When Singapore’s terrorist leader escaped from
high-security detention two months ago, he could not possibly have
foreseen the political repercussion that he was leaving
behind.
It has given Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong his worst political
headache since he took office nearly four years
ago.
The saga of the Jemaah Islamiah leader’s escape from the Whitley
Detention Centre has moved beyond security concern and the negative
international image.
It has raised doubts on government accountability in Singapore and
revisited the unpopular issue of high cabinet pay by raising
questions like: -
-- How damaging to the nation must a government
mistake be before a cabinet minister – who is paid more than the US
president – is held responsible?
-- Must punishment, however serious the mistake,
be applicable only to the civil servants or the foot soldiers – but
not the political leader who is responsible for overall
planning?
This dilemma began with a government-appointed committee report
revealing a list of incredible bungles and neglect by the Home
Affairs Ministry, which is in overall charge of the
Centre.
A “confluence of factors” or “lapses” is how the report calls the
mistakes that allowed JI leader, Mas Selamat Kastari, to climb out
of a toilet window and flee in his underwear. Two months later,
he’s still at large.
Mas Selamat is no ordinary criminal, but leader of a terror network
who was trained in Afghanistan. He had plotted to crash a
commercial plane into Changi Airport as well as blow up foreign
embassies.
Minister mentor Lee Kuan Yew has said that if he succeeds in
fleeing to Indonesia, he may return to carry out his bombing
threats.
And the Whitley Detention Centre is a tiny version of America’s
Guantanamo, which houses all the terrorist suspects in
Singapore.
His escape presented PM Lee with a tough choice: Either ditch the
minister responsible as widely demanded by the public – or defend
him.
He chose to support a party colleague, who is also Deputy Prime
Minister, and go against public opinion.
PM Lee stated that ministers should not be automatically removed
for lapses down the line. This came as a surprise to a generation
of Singaporeans raised under his father’s strict
governance.
Pm Lee said his government would not encourage a culture where
ministers resign whenever things go wrong on their watch, whether
or not they are actually to blame.
By downgrading ministerial responsibility, he may have established
a new principle of governance for Singapore that differs from other
countries’.
Many nations in Europe and Asia (from Britain to Japan and South
Korea) hold their leaders or cabinet ministers liable for a major
blunder, either by sacking or allowing them to
resign.
The response of Singaporeans over the Internet has predictably been
very negative with some accusing him of double standards – one rule
for ministers and another for the civil service.
An online poll on whether Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng
should be sacked showed a 94% ‘yes’ vote, with only six per cent
disagreeing.
But Lee was adamant. “That would be the easy way out. It may
temporarily appease an angry public, but it will not fundamentally
solve the problem,” he said.
The result has been a transfer of some of the political heat from
the Home Affairs Minister to the Prime Minister.
The critics complain that since ministers are paid super-high wages
pegged to the top private sector, Lee should also hold them to the
same standards of accountability.
Said Workers' Party chief Low Thia Khiang, "In the corporate world,
when something goes wrong, heads that roll would include the CEO's.
Here, when something goes wrong, we talk about honest
mistakes."
Even government backbencher Inderjit Singh (Ang Mo Kio) drew the
same conclusion.
"We have adopted a reward system that matches that of the private
sector, that we pay everyone as high as possible,” he said.
“Therefore, people expect that when you make a mistake, you will be
appropriately punished."
The pressure for accountability is so strong and widespread that
some observers believe that Lee’s defence of Wong will not stand
beyond the next election in three years time.
“In a one-man-one-vote system, no prime minister is silly enough to
stand in front of a tidal electoral wave,” said a newspaper
reporter. “Wong is a big political liability and will have to
go.”
Some observers believe this will happen after a decent interval
with Wong being transferred out of Home Affairs before
2011.
In a cabinet reshuffle on Mar 29, a month after Selamat’s escape,
Lee appointed Mr. K. Shanmugam as Law Minister - as well as Second
Minister for Home Affairs.
This was seen as preparation for Wong’s eventual replacement in
case Lee decides to make the change.
The public criticism rages on over the websites with newspapers’
letters pages remaining largely silent.
“Singaporeans with half a brain will know it is less about being
different from other countries, but more about protecting their own
kind - the tight-knit network of elites who run this country,”
Gerald Giam wrote in his blog,
Kelvin Tong added: “In my view, PM Lee failed to see one point:
Singapore ministers are the highest paid in the world. Logically
speaking, the echelon of accountability has to be higher in tandem,
no?”
Robert Teh wrote, “This is truly world's best leadership - just
watch the charisma of a leader explaining all the faults in his
prison windows as caused by other junior officers - not his own
ministry.”
Against public feelings, Prime Minister retains his Home Affairs
Minister despite blunders that let terrorist leader to escape - at
least until the next election.
By Seah Chiang Nee.
Apr 26, 2008