Month: July 2026


  • Arrested For Being Pro-Palestinians?

    by Teo Soh Lung

    It is my observation that whenever there is unrest, wars or new organised movements in other parts of the world, the Singapore government is quick to use the ISA against its opponents or people who have different opinions from them. The arrests are made on the pretext that citizens need to be protected from impending terrorist attacks.

    It started with the arrests of alleged communists from the 1960s to the 1970s. Then the euro-communists in the 1970s and the Marxists in the 1980s. In the 1990s, I wondered who would be the next victims. Fortunately for the following 20 years, no one was arrested. Chia Thye Poh who was arrested in 1966 was released in 1989. He was subjected to severe restrictions for another 9 years. Vincent Cheng was released in 1990. So for 20 years, there were no ISA prisoners.

    Who destroyed the World Trade Centre? The Americans like to believe that it was Osama bin Laden and his group who did it. They killed him but was he the culprit? Why didn’t they try him in America? Till today, rumours are still circulating that the attacks were not carried out by Al-Qaeda or Osama bin Laden but by Israel.

    The government’s press releases concerning ISA arrests since 2001 are always the same. The usual allegations are made – that they were inspired by groups far away and were influenced by social media and chat groups; they were self-radicalised and their families were not aware of what they were doing; they wanted to join the resistant movement in Syria but have no financial means to travel there; they wanted to destroy the world order and were anti Zionists, anti LGBT and anti-women. In the most recent press release, Tarmizi was alleged to have communicated with a foreign contact “who claimed to be a HAMAS member”. Cyrus was pro Hamas and viewed them as defenders of the Palestinians.

    Bearing in mind that those detained do not even know of the existence of such press releases, the government is free to say what it wants. So we have to read all these press releases with open minds. Don’t trust the reports in The Straits Times. They do not do or are not permitted to do investigative journalism.

    I find the government’s allegations against the detainees baseless. To continue to detain Tarmizi over his views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is ludicrous. When it claimed that he and Cyrus’ “radicalisation were triggered by the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict”, what do they mean? What is wrong with Tarmizi becoming “deeply interested in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict following HAMAS’ October 7, 2023 attacks against Israel? Lots of people become aware of the decades old conflict only after October 7.

    It is time for our government to stop using the ISA as a tool to control the minds of people who are interested in what is happening outside Singapore. Singaporeans should not be ignorant of what is happening in other parts of the world or as the Malays nicely put it, we should not be “Katak di-bawah tempurung” (frogs under the shell). It is easy to arrest and detain people on the words of the minister. For detainees, it is pointless to seek fairness and justice from our courts as various habeas corpus applications have shown. The government should think of the families of the detainees who may have been deprived of their sole bread winners.


  • From Singapore To London & Belgium

    by Teo Soh Lung

    A government that holds 78 out of 79 seats in parliament can still be afraid of losing power. This is the sorry state of the PAP the 1980s and even today.

    Perpetually afraid of more opposition members entering parliament, it adopted the policy of NIP IN THE BUD since the days of its founder, Lee Kuan Yew.

    In 1987, the PAP took drastic measures to ensure that at least two Singaporeans living thousands of miles away from Singapore do not return to contest the general election which must be held before the end of 1988.

    Holding super majority in parliament, it was easy for the PAP to amend laws and even the most sacred of laws, the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore. Thus in 1985, the PAP presented a bill to amend Article 135 of the Constitution. Any citizen (including a citizen by birth) who has not returned to Singapore for a continuous period of 10 years may be deprived of his Singapore citizenship.

    Tan Wah Piow was one such citizen. He had proven himself to be a thorn in the flesh of the government when he was a young architecture student in the 1970s. They tried to get rid of him by fabricating a riot in the Pioneer Industries Employees’ Union in Jurong. He was charged for rioting and duly convicted by the First District Judge, Mr T S Sinnathuray. He served a jail term and left Singapore, escaping enlistment into the army. Since then he has been living as an exile in London.

    In 1984 or 1985, Tan Wah Piow had intended to return home to Singapore. He was prepared to pay the usual fine and jail term for evading national service. He made enquiries from personnel who he thought could assist him. But before he could complete his preparations to return, the PAP government pre-empted him from returning. He received a notification that the government would deprive him of his citizenship because he had failed to return home for 10 years.

    Tan Wah Piow appointed me as his lawyer He instructed me to oppose the decision of the government. How could it deprive a citizen by birth of his citizenship? It was against international law! But even before I could take my client’s full instructions, I together with 15 others were arrested under the Internal Security Act on 21 May 1987. Tan Wah Piow was named the alleged leader of the “Marxist Conspirators”. His entire file was taken away when security officers raided my office.

    Making sure that Tan Wah Piow would not be able to return to Singapore was not sufficient for a vindictive government. Even arresting another six innocent young people a month later, on 20 June 1987 was not enough. In July that year, the Controller of Immigration issued a notification to Paul Lim Huat Chye, a PhD student at the Catholic University of Louvain in Belgium, cancelling his Singapore passport with immediate effect. It promised to issue a document of identity to enable him to return if he was aggrieved by the decision. The letter read:

    Sir

    NOTIFICATION

    This is to notify you that on instructions from the Minister, the Singapore Passport Nos. 0191976H and A1558215 which were issued to you are cancelled with immediate effect.

    2 You are required to surrender forthwith the passports to the Singapore Embassy in Brussels.

    3 A Document of Identity will be issued for you to return to Singapore.

    4 However, if you are aggrieved by the decision, you may within thirty days of the receipt of this notification, appeal by petition in writing to the Minister.

    Sd
    LIM EK HONG
    CONTROLLER OF IMMIGRATION

    Date: 11th July, 1987

    It was an invitation to Paul Lim to deliver himself into the lion’s den and be eaten up like the 22 already in detained. Paul Lim asked for the government’s reasons for cancelling his passport. As expected, the government kept silent. A warrant of arrest was also issued against him. Paul was thus compelled to issue a press statement on 18 July 1987. It reads as follows:

    “Statement by Paul Lim concerning Minister’s decision to cancel his passport.

    On 15th July 1987 I received by registered post a Notification (copy attached below) dated 11 July 1987 from the Singapore Embassy in Brussels in which I was informed that my Singapore passport was cancelled forthwith.

    In my reply (copy attached below) I have asked for a written explanation of this decision. However, it is fair to suppose that this decision is connected with the fact that the Singapore government has issued an arrest warrant in my name under the Internal Security Act which permits detention without trial. This notification is clearly an attempt to compel me to return to Singapore and place myself in the hands of the Internal Security Department.

    I ask again that I be removed from this wanted list. My political activities in Singapore have never in any way been illegal or illegitimate. If one removes the terms “Marxist conspiracy”, from the Singapore government’s accusations against me, I am only ‘accused of activities which are in reality – and under Singapore law – perfectly legal and acceptable. Talking politics to friends is legitimate and lawful. Describing my political activities and those of others as conspiratorial is no more than an unsubstantiated allegation. The only ‘evidence’ offered by the Singapore government is that provided by confessions of those recently detained – confessions obtained in conditions of “continuous interrogation under extreme psychological pressure” according to Amnesty International.

    The PAP government has no right to cancel my passport for my legitimate and legal political activities. “Marxist conspiracy” and “Marxist conspirators” are simply pretexts to destroy nascent sources of a credible alternative opposition – something which the PAP itself claims to wish for.

    Sd
    Paul Lim
    Ferme de Froidmont
    1330 Rixensart
    Belgique
    18th July 1987″

    Despite what the PAP government did, Paul Lim continued to contribute to the well being of Singapore. He co-founded the European Institute of Asian Studies (EIAS) in 1989 (see https://eias.org/news/in-memoriam-paul-joseph-lim/ ) and entertained Singapore diplomats when they arrived in Brussels. But as Paul’s friend, I know that he was deeply hurt by what the Singapore government had done to him in 1987. He visited Singapore once at the invitation of a university or organisation and stayed with the Belgium ambassador who was also his guarantor. Thereafter, he never returned. He worked at his institute in Penang for several years. Friends would meet up with him when he was in the region.

    He died in Belgium on 21 July 2025