have received or am receiving foreign funding (including but not limited to the comments posted by "Right versus Wrong" on 16 May 09 at 12:45 PM, "Margret wong" on 16 May 09 at 15:50 PM, "James Lim" on 16 May 09 at 17:53 PM, "pinkdot" on 16 May 09 at 18:39 PM, "piss off" on 17 May 09 at 12:52 PM, and "GET THE FACT RIGHT" on 17 May 09 at 17:46 PM) at the URL http://app.reach.gov.sg/reach/TalkAbuzz/SnapshotsofHotIssues/tabid/233/ctl/Details/mid/917/ItemID/82/Default.aspx Please note that I have made a police report about this matter.



I hereby request that:

(a) you immediately remove either the entire thread, or at least the offending comments and all associated comments at the above URL, and provide e-mail confirmation of the same immediately upon removal;

(b) you produce all particulars in your possession, custody or control pertaining to the users listed above, including all registration particulars and IP addresses (and corresponding dates and times) associated with these users and/or their comments, as soon as possible and in any event not later than close of business on Wednesday 20 May 2009; and

(c) you immediately preserve all information in your possession, custody or control relating to this matter (including the particulars referred to in paragraph (b)), in view of potential criminal investigations and civil proceedings that may require the production of this information.

Please feel free to contact me at my email should you have any queries or require any clarifications. Please send the confirmation requested for in paragraph (a) above, and the information requested for in paragraph (b) above to, to this e-mail address.

Thank you for your attention.

Siew Kum Hong

Response from REACH

Mr Siew Kum Hong has written to REACH to request the removal of postings which made specific allegations against him that he felt were defamatory. Mr Siew has disputed the allegations and informed us that he has filed a police report.

Mr Siew has also asked REACH to furnish him with the IP addresses and particulars of the netizens who made the alleged postings on the REACH website. As his request will breach our website's privacy policy, we are unable to accede to it.

As the administrator of the REACH website, we have the right to remove any postings, including those which we consider to be in breach of the Terms of Use of the website, or otherwise objectionable. We have exercised this right and removed some postings.

REACH offers an open platform for Singaporeans to engage the Government on issues as well as to engage one another freely with their views and ideas. We encourage responsible online discourse, and we would expect netizens to act with decorum, observe acceptable norms of cyber etiquette, and avoid making irresponsible comments. For meaningful and constructive engagement, netizens have to be accountable and responsible for the comments they make.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28866.72

Siew Kum Hong blasts allegations that he has foreign funding and is SDP mole

May 19, 2009

NMP files police report

Siew blasts allegations that he has foreign funding and is SDP mole

By Goh Chin Lian, Senior Political Correspondent
		Mr Siew says the attack crosses the line and is nothing short of character assassination.

NOMINATED MP Siew Kum Hong has made a police report over allegations on the Internet that he is receiving funding from a Swedish politician who allegedly also funds the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), and that he is the party's representative or 'mole' in Parliament.

In a post on his blog yesterday, the in-house counsel, 34, who is at the centre of an online storm over his application to seek a second term as a Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP), said the allegations were untrue and false.

'They are vile, vicious and malicious attacks on me, and nothing short of character assassination. I consider them extremely defamatory and criminal in nature,' he said, without identifying those who made the allegations, or the sites in question.

But he said he has asked 'those forums that I am aware are currently hosting these falsehoods, to take them down'.

When contacted last night, he confirmed making the police report. It is now a police matter and he declined to make further comments.

In his posting, 'The line has been crossed', he said he did not ask for, nor was he offered or received funding from any local or foreign entity, including the Swedish politician, whom he did not name.

Mr Siew said his only sources of income were from his employer - a technology company - and from the Government in the form of his monthly NMP allowance.

He added: 'I am not involved or affiliated or associated, whether directly, indirectly or in any other way, with the SDP, and am certainly not their representative or 'mole' in Parliament.'

Mr Siew said that while he had not previously taken action against those who attacked him on the Internet, the latest salvo 'crosses the line and goes beyond any attacks that I am willing to countenance as being fair game for a public figure'.

In his posting, he said he did meet 'certain Swedish gentlemen' at their request. But this was no different from his meetings with other foreigners, whether from embassies or academia.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28866.50

NMP Siew Kum Hong makes police report against netizens

NMP Siew Kum Hong makes police report against netizens
By 938LIVE/TODAY | Posted: 18 May 2009 1834 hrs

	Photos 1 of 1 Nominated MP Siew Kum Hong

SINGAPORE: Nominated MP Siew Kum Hong has made a police report against netizens posting defamatory comments about him. He revealed this in his blog. He has also requested forums which hosted such remarks to take them down.

When contacted, Mr Siew refused further comment, saying the matter is now with the police.

The latest attacks have alleged or insinuated that he had asked for and is receiving foreign funding from a Swedish politician who allegedly funds the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) as well.

They have also alleged that he is involved or associated with the SDP and may be their representative or "mole" in Parliament.

Mr Siew has issued a strong rebuttal to these allegations on his blog. He said both of these allegations are untrue and false.

He considered them extremely defamatory and criminal in nature and goes beyond anything that a reasonable person could possibly perceive as being a valid or legitimate exercise of the right to free speech.

Mr Siew stressed that he did not at any time ask for and have not at any time been offered or accepted any sort of funding from any local or foreign entity.

He said the only sources of income or funding that he has are from his employer and the government in the form of his monthly NMP allowance.

He also said he is not involved or affiliated or associated, whether directly, indirectly or in any other way, with the SDP, and certainly not their representative or "mole" in Parliament.

The attacks on Mr Siew first started in the aftermath of the extraordinary general meeting of the Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE). They have culminated in a campaign to sabotage his re-application for a second term of NMP.

A week ago, netizens flooded the REACH portal with comments about why he should not be given a second NMP term.

REACH chairman Amy Khor confirmed that the feedback unit has received Mr Siew's request to take down defamatory comments about him.

As a general policy, while "always mindful that over-regulation could stifle participation and engagement of contributors", Dr Khor said that like other online platforms, REACH would not hesitate to remove postings "deemed sensitive or offensive".

As at 8pm on Monday, the discussion thread involving Mr Siew had almost 13,900 page views and more than 900 postings since it was initiated on May 1.

On one occasion last week, REACH administrators urged Netizens to refrain from personal attacks and offensive postings. After growing feedback from users and as the discussion "became heated", said Dr Khor, REACH had removed some of these postings.

Meanwhile, the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) has referred to the Law Society the issue of Mr Siew's role in the AWARE saga.

Earlier this month, corporate counsel Tongel Yeo had emailed the AGC and three other legal bodies, including the Law Society, to ask if Mr Siew had breached the Legal Profession Act by advising the AWARE "Old Guard".

When contacted, a Law Society spokesperson said that under the Act, it "cannot comment on any complaint or disciplinary matter".

- 938LIVE/TODAY

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28866.55

Siew Kum Hong makes police report against “vile, vicious and malicious” attacks

The line has been crossed

The attacks have continued since my last posting on this blog. In particular, the latest attacks have alleged and/or insinuated that (a) I asked for and am receiving foreign funding from a Swedish politician, who allegedly funds the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) as well, and (b) I am involved or associated with the SDP and may be their representative or “mole” in Parliament.

Both of these allegations are untrue and false. They are vile, vicious and malicious attacks on me, and nothing short of character assassination. I consider them extremely defamatory and criminal in nature.

I did not at any time ask for, and have not at any time been offered or accepted, any sort of funding from any local or foreign entity, including the Swedish politician named in the latest attack. The only sources of income (or funding) that I have, are my employer and the Government of Singapore (in the form of my monthly NMP allowance). Furthermore, I am not involved or affiliated or associated, whether directly, indirectly or in any other way, with the SDP, and am certainly not their representative or “mole” in Parliament.

While I have not previously taken any action in response to the attacks to me on the Internet, I feel that this latest attack crosses the line and goes beyond any attacks that I am willing to countenance as being fair game for a public figure. I do not think that it is appropriate or acceptable for any MP, including an NMP, to accept any funding, whether local or foreign.

Accordingly, I made a police report on this matter tonight. I have also requested those forums that I am aware are currently hosting these falsehoods, to take them down.

In the interests of full transparency, I did meet with certain Swedish gentlemen recently. Details of those meetings are set out in my statement to the police. I met them at their request, just as I have met other foreigners from time to time, including staff from the various High Commissions and embassies in Singapore (such as from Australia, the US, the UK and other EU countries) and visiting foreigners, such as academics doing research on aspects of Singapore. At these meetings, we discuss matters related Singapore, in particular current affairs and the political situation in Singapore. From my perspective, these meetings are to help the foreigners obtain a better understanding of Singapore. I do not think that there was anything wrong with those meetings, and I have nothing to hide.

While I continue to believe that it is, on the whole, beneficial for Singaporeans to speak up for what they believe in, and I certainly hope that this wish and desire will continue and extend beyond the current discussions around the NMP re-nomination process and homosexuality, I also do believe -- and have always believed -- that rights and freedoms have limits.

I have to date refrained from taking any legal action in response to the lies and falsehoods that have been levelled at me. But this latest attack goes beyond anything that a reasonable person could possibly perceive as being a valid or legitimate exercise of the right to free speech, and I certainly will not tolerate the latest rounds of character assassination from cowards hiding behind the perceived anonymity of the Internet.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28866.37

Aware president calls attacks on Siew Kum Hong “most foul and unfair”

Aware president calls attacks on Siew Kum Hong “most foul and unfair”

Saturday, 16 May 2009

Darren Boon

A Facebook group, ‘We Support Siew Kum Hong’, has been set up to support Mr Siew Kum Hong’s bid for a second term as a Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP).

In a strong show of support for Mr Siew, the group, which was set up only yesterday, has 430 members so far, ballooning from 90 odd members to more than 400 members in a number of hours. The number is still on the increase.

The group was set up by Mr Patrick Chng, in response to the personal attacks directed at Mr Siew on the government portal, REACH, over his involvement with AWARE’s Extra-ordinary General Meeting and his purportedly pro-gay agenda.

Amongst those who have joined the facebook group are Sintercom founder Mr Tan Chong Kee, filmmaker Mr Martyn See, and current AWARE president Ms Dana Lam.

Ms Lam posted a message in support of Mr Siew saying: “I speak for the many who have witnessed his generosity. We are shocked and extremely upset by the aspersions and baseless allegations made against Kum Hong for standing with AWARE during our most vulnerable and critical period.”

“It is most foul and unfair. It pains us to witness the progress of this smear campaign over the past weeks,” Ms Lam added. “We have no doubt he will triumph over the current adversity.”

Sintercom founder Mr Tan wrote: “Kum Hong is one of the best NMP we have seen in Singapore. He has enormous integrity and passion.”

Mr Tan condemned the “coordinated attack” on Mr Siew and the use of the “wedge issue” of homosexuality.

Another supporter, Mr Jonathan Kwok, argued that it is necessary for people to understand that a person is “multi-layered” and is defined by more than his sexuality or views on sexuality.

“Mr Siew has much to contribute to Singapore, and his views on sexuality form just a small part of his person and his portfolio,” Mr Kwok said.

Mr Abdul Salim Harun, a former Workers’ Party member and elections candidate, said Mr Siew is a good man who vocalises issues in the open when necessary and for walking the talk, and pledges his support for Mr Siew.

Ms Elaine Jung, another supporter, hopes for more NMP terms for Mr Siew, while Mr Chang Yong Kai suggested that Mr Siew ran for Member of Parliament in the general elections.

However, Mr Chia Yeow-Tong highlighted what he felt was the undemocratic NMP selection process. He pointed out that the final decision rests on the Parliamentary Selection Committee: “And they can choose either the voice of reason or to side with the conservative view. It does not matter even if the majority of Singaporeans want Mr Siew back as NMP. We are unable to make the decision.”

Meanwhile Mr Colin Lam wrote his praise for the starting of the Facebook group. “It’s time for the people who appreciate what his man has done to be more vocal in their support for him,” he said.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28866.30

NMPs should not become subjects of debates

NMPs should not become subjects of debates

WHEN the Nominated MP (NMP) scheme was introduced, the aim was to pluralise views and opinions in Parliament. Moreover, there was concern that People's Action Party MPs would not be put to the test of parliamentary debate.

Today, the scheme is strongly rooted in the nation's political process. It has come to the point where 'campaigning' takes place in the media. In the press and cyberspace, the battle to be heard without electoral accountability is heating up as Parliament seeks new representation under the scheme. That it now attracts a wider pool of groups and organisations, as well as individuals, marks its acceptance as a recognised political stage to be heard.

The scheme has opened Parliament to a number of leaders from different fields. At least one NMP pushed through a Bill one can argue is beneficial to Singaporeans at large. For this, the scheme should be applauded.

However, in the next round of nominations, the scheme could admit individuals or organisations that represent a very small group of Singaporeans or challenge the socio-religious fabric of society.

While either of these resonates well with the spirit of the NMP scheme, they are socio-politically contentious. To conclude that Singaporeans are not socio-politically mature enough to handle diversity of this nature - hence the opposition to certain organisations or individuals - is not right. In fact, it is politically incorrect to say so, and some might argue insensitive too, for if we were, we would not have this discussion.

Singapore society is anchored in two very sensitive dimensions - namely, race and religion. Regardless of the socio-political maturity of Singaporeans, priority must always be given to maintaining the status quo on matters of immediate concern to this balance.

While Parliament is the stage to capture, deliberate and act on diversity in society, where relevant to the nation's well-being and progress, it should not be used as an open market to trade views and opinions of anyone and everyone. There are many other forums and platforms to champion specific interests. If issues are important enough, they will eventually make their way to Parliament.

I urge those who have stepped forward to be nominated to reflect. Will you be the subject of debates in Parliament and outside? If you will, why should taxpayers pay for you to be debated?

Mohd Aminudin Buang

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28866.24

NMP UNDER ATTACK: Online postings immature and inflammatory

May 16, 2009
NMP UNDER ATTACK
Online postings immature and inflammatory

AFTER reading yesterday's report, 'NMP candidates attacked online', I went online to check those comments. What I read sounded alarm bells in my head.

I will not seek to authenticate the charges filed by these people online, which I read on the Government's Reach portal. However, charges that Nominated MP Siew Kum Hong is pro-gay just because he supported the original members of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) were immature.

The comments are emotionally charged and will inflame the public. They consist of words that seek to polarise society and mobilise the masses to support them. This reminded me of the racial riots in the 1960s, when the masses were mobilised based on emotional rumours. Why does the Reach portal allow such inflammatory postings to remain? I dread to think of the consequences should people be led to believe the charges by these so-called 'pro-Singapore, pro-family' posters.

The report highlighted 'astroturfing' - the creation of a fake grassroots movement - which the Government should note. I frequent several online forums and in most, I seldom encounter these 'pro-family' comments, and comments on social issues are usually civilised and polite. But in forums that are perceived to reach out to the masses, there are many rude and inflammatory comments.

Such postings may have persuaded the authorities that the online community is immature. But should they venture into other forums, they will realise that most Singaporeans are polite in cyberspace, and many of the so-called 'majority' views are from a very vocal minority.

From the viewpoint of my younger generation today, Singapore society is not that conservative, but 'astroturfing' may suggest that it is very conservative.

I urge restraint among Singaporeans. Judging someone's credibility based on his sexuality and stand on non-discrimination, is shallow.

We should assess these candidates' overall performance. They have a great desire to serve Singapore and should be allowed to do so without interference by false or emotionally charged comments online.

Lester Lam

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28866.23

NMP hopeful Beatrice Chia flattered to be considered 'dangerous'

NMP hopeful Beatrice Chia flattered to be considered 'dangerous'
By Neo Chai Chin, TODAY | Posted: 15 May 2009 0802 hrs

	Photos 1 of 1 > " onclick="Next();" src="http://www.channelnewsasia.com/images/butt_next.gif" type="image" width="18" height="15"> Beatrice Chia-Richmond and her husband, Mark Richmond - from TODAY
	Related News • Three NMP hopefuls come under fire • Analysis: Time to tweak NMP nomination process • Questions over Siew Kum Hong's role as AWARE 'legal adviser' • Media coverage "not sufficiently balanced" at times • Government's position on homosexuality unchanged

SINGAPORE: She says she is flattered to be considered "more dangerous than Siew Kum Hong", after submitting her application for the post of a Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP).

And theatre practitioner Beatrice Chia-Richmond has "absolutely no issue with netizens voicing their opinions, approvals or disapprovals", even after reading the scorching comments on the government's REACH website on Thursday night.

TODAY had reported about the deluge of comments to REACH's thread on NMP candidates, and on Thursday night, the number of posts and page views tripled from a day earlier, with 337 comments and 5,661 hits as of 10.45pm.

While some accused NMP hopefuls Chia-Richmond and theatre director Loretta Chen, as well as incumbent Siew of having a "personal agenda", others defended Mr Siew's record in Parliament.

Ms Chia-Richmond said she welcomed the netizens' feedback, although many of her friends were mortified by some of the scathing remarks.

"I would say that it might be too early to presume the issues I would be voicing should I have the opportunity to be in Parliament," she said.

Her body of work has dealt with themes of discrimination, and the "gay theme has been featured often as it is an issue", she said, adding: "As a citizen of Singapore, a working artist, a wife and a young mother, I believe I have many other concerns besides LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) issues."

Some netizens like Chan Chow Phang believe the NMP nomination should not be determined by a single issue.

Another, Mr Bryan Tan, pointed out that then-First Deputy Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong had said in 1989 that the NMP scheme was implemented to evolve a "consensual style of government where alternative views are heard and constructive dissent accommodated".

Mr Siew said he was heartened and comforted by those who had spoken in his favour. But many of those who oppose his re-nomination have "mischaracterised my position", and "there are a number of baseless accusations and misrepresentations there".

Ms Chen said she was "bemused by the comments", adding that as a "working-class artist" - her father was a clerk, mother a homemaker, and her brothers had to quit school early to work - she was capable of handling and raising issues for the arts, youth, elderly and disenfranchised.

"If you truly want an open harmonious society, you must allow for diversity," she added.

A REACH portal spokeswoman told TODAY that "the interest and discussion show that Singaporeans are not an apathetic lot and they will come forward to give views and feedback to REACH when they feel strongly about an issue, and we are heartened".

"As with every issue, there will always be diverse views, so it's not surprising to see different views being expressed on this issue, whether mature or less so," she said, adding that Parliament's NMP Select Committee will make an independent decision based on a set of evaluation criteria.


- TODAY/so

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28866.16

Questions over Siew Kum Hong's role as AWARE 'legal adviser'

Questions over Siew Kum Hong's role as AWARE 'legal adviser'
By Loh Chee Kong, TODAY | Posted: 15 May 2009 0802 hrs

	Photos 1 of 1 > " onclick="Next();" src="http://www.channelnewsasia.com/images/butt_next.gif" type="image" width="18" height="15"> Siew Kum Hong - from TODAY
	Related News • Beatrice Chia: Dangerous? I'm flattered • Three NMP hopefuls come under fire • Analysis: Time to tweak NMP nomination process • Media coverage "not sufficiently balanced" at times • Government's position on homosexuality unchanged

SINGAPORE: After being accused on the Internet of pushing the gay agenda, Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) Siew Kum Hong now finds himself defending his professional conduct following his active role in the recent Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE) saga.

TODAY has learnt of an email seeking clarification on whether Mr Siew – a non-practising lawyer – had contravened the Legal Profession Act by rendering pro-bono legal advisory work.

It was sent to four bodies: The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC), the Law Society, the Singapore Corporate Counsel Association (SCCA) and the Singapore Academy of Law.

Neither the AGC nor the Law Society, which govern the conduct of lawyers, was able to respond by press time. SCCA president Angeline Lee said her association was "looking into this matter".

Corporate counsels are not considered to be practising lawyers, who need to renew their practising certificates every year. Section 33 of the Legal Profession Act prohibits any person without such a certificate from providing the services of an advocate or solicitor.

Offenders could be fined up to S$25,000, or jailed for a maximum of six months.

When contacted, the sender of the email, Mr Tongel Yeo, 51, stressed that it was "not about Siew Kum Hong", but the wider question on the extent that corporate counsels could "represent to people that we are legal advisers".

Mr Yeo, himself a corporate counsel who sits on the board of the charity group Methodist Welfare Services, said he had been a passive onlooker in the AWARE saga. He did not attend the extraordinary meeting on May 2, but read the subsequent newspaper reports.

He said: "That's when I read that he was reported to have claimed he was a legal adviser and going to his website, it appears that's what he was doing – advising them."

In response, Mr Siew, who is seeking a second NMP term, was confident he had not breached any regulations.

Reiterating that he was "at all time, cognisant of the fact that I do not hold a practising certificate", Mr Siew said: "It was the members of the Old Guard of AWARE who described me as their legal adviser. I did not hold myself up as such."

He did advise them "on a variety of matters, including my own views on the Constitution of AWARE".

But he stressed: "I believe that all in-house counsels – and in fact, all trained lawyers – do from time to time, state their views of what the law in a specific situation would be, in the context and capacity other than being an advocate or solicitor."

He added: "I hope this is not part of what seems to be an ongoing, orchestrated campaign to target me."

While the legal bodies have not yet sought Mr Siew's response, he said he was considering writing to them to express his position.


- TODAY/so

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28866.15

Siew Kum Hong under attack for promoting homosexuality

官委议员被指倡导同性恋　萧锦鸿遭炮轰

萧锦鸿在AWARE纷争上，站在旧执委这一边。

官委议员萧锦鸿网上被攻击，被指积极推广同性恋，没资格寻求连任！

萧锦鸿律师日前表示将寻求连任官委议员一职，不过网络上最近却出现了不少网友，炮轰他没资格！

许多网络论坛，包括在民情联系组（REACH）的讨论话题，都有大批网民批判他参与最近AWARE的纷争。

网民甚至也在他的部落格上继续讨伐他。

萧锦鸿在AWARE纷争上，站在旧执委这一边。

他积极为她们站台，并在5月2日的特别会员大会上与她们同坐。新执委当时要求他与其他男性会员同座，但他却不肯，引起一阵骚动。

最后，旧执委辨称他是她们的法律顾问，他才得以留下。

不过，他后来又被指超越界限，不仅为旧执委说话，还安排支持者欢呼和吹嘘。

有网民在民情联系组网站上写道：“我想对萧锦鸿的寻求连任表示反对…他最近和过去作为官委议员的行为，很明显不让多数新加坡人接受。”

另有人说：“我们相信，他想借官委议员一职，利用公共服务为平台来发展他个人的议程。”

有人也表示，身为官委议员，萧锦鸿实际上就是个政治人物，因此他在任何纷争上都应保持中立。

有网民也对萧锦鸿“积极推动”同性恋社群在我国的权利的行为表示怀疑。

不过，也有人觉得，这一连串冲着萧锦鸿而来的批评，可能是一小群人的策划行动，希望制造多数人都有这样的想法的假象。

萧锦鸿：不会动摇

萧锦鸿：不会动摇。

萧锦鸿在接受媒体访问时说，他是以个人身份，而不是官委议员身份，参与AWARE事件。

在同性恋课题上，他强调，自己的立场是不支持也不谴责。

“我是反歧视的。我只是觉得同性恋者有权利过私人生活，远离公众的干扰。这和‘普通’人的需要的一样的。那些说我支持同性恋者的人，完全忽略了中立观点的存在。”

他认为，把他寻求连任的资格集中在一个课题（同性恋课题）上是不对的。

“和其他人一样，我被抓着来打，当然会感到烦扰。更让我不解的是，我在私人时间做的事，也被拿来与我寻求连任的课题挂钩。”

不过，他表示这“不会动摇”他寻求连任的决定。

他也表示会尊重批判者的意见。

“他们有资格站起来说话，这是言论自由的一部分。但我只是希望他们的言论能更理智敏感。”

2官委议员提名者——剧团“斑马线”导演陈仙凤（32岁）和本地英语戏剧界女导演兼演员谢敏（34岁），也被网民指是“同性恋积极分子”。详细新闻看14.05.2009《联合晚报》。

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28866.14

Siew Kum Hong: 'It bothers me to be singled out for organised campaign'

'It bothers me to be singled out for organised campaign'

Netizens attack Siew Kum Hong, who's seeking second term as NMP, for his involvement in Aware saga

By Liew Hanqing

May 15, 2009

IN HIS own words, nominated member of parliament (NMP) Siew Kum Hong describes himself as an 'advocate of active citizenry'. DIDN'T BUDGE: Mr Siew, among the women at the Aware EGM. He was asked to sit with the male members but refused to do so. TNP PICTURE: KELVIN CHNG Ironically, the corporate lawyer now finds himself at the receiving end of online attacks by 'active citizens' who are vociferously opposing his re-nomination as an NMP. Mr Siew, who is seeking a second term as NMP, has been flamed on several popular forums, including a discussion thread on the Reach website, over his involvement in the recent tussle at the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware). Reach is a government-run website which encourages Singaporeans to give feedback on topics concerning them. If that's not bad enough, he has also been flamed on his own blog. Known for his controversial views on several issues (see report, below), Mr Siew, 34, had supported the old guard, which was ousted from office in the Aware annual general meeting in March. He actively campaigned for them and sat with them during the Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) on 2 May. FREE HELP: (From left) Former Aware president Constance Singam with Mr Siew, who's part of the voluntary legal team. TNP FILE PICTURE His presence among the women sparked a ruckus when he was asked to join the male associate members and refused. He was finally allowed to remain after the old guard loudly protested that he was their legal adviser. However, he was later accused of over-stepping his boundaries by speaking up and apparently orchestrating the cheering and booing during the rowdy proceedings. Most of Mr Siew's detractors campaigning against his re-nomination have cited his involvement in the Aware saga as their main reason for doing so. Netizens have flooded the Reach website with comments, many of which are directed at Mr Siew. One netizen wrote: 'I wish to register my disapproval of the NMP Mr Siew Kum Hong. 'I do not know him personally. But his recent and past activities as an NMP are clearly unacceptable to many Singaporeans.' Another added: 'We believe that as an NMP, his plans and motives are to use the public service as a stage and platform to further his own personal agenda.' Agreeing, another netizen wrote: 'As a NMP and a de facto politician supposed to lead and represent us, Mr Siew should not have taken sides in the Aware conflict and fanned the flames in the volatile situation.' Yet another netizen called Mr Siew's behaviour 'questionable' and asked why he had been 'pushing so hard' for the rights of the homosexual community in Singapore. The deluge of comments directed at him has led some netizens to speculate that the online attacks are part of an organised effort to discredit Mr Siew, in order to give the impression that these online views are representative of majority beliefs. 'Disorder & mayhem' In an interview with The New Paper, Mr Siew said he was unaware that he was being flamed on the Reach website, but said he had come across comments directed at him on The Straits Times website and on several online forums. He said he had also received an e-mail, forwarded to him by a friend, which called for Singaporeans to collectively oppose his re-nomination. The e-mail, which he later posted on his blog (siewkumhong.blogspot.com), accused him of 'openly taking sides in this internal affair of a secular organisation (Aware).' The writer also said Mr Siew was 'part of the orchestrated disorder and mayhem on that day'. 'He showed no regard for protocols until challenged by a member from the floor,' the writer added. Responding to the netizens opposing his re-nomination, Mr Siew told The New Paper that his involvement with Aware was in his personal capacity. 'At no point did I seek to leverage on the fact that I am an NMP,' he said. On online comments that he was actively supporting the homosexual agenda, he stressed that he neither supports nor condemns homosexuality. He said: 'I am anti-discrimination. I just feel that gay people have the right to live their private lives free from public interference. It's the same for straight people. 'These people (making these comments) are ignoring the existence of the middle ground.' He also acknowledged that some of the online hostility could have been from netizens who felt he had promoted the homosexual cause by putting together a petition in Parliament to repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code, which criminalises homosexual sex between consenting men. He said, however, that he didn't feel it was right to reduce his re-nomination to be all about one single issue (homosexuality). 'This speaks more about the intolerance of the people making these comments,' he said. Not wavering On whether he was affected by the online furore on his re-nomination, he replied: 'Like any other person, it does bother me to be singled out as the target of what seems like an organised campaign. 'It bothers me even more that my re-nomination is being linked to activities which I carried out in my personal capacity.' He is one of two NMPs seeking a second term, the other being Mr Gautam Banerjee, 54, executive chairman of PricewaterhouseCoopers. Mr Siew handed in his papers at 2.45pm on the closing day on Monday , but said he had 'not wavered' about his decision to seek a second term. He plans to focus on needy Singaporeans, civil liberties and economic issues. NMPs were introduced to provide for alternative views in Parliament and they serve for up to 21/2 years. The new term starts in July. Mr Siew, who became an Aware member last year, added in a recent blog entry that he got involved in its recent controversy because he 'wanted to restore the society to the values that I supported when I joined...' He added: 'At no time did I mention or seek to rely on my position as an NMP.' Despite the online attacks, Mr Siew said he respects the opinions of those who have spoken up. He said: 'They have the right to speak up - it's part and parcel of their right to free expression. 'I just hope that the comments will reveal more sensible and rational minds.' HIS MILESTONES JANUARY 2007: Lawyer Siew Kum Hong, 31, appointed as a Nominated Member of Parliment (NMP) FEBRUARY 2007: Among four MPs who was concerned about GST hike and gaps in offset package, saying it missed out on families who have to raise children and support parents. OCTOBER 2007: Tabled petition to have Section 377A, which criminalises sex between consenting males, repealed. It was rejected. MARCH 2008: Argued that Electronic Road Pricing is regressive 'as it reduces drivers' choice of roads.' OCTOBER 2008: Noted that there are still divisions in society, in response to uproar over plans to build a dormitory for foreign workers in Serangoon Gardens. AUGUST 2008: Conducted street poll in Jurong GRC on whether a by-election should be held in the constituency after MP Ong Chit Chung's death. MARCH 2009: Only MP to object to amendment to Films Act. He said the amendments on party political films actually narrow the space for such films. APRIL 2009: One of three NMPs who opposed the move-on order (which allows police to order someone to leave an area if they determine that he is about to break the law). MAY 2009: Told to sit with the men during Aware EGM, but old guard insisted he should remain with them as he was there as their legal adviser.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28866.13

3 NMP hopefuls draw flak

May 14, 2009

3 NMP hopefuls draw flak

By Derrick Ho
		(From left) Mr Siew Kum Hong, Ms Loretta Chen and Ms Beatrice Chia-Richmond, have come under heavy criticism from netizens for being 'homosexuality' activists. -- ST FILE PHOTOS

THREE Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) hopefuls, Mr Siew Kum Hong, Ms Loretta Chen and Ms Beatrice Chia-Richmond, have come under heavy criticism from netizens for being 'homosexuality' activists.

Mr Siew - who is seeking a second term as an NMP - has been bearing the brunt of the flak and was flamed on several popular forums, including a discussion thread on the government's Reach website, over his recent involvement in the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) leadership tussle.

What some netizens are saying ON MR SIEW KUM HONG NMPs are like de facto politicians..not elected by the people but have the privilege to give their views in parliament. They should be responsible in their actions and speak. They should carry balanced and objective views as any issue is a double-edged sword. Rather than just shoot from-the-hip and give biased views through 'tinted lenses' like Mr Siew Kum Hong when he commented and sided on the AWARE saga. We need NMPs who come with objective positions and solutions. They must bring inside information and issues that the government have not heard..and again I believe our government are already very well informed and have a very good ear on the ground. So NMPs must bring added value and Not just lobby for some group. If one cannot contribute in this manner, they don't deserve to be selected to be an NMP. -- Kay Tee on Reach website ... more

Several postings accuse him of 'promoting homosexual lifestyle' and creating 'outrage among the majority of Singaporean', especially among parents.

One netizen wrote: 'I strongly feel that Siew Kum Hong is not suitable to be an NMP at all. His recent behaviour is really questionable. Why is he pushing so hard for the GLBT (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexuals and Transgender)? There are so many more pressing issues during this recession and yet he devoted so much of his time to the Aware saga.'

Another wrote: 'Does his views reflect the views of Parliament? He is dragging the whole reputation of the Singapore Govt and Parliament down with his actions. Stop wasting our time in Parliament and polarising Singapore society.'

But a small group is defending him. Said one of them: 'The more comments I read here, the more I realise that Siew Kum Hong has stood up for the advancement of very basic social and human rights issues that far too often goes unspoken or ignored by other representatives in the country.'

First opened for comments on May 1, the thread has gathered over 114 comments, with over 1,800 page views on Thursday morning.

Reach is a government-run website which encourages Singaporeans to contribute feedback and ideas on issues that concern them.

Known for his controversial views on several issues, including the repeal of of Section 377A which criminalises sex between consenting males, Mr Siew, 34, has supported the Aware's old guard who were ousted from office. He then actively campaigned for them and acted as their legal advisor during the Extraordinary General Meeting (EOGM) on May 2, which booted out the new executive committee and brought back the old guard.

Socio-political website Wayang Party said on its site that it has received notice that a campaign is underway to 'swarm' Reach with feedback to exert pressure on the Parliamentary Select Committee to reject Mr Siew's application.

The committee, led by Parliament Speaker Abdullah Tarmugi, will make its recommendations on NMPs to the President after the interview process.

Ms Chen, a theatre director, has been accused of being 'no different' in advocating a gay agenda.

'She's openly gay and has also directed films with mainly controversial themes. She's supposed to be a nominee from the arts community but is this again a back door for more pro LGBTs to represent voice in Parliament for education?' wrote a netizen on Reach.

Another critic says of Ms Chia-Richmond: 'She has directed and acted in many movies and mostly, if not all, are extremely provocative, dark and controversial, and many based on theme on homosexuality...'

Mr Siew has also been flamed on his personal blog for his so-called 'gay agenda', which prompted netizen to complain to the Prime Minister's Office.

This letter, which is posted by Mr Siew's blog site, says: 'We want to complain to the govt that an NMP Siew Kum Hong was not only openly taking sides in this internal affair of a secular organisation, but was part of the orchestrated disorder and mayhem on that day. He showed no regard for protocols until challenged by a member from the floor.'

Mr Siew remains unfazed by the torrent of criticisms. He told The New Paper (TNP) on Thursday that 'at no point did I seek to leverage on the fact that I am an NMP'.

'I am anti-discriminatory.... these people are ignoring the existence of the middle ground,' TNP quoted him as saying.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.362

‘Was I making any difference?’

‘Was I making any difference?’

He realises his viewscould influence juniorpolicymakers

Wednesday • April 8, 2009

Loh Chee Kong

cheekong@mediacorp.com.sg

HE WAS the first Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) to proclaim his intention to re-apply for a second term.

But as Mr Siew Kum Hong (picture) revealed, he “struggled” for months before coming to a decision because he kept asking himself the same question: Was he making any difference?

Mr Siew, 34, told Today: “I ask myself why am I doing all this?”

After an eventful two-year term that included a failed petition and futile objections to the recent changes to the Film’s Act, the staunch advocate of civil liberties believes he has found the answer, somewhat.

Optimistically, from his perspective, his views would influence “junior policymakers” who would shape government policies in time to come. At worst, his dissenting views would go down in the history books — or at least in the Hansard — in place of a “near-uniform chorus of voices in Parliament endorsing everything”.

Having had no inkling at all what to expect in Parliament, Mr Siew confessed that it did not take too long for the former lawyer, who is now a senior legal counsel for Yahoo! South-east Asia, to find himself in the thick of the action.

Memorable exchanges are aplenty, said Mr Siew, as he recalled how his calls for greater public spending to help the needy saw him labelled as “reckless” — and even “dangerous” — by some of the ministers.

“I had to be on my toes in a way that I haven’t been since I stopped going to court,” said Mr Siew.

Ruling out the possibility of joining any political party — because of various reasons, including his inability to “toe the party line” — Mr Siew revels in his role of challenging underlying assumptions and principles of Government policies.

“I actually made a very conscious decision to question the fundamentals ... if you want to talk about policy refinements, the PAP MPs would almost always do a better job than me,” said Mr Siew.

Which brings him back to his first conversation with the Prime Minister whenMr Lee Hsien Loong met the fresh batch of NMPs over lunch in May 2007.

Mr Siew said: “That was just after theParliamentary debate on the ministerial salaries. So I asked PM: ‘After all the debate ... nothing’s changed ... so what is the purpose?’”

According to Mr Siew, Mr Lee pointed out the primary function of Singapore MPs is to make a “political contribution” — which Mr Siew understands to mean “putting on record” what citizens feel — unlike their counterparts in the Western democracies who, with the help of their own policy staff, dissect the nuts and bolts of policies.

Taking PM’s stance “to heart”, it is something he “consciously bears in mind” these days.

In fact, it was partly what drove Mr Siew to start a petition to repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code — which criminalises homosexual acts — even though he already knew what would be the outcome.

“I didn’t expect anything to change,” he said. Still, “if my role is to make a political contribution, then I will do my best to provide one,” Mr Siew added.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=26280.1