Defending Human Rights: Somebody’s Got to Speak Up
Mr. Low, who is also a founding member of MARUAH,1 spoke of the challenges facing human rights activists in Singapore in the past, listing firstly, the “climate of fear” engendered by the ISA. According to section 8(1)(a) of the ISA, an individual can be detained without trial for any period not exceeding 2 years to prevent that person from “acting in any manner prejudicial to the security Mr Peter Low of Singapore”. Section 8(2) allows the 2-year detention period to be extended for further periods not exceeding 2 years at a time. Although detention without trial appears to violate a number of the fundamental liberties guaranteed by the Singapore Constitution, Article 149, entitled “Legislation against subversion”, immunises the ISA from inconsistency with constitutional provisions protecting human rights.2 This includes the right not to be deprived of personal liberty (Article 9), the rights to equality before the law and equal protection of the law (Article 12), the prohibition of retrospective criminal laws and repeated criminal trials (Article 11), the prevention of citizens from being banished and guaranteeing them freedom of movement throughout Singapore (Article 13), and the rights to freedom of speech, assembly and association (Article 14). It is certainly arguable that past use of the ISA has had an adverse and chilling effect on the willingness of the citizenry to speak up on human rights issues – and, on the lack of willingness of lawyers to represent clients in politically sensitive cases. In 1977, when Mr. Low entered the legal profession, several of his law school seniors were arrested and detained indefinitely under the ISA, including Mr. G Raman, Mr. Tan Bock Chuan, Mr. R Joethy and the late Mr. Tan Jing Quee. Another lawyer, the late Mr. Francis Khoo had to flee Singapore to avoid arrest. He took refuge in the United Kingdom. “Over a decade earlier, in 1963, the government mounted Operation Coldstore to detain about 113 people. ISA arrests were also made in 1987 and 1988, and, among the detainees were former Law Society president, Mr. Francis T Seow, my former partner, Mr. Patrick Seong, my law school classmate and colleague, Miss Tang Lay Lee and my lawyer-friends, Miss Tang Fong Har and Miss Teo Soh Lung. Some detainees spent many years incarcerated without trial: for example, Chia Thye Poh (26 years in prison, 6 years confined on an island) and Said Zahari (17 years).” Given the dire consequences faced by those arrested under the ISA, one can certainly understand the resulting fear of taking up politically sensitive cases. Additionally, lawyers who entered politics like the late Mr. JB Jeyaretnam and Mr. Tang Liang Hong also had a difficult time with government leaders, including being faced with defamation 1 Maruah, meaning dignity in Malay, is a Singapore-based human rights non-governmental organization. 2 Jack Tsen-Ta Lee, “The Past, present and future of the Internal Security Act” (Singapore Public Law, 5 June 2012) < http://singaporepubliclaw. com/2012/06/05/internal-security-act/>.
145
lawsuits. The threat of legal action as well as restrictions in freedom of speech and expression resulted in a stifling lack of political space, especially pre-1996, before the introduction of the Internet. “Dissenting views could not be disseminated through the Internet,” laments Mr. Low, and “alternative voices found little space for expression.” When asked what inspired him to take on so many high-profile, controversial cases given the many challenges faced by activists at the time, Mr. Low spoke of his strongly held belief that people need access to justice. He quoted Lord Hailsham, Chancellor of Great Britain, who argued that: “No one should be so poor, no one so wicked, above all, no one so unpopular or hated of mankind that he cannot find by his side in his hour of need, a trustworthy lawyer ready with advice and willing to throw into his service at whatever cost at himself, except the sacrifice of the high standard of ethics by which the profession is bound, all the talents he possesses at his command.” At the time, many opposition politicians such as Dr. Chee Soon Juan and Mr. Tang Liang Hong had difficulty engaging senior lawyers to act for them. Mr. Tang had even complained to the media that more than 12 senior lawyers whom he approached had turned down his brief because they were afraid to act for him against senior governmental figures that were suing him for defamation – these governmental officials included (then) Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew, (then) Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong, (then) Deputy Prime Ministers Lee Hsien Loong and current President Tony Tan, cabinet ministers Rear Admiral Teo Chee Hean and Mr. Lee Yock Suan. He was quoted in the Straits Times, “The whole town – no lawyer was prepared to act”, Mr. Low recalls. Indeed, the problem of finding senior lawyers to act in public interest cases was not confined to situations where opposition politicians were involved, and was one Mr. Low grew accustomed to over the years. Mr. Low, who also defended Dow-Jones owned publication Far Eastern Economic Review (“FEER”) when it was sued for defamation by (then) Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, said that he came to do so “by default”. Dow Jones wanted the best litigator to defend FEER – a local Senior Counsel, the crème de le crème of Singapore’s top litigators. Mr. Low wrote to many Senior Counsels without success – “A few said they were unavailable because of other commitments, a few said defamation law was not their area of specialty. At least 2 Senior Counsel said the leadership of their law firms did not want them to accept FEER’s brief. Only one Senior Counsel responded somewhat less than positively; this Senior Counsel agreed to accept FEER’s brief, provided FEER agreed to accept liability for defamation so that the Senior Counsel could represent FEER in relation to assessment of damages payable to (then) Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. The condition was not acceptable to FEER.” Subsequently, Mr. Low’s application for the admission of an English Queen’s Counsel (QC) was also rejected. As a result, Mr. Low “was constrained to step up and acted for FEER.” Even today, Mr. Low expresses that there is a dearth of lawyers in Singapore prepared to take on public interest cases, citing a lack