Amnesty International published this article on 23 April 2009:
Further restrictions on rights in Singapore
On 13 April Singapore’s parliament passed a new Public Order Act, which further restricts the human right to freedom of peaceful assembly and enhances policing powers to the exclusion of adequate safeguards to prevent abuse.
The government stated that the Act was needed in advance of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit to be held in Singapore during November, when heads of state from member countries will meet. It claimed that such legislation was needed to combat the threat of terrorist acts during the summit.
Amnesty International recognises the security concerns and the challenges of policing such a large event. However, this development has the potential of further constricting freedom of peaceful assembly in Singapore, which is already compromised. This law should be amended to ensure full compliance with international human rights standards.
The law complements and strengthens provisions of existing legislation, including the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act (PEMA) and the Miscellaneous Offences Act (MOA) which have been used previously to suppress peaceful demonstrators.
These include prominent opposition leader, Dr. Chee Soon Juan, the Secretary-General of the Singapore Democratic Party. He was sentenced in November 2006, under the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act, to five weeks in jail after refusing to pay a S$5,000 fine for speaking in public without a permit, prior to the country's general election in May 2006.
Amnesty International calls on the Singapore government to meet its legal obligations under Article 14(1) of the Singapore Constitution to preserve freedom of speech and expression; the right to assemble peaceably and without arms; and the right to form associations.
Amnesty International also calls upon Singapore to abide by Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) which states that, “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes the freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers”. While this right, as well as the right to peaceful assembly (in Art. 20(1) of the UDHR) may be restricted for purposes such as national security or public order, these restrictions can only be applied narrowly and to the extent necessitated by the specific circumstances.
A law which defines as few as two persons moving “substantially as a body of persons” in order to show opposition or support to somebody’s view, publicise a cause or commemorate an event (Sec. 2(1) of the Act) - as “a procession” which needs a permit and on which restrictions may be applied cannot be seriously considered as falling within internationally accepted limitations on these rights.
The circumstances under which permits may be denied are stated in Section 7(2), using vague language that can be broadly interpreted. This includes where there are reasonable grounds for believing that the proposed assembly or procession may “create a public nuisance” or “cause feelings of … ill will … between different groups in Singapore”.
The government can, under Sections 12, 25 and 28 of the Act, give enhanced powers to the police by declaring an event to be a prohibited one. This would enable police to stop and search any person who is entering or about to enter such an area. They may also search any person who is already in this area. They may question an individual’s reason for wanting to enter a venue and also deny entry to such a venue. Failure to comply will subject the individual to a fine and imprisonment. Amnesty International is concerned that these powers are excessive and open to abuse, which could result in violations of the rights to privacy and freedom of movement, as well as arbitrary detention.
Under Section 40 of the Act, police may arrest individuals without a warrant for contravening any of the Act’s provisions, which would include anyone who “assists or promotes… any assembly or procession” (Sec. 3(1)(a) of the Act).
Rather than restricting further the rights to freedom of speech and peaceful assembly, Singapore should revise its laws and policies to accord with international human rights standards, including by ratifying international human rights treaties such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The government should also seek guidance from international human rights monitoring bodies and experts on maintaining security while respecting and protecting human rights.
Background
Singapore imposes significant restrictions on freedom of expression and assembly, particularly on critics of the government, the media, and peaceful demonstrations. In 2008, 18 activists and members of the opposition Singapore Democratic Party faced charges for holding unauthorised protest marches against the rising cost of living. In October 2008, already bankrupt Secretary-General of the opposition Singapore Democratic Party, Dr. Chee Soon Juan and activist Chee Siok Chin were ordered to pay S$610,000 (approximately US$406,000) in defamation damages to current and former government leaders. They were subsequently sentenced to prison for contempt of court after criticising the conduct of their trial. Although they have since been released, as bankrupts they were barred from seeking parliamentary seats or leaving the country without permission.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Aware: How Things are Done Just As Important
Today ran this letter on 22 April 2009:
Aware: How things are done just as important
By Isabel Vadivu Govind
We refer to the recent events at Aware. The policies and programmes that emanate from Aware's efforts can affect many women and families across Singapore. It is therefore critical to examine the actions of the new Aware team and consider the consequences of entrusting an influential organisation to their stewardship.
Leaders we respect treat others with dignity. The new team swiftly dismissed Braema Mathi, CEDAW sub-committee chairperson and veteran women’s rights advocate, via email and without consultation. In progressive organisations, there are face-to-face discussions to address problems before such last resort measures. The team also barred Constance Singam, Aware's then advisor, from an Exco meeting.
Leaders we respect display trustworthiness. The new team’s public rhetoric and private actions are incongruent. While Aware’s President, Ms Josie Lau, publicly bemoans Ms Singam’s resignation as a “loss to Aware and women in Singapore”, in private, Ms Singam was treated with disrespect and her advice went ignored by the new team. While publicly insisting they will honour the previous work of Aware, they plan to replace Aware’s sub-committee chairpersons with themselves. And Ms Lau speaks a half-truth when she says Chew I-jin was not contested when she indeed was for the role of vice-president.
Leaders we respect demonstrate empathy. Empathy, an important aspect of emotional intelligence, requires a compassionate understanding of others’ emotions. Ms Lau expresses a chilling lack of empathy when she asks: “Why are they so angry with us?” She says the new team is only responding to a call for new people to serve Aware. However, there is a marked difference between a call for ‘fresh blood’ and a complete takeover of this nature.
Politically correct rhetoric lends itself easily to manipulation. But actions speak louder than words. The women’s movement, in essence, is a critique of power and its imbalances. It is about establishing fair and respectful systems and empowering the marginalised. The new team’s non-consultative and controlling tactics are neither fair nor respectful and are reminiscent of the very patriarchal hegemony that oppresses women.
How things are done is just as important as what is done. In an era where loss of faith in institutional leadership has peaked, we need leaders whose actions inspire respect and trust. Assessment is in the domain of ethics and we require moral discernment.
Aware: How things are done just as important
By Isabel Vadivu Govind
We refer to the recent events at Aware. The policies and programmes that emanate from Aware's efforts can affect many women and families across Singapore. It is therefore critical to examine the actions of the new Aware team and consider the consequences of entrusting an influential organisation to their stewardship.
Leaders we respect treat others with dignity. The new team swiftly dismissed Braema Mathi, CEDAW sub-committee chairperson and veteran women’s rights advocate, via email and without consultation. In progressive organisations, there are face-to-face discussions to address problems before such last resort measures. The team also barred Constance Singam, Aware's then advisor, from an Exco meeting.
Leaders we respect display trustworthiness. The new team’s public rhetoric and private actions are incongruent. While Aware’s President, Ms Josie Lau, publicly bemoans Ms Singam’s resignation as a “loss to Aware and women in Singapore”, in private, Ms Singam was treated with disrespect and her advice went ignored by the new team. While publicly insisting they will honour the previous work of Aware, they plan to replace Aware’s sub-committee chairpersons with themselves. And Ms Lau speaks a half-truth when she says Chew I-jin was not contested when she indeed was for the role of vice-president.
Leaders we respect demonstrate empathy. Empathy, an important aspect of emotional intelligence, requires a compassionate understanding of others’ emotions. Ms Lau expresses a chilling lack of empathy when she asks: “Why are they so angry with us?” She says the new team is only responding to a call for new people to serve Aware. However, there is a marked difference between a call for ‘fresh blood’ and a complete takeover of this nature.
Politically correct rhetoric lends itself easily to manipulation. But actions speak louder than words. The women’s movement, in essence, is a critique of power and its imbalances. It is about establishing fair and respectful systems and empowering the marginalised. The new team’s non-consultative and controlling tactics are neither fair nor respectful and are reminiscent of the very patriarchal hegemony that oppresses women.
How things are done is just as important as what is done. In an era where loss of faith in institutional leadership has peaked, we need leaders whose actions inspire respect and trust. Assessment is in the domain of ethics and we require moral discernment.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Wanted: An NMP For the Arts
Today ran this story on 22 April 2009:
Wanted: An NMP for the arts
By Mayo Martin
THEIR socio-political commentaries can be found in their films, plays
and literary works. Now, the arts community hopes to have a voice on a
new stage: The chamber of Parliament.
For the first time, the community is searching ground-up for
candidates to the post of Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) .
To create a buzz among their peers, a group of artists set up on
Monday an online community group, ArtsNMP, on Yahoogroups to stimulate
discussion and debate.
The move followed an initial meeting last Thursday of some 100 arts
practitioners from various disciplines, where several names were
suggested.
Potential candidates included stage veterans Beatrice Chia, Eleanor
Wong and Janice Koh. Today understands that theatre director Loretta
Chen and musician Jeremy Monteiro also expressed interest.
The freewheeling meeting, held at White House @ Emily Hill, was
organised by Theatre Training and Research Programme director T
Sasitharan, along with peers such as playwright Tan Tarn How, The
Substation artistic director Audrey Wong, The Necessary Stage’s Alvin
Tan and Haresh Sharma, TheatreWorks’ Ong Keng Sen and Tay Tong, and
Post Museum owner and Artists Village member Woon Tien Wei.
Also present at the event was current NMP Siew Kum Hong, who gave his
opinion and advice on the matter.
Given that the NMP scheme has been around for two decades, what
prompted the landmark event?
Mr Sasitharan told Today: “There’s been, for a long time, a sentiment
among artists and the arts community that there’s a need for
representation of some of the primary concerns of artists at the
highest level in society.
“It’s quite clear the community is extremely diverse (but) it doesn’t
belie the fact that there are significant concerns that sometimes
affect large numbers ... We feel a voice in Parliament would have
these issues and concerns aired at the right forum.”
He cited censorship, funding for the arts and “transparency and
accountability in cultural policies” as some examples on the minds of
practitioners.
The names bandied about so far suggests “there are a number of names
capable of standing up and representing this motley group in
Parliament”, he believes.
Last week’s meeting also surfaced names such as W!ld Rice’s Ivan Heng
and filmmakers Tan Pin Pin and Sun Koh, who all declined, along with
the organisers.
Through the online discussion group, the hope is that more would step
forward and express their keenness to be put forward as a candidate,
said an arts practitioner who declined to be named, adding that they
do not expect the person to champion only an arts agenda if selected.
While the group is willing to endorse individuals, it is not insisting
that candidates must get its backing, stressed Mr Sasitharan. “We want
to engage these people and let this people know that is a group of
peers who are supportive.”
Media, arts and sports organisations constitute one of the six
functional groups invited to nominate candidates for the NMP post. The
incumbent representative from this group is Ms Jessie Phua, president
of the Singapore Bowling Federation.
The deadline for NMP nominations is May 11.
Wanted: An NMP for the arts
By Mayo Martin
THEIR socio-political commentaries can be found in their films, plays
and literary works. Now, the arts community hopes to have a voice on a
new stage: The chamber of Parliament.
For the first time, the community is searching ground-up for
candidates to the post of Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) .
To create a buzz among their peers, a group of artists set up on
Monday an online community group, ArtsNMP, on Yahoogroups to stimulate
discussion and debate.
The move followed an initial meeting last Thursday of some 100 arts
practitioners from various disciplines, where several names were
suggested.
Potential candidates included stage veterans Beatrice Chia, Eleanor
Wong and Janice Koh. Today understands that theatre director Loretta
Chen and musician Jeremy Monteiro also expressed interest.
The freewheeling meeting, held at White House @ Emily Hill, was
organised by Theatre Training and Research Programme director T
Sasitharan, along with peers such as playwright Tan Tarn How, The
Substation artistic director Audrey Wong, The Necessary Stage’s Alvin
Tan and Haresh Sharma, TheatreWorks’ Ong Keng Sen and Tay Tong, and
Post Museum owner and Artists Village member Woon Tien Wei.
Also present at the event was current NMP Siew Kum Hong, who gave his
opinion and advice on the matter.
Given that the NMP scheme has been around for two decades, what
prompted the landmark event?
Mr Sasitharan told Today: “There’s been, for a long time, a sentiment
among artists and the arts community that there’s a need for
representation of some of the primary concerns of artists at the
highest level in society.
“It’s quite clear the community is extremely diverse (but) it doesn’t
belie the fact that there are significant concerns that sometimes
affect large numbers ... We feel a voice in Parliament would have
these issues and concerns aired at the right forum.”
He cited censorship, funding for the arts and “transparency and
accountability in cultural policies” as some examples on the minds of
practitioners.
The names bandied about so far suggests “there are a number of names
capable of standing up and representing this motley group in
Parliament”, he believes.
Last week’s meeting also surfaced names such as W!ld Rice’s Ivan Heng
and filmmakers Tan Pin Pin and Sun Koh, who all declined, along with
the organisers.
Through the online discussion group, the hope is that more would step
forward and express their keenness to be put forward as a candidate,
said an arts practitioner who declined to be named, adding that they
do not expect the person to champion only an arts agenda if selected.
While the group is willing to endorse individuals, it is not insisting
that candidates must get its backing, stressed Mr Sasitharan. “We want
to engage these people and let this people know that is a group of
peers who are supportive.”
Media, arts and sports organisations constitute one of the six
functional groups invited to nominate candidates for the NMP post. The
incumbent representative from this group is Ms Jessie Phua, president
of the Singapore Bowling Federation.
The deadline for NMP nominations is May 11.
Monday, April 20, 2009
The New AWARE Exco Speaks...
Today ran this story on 20 April 2009:
The new Exco speaks...
On former Aware president Constance Singam who has quit as adviser of the society:
Acknowledging Ms Singam’s concerns listed in her resignation email, Ms Josie Lau said: “Constance has a wealth of ideas and perspectives and her resignation is a loss to Aware and women in Singapore.”
On Ms Braema Mathi, two-time Aware president, who was told she was no longer in charge of producing a key report on discrimination against women in Singapore:
Ms Ong said Ms Mathi had failed to submit a draft report which, according to the latest annual report prepared by the previous Exco, had been due since March last year.
“At the first exco meeting (on April 15), we had asked her for the report. To date, she has not submitted it.”
Ms Mathi, who has been on a hectic travelling schedule, could not be reached for comment. When contacted by Today, Ms Singam clarified that it was a misprint — the deadline should have been “March 2009”. She said she would communicate the error to the Exco today. “Yes, (the misunderstanding) shouldn’t have happened ... but they never asked me about it,” she said.
On Ms Claire Nazar, who quit as president less than two weeks after she was elected:
Noting that Ms Nazar’s email stated that her resignation was “purely out of personal reasons”, Ms Lau said she was surprised at her assertions that she did so because the Exco “were not going to follow in my direction”.
“The president is there to provide leadership and guidance but the Exco actually helps to set the direction,” said Ms Lau.
Instead of quitting in a huff, Ms Nazar should have tried to iron out the differences she had with the rest of the Exco, said Aware honorary treasurer Maureen Ong.
The new Exco speaks...
On former Aware president Constance Singam who has quit as adviser of the society:
Acknowledging Ms Singam’s concerns listed in her resignation email, Ms Josie Lau said: “Constance has a wealth of ideas and perspectives and her resignation is a loss to Aware and women in Singapore.”
On Ms Braema Mathi, two-time Aware president, who was told she was no longer in charge of producing a key report on discrimination against women in Singapore:
Ms Ong said Ms Mathi had failed to submit a draft report which, according to the latest annual report prepared by the previous Exco, had been due since March last year.
“At the first exco meeting (on April 15), we had asked her for the report. To date, she has not submitted it.”
Ms Mathi, who has been on a hectic travelling schedule, could not be reached for comment. When contacted by Today, Ms Singam clarified that it was a misprint — the deadline should have been “March 2009”. She said she would communicate the error to the Exco today. “Yes, (the misunderstanding) shouldn’t have happened ... but they never asked me about it,” she said.
On Ms Claire Nazar, who quit as president less than two weeks after she was elected:
Noting that Ms Nazar’s email stated that her resignation was “purely out of personal reasons”, Ms Lau said she was surprised at her assertions that she did so because the Exco “were not going to follow in my direction”.
“The president is there to provide leadership and guidance but the Exco actually helps to set the direction,” said Ms Lau.
Instead of quitting in a huff, Ms Nazar should have tried to iron out the differences she had with the rest of the Exco, said Aware honorary treasurer Maureen Ong.
New AWARE Exco Remains Defiant
Today ran this story on 20 April 2009:
More than a numbers game
Loh Chee Kong
EVEN as both factions are reportedly gathering support for theMay 2 showdown — in which members will vote on a no-confidence motion in the new Exco — the power tussle at Aware could require more than just sheer numbers, with its constitution not providing specifically for a no-confidence vote.
Asked whether her committee would step down in the face of a majority vote at the upcoming extraordinary general meeting (EOGM), Aware president Josie Lau instead questioned the commitment of those pushing for the motion towards “women’s issues”.
Of the 160 signatories for the EOGM, 120 joined only after the annual general meeting (AGM). Only five of the 40 older members actually attended the AGM.
“The other 30 or so members were not even interested enough to show up,” Ms Lau told Today.
With membership rising to 600 — up from 440 just three weeks ago, before the saga began — a big turnout at the EOGM is expected.
Ms Corinna Lim, a spokesperson for the Old Guard, pointed out the Constitution states that “management is vested in general meeting” and the Exco “always remains subordinate to the general meetings”.
Should the Exco refuse to budge, the issue could be brought up to the Registry of Societies, said Ms Lim, a corporate counsel.
While the leadership tussle is unlikely to go away anytime soon, Ms Lau remains undeterred — despite the fact she is a reluctant leader. She revealed on Channel NewsAsia’s Talking Point yesterday that she took the post after everyone else turned it down.
The controversies surrounding her appointment, including the public reprimand from her employer DBS, have strengthened her resolve.
“Once I’m in, I’m in. There’s no such thing as dropping the baton halfway,” she said.
She would not be drawn into taking a stance on homosexuality — a “very controversial topic” — only saying that “the new Exco will have to take a look at this and see what is the direction we want to take”.
Some newspaper reports have claimed that Ms Lau and at least five other members are part of a church that adopts a strong stance against homosexuality. But Ms Lau stressed the Exco “was not there to push our personal religious affiliations”.
Her team had come into power following a controversial AGM on March 28 when they were voted in by a large group of new members. She denied that the Exco had orchestrated a leadership grab, insisting that several members were previously strangers to one another.
Criticising the ex-leadership for having “lost its focus”, she said: “We have to bring it back to basics and try ... to equip our younger women to take on leadership position roles.”
Aware would be seeking to introduce several “constitutional changes”: Expanding the voting rights to men, expatriate women and teenagers above the age of 15 who could seek parental consent to join the society.
More than a numbers game
Loh Chee Kong
EVEN as both factions are reportedly gathering support for theMay 2 showdown — in which members will vote on a no-confidence motion in the new Exco — the power tussle at Aware could require more than just sheer numbers, with its constitution not providing specifically for a no-confidence vote.
Asked whether her committee would step down in the face of a majority vote at the upcoming extraordinary general meeting (EOGM), Aware president Josie Lau instead questioned the commitment of those pushing for the motion towards “women’s issues”.
Of the 160 signatories for the EOGM, 120 joined only after the annual general meeting (AGM). Only five of the 40 older members actually attended the AGM.
“The other 30 or so members were not even interested enough to show up,” Ms Lau told Today.
With membership rising to 600 — up from 440 just three weeks ago, before the saga began — a big turnout at the EOGM is expected.
Ms Corinna Lim, a spokesperson for the Old Guard, pointed out the Constitution states that “management is vested in general meeting” and the Exco “always remains subordinate to the general meetings”.
Should the Exco refuse to budge, the issue could be brought up to the Registry of Societies, said Ms Lim, a corporate counsel.
While the leadership tussle is unlikely to go away anytime soon, Ms Lau remains undeterred — despite the fact she is a reluctant leader. She revealed on Channel NewsAsia’s Talking Point yesterday that she took the post after everyone else turned it down.
The controversies surrounding her appointment, including the public reprimand from her employer DBS, have strengthened her resolve.
“Once I’m in, I’m in. There’s no such thing as dropping the baton halfway,” she said.
She would not be drawn into taking a stance on homosexuality — a “very controversial topic” — only saying that “the new Exco will have to take a look at this and see what is the direction we want to take”.
Some newspaper reports have claimed that Ms Lau and at least five other members are part of a church that adopts a strong stance against homosexuality. But Ms Lau stressed the Exco “was not there to push our personal religious affiliations”.
Her team had come into power following a controversial AGM on March 28 when they were voted in by a large group of new members. She denied that the Exco had orchestrated a leadership grab, insisting that several members were previously strangers to one another.
Criticising the ex-leadership for having “lost its focus”, she said: “We have to bring it back to basics and try ... to equip our younger women to take on leadership position roles.”
Aware would be seeking to introduce several “constitutional changes”: Expanding the voting rights to men, expatriate women and teenagers above the age of 15 who could seek parental consent to join the society.
Aware Chief Wants to Heal Rift With Upset Members
The Straits Times ran this story on 20 April 2009:
Aware chief wants to heal rift with upset members
by Wong Kim Hoh
AS ITS new president, Ms Josie Lau says her priority is to reconcile members of the Association of Women And Research (Aware) following the controversial leadership change on March 28.
She hopes that an extraordinary general meeting to be held soon will provide an opportunity for an open discussion.
'The team has clearly fissured. I want to operate such that my members can support me, and we can all disagree in an agreeable environment,' she said.
Ms Lau and Aware's new honorary treasurer Maureen Ong appeared on Channel News Asia's half-hour Talking Point programme aired last night.
They said they could not understand why the Aware old guard had been unhappy with the change, when the exco's new faces had merely responded to calls to serve women.
Asked if their takeover was a planned coup, Ms Lau said: 'No.' She and Ms Ong claimed they had only just got to know each other.
They were short on details about their plans, saying it was too soon.
But Ms Lau said change was needed because Aware had lost its focus and diversified too much, going into too many different areas. The result was that it did not have enough depth.
'Like any good corporation, if you have diversified too much, consolidate,' she said. 'And as with any new committee, we know that resources are always limited, (so) let's take a look and review what is done in the past that is good, let's keep that, and what new ideas we have, bring on.'
She said she hoped to start a mentoring scheme to groom younger women for leadership positions.
In fact, she already had a new programme called 'Wind Beneath My Wings' in mind, and said it would pair younger women with successful role models such as former Aware president Claire Chiang and Singapore Ambassador to the United States Chan Heng Chee.
The past three weeks have seen a series of stormy events at Aware after a large group of new members swarmed the annual general meeting and voted in an exco of mostly unknowns.
Mrs Claire Nazar was elected president, but quit after just 11 days.
She revealed in The Sunday Times yesterday that she gave up because of the aggressive tactics of the new office bearers, who seemed in a rush to replace sub-committee heads and disregarded input and advice from older Aware members.
Ms Lau filled the gap when she was appointed president last week, but immediately landed in trouble with her employer DBS Bank, which said it had advised her not to take up the top post.
Meanwhile, a group of 160 Aware members have called for an extraordinary general meeting to table a vote of no confidence in the new team.
Last night, Ms Lau said she and her team had remained silent because events had moved so fast.
As for her problem with her employer, she said it 'has been resolved', but was still under discussion.
Explaining why she took the post, she said: 'I felt that I had to pick up the baton, to run and to continue to lead this organisation that had been mired in controversies in the last one, two weeks.'
Near the end of the programme Ms Lau was asked how her exco would respond to a woman facing discrimination at work because of her sexuality.
She replied: 'Aware is a secular organisation. We are not there to push our personal religious beliefs. We do not discriminate against anyone of particular religion, whether you are a man or woman.
'Talking about sexual discrimination, it is a very controversial topic, and the new exco will have to take a new look at this and see what is the role we want to take.'
Aware chief wants to heal rift with upset members
by Wong Kim Hoh
AS ITS new president, Ms Josie Lau says her priority is to reconcile members of the Association of Women And Research (Aware) following the controversial leadership change on March 28.
She hopes that an extraordinary general meeting to be held soon will provide an opportunity for an open discussion.
'The team has clearly fissured. I want to operate such that my members can support me, and we can all disagree in an agreeable environment,' she said.
Ms Lau and Aware's new honorary treasurer Maureen Ong appeared on Channel News Asia's half-hour Talking Point programme aired last night.
They said they could not understand why the Aware old guard had been unhappy with the change, when the exco's new faces had merely responded to calls to serve women.
Asked if their takeover was a planned coup, Ms Lau said: 'No.' She and Ms Ong claimed they had only just got to know each other.
They were short on details about their plans, saying it was too soon.
But Ms Lau said change was needed because Aware had lost its focus and diversified too much, going into too many different areas. The result was that it did not have enough depth.
'Like any good corporation, if you have diversified too much, consolidate,' she said. 'And as with any new committee, we know that resources are always limited, (so) let's take a look and review what is done in the past that is good, let's keep that, and what new ideas we have, bring on.'
She said she hoped to start a mentoring scheme to groom younger women for leadership positions.
In fact, she already had a new programme called 'Wind Beneath My Wings' in mind, and said it would pair younger women with successful role models such as former Aware president Claire Chiang and Singapore Ambassador to the United States Chan Heng Chee.
The past three weeks have seen a series of stormy events at Aware after a large group of new members swarmed the annual general meeting and voted in an exco of mostly unknowns.
Mrs Claire Nazar was elected president, but quit after just 11 days.
She revealed in The Sunday Times yesterday that she gave up because of the aggressive tactics of the new office bearers, who seemed in a rush to replace sub-committee heads and disregarded input and advice from older Aware members.
Ms Lau filled the gap when she was appointed president last week, but immediately landed in trouble with her employer DBS Bank, which said it had advised her not to take up the top post.
Meanwhile, a group of 160 Aware members have called for an extraordinary general meeting to table a vote of no confidence in the new team.
Last night, Ms Lau said she and her team had remained silent because events had moved so fast.
As for her problem with her employer, she said it 'has been resolved', but was still under discussion.
Explaining why she took the post, she said: 'I felt that I had to pick up the baton, to run and to continue to lead this organisation that had been mired in controversies in the last one, two weeks.'
Near the end of the programme Ms Lau was asked how her exco would respond to a woman facing discrimination at work because of her sexuality.
She replied: 'Aware is a secular organisation. We are not there to push our personal religious beliefs. We do not discriminate against anyone of particular religion, whether you are a man or woman.
'Talking about sexual discrimination, it is a very controversial topic, and the new exco will have to take a new look at this and see what is the role we want to take.'
What Did She Do to Deserve Position?
The New Paper ran this article on 20 April 2009:
'What did she do to deserve position?'
by Benson Ang
IT ALL began when a hand was raised, innocently enough, by a new member.
Ms Jenica Chua wanted to nominate Ms Charlotte Wong for vice-president.
And so began the takeover.
That 28 Mar annual general meeting (AGM) was to spark a bitter feud between new office-bearers and the old guard of the Association of Women For Action Research (Aware), one that has split the 24-year-old association.
What exactly happened that day? Four different sources present at the meeting have revealed the twists and turns that led to what amounted to the carpet being pulled from under the Aware stalwarts' feet.
Ms Wong's nomination raised eyebrows among veterans. A newcomer for vice-president? It was unheard of.
When Ms Wong made her pitch and listed her credentials, she hardly mentioned a word about feminism.
Said a source yesterday: 'Many of us wondered what has this woman done for Aware to deserve to be second-in-charge?'
How do her accomplishments compare to an incumbent, Ms Chew I-Jin, who has been volunteering for more than a decade. How does she compare to someone who has pounded the streets handing out flyers, and manned the phone for hours counselling desperate women?
How much did Ms Wong even know about Aware? Did she stand a chance?
She did.
In hindsight, the first indication that this election would be a watershed was the large turnout.
By 2pm, the Aware Centre was teeming with women. In previous years, only about 40 people would show up. But this year, there were over 100 - 80 of whom were fresh faces.
Almost all of them were middle-aged Chinese women. They appeared unfamiliar with the Aware Centre.
Both the air-conditioned conference room and the lobby had to be used to accommodate the large turnout.
Shock for veterans
Ms Constance Singam, 72, the outgoing president and chair of the AGM, nominated Mrs Claire Nazar for presidency. She spoke glowingly about Mrs Nazar's work on the sexual harassment committee.
Mrs Nazar was elected unopposed.
Next was the vice-president's seat. Ms Singam nominated Ms Chew, who gave a speech about her involvement with feminism.
After 15 years in Aware, this was her time to shine.
Then Ms Wong was nominated.
When both of them left the room, and it was time to vote, Ms Wong won by a huge margin.
The veterans were shocked.
They did not know Ms Wong. Neither did they know the women who voted for her. That was how Aware's No 2 spot went to an unknown.
This process - whereby a new member would nominate another new member, who was then voted in by new members - repeated itself when Ms Jenica Chua was elected honorary secretary.
By this time, older members were becoming alarmed. One said she felt uncomfortable with the new members running for positions because they did not understand Aware enough, and had not done enough for Aware.
But a new member replied that Ms Singam was looking for new faces, and they were new faces.
The pattern continued. All but one of the key positions were won by large margins - through new voters. Only another key position - assistant honorary treasurer - went to Ms Chew, and it was a walkover.
When it came to voting in committee members, each of the 13 nominees gave a speech, and the ones with the top six votes were to get in.
During the meeting, some veteran members started searching the Internet for background on the more vocal new members. They discovered that many of them had written strongly-worded letters to the press against gay lifestyles.
This, combined with the increasingly obvious voting pattern, prompted the veteran members to start asking a lot more questions.
A veteran member pointedly asked a new member what she felt about homosexuality. Her reply: She didn't accept it.
The veteran member rebutted: 'But in Aware, we do not discriminate.'
The new member said she just did not agree with gay lifestyles. Eventually, she got voted in.
One nominee, a veteran member, spoke passionately about the need to educate teenagers about safe sex and the dangers of sexually-transmitted diseases.
She got one of the lowest number of votes.
Throughout the meeting, several veterans said they were happy that so many people were interested in Aware, but advised these members to familiarise themselves with Aware before running for key positions.
Their advice went unheeded.
When the meeting ended at 5.30pm, only three of the 12 were veterans.
And that was how 28 Mar became the day the old guard of Aware was caught unawares.
'What did she do to deserve position?'
by Benson Ang
IT ALL began when a hand was raised, innocently enough, by a new member.
Ms Jenica Chua wanted to nominate Ms Charlotte Wong for vice-president.
And so began the takeover.
That 28 Mar annual general meeting (AGM) was to spark a bitter feud between new office-bearers and the old guard of the Association of Women For Action Research (Aware), one that has split the 24-year-old association.
What exactly happened that day? Four different sources present at the meeting have revealed the twists and turns that led to what amounted to the carpet being pulled from under the Aware stalwarts' feet.
Ms Wong's nomination raised eyebrows among veterans. A newcomer for vice-president? It was unheard of.
When Ms Wong made her pitch and listed her credentials, she hardly mentioned a word about feminism.
Said a source yesterday: 'Many of us wondered what has this woman done for Aware to deserve to be second-in-charge?'
How do her accomplishments compare to an incumbent, Ms Chew I-Jin, who has been volunteering for more than a decade. How does she compare to someone who has pounded the streets handing out flyers, and manned the phone for hours counselling desperate women?
How much did Ms Wong even know about Aware? Did she stand a chance?
She did.
In hindsight, the first indication that this election would be a watershed was the large turnout.
By 2pm, the Aware Centre was teeming with women. In previous years, only about 40 people would show up. But this year, there were over 100 - 80 of whom were fresh faces.
Almost all of them were middle-aged Chinese women. They appeared unfamiliar with the Aware Centre.
Both the air-conditioned conference room and the lobby had to be used to accommodate the large turnout.
Shock for veterans
Ms Constance Singam, 72, the outgoing president and chair of the AGM, nominated Mrs Claire Nazar for presidency. She spoke glowingly about Mrs Nazar's work on the sexual harassment committee.
Mrs Nazar was elected unopposed.
Next was the vice-president's seat. Ms Singam nominated Ms Chew, who gave a speech about her involvement with feminism.
After 15 years in Aware, this was her time to shine.
Then Ms Wong was nominated.
When both of them left the room, and it was time to vote, Ms Wong won by a huge margin.
The veterans were shocked.
They did not know Ms Wong. Neither did they know the women who voted for her. That was how Aware's No 2 spot went to an unknown.
This process - whereby a new member would nominate another new member, who was then voted in by new members - repeated itself when Ms Jenica Chua was elected honorary secretary.
By this time, older members were becoming alarmed. One said she felt uncomfortable with the new members running for positions because they did not understand Aware enough, and had not done enough for Aware.
But a new member replied that Ms Singam was looking for new faces, and they were new faces.
The pattern continued. All but one of the key positions were won by large margins - through new voters. Only another key position - assistant honorary treasurer - went to Ms Chew, and it was a walkover.
When it came to voting in committee members, each of the 13 nominees gave a speech, and the ones with the top six votes were to get in.
During the meeting, some veteran members started searching the Internet for background on the more vocal new members. They discovered that many of them had written strongly-worded letters to the press against gay lifestyles.
This, combined with the increasingly obvious voting pattern, prompted the veteran members to start asking a lot more questions.
A veteran member pointedly asked a new member what she felt about homosexuality. Her reply: She didn't accept it.
The veteran member rebutted: 'But in Aware, we do not discriminate.'
The new member said she just did not agree with gay lifestyles. Eventually, she got voted in.
One nominee, a veteran member, spoke passionately about the need to educate teenagers about safe sex and the dangers of sexually-transmitted diseases.
She got one of the lowest number of votes.
Throughout the meeting, several veterans said they were happy that so many people were interested in Aware, but advised these members to familiarise themselves with Aware before running for key positions.
Their advice went unheeded.
When the meeting ended at 5.30pm, only three of the 12 were veterans.
And that was how 28 Mar became the day the old guard of Aware was caught unawares.
Interview with AWARE new President Josie Lau
Thanks to the Singapore Enquirer for putting this ChannelNewsAsia interview with AWARE new President Josie Lau and new honorary treasurer Maureen Ong up on YouTube.
Part 1
part 2
Part 1
part 2
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Some of AWARE's New Exco Members Attend Same Church
The Straits Times ran this article on 18 April 2009:
Some attend the same church
By Tan Dawn Wei with additional reporting by Jamie Ee
EVEN as the Aware saga continues to unfold, it appears that some of the newcomers in its leadership are familiar faces at the Anglican Church Of Our Saviour at Margaret Drive.
Aside from new Aware president Josie Lau and her husband Alan Chin, the others are believed to be Ms Charlotte Wong, Ms Irene Yee, Ms Jenica Chua, Ms Maureen Ong and Ms Sally Ang.
So far, the new Aware leaders have refused to answer questions about whether they knew each other before sweeping the elections three weeks ago.
According to a long-time friend, Dr Chin is related to former law dean Dr Thio Su Mien and her daughter, Nominated Member of Parliament Professor Thio Li-Ann.
When contacted, the NMP declined to answer any questions. Dr Chin did not respond to questions e-mailed to him.
But checks yesterday showed that Dr Thio Su Mien and her husband, Mr Thio Gim Hock, the chief executive officer of property investor Overseas Union Enterprise, attend the church and also hold regular faith-healing sessions at their home.
Senior pastor Derek Hong was not answering any questions about his church members or Aware yesterday.
Asked if any of the new Aware exco members attended his church, he replied: 'No comment.'
Housed in a renovated former cinema near Commonwealth, the church has a congregation of about 4,000.
It takes a strong stand against homosexuality and states so on its website.
'Homosexual practice is contrary to God's Word. So we stand against that and the active and aggressive promotion of such behaviour,' it states.
It believes homosexuals can change, and has a programme to counsel and help those who want to give up 'homosexual thoughts, tendencies and practices'.
Some attend the same church
By Tan Dawn Wei with additional reporting by Jamie Ee
EVEN as the Aware saga continues to unfold, it appears that some of the newcomers in its leadership are familiar faces at the Anglican Church Of Our Saviour at Margaret Drive.
Aside from new Aware president Josie Lau and her husband Alan Chin, the others are believed to be Ms Charlotte Wong, Ms Irene Yee, Ms Jenica Chua, Ms Maureen Ong and Ms Sally Ang.
So far, the new Aware leaders have refused to answer questions about whether they knew each other before sweeping the elections three weeks ago.
According to a long-time friend, Dr Chin is related to former law dean Dr Thio Su Mien and her daughter, Nominated Member of Parliament Professor Thio Li-Ann.
When contacted, the NMP declined to answer any questions. Dr Chin did not respond to questions e-mailed to him.
But checks yesterday showed that Dr Thio Su Mien and her husband, Mr Thio Gim Hock, the chief executive officer of property investor Overseas Union Enterprise, attend the church and also hold regular faith-healing sessions at their home.
Senior pastor Derek Hong was not answering any questions about his church members or Aware yesterday.
Asked if any of the new Aware exco members attended his church, he replied: 'No comment.'
Housed in a renovated former cinema near Commonwealth, the church has a congregation of about 4,000.
It takes a strong stand against homosexuality and states so on its website.
'Homosexual practice is contrary to God's Word. So we stand against that and the active and aggressive promotion of such behaviour,' it states.
It believes homosexuals can change, and has a programme to counsel and help those who want to give up 'homosexual thoughts, tendencies and practices'.
1 clash settled, 1 heats up
Today ran this story on 18 April 2009:
1 clash settled, 1 heats up
MS JOSIE Lau’s fate as a vice-president at DBS Bank appears settled for now, after a lengthy meeting with her employer on Friday night — but the future of the Association of Women for Action and Research’s (Aware) new president, and her executive committee, will yet be determined on May 2.
The date for an extraordinary general meeting of the women’s advocacy group has finally been set to address the rift between the old guard and the new leadership.
This came even as Ms Lau and her employer were locked in a meeting on Friday from 5pm to past 9pm, to settle their own differences after DBS had publicly rebuked her for going against its wishes to take up the top Aware post.
As of press time, both parties were tight-lipped on the discussions — but Aware vice-president Charlotte Lim told Today that Ms Lau,who heads DBS’ consumer banking group cards and unsecured loans division, had said the situation with her employers was “business as usual”.
The pair met up with some exco members for last-minute drinks at about 10pm, and those present said Ms Lau was “cheerful and relieved” after her meeting.
She was also touched by the “outpouring of support and the well-wishes from colleagues and members of the public”, said Ms Lim. “People were giving her the thumbs-up all the time. So that encouraged her a lot.”
While Ms Lau and DBS appear to have come to an understanding for now, this was far from the case with the opposing groups in Aware, who locked horns in a strong exchange of words on Friday.
It started with a press statement fromMs Lau on behalf of the exco at 1.30pm, asking “why have some people cast aspersions on our good intentions?” Turning the tables on Aware’s long-time members, she asked if “the old guard harbour an alternative agenda”.
“If so, they should disclose their motives and objectives fully and honestly,” she said, noting that 120 of the 160 signatories to a requisition for an EGM seemed to have been recruited very recently “to swell support for the requisition”.
The new exco itself had been the target of similar allegations, after nine new faces were voted to the 12-member committee at the March 28 annual general meeting.
In a retort sent to the media at about 7.40pm, the old guard said they were “astonished”. “Our motives and objectives have been fully visible for nearly 25 years in (Aware’s) policies and programmes,” they said in the statement. “What do you (the new exco) want to do in Aware that is fundamentally different from what was already being done? ... Why the need to muscle your way into the exco? Such tactics suggest a hidden agenda that may be contrary to the stance and ethos of Aware.”
In her statement, Ms Lau sought to clarify events during the controversial March 28 election. Since the AGM, a point of distress among the older members has been that nine of the exco positions were filled by new faces.
But Ms Lau noted that Ms Claire Nazar, who had been nominated by outgoing president Constance Singam as her successor, had in turn nominated — with the old guard’s support — six of the 11 members who now make up the exco. When contacted, Ms Nazar told Today the six included two older members and Ms Lau.
The new team’s two-week silence on their intentions also worried the old guard.
Ms Lau explained, “the new exco members were eager to start work” but Mrs Nazar “kept re-scheduling” their first meeting. Then, one day after they finally met on April 7, Ms Nazar “abruptly and unilaterally resigned by email”.
Since Aware’s constitution required seven days’ notice to call exco meetings, the committee met on April 15 and issued a statement straight after, said Ms Lau, who was disappointed that the call for the EGM was issued a day earlier.
The old guard, however, have their own beef with recent events. For instance, past Aware president Braema Mathi had her term ended as chair of the subcommittee on the Convention for the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women. She told Today she was “unceremoniously dumped” without reason given.
In the statement, the older members also “noted with alarm” how Ms Lau had disregarded the DBS staff code twice, and drew attention to reports that her division was reportedly in charge of recommending a charity for DBS to support late last year — which was the “evangelical Christian organisation Focus on the Family”.
1 clash settled, 1 heats up
MS JOSIE Lau’s fate as a vice-president at DBS Bank appears settled for now, after a lengthy meeting with her employer on Friday night — but the future of the Association of Women for Action and Research’s (Aware) new president, and her executive committee, will yet be determined on May 2.
The date for an extraordinary general meeting of the women’s advocacy group has finally been set to address the rift between the old guard and the new leadership.
This came even as Ms Lau and her employer were locked in a meeting on Friday from 5pm to past 9pm, to settle their own differences after DBS had publicly rebuked her for going against its wishes to take up the top Aware post.
As of press time, both parties were tight-lipped on the discussions — but Aware vice-president Charlotte Lim told Today that Ms Lau,who heads DBS’ consumer banking group cards and unsecured loans division, had said the situation with her employers was “business as usual”.
The pair met up with some exco members for last-minute drinks at about 10pm, and those present said Ms Lau was “cheerful and relieved” after her meeting.
She was also touched by the “outpouring of support and the well-wishes from colleagues and members of the public”, said Ms Lim. “People were giving her the thumbs-up all the time. So that encouraged her a lot.”
While Ms Lau and DBS appear to have come to an understanding for now, this was far from the case with the opposing groups in Aware, who locked horns in a strong exchange of words on Friday.
It started with a press statement fromMs Lau on behalf of the exco at 1.30pm, asking “why have some people cast aspersions on our good intentions?” Turning the tables on Aware’s long-time members, she asked if “the old guard harbour an alternative agenda”.
“If so, they should disclose their motives and objectives fully and honestly,” she said, noting that 120 of the 160 signatories to a requisition for an EGM seemed to have been recruited very recently “to swell support for the requisition”.
The new exco itself had been the target of similar allegations, after nine new faces were voted to the 12-member committee at the March 28 annual general meeting.
In a retort sent to the media at about 7.40pm, the old guard said they were “astonished”. “Our motives and objectives have been fully visible for nearly 25 years in (Aware’s) policies and programmes,” they said in the statement. “What do you (the new exco) want to do in Aware that is fundamentally different from what was already being done? ... Why the need to muscle your way into the exco? Such tactics suggest a hidden agenda that may be contrary to the stance and ethos of Aware.”
In her statement, Ms Lau sought to clarify events during the controversial March 28 election. Since the AGM, a point of distress among the older members has been that nine of the exco positions were filled by new faces.
But Ms Lau noted that Ms Claire Nazar, who had been nominated by outgoing president Constance Singam as her successor, had in turn nominated — with the old guard’s support — six of the 11 members who now make up the exco. When contacted, Ms Nazar told Today the six included two older members and Ms Lau.
The new team’s two-week silence on their intentions also worried the old guard.
Ms Lau explained, “the new exco members were eager to start work” but Mrs Nazar “kept re-scheduling” their first meeting. Then, one day after they finally met on April 7, Ms Nazar “abruptly and unilaterally resigned by email”.
Since Aware’s constitution required seven days’ notice to call exco meetings, the committee met on April 15 and issued a statement straight after, said Ms Lau, who was disappointed that the call for the EGM was issued a day earlier.
The old guard, however, have their own beef with recent events. For instance, past Aware president Braema Mathi had her term ended as chair of the subcommittee on the Convention for the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women. She told Today she was “unceremoniously dumped” without reason given.
In the statement, the older members also “noted with alarm” how Ms Lau had disregarded the DBS staff code twice, and drew attention to reports that her division was reportedly in charge of recommending a charity for DBS to support late last year — which was the “evangelical Christian organisation Focus on the Family”.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
