Dear huafeng,
This didn't happen in 1984 but in May 1987, and was allegations that
were partly probably led to incite Muslims against the Catholics and
to suppress criticism against the government. Catholics consist 4%-5%
of the population in Singapore and many were influences in the 1980s
by the "Liberation Theology" [The "Liberation Theology" stemmed from
Latin America in the 1960s and 1970s and consisted an attempt to
integrate ideals of socialism within Catholic theology and doctrine.
This is very broad definition and there are many faces to Liberation
Theology, some even arrived to armed conflict with the government - I
have written my MA thesis on the subject, I should know :-) - read
these Rose Hulamn College links
<http://www.rose-hulman.edu/~delacova/theology.htm> and definition in
encyclopedia.com <http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/l1/liberati.asp>).
Reverend You-Leng Lim writes "... in 1987, several individuals,
including a few prominent lawyers, linked up with some lay and
ordained members of the Roman Catholic Church to organise for the
rights of Filipina women, then working as domestic help in Singapore.
This came to an end when 16 of them were arrested by the government
under the Internal Security Act (a piece of law left over from British
colonial days, which provided for the detention without trial of
political subversives) and charged with conspiring to overthrow the
government. The liberation theology of some of the individuals was
considered disguised Marxism. " (Reverend You-Leng L. Lim,
"Homosexuality: How the economics and politics of Singapore have
shaped the Anglican Diocese and its role in the Province of South East
Asia", Rutgers University,
<http://newark.rutgers.edu/~lcrew/lenglim2.html>).
In an article about press freedom in Asia, another piece of
interesting information on this affair was found: "The Far Eastern
Economic Review’s circulation was drastically restricted from 9000 to
500 copies per issue in December 1987. This was because of its
coverage of the May / June 1987 arrests of 22 Roman Catholic church
and lay workers, young professionals and social activists accused of
being involved in a clandestine Marxist conspiracy to overthrown the
government through violence, and their subsequent allegations of
abuse, ill-treatment and torture by government officers to extract
confessions to order." (source: Anita Zee, "Tightening the Reins:
Foreign and Local Media Under Fire", The Digital Columbia Missourian
<http://digmo.org/~in-c/singapore.htm> - unfortunately the page
wouldn't appear, so <http://216.239.51.100/search?q=cache:OMyo1T92ascC:digmo.org/~in-c/singapore.htm+singapore+catholic+1987+marxist&hl=en&ie=UTF-8>
is the Google cache for it - I recommend that you'd save it/print it
if you're interested in the article, since the cache may change). Asia
Week and Asian Wall Street Journal were also censorized (source:
Robert Ho, "The Media", soc.culture.singapore group, 2001-07-30,
<http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=c443dfe.0107300622.fcd2104%40posting.google.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain>.
The most comprehensive information on the subject is available in
Singapore Window, that published the short e-book "Marxist Plot
Revisited" <http://www.singapore-window.org/sw01/010521m1.htm>, which
aims to investigate what really happened there.
Francis Seow "'Marxist Conspiracy' annniversay remembered" May 21,
2002, Google Groups soc.culture.singapore
<http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=c443dfe.0205212041.3b7c6f3c%40posting.google.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain>
My search terms were
singapore catholic 1987 marxist
singapore "catholic church" 1987
singapore "catholic church" 1984
I think that answered your question. However, if you need
clarifications, please let me know. I'd be pleased to answer any
clarifications before you rate the answer. |
Clarification of Answer by
politicalguru-ga
on
26 Sep 2002 01:59 PDT
Dear huafeng,
I found more sources that indicate that the events took place in
May/June 1987. However, no further sources indicate that the events
took place in 1984 (could you please tell me what your source is and
if it is a refutable one? The sources mentioned here and in my
original answer are all "refutable", including one academic article).
My best source is the Singaporian Supreme Court decision itself: "A1,
A2, A3 and A4 were detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA) (Cap
143, 1985 Ed) in May and June 1987 allegedly as members of a Marxist
conspiracy to subvert the existing social and political system in
Singapore. The detention orders were for one year. However, they were
all released in September 1987 when the Minister of Home Affairs
directed that the detention orders be suspended subject to certain
conditions. On 18 April 1988 the appellants and other ex-detainees
issued a joint statement denying that they had been part of any
Marxist conspiracy and alleging that they had been tortured. The
following day the Minister revoked the suspension orders and they were
all re-arrested. They applied for writs of habeas corpus. The High
Court dismissed their applications. The appellants appealed to the
Court of Appeal". (source and the rest of the court discussion is
unfortunately in Geocities, which means that you'll have pop-ups all
over, but one has to suffer in the name of science: "10 [1251]
PREVENTIVE DETENTION Detention order – Review of detention order by
court – Principles on which judicial review to be exercised – Internal
Security Act (Cap 143, 1985 Ed), ss 8(1), 10, 11 & 16 – Constitution
of the Republic of Singapore, arts 21(1), 149(1) & 151",
<http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/3535/10v1500.html>).
However, it has to do with 1984. The activists that were arrested
might have been arrested because of their involvement in helping the
opposition in the 1984 elections: "In 1987 twenty two (22) persons
were arrested under the Internal Security Act for their involvement in
a “Marxist plot to overthrow the government”. All the evidence that
the government could provide was that some of them were concerned with
the plight of foreign maids in Singapore and were attempting to help
the maids. Some were members of a drama group and they were accused of
staging a play that was critical of Singapore. Some were detained
because they had helped my party in the general elections held in
1984.
A lawyer, Fuan is T Seow, was instructed on behalf of one of the
detainees and he went to the detention centre, where the detainees
were held, to interview his client. On arrival, he was promptly
arrested himself and detained under the ISA. He has given an account
of his questioning by the Singapore secret police whilst under
detention in his book “To Catch a Tartar”. He is currently in exile in
the United States."
(source: Mr. JB Jeyaretnam of the Open Singapore Centre "Dangers Faced
by Human Rights Defenders in Singapore", in: Steps to Protection: The
Dublin Platform for Human Rights Defenders 17-19 January 2002 Dublin
Castle Testimonies from Human Rights Defenders,
<http://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/papersweb/testimony.doc>
(Requires MS Word).
Think Centre.org <http://www.thinkcentre.org/article.cfm?ArticleID=1188>
write in a political timeline on Singapore that on "May-June 1987:
Twenty-two people are detained without trial under the Internal
Security Act and charged with involvement in a Marxist plot. All but
one are released seven months later."
In an article on religious freedoms in Singapore, About.com's Austin
Cline writes "in 1987 the government detained a group of Roman
Catholic social activists, accusing them of using church organisations
as cover for a Marxist plot" (source: atheism.About.com, "Religion
Around the World, Singapore",
<http://atheism.about.com/library/world/KZ/bl_SingaporeChanges.htm>).
Cline, how sad, probably used another source, that of the US Military,
which states the same word-in-word in this PDF document
<http://www.monterey.army.mil/atzp/ch/world/pdf/k2indone.pdf>
(requires Acrobat Reader).
I hope these further resources assisted you and I would like to wish
you success in your research. Please contact me if you need any
further clarifications.
|
,
0 Comments
)