Where Are the Writers?
Weekly column for Singapore Unbound newsletter. Sign up here.
The Singapore government's proposed anti-fake news law has been heavily criticized by local and international media and rights groups for investing too much arbitrary power in government ministers to decide what is fact or otherwise. Most recently, a group of 59 academics, with expertise, experience, or interest in Singapore and Asia generally, have joined in the chorus of criticism by issuing a joint public statement and sending letters to the Education Minister and Singapore University Leaders.
Other professional groups with a stake in free speech and democratic process should do likewise. Unfortunately, the Law Society of Singapore has been gagged by a 1986 law from commenting on legislative proposals unless they are invited to do so by the government. Singapore's creative writers are not so proscribed. Individual writers have spoken up but they could make a far bigger impact if they would speak together, as the academics did.
Although Singapore does not have a national organization like PEN America, which advocates for both literature and free speech, there are well-established literary organizations in Singapore that could lead the effort to speak. So far they have chosen to remain quiet instead. A variety of reasons could explain this silence. They do not think that writers have a duty to speak up against arbitrary power, having forgotten powerful literary precedents, such as the late playwright Kuo Pao Kun, the poet Mohamed Latiff Mohamed, and the short-story writer Catherine Lim. They occupy themselves with literary programs and initiatives, and have no time for politics. They rely on government funding.
When the Law Society kept quiet, they received so much on-line flak that they felt compelled to issue a public explanation. Sadly, there is no such expectation of Singapore's writers to defend free speech. This does not have to be the way. Members of literary organizations could ask their leaders for their stance on the anti-fake news bill. Readers and audiences could question their providers about what they could do to fight this unconstitutional law. We are not as powerless as we think.
Jee Leong Koh
April 18, 2019
The Singapore government's proposed anti-fake news law has been heavily criticized by local and international media and rights groups for investing too much arbitrary power in government ministers to decide what is fact or otherwise. Most recently, a group of 59 academics, with expertise, experience, or interest in Singapore and Asia generally, have joined in the chorus of criticism by issuing a joint public statement and sending letters to the Education Minister and Singapore University Leaders.
Other professional groups with a stake in free speech and democratic process should do likewise. Unfortunately, the Law Society of Singapore has been gagged by a 1986 law from commenting on legislative proposals unless they are invited to do so by the government. Singapore's creative writers are not so proscribed. Individual writers have spoken up but they could make a far bigger impact if they would speak together, as the academics did.
Although Singapore does not have a national organization like PEN America, which advocates for both literature and free speech, there are well-established literary organizations in Singapore that could lead the effort to speak. So far they have chosen to remain quiet instead. A variety of reasons could explain this silence. They do not think that writers have a duty to speak up against arbitrary power, having forgotten powerful literary precedents, such as the late playwright Kuo Pao Kun, the poet Mohamed Latiff Mohamed, and the short-story writer Catherine Lim. They occupy themselves with literary programs and initiatives, and have no time for politics. They rely on government funding.
When the Law Society kept quiet, they received so much on-line flak that they felt compelled to issue a public explanation. Sadly, there is no such expectation of Singapore's writers to defend free speech. This does not have to be the way. Members of literary organizations could ask their leaders for their stance on the anti-fake news bill. Readers and audiences could question their providers about what they could do to fight this unconstitutional law. We are not as powerless as we think.
Jee Leong Koh
April 18, 2019
Comments