Shanmugan used Low Thia Kiang to defend the PAP’s “litigious” track record
October 31st, 2009 | 
Author: From our Correspondent
Out of sheer desperation, Singapore Law Minister Shanmugan made used of the name of opposition MP Low Thia Kiang to defend the PAP’s “litigious” track record of suing its opponents!
In a speech directed at American lawyers from the New York State Bar Association International Section who are in Singapore for a week-long meeting, Mr Shanmugam addressed the issue of the opposition and defamation suits, which he said was mentioned in ‘every single report on Singapore’.
He said the most successful opposition politician here is Workers’ Party chief Low Thia Khiang. He has been in Parliament as Hougang MP since 1991 and has never been sued. (in the actual transcript of the Q&A session, Mr Shanmugam said Mr Low has been in Parliament since 1984)
Mr Low Thia Kiang is known to be on good terms with the PAP and he seldom dare to oppose them during his long career leading some to question if he is in the opposition at all.
In an interview with the state media in 2007, Mr Low gave the PAP government a “passing mark” in governance and insinuated that vocal opposition leader Dr Chee Soon Juan to be a “mad dog”.
“The role of the opposition is to be a watchdog, not a mad dog,” he said. His remarks were widely publicized in the state media to lend credibility to the ruling party.
In 2008, during a parliamentary session, Mr Low was asked by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong if Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng should resign over the escape of suspected terrorist Mas Selamat. Mr Low appeared stunned and did not give a reply.
In the recent LUP fiasco over Hougang, the PAP losing candidate Eric Low revealed that he was on good terms with Mr Low Thia Kiang and they often went for “coffee” together after meetings.
Mr Low’s attempts to “please” the ruling party did not go unnoticed by MM Lee who once praised him as being a “credible and moderate” opposition MP.
While Mr Low is widely respected as a MP, his conservative approach does not go down well with certain quarters who felt that he should do much more to advance the opposition cause in Singapore.
Some even accused him of pandering to the whims and fancies of the ruling party by helping them promote Singapore as a “parliamentary democracy” (as Shanmugan has done) to the international community when it is a de facto one-party state.
The Workers’ Party used to boast of strong personalities like J.B Jeyaretnam, Tang Liang Hong, Francis Seow and Jufrie Mahmood who sent chills down the spines of the ruling party.
Under the congenial and friendly Mr Low, it has transformed itself to a “moderate” party which appears to be too quiet and inactive at times.
Mr Low once remarked casually that it will take the Workers’ Party another “20 years” to challenge the PAP.
For Singaporeans who are eager to change the status quo, it is unlikely that they can count on Mr Low to do so.
Posted in Headlines
24 Responses to “Shanmugan used Low Thia Kiang to defend the PAP’s “litigious” track record”
Loading ...
Alex Tan Allan Ooi AWARE Chee Soon Juan Chiam See Tong Claire Lee David Widjaja DBS Dr Allan Ooi Dr Silviu Ionescu Dr Vivian Balakrishnan Foyce Le Xuan highnote5 Hong Lim Park Jack Lin Xinli Jack Neo Jack Neo affair Jack Neo scandal Josie Lau Josie Lau Meng Lee Lee Kuan Yew Lehman brothers Lighthouse Evangelism MAS minibonds Miss Singapore World NTU stabbing PAP Pastor Rony Tan Ris Low Romanian diplomat in hit-and-run Rony Tan S-League silviu ionescu Singapore Singapore 2010 Youth Olympic Games Tan Kin Lian Thio Su Mien Tiger Woods affair Tong Kok Wai Top 8 Vivian Balakrishnan Wendy Chong Y O G Youth Olympic Games
WP Cumulus Flash tag cloud by Roy Tanck and Luke Morton requires Flash Player 9 or better.
as i said staying low-profile and wisely picking your battle when it is to your advantage ma be what low thia kiang is thinking of. in essence,扮猪吃老虎
I am not sure if there are that many people who think that he is being soft. Personally I find Low This Kiang sensible and pragmatic. While Chee is trying to pursue a cause for the ‘good’ of the country, the manner in which he had acted indeed leaves room of imagination if he is being made used, or influenced by external source.
Chee is deemed to be brave but does it achieve anything till date other than invite foreign attention and booking his place in the cell. Being academically qualified and oratorically articulated, it would be more responsible if he were to get himself into unwanted troubles and unnecessary waste of his times to knock against the wall. Playing by the rule to defeat the elites is one way where he can make himself available to fight for more practical course, no more hunger strikes please.
As for Mr Low, I will continue to support him. Receiving praise from MM himself and from other members of the ruling party may not be a good thing for him altogether. Whether it is a ploy on the part of the ruling party to sway fence sitters is a matter of interpretation for voters. At least he stays within the perimeter of the playing field. He needs not get into unwanted tussle thus availing himself at the right place to take steps, no matter how small they are, towards the goal.
Yes, Low is not perfect, and so is Chee. We shall await the next election to see the true sentiment on the ground. I believe many people are anticipating more opposing voices in Parliament.
Any opposition is still better than many current MP’s. Let us all see.
I would like to see more Singaporeans coming forward to question and criticise our non-PAP politicians more.
There seems to be a singular obsession about the PAP and its policies in almost all political discussion forums in Singapore, including online blogs, coffeeshop chats etc. This is most unhealthy.
Please do not be mistaken. I do not mean condemning Mr Low and co., while whitewashing the obvious flaws of the ruling party.
Singaporeans need to start seeing the Workers Party, Reform Parties etc as our alternative leaders, and likewise, they must see themselves as so.
They must be bold enough to openly present their visions, ideas, thoughts and plans (rather than just criticising the existing ones) through the internet and other platforms, so that we can know who they are, and what they are about. Each of them too must be open to engage the public in dicussions, and expose themselves to feedbacks and criticisms. (I do not of course have in mind here the public acts of placard-waving, public marching, clenched fist-waving of a few individuals) Only through this, can they learn and improve. In other words, they must put into real action the form of democracy and citizen participation that they preach.
The future of Singapore’s politics and indeed our survival, should not be fixated about whims and fancies of one party and its leaders. We must assume that it will not be in power for ever.
It’ll take courage, confidence and humility for any politician to step forward and volunteer himself not just as leader of his party, but also his country, especially those without the protective cloak of a state media. Their personality, characters, and even personal lifestyle will come under the spotlight. But only by doing so, can Singaporeans truly be convinced that our non-PAP politicians are not just the “opposition”, but worthy peopple whom we can entrust to lead the future of our country.
Some people find LTK too meak and moderate. Others find CSJ too “mad” and critical.
Whatever it is, we need as many opposition MPs as we can get, in order to serve as an effective watchdog and provide sufficient dissenting opinions in Parliament.
So people, please do NOT pick and choose only your favorite “decent” opposition. Else we’ll end up with single digit opposition AGAIN.
I think we should give Low abit more credit. I don’t think its feasible to fight like CSJ and be crippled. Choose your war wisely. its 2 ppl against the rest, he needs to survive and retain his ward, then build up strong base. It is utterly useless to let the powers take you down before you can even build a strong foundation.
At least this is what i hope.
If Shanmugan picked the late JBJ as his illustrative example to assert his position, what do you all think his very polite audience’s responses be like? Big round of laughter or applause?
Would that response then feature on front page of MSM print media?
I don’t blame LTK for keeping a low profile. After all there are only two opposition in parliament.
In is up to the electorate to send more opposition into parliament so that they can have a bigger voice.
I have always voted for the PAP in the past. As I said then, it was a Singapore filled with Singaporeans only. It was a sacrifice I was willing to make. But now it appears that the ruling party have run out of ideas. They are doing 2 things which they would not have done in the past, building casinos and flooding this tiny island with cheap foreign labour.
Worse they are putting foreigners ahead of Singaporeans. Now I am patiently waiting for the next GE so that I can cast my vote for the opposition.
Ah Lian
the day it arrives, the election dept must independently function out of the PM office.
the judiciary and the law society must be reinstated and held honourably by men and woman to remove all unjust laws to return its democratic rights for its citizens…
LTK – understand Sunzi Art of war at work due to electoral boundaries… keep shifting the goalpost…
to ah lian,
pls visit opposition parties website and read their articles for better view of their visions, ideas, thoughts and plans.
Just because PAP praise LTK, TR has to start an article to bring him down…
TR = Wanbao?
Sometime is it difficult to blame the opposition for being too quiet or too soft when the vast majority of Singaporeans are apathy or fearful of politics. If we need a strong opposition, we need to give them the mandate and if possible render them the support during and after election. It is easier to stay behind PC to criticise LTK when he is in the front line of battle facing 82 opponents. If you were him, what would you have done given that msm also did not give him much airing of his views and was 24/7 ready to pick bones out of porridge with him. He need to tiptoe to prevent falling into pap traps and we all know PAP is made up of a group of ungentlemently souls. My 2 cents worth of thoughts.
@Time for change
“I have always voted for the PAP in the past. As I said then, it was a Singapore filled with Singaporeans only. It was a sacrifice I was willing to make. But now it appears that the ruling party have run out of ideas. They are doing 2 things which they would not have done in the past, building casinos and flooding this tiny island with cheap foreign labour.”
Do you realize that Singapore had no plans after year 2010? What happens after the casinos, IR, universal studios, F1s, Youth Olympics, have come and done with?
Do we have any backup plan? What if the IRs, casinos, universal studios don’t work? Keep raising GST, ERP, CPF???
I think that Low Thia Kiang is a wise man. He has learnt from JBJ’s mistakes. That is why he has been moving cautiously.
He knows fully well the Workers’ Party is not able to take on the PAP, given the PAP’s strength, dominance and reach. He is right to say that it will take 20 years for the Workers Party (for that matter, any other parties) to give the PAP a run for its money. A small fry cannot challenge a giant. It is elementary; as simple as that.
I think Dr CSJ is the one who is letting the opposition’s cause down. If one is unable to be elected into the Parliament, there is very little one can do for the people except to make a lot of noises and to try to draw attention of others.
To fight the PAP, one must be able to deprive it of more seats in Parliament. If one can’t even be eligible to enter as a candidate for the General Election, what is there to talk?
The SDP was in good hands under Chiam See Tong, when it started to grow and expand. Then came CSJ and now the SDP has only how many members? The membership went down from two thousand or more to the present miserable twenty or so. What a sad state of affairs!
At least the Workers Party’s membership is growing, slowly but steadily. There is hope.
//Ah Lian
Try getting bankrupt for something you predicted which proved to be true, and see if you can become mad.
No other country sue an opposition until he become bankrupt.
The other lowly developed country only kill their opposition and it is at least a swift dealth.
crtiticise opposition. That’s a paid job with the PAP.
to Rainnix,
there will always be surprises. the gahmen not stupig. perhaps they will announced that the old kallang stadium will be torn down, eventually. people kana conned to buy tickets to say bye bye to the stadium but the stadium is still not dead yet.
maybe the world cup hosted by asean will come to singapore soil, tear down the old stadium then build a super-duper new one next to the indoor stadium and da-da… we have a new sports hub.
Ah lian, It seem that U love to have White Ants in your House
U know what’s meaning of “White Ant’ (Men In White)
I read this article with great disbelief. It is articles like these – that misconstrue and twist seemingly objective facts and makes me view ‘political commentary’ sites with caution. I felt compelled to respond because of the article is biased and not objective at all.
Let me look at what this article has mentioned again, point by point:
1. Mr Low Thia Kiang is known to be on good terms with the PAP and he seldom dare to oppose them during his long career leading some to question if he is in the opposition at all.
My comments: On what basis do you say ‘he seldom dare to oppose’. If he didn’t dare oppose the government, he wouldn’t even has risked running for elections would he? I suggest you follow Low in parliament and look at the hard questions he raised during the session before you make unfair blanket statements like these.
2. In an interview with the state media in 2007, Mr Low gave the PAP government a “passing mark” in governance and insinuated that vocal opposition leader Dr Chee Soon Juan to be a “mad dog”.
“The role of the opposition is to be a watchdog, not a mad dog,” he said. His remarks were widely publicized in the state media to lend credibility to the ruling party.
Comments: If this shows anything, it shows that Low is willing to criticize his fellow opposition member. Do you want an opposition member just for the sake of having an opposition presence or do you want an opposition member who actually acts and thinks according to what he thinks is right?
3. In 2008, during a parliamentary session, Mr Low was asked by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong if Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng should resign over the escape of suspected terrorist Mas Selamat. Mr Low appeared stunned and did not give a reply.
Comments: Please cite where you got the words ’stunned’ from. He was actually one of the few that questioned the Wong’s position in parliament.
4. In the recent LUP fiasco over Hougang, the PAP losing candidate Eric Low revealed that he was on good terms with Mr Low Thia Kiang and they often went for “coffee” together after meetings.
comments: This is ridiculous. It was Low and Sylvia Lim that wrote in and responded to the LUP saga. Now you’re saying that Eric Low revealed they went for coffee? Citations please. And even if they did went for coffee, what does that show? That they are besties? That there is a conspiracy theory that Low is secretly helping the PAP together with Eric Low? What are you driving at and implying? Does the opposition has to hate PAP members? Must it always be antagonistic? Please be more responsible with your words!
5. Mr Low’s attempts to “please” the ruling party did not go unnoticed by MM Lee who once praised him as being a “credible and moderate” opposition MP.
I really cannot fathom why you would get the incredible idea that Low wants to please the ruling party? I doubt many people believe that as well. And I really don’t see what’s wrong with being praised by MM Lee? Beside Low didn’t ask nor did he seek out to get praised did he?
6. The Workers’ Party used to boast of strong personalities like J.B Jeyaretnam, Tang Liang Hong, Francis Seow and Jufrie Mahmood who sent chills down the spines of the ruling party.
Comments: Please understand the socio-economic and cultural context was vastly different from the hey-days of the people you mentioned above is vastly different. Sending ‘chills’ won’t do any good in today’s pragmatic terms. Reasoning, logic and winning votes are more important.
7.Mr Low once remarked casually that it will take the Workers’ Party another “20 years” to challenge the PAP.
comments: how soon do you REALISTICALLY believe a party can emerge and challenge the PAP? Seriously, give us a time frame. Low was realistic enough to give “20 years” as a time line. Instead of being disheartened, we should be encouraged that there are people like Low that continues to fight for what is good for Singaporeans despite the odds overwhelmingly stacked against the opposition!
8. For Singaporeans who are eager to change the status quo, it is unlikely that they can count on Mr Low to do so.
Comments: if not Low, then who? Please give me some names! Chee Soon Juan? I honestly think, the Worker’s Party is the only opposition party that can give the incumbent a good fight in the next few elections.
The minute the state the opposition is in is mooted, sure you got somebody come out and blame Dr Chee for the lack of followers of Chiam See Tong following the split with SDP.
WTF, Chiam See Tong and the other opposition in general got no reputation or what? Dr Chee spoil the market for opposition on his own? Can one man do that?
Want to blame also must blame with logic. If you are kiasu, kiasi, kiasai, don’t fcuk someone else for it.
Excuses excuses excuses. What has Low Thia Kiang or Chiam See Tong done to convince you they are opposition? They are only kampong chiefs, approved opposition, allowed to be kampong chiefs to show the world Chinapore is not SAR of China.
Just read what the Ah Neh said:
K Shanmugam:
….. The most successful person in opposition is Mr Low Thia Khiang, with his Workers’ Party. He has never been sued. He has been in Parliament since 1984. The other successful figure is Chiam See Tong .… Mr Chiam is known and seen as an honourable man, and there is an interesting story about him. When he first stood for election, two PAP ministers … made some remarks about his law firm and his abilities as a lawyer. They said he is a “one man band” and said “why would you want to elect him”. Mr Chiam threatened to sue. Because he said “this is not fair comment you are attacking my ability as a lawyer. What has that got to do with my policies, as a MP”. And the two ministers took legal advice and paid damages. They did not go to court because that is the way we operate. Sensible people take legal advice and if you think you do not have a case you pay up and they paid up. And Mr Chiam sued other people as well. And he has never ever faced a legal suit ….
Chiam See Tong that honorable meh?
I set up the website
http://chiam-see-tong.blogspot.com/
with the intention to lure Chiam See Tong into suing to protect his reputation and ‘his abilities as a lawyer’.
And WTF? You think the States Times does not know the website exist?
You think the Law Society of Singapore does not know the website exist?
You think no practicing lawyer know of it’s existence?
You think no MIW is aware of it’s existence?
You think Chiam See Tong himself is unaware of it’s existence?
WTF does ‘HONORABLE’ mean? It’s Swa-Tow-Or Kwe!
i.e. Die die also dare not sue!
So please hor, you want to argue the lack of opposition, argue with some facts, don’t any-o-how call somebody ‘mad dog’. Mad dog got PHD, you have or not? Mad dog speaks with ‘Queen’s Engrish’ OK! Mad dog diesn’t speak with a stutter whenever he comes under pressure! Mad dog doesn’t capitulate and say ‘Lee Kuan Yew is always right’.
And, so far, Mad dog is not down with stroke.
Agree with D.
TR is going the way of MSM.
cy on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 9:16 pm
“pls visit opposition parties website and read their articles for better view of their visions, ideas, thoughts and plans.”
What good does what you say helps to bolster Singapore’s image in the eyes of the members of the NY State Bar Association, and the use of unjust laws to bankrupt/jail politicians not to the liking of the regime?
What good has come out of Low & Chiam other than to be used as a shield by the regime to shield against international criticism?
———————–
Ah Lian on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 3:52 pm
Once again the likes of Low Thia Khiang and Chiam See Tong help the regime’s legitimacy, rather than the cause of justice and other human rights of the lesser mortals.
W
cy – you’ve made a valid point.
If you hold a significant market share and is already a preferred brandname, that’s fine and well.
But to tell potential customers “come to my shop if you want to know my products” when you are still a start-up business, well, don’t be surprised if you can’t sell!
The alternative parties must learn to be more savvy and posh.
Law Minister Shunmugam is grossly mistaken when he said LTK has never been sued. Or was he really mistaken?
LTK as well as the Workers Party have a judgement against them. This was the judgement that made JBJ bankrupt the last time.
The Minister could not have been unaware of this. So did he tell a lie at the conference?
The entire WP CEC was sued by a Tamil group as well as Indian MPs over an article written by Mr. Balakrishnan, the former WP Treasurer and published in the Hammer. The PAP chose to pick on only JBJ to shoulder the liability while leaving the other CEC members alone. LTK, being the Asst Sec Gen then, was also liable and together with the WP have a judgement hanging over his head. The PAP can technically execute the judgement and even wind up the WP if it cannot pay the damages.
Why there has been a stay of execution is anyone’s guess.