All through the years, Robert Ho is known for his strong views,
and has been persecuted regularly as a netizen.
‘Singaporean cyber-dissident speaks his
mind’
By
Martyn See
SINGAPORE - Robert Ho is arguably Singapore's leading
cyber-dissident. In late 2001, Ho was arrested in his home for
allegedly posting "inflammatory" articles online during the general
elections, representing the first-ever case of its kind.
In 2002, after an as-yet-unspecified article(s) was posted on the
soc.culture.singapore newsgroup, police entered his home, seized
his computer and served him a summons to attend an
investigation.
Three weeks later, he was forcibly taken to a police station by
officers who entered his home without a warrant or a charge. In
2005, on returning from a shopping mall where he had distributed
flyers alleging electoral fraud, he was again apprehended and his
computer seized.
In all, he has been arrested an additional three times since 2001,
and on repeated occasions the authorities have remanded him at a
mental institution. He has yet to be prosecuted for any of the
alleged offences, although a criminal-defamation case is still
pending from 2002.
While other critics, including international publications, have
yielded to defamation threats from Singapore's political leaders,
Robert Ho has emerged from his arrests and detentions even more
recalcitrant against the establishment.
In Singapore's political cyberspace, where fear of surveillance and
potential libel suits have compelled many dissident netizens and
bloggers to post articles under pseudonyms, Ho continues to stick
his neck out by disclosing his real identity online.
He is now a regular contributor to the Singapore Review
newsgroup and is a blogger.
Fellow blogger and independent filmmaker Martyn See interviewed Ho
via e-mail and telephone last month. A longer version of the
interview was first published at the blogspot singaporerebel.
See: In 2001, you became the first person
in Singapore to be arrested for posting an article on the Internet.
What happened?
Ho: On November 16, 2001, about 11:15am,
eight serious stern men rang my doorbell and came into my flat.
They quickly searched my entire flat, asked for my computer and
took it as well as every single computer-related device from
printers, floppy disks, CD-ROMs [and] modems to cables.
They then took me away to the CID [Central Investigation
Department] Police Cantonment Complex. Being arrested and having
all my entire computer system confiscated was quite unnerving and
disconcerting. The handcuffs were locked on so tight I suffered a
pinched nerve in my left wrist for weeks after.
At the CID, I was questioned for hours, during which I dictated my
statements to [police official] Soh Kien Peng. I finished the
statements around 14:05pm, pleading not guilty in summation to the
charge of posting in soc.culture.singapore my article entitled
"Break the law and get away with it, like PAP", posted on October
19, 2001. This article is also posted in "Singaporeans for
Democracy" at www.sfdonline.org. [This was a reference to the
ruling People's Action Party.]
After my statements were recorded, edited and signed, I was taken
to a cell where I was to spend the night on the bare floor. The
next morning, I was driven to the Subordinate Courts, where I
awaited my turn for the judge to deal with me. We accused were
processed like an assembly line, with each one getting very limited
time or attention. Singapore efficiency, if you like.
When my turn came to plead, I tried to tell the judge that I wanted
to claim trial and ask for release on bail, since my offense was
probably bailable, being merely an [online] posting in a newsgroup.
She was impatient, there being about 100 accused to process that
morning before her lunch. I spoke into the microphone that she
should not treat me on the basis of "once a madman always a
madman", but I was sent to the Institute for Mental Health (IMH)
for observation anyway.
In IMH, the doctors see us about once a week, so it took about
three weeks before the doctor assigned to me could finalize his
report, which was "fit for trial", which is another way of saying
that I was not mentally ill. The charge against me was "incitement
to violence" for asking voters to enter the polling stations
without authorization. That this was a trumped-up charge, with very
serious jail terms.
At trial, after I was released from IMH ... prosecutor Han Ming
Kuang read the psychiatrist's report on me, but only the old
historical parts and not the conclusion, which is that I am fit for
trial, to show that I was unfit for trial! Who would believe the
truth of my mental state: a [public prosecutor] and the Straits
Times or the psychiatrist who saw me? I was told beforehand by Soh
that the charge would be dropped, and that once released from court
I was to avoid reporters and leave the courthouse. So I left the
Subordinate Courts, collected my entire computer system back from
the CID, and went home without giving any interviews to
reporters.
[Prosecutor] Han took so long to read all the old historical parts
that the judge told him testily to stop. But Han continued anyway.
The next day I knew why. He was reading not for the court, but for
the Straits Times reporters present. The next day's Straits Times
carried a large report of Han's readings to give the impression
that I was mad and that was why the charge was dropped. At that
time, Han Fook Kwang was editor, now chief editor I believe, of
Page 1 of
4
Continued 1
2 3 4
