June 6, 2008
PROFESSOR Walter Woon's attack on human-rights activists as 'fanatics' is very disturbing (A-G cautions against human rights becoming a 'religion' with fanatics, May 31). Surprisingly (although perhaps not) it comes at a time when the Singapore Government itself is trying to promote the Asean Regional Mechanism on Human Rights.
Last year, prior to the signing of the Asean Charter in November, Professor Woon and the then Asean Secretary-General Ong Keng Yong declared at the Asean Civil Society Conference that 'the principles of good governance, rule of law and democracy will be enshrined as 'aspirational goals' in the Asean Charter (Asean Charter to turn region into community, Oct 28, 2007)'.
My questions are: What did they mean by 'aspirational goals'? Who set the views of what is acceptable and what's not? Who defines the ideals of human rights in a 'democracy'?
Surely the obvious answer is that in a democracy, views and rights become accepted and enshrined through an on-going process of negotiation between governments and its citizens.
We have seen over many years Singapore officialdom's strategy of undermining the passionately held views of advocates of human rights, for instance, 'liberal democratic views' and 'feminism' have been dismissed as 'corrupt Western views'.
When the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) started in 1985, its members were considered by the Government and conservatives to be disruptive, bra-burning 'fanatics' that would destroy the family. More than 20 years later, Aware has proven itself as a positive advocate for women and families in Singapore. 'Fanatics' - or in our opinion advocates - are often exactly what our society needs.
I note, not surprisingly, the contradiction between the dismissal of human-rights activists as 'fanatics' and Singapore officialdom's promotion of 'human rights'.
The strong words of dismissal are inappropriate and unbecoming in the context of the time and circumstances, especially seeing the continued and appalling degradation of our domestic workers (Couple jailed for maid abuse, June 4) and the neglect and suffering in Myanmar.
Considering the limitations imposed on civil society activism in Singapore and the official ambivalence over the term 'human rights', I applaud and celebrate the so-called 'fanatics' of human rights for the work they do.
Constance Singam
President, Aware
[Comment: AWARE not fanatical enough because they "approved" by Govt.]
PROFESSOR Walter Woon's attack on human-rights activists as 'fanatics' is very disturbing (A-G cautions against human rights becoming a 'religion' with fanatics, May 31). Surprisingly (although perhaps not) it comes at a time when the Singapore Government itself is trying to promote the Asean Regional Mechanism on Human Rights.
Last year, prior to the signing of the Asean Charter in November, Professor Woon and the then Asean Secretary-General Ong Keng Yong declared at the Asean Civil Society Conference that 'the principles of good governance, rule of law and democracy will be enshrined as 'aspirational goals' in the Asean Charter (Asean Charter to turn region into community, Oct 28, 2007)'.
My questions are: What did they mean by 'aspirational goals'? Who set the views of what is acceptable and what's not? Who defines the ideals of human rights in a 'democracy'?
Surely the obvious answer is that in a democracy, views and rights become accepted and enshrined through an on-going process of negotiation between governments and its citizens.
We have seen over many years Singapore officialdom's strategy of undermining the passionately held views of advocates of human rights, for instance, 'liberal democratic views' and 'feminism' have been dismissed as 'corrupt Western views'.
When the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) started in 1985, its members were considered by the Government and conservatives to be disruptive, bra-burning 'fanatics' that would destroy the family. More than 20 years later, Aware has proven itself as a positive advocate for women and families in Singapore. 'Fanatics' - or in our opinion advocates - are often exactly what our society needs.
I note, not surprisingly, the contradiction between the dismissal of human-rights activists as 'fanatics' and Singapore officialdom's promotion of 'human rights'.
The strong words of dismissal are inappropriate and unbecoming in the context of the time and circumstances, especially seeing the continued and appalling degradation of our domestic workers (Couple jailed for maid abuse, June 4) and the neglect and suffering in Myanmar.
Considering the limitations imposed on civil society activism in Singapore and the official ambivalence over the term 'human rights', I applaud and celebrate the so-called 'fanatics' of human rights for the work they do.
Constance Singam
President, Aware
[Comment: AWARE not fanatical enough because they "approved" by Govt.]
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please note that this is a "news clipping" blog. Articles may have been authored elsewhere and "clipped" to this blog for ease of reference. The blog "owner" is usually not the author and does not have any means of relaying your comments or questions to the author or authors.
Comments that will drive discussion and explore issues may be kept. Other comments may be deleted.