By Andrew Loh
“Foreign Affairs and Law Minister K Shanmugam told Yahoo! Singapore in an exclusive interview recently [that] the proposed changes were the result of the government’s continuous review of laws and not from activist campaigning.” (Yahoo Singapore: “Death penalty change came from review, not activists: Shanmugam”)
“But it is the online media, like The Online Citizen, NGOs, like Second Chances and the Singapore Anti-death Penalty Campaign, and lawyer M Ravi who have highlighted and championed the cause.
“From campaigning against the death sentence imposed on 24-year-old Malaysian Yong Vui Kong, to organising forums, to examining the law, they have made some headway.” (PN Balji, Yahoo Singapore: “Online media keeps alive debate on death penalty”)
Those are two very different takes on the issue of the death penalty and the changes which the government will be making to the practice in Singapore.
Try as Mr Shanmugam and the government may, the activists and their campaigns have no doubt played a part – however small – in highlighting the plight of those on death row, especially small-time drug runners such as Yong Vui Kong. The activists have also shown how the mandatory death penalty (MDP) stands on shaky grounds, with certain cases which have cast doubts on its efficacy and even fairness. Their efforts have taken them to the courts and even beyond Singapore.
To dismiss them as Mr Shanmugam seems to do is an affront to civil society which took upon itself to work towards effecting changes to the practice of the MDP.
But ask any of the activists – and they are from a broad range of people, from the tireless M Ravi, to the late Mr JB Jeyaretnam to the Singapore Democratic Party, from bloggers to civil society groups such as the Singapore Anti-Death Penalty Campaign, Second Chances and Think Centre, and countless other individuals – ask any of them if it matters if they are credited for the changes and you will hear them say it is the least of their concerns.
The reason, if I may offer one, having worked with some of these activists, is that there is a deep emotional bond with those whom the activists have championed. Saving them from the gallows is what matters above all else. And this is not just from a principled belief that the death penalty is inherently wrong, it stems also from that visceral connection to those on death row.
In short, it is about having a conscience and trying to live according to it.
But it is also about the kind of society these activists want. For too long, Singapore has been an unfeeling, cold-hearted, pragmatic society founded on the “hard truths” of economic survival. There wasn’t any time for these “highfalutin”, “soft-hearted” concerns.
But times are changing – and it is the ordinary Singaporeans who are affecting this, demanding and indeed working towards creating a society, a nation, with a heart even as we realise that criminals have to be punished for their crimes.
It is rather ironic that PM Lee Hsien Loong said on 10 November, Saturday, that our nation’s success must be measured by values too. Although he was referring to help for the less fortunate, it is also what the activists are saying – what do we value? How do we value the sanctity of human life? What values are we teaching our young by allowing the state to take a human life, on our behalf?
“We can’t just measure our success by GDP growth, important as this is, but also by the growth of our values: compassion, empathy, altruism, love for our fellow citizens,” PM Lee was reported by the Straits Times as having said. “I hope more Singaporeans will step forward to contribute in big ways and small, because this is the way Singapore can remain our home with a heart.”
What PM Lee is urging is precisely what the activists are doing and trying to achieve.
And then PM Lee goes on to say this:
“It’s easy to express what we would like to see and to expect others to do the hard work, especially the Government. It’s harder to make the effort to study the problems, to understand the issues, and to develop considered proposals.
“It’s most difficult to bestir ourselves, sacrifice our own time and energies, roll up our sleeves and do the heavy lifting day after day, organising, fund-raising, volunteering, and doing things which make a real difference to the lives of others.”
PM Lee is rather prescient here. Indeed, the anti-death penalty activists have done the hard work, they have made the effort to study the problem of the death penalty, and have written extensively and offered solutions to it.
And for sure they have bestirred themselves when no one else cared, sacrificed their time and energies (all of them have day jobs, by the way). They have rolled up their sleeves and done the heavy lifting – day after day, week after week, months and years on end now. They have organised themselves and organised events – fundraisers, film screening, protests, petitions, visits to the inmates and their families, studied the law, written stories, spoken to the media, MPs and ministers. They have volunteered. They cared. They have cried when one is hanged. They have despaired when the Government steels its heart and refuses to budge.
But they have made a real difference, even as the Government may deny this.
The point I am trying to make here is this: there is no shame or “loss of face” in expressing appreciation for those who have given their time and energy in exactly the way which the PM has described, even if it is done in ways which the Government may not approve. But that should matter less than the fact that these Singaporeans care and have taken, as it were, the road less travelled to express that care.
They and their effort should be appreciated and applauded.
There is no use in admonishing Singaporeans when they do not step up, or in expressing gratitude and appreciation only if they do as the Government hopes. What matters, really, is that the activists have a deep desire to see their nation be one which is compassionate and empathetic. A home with a heart.
The very same kind which PM Lee calls for.