Saturday September 16, 10:53 AM
Singapore's climbdown on activists too late: NGOs
ADVERTISEMENT
AFP Photo
Singapore acted too late in finally agreeing to admit 22 activists
whose accreditation for World Bank and International Monetary Fund
meetings it had opposed, non-governmental organizations say.
The city-state's partial climbdown late Friday followed stinging
criticism from the World Bank in a controversy which activists say
reinforces the city-state's image as a restrictive society, despite
its economic success.
Singapore had said there were security concerns about 27 of the
hundreds of activists accredited by the Bank and Fund as part of a
long-standing dialogue between the financial institutions and their
critics.
But it partially reversed its stand after Bank president Paul
Wolfowitz said the issue had damaged the reputation of the
city-state, which prides itself on its image as an efficiently-run
regional commercial hub.
Singapore said 22 of the 27 activists would now be allowed
entry.
The Bank welcomed Singapore's move but said it wants all 27
admitted "without delay" in line with a memorandum of understanding
with the Singapore government.
"This gesture is, quite simply, too little too late. Expensive
travel plans have already been undone, and many civil society
organizations are unable to fly to Singapore on a moment's notice,"
said Romilly Greenhill, of the relief agency ActionAid
International.
Lidy Nacpil, of the non-governmental organization (NGO) Jubilee
South, agreed.
"Also, why only 22 of the 27?" she said on the Indonesian island of
Batam, near Singapore, where more than 160 NGOs on Friday declared
a boycott of the meetings in Singapore to protest the clampdown on
free speech and banning of activists.
Wolfowitz said at a meeting with NGOs in Singapore on Friday that
"enormous damage has been done ... A lot of that damage has been to
Singapore and it's self-inflicted."
A few hours later, Singapore announced its climbdown.
"Singapore apparently has realised that their image has been
tarnished, to say the least," Nacpil said.
It was a rare reversal by the city-state which generally stands
firm in the face of criticisms. Last year Singapore hanged an
Australian drug trafficker despite a high-level diplomatic campaign
to save the man's life.
The city-state's hard line against the NGOs "has underlined how cut
off Singapore is from a world where free speech, free association
and democratic choice are established norms of political
association," said Walden Bello, executive director of Focus on the
Global South, another NGO.
Singapore is "out of step with the times," Bello said.
Political stability has been the bedrock of the economic success of
the city-state, which grew from a Third World country to become one
of Asia's wealthiest nations.
Critics say this came at a price, in the form of restrictions on
freedom of speech and political activity.
Sinapan Samydorai, president of local human rights group Think
Centre, said the controversy over the activists "just strengthened
that view that it's a very closed society when it comes to
political rights."
He said Singapore should have been "more mature" and allowed the
foreign protesters to make their point against the financial
institutions.
Despite appeals from the Bank that accredited protesters be allowed
to hold outdoor demonstrations, Singapore has refused to waive a
long-standing ban on public protests.
Police have said tough security measures were necessary because the
country is a high-profile "terrorist" target.
But NGOs said the measures -- enforced by 10,000 security personnel
-- were directed toward local activists, not outsiders.
Bello said Singapore "fears the effect that civil society
organisations criticising and debating the IMF and World Bank might
have on the citizens of Singapore."
A local opposition politician, Chee Soon Juan, was set to break the
ban on outdoor protests Saturday.
He said the international community has begun to see the nature of
Singapore's system.
"How do you expect to become a financial centre, a global hub...
and yet be so repressive?" he said.
