Who is LKY ?
What was the history behind the formation of the PAP ?
The PAP was started by two persons - Dr Toh Chin Chye and Dr Goh Keng Swee on their
return from London to Singapore(*1).
While in London as a student from
1949 to 1953, Toh Chin Chye led the anti-colonial group
of Malayan students known as Malayan Forum. The Forum provided a
place for native nationalists to debate and to examine the future
of Malaya. Before returning to Singapore, Goh Keng Swee, the then
chairman of the Forum, nominated Toh to succeed him.
In his early years, Toh was
very much a socialist and close friend of Dr Goh Keng Swee during
his days in London. Together, they took up the political cause and
came back to Singapore in 1953.
Later, Dr Goh, Kenny Byrne and Dr
Toh formed the Council for Joint Action with Lee Kuan Yew as the
legal advisor.
That was how LKY got involved in
union politics. During then, LKY was also the legal advisor to
Samad Ismail (editor of Utusan Melayu and ex-detainee), Lim Chin
Siong and Devan Nair.
The few of them would always meet
in the “basement” of LKY’s house but with special attention from
the “Special Branch” (old version of ISD), they would always be
watched and risk being detained without trial.
Toh did not belong to the first
wave of founding members who met at LKY’s house; he was still in
England when the “basement group” first met.
However, after Dr Toh joined the
group, it was Dr Toh who proposed the formation of an open and
legal political party to champion the cause of nationalism and
independence of Malaya.
“Sometimes, I wonder what
would have happened to our basement group had I not pushed for it
to register as a political party. What if I had not come back to
Singapore? You know, in 1953, I was advised to go to USA to
continue my research. If I had gone that route, would anyone have
started the PAP? Would the basement crowd have remained in Kuan
Yew’s house? Would it have come together at all?” –
Dr Toh Chin Chye.
Would Singapore have been different if Dr Toh Chin Chye
had accepted nomination to be the Prime Minister on at
least two occassions ?
On both occassions, he declined the position in support of LKY,
who had tendered his resignation at the behest of disgruntled party
members - and on both occassions, Dr Toh gave his unwavering
support to LKY in the interest of the PAP.
On at least two occasions, Toh
Chin Chye’s name was floated as an alternative Prime Minister to
LKY. In 1961, they lost two successive by-elections to Ong Eng Guan
and David Marshall.
On 17 July 1961, Lee Kuan Yew
wrote a letter to Dr Toh, Chairman of the CEC. He wrote that the
trade unions, the Middle Road Crowd wanted him to resign and they
wanted Dr Toh to take over as the Prime Minister.
Dr Toh read the letter to all the
Cabinet Ministers and CEC members during a Cabinet meeting. All who
were present were stunned. Yong Nyuk Lin asked Dr Toh, “Should we
accept his resignation?” Dr Toh replied, “No,” because it will
divide the government and it will appear to the people of Singapore
that they are being unsteady. So they declined the
resignation.
Dr Toh could very well make
himself as the Prime Minister, but he didn’t.
In 1964, in the aftermath of race
riots in Singapore and Malaysia, LKY offered again to resign as PM
in an attempt to ease the strained relations between Kuala Lumpur
and Singapore.
In the wake of certain extremist
demands from UMNO (United Malays National Organization) to arrest
LKY for the ostensible reason of preventing him from causing more
political and ethnic tension within Malaysia, Dr Toh and his
comrades stood by LKY.
If LKY was arrested and detained
without trial, Dr Toh or Dr Goh might have been the next logical
choice to become PM of Singapore.
Dr Toh’s support and ability to
rally members behind LKY probably prevented the Malaysian
government from arresting LKY.
Sadly, the PAP came first before the interests of
Singaporeans.
Who is LKY ?
In the years during Colonial Rule and when Singapore was part of
Malaysia, LKY was a strong advocate of Human Rights to Freedom
of Assembly, Open Debate and the Exchange of Competitive
Political Ideas, unfettered Press and Broadcast Media - as
seen in his Parliamentary Speeches in the Singapore State Assembly
when David Marshall was the Chief Minister of Singapore, and also
in his speech in the Federal Parliament in Kuala Lumpur.
"But we either believe
in democracy or we not. If we do, then, we must say categorically,
without qualification, that no restraint from the any democratic
processes, other than by the ordinary law of the land, should be
allowed... If you believe in democracy, you must believe in it
unconditionally. If you believe that men should be free, then, they
should have the right of free association, of free speech, of free
publication. Then, no law should permit those democratic processes
to be set at nought, and no excuse, whether of security, should
allow a government to be deterred from doing what it knows to
right, and what it must know to be right... "- Lee Kuan Yew,
Legislative Assembly Debates April 27, 1955
"If we are to survive as a free
democracy, then we must be prepared, in principle, to concede to
our enemies - even those who do not subscribe to our views - as
much(sic)constitutional rights as you concede yourself." -
Lee Kuan Yew Legislative Assembly Debates Sept 21,
1955
"Let us get down to fundamentals. Is this an
open, or is this a closed society? Is it a society where men can
preach ideas - novel, unorthodox, heresies, to established churches
and established governments - where there is a constant contest for
men's hearts and minds on the basis of what is right, of what is
just, of what is in the national interests, or is it a closed
society where the mass media - the newspapaers, the journals,
publications, TV, radio - either bound by sound or by sight, or
both sound and sight, men's minds are fed with a constant drone of
sycophantic support for a particular orthodox political philosophy?
That is the first question we asked ourselves. I would like to see
minds stimulated and debate provoked, and truth refined and
crystallized out of the conflict of different evidence and views.
I, therefore, welcome every and any opportunity of a chance to
agree, or to dissent, in order that out of thesis comes synthesis -
thesis, anti-major premise, anti-premise, synthesis, so we
progress... I welcome every opportunity to meet members of the
opposition, and so do members of my party, over the radio, over the
television, university forums, public rallies. We never run away
from the open encounter. If your ideas, your views cannot stand the
challenge of criticism then they are too fragile and not sturdy
enough to last. I am talking of the principle of the open society,
the open debate, ideas, not intimidation, persuasion not
coercion... Sir, the basic fundamentals we asked ourselves...is
whether the duties of the Minister of Information and Broadcasting
are to produce closed minds or open minds, because these
instruments - the mass media, the TV, the radio - can produce
either the open minds receptive to ideas and ideals, a democratic
system of life, or closed and limited. But I know that the open
debate is a painful process for closed minds...But let me make this
point: that 5 million adult minds in Malaysia cannot be closed -
definitely not in the lifetime of the people in authority. It is
not possible because whatever the faults of the colonial system,
and there are many...they generated the open mind, the inquiring
mind." - Lee Kuan Yew Dec 18, 1964 Malaysian Parliamentary
Debates
What changed the PAP political idealism that was so
eloquently expressed by LKY after Singapore was kicked out of
Malaysia ?
Prior to Singapore being kicked out of Malaysia, the
Malaysian Government had considered arresting LKY and even the
entire Singapore Cabinet(*2).
LKY's arrests must have been considered as already
evidenced by the publicity given in the speeches made by Malaysian
Politicians from UMNO and even from the MCA, when
both parties saw LKY's challenge to the political status
quo as destructive to what was agreed between Tunku and LKY
before the merger was completed.
In his biography, Lee Kuan Yew stated that he did not
sleep well, and fell sick days after Singapore's independence. As
the British prime-minister at the time, Harold Wilson expressed
concern upon learning of Lee's condition from the British High
Commissioner, John Robb(*3).
Who was holding the fort during the critical days
immediately after the devastating events of Singapore being
kicked out of Malaysia ?
With LKY devastated over the separation and tearing
on national television (and later seek solace in Changi Villa), Dr
Toh and other Minister held the fort. Opposition members demanded
Dr Toh for a parliament seating but was only able to recommence on
December 1965. The crucial stabilizing role that Dr Toh played
after the separation could not be
under-estimated(*4).
Is LKY the real pillar of strength that propaganda
has made him out to be ?
Is a mentally weak person fit to lead a nation, when he depends
on Machiavelli's ways to rule and force the political process to
his will ?
Is Singapore what it is today from his singular vision and
ability to mobilise people ?
With the first generation Old Guard removed from the PAP
and from Government, now LKY reign supreme, and the
remaining surviving members in their old age left impotent by
the gag order imposed from the Official Secrets Act which
they have signed acceptance while in Public Office.
Singaporeans remain anxious to view whatever honest biographies
of the historical events that transpired as viewed and recalled
from the different minds of those who loved and continue to have
hope for Singapore.
History is being re-written to glorify the LKY image as
THE Founding Father of Singapore and he do not seem to be too
inmodest in allowing such accolades to be continued.
