Generally speaking, I know where you are coming from but the
lack of speech freedom is stretched and by so, the use of certain
examples.
Francis Seow (if I assume is referring to him) was not fugitived
due to something he said but PAP dug out something from his
records. Tang Liang Hong was, but they are all politicians, not
people who go to Speakers' Corner.
Mr Brown was censored by TODAY and had his column dropped. Yes,
MICA overreacted. But was in no way persecuted. He still has his
blog running. TODAY is no big deal.
No one has been sued for defamation for speaking at Speakers'
Corner. The only one who was charged (not sued) was Chee who spoke
on the tudung issue which was a racial issue banned from being
highlighted at Speakers' Corner. Tan Kim Chuang and former SPP
(Vice Chairman?) S Kunalen has made the most number of speeches
(more than 200 each?), being there every weekend. Nothing
happened.
A lot of fear is perceived because we use wrong examples and
without looking at the various cases as individual ones and examine
them with more detail.
On closer look, the only thing that can get one of these suits is
if one implies legal impropriety on a person's part. I don't fully
agree that such things cannot be questioned because, PAP wants
proof before you raise such allegations, but if you don't ask, you
don't know.
Then again, if PAP relents, will people use this privilege to score
political points until the government cannot work? And if the
government cannot work, won't the people suffer?
I have also raised this example before many times over last 10
years that Chiam See Tong sued two ministers for alleging that the
former plotted the SIA illegal strike in 1982 (when it was another
SDP member whom Chiam and the CEC expelled) and Chiam won out of
court settlement.
Regards