Want to know what really went on in Parliament over the Speaker's Corner Human Rights Day event? Read on to find out the word for word debate between Mr. JB Jeyaretnam and Minister of State for Home Affairs, Ho Peng Kee.
POLICE WARNING TO MR JAMES GOMEZ AND MR KEVIN LIEW
14. Mr J. B. Jeyaretnam asked the Minister for Home Affairs what offences were committed by Mr James Gomez and Mr Kevin Liew on 10th December 2000 to justify the warning given to them by the police.
The Minister of State for Home Affairs (Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Sir, Mr James Gomez and Mr Kevin Liew were investigated for an offence of holding an assembly without a permit under Rule 4(1)(a) of the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) (Assemblies and Processions) Rules, Chapter 184, on 10th December 2000, at Hong Lim Green. They were warned in lieu of prosecution.
Mr Jeyaretnam: May I ask the junior Minister whether he is aware of section 5(2) and (3) of the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act? Has he read it up before he came here?
Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Sir, I do not have the Act with me. If the hon. Member can read out the sections, I will respond. But I am sure that police would have looked at the entirety of all the laws before deciding on whether or not to investigate and in deciding whether or not to prosecute. In the circumstances, they have decided to warn instead of prosecute.
Mr Jeyaretnam: Am I to understand that the Minister has not read the sections before coming here?
Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Sir, I have read the Act many, many times. It is just a matter of pinpointing what the section in particular says. If the hon. Member can read the section, I will tell him I have read it and why it will not apply.
Mr Jeyaretnam: May I say that I am surprised, but I suppose that does not count. Is the Minister aware that section 5(2) requires the Minister, first of all, by an order - which I take will be published in the Gazette - to prohibit any assembly or procession in any public place, and it is only after that order has been made that the penalties provided under section 5(4) come into operation? The rules were made to implement these sections of the Act.
So, my first question, following what I have told the Minister, is when was this order made that any assembly at the Speakers' Corner is prohibited.
Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Sir, once again, Mr Jeyaretnam reads the Act selectively because, under section 5(1), rules can be made by the Minister to govern assemblies. Indeed, under section 5(1) of the Act, the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) (Assemblies and Processions) Rules are promulgated legally, and Rule 2 states very clearly that any assembly of five or more persons in any public place to:
(a) demonstrate support for or opposition to the views or actions of any person;
(b) to publicise a cause or campaign; or
(c) to mark or commemorate any event,
must get a permit under these rules.
Mr Jeyaretnam: Does the Minister accept that rules owe their legitimacy to the parent Act? I repeat: was there an order made by the Minister under section 5(2) prohibiting the holding of any assembly in the Speakers' Corner?
Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Sir, Mr Jeyaretnam is a lawyer. He must know that sections must be read in their totality. He has mentioned section 5(2). But that is in the context of the entire section 5, and section 5(1) allows the Minister to make rules and the Minister has made these rules. So section 5(2) will not apply. Section 5(2) may apply, for example, in a situation where the Minister makes a specific order as to a particular place, but it is still subject to section 5(1) and the rules which have been promulgated. And we have said very clearly in Parliament when we set up the Speakers' Corner, that the Speakers' Corner will be subject to the laws of the land. So the Miscellaneous Offences rules are indeed part of the laws of the land.
Mr Jeyaretnam: May I have an answer to the question? Has the Minister made any order or declaration that before anybody holds an assembly at the Speakers' Corner he will have to get a licence? May I have an answer to that question?
Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: May I ask the hon. Member whether or not the Speakers' Corner is a public place? Under section 5(1) read with Rule 2 of the Miscellaneous Offences Rules, any assembly of five or more persons in a public place, if they do (a), (b) or (c), they must apply for a permit. And that is the governing provision, in so far as the Speakers' Corner is concerned.
In any case, if Mr Jeyaretnam or anybody is doubtful about it, he can challenge it in court. But, in this case, Mr James Gomez accepted the warning, which means that he did not challenge the interpretation of the laws by the police and the AG's Chambers.
Mr Jeyaretnam: May I again ask the Minister: did his Minister say in this House not very long ago that nobody needs any permit for going to the Speakers' Corner and address an assembly, that all he had to do was to register? Are we to understand that that utterance by the Minister was simply hot air and that it will be an offence for any person to assemble at the Speakers' Corner to listen to somebody?
Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Sir, I do not know who is spouting hot air and who is selectively only hearing speeches in Parliament. The Minister said that one does not have to apply for a permit to speak, because we have talked about exemption under the Public Entertainments Act. So that is the exemption. He also said that one needs to comply with all the other laws of the land and, like I have said, the Miscellaneous Offences Rules are part of the land. So the exemption is to speak, not exemption for anything else.
Mr Jeyaretnam: Would the Minister tell us what did these two persons do at the Speakers' Corner on 10th December last year except to speak? Now you say that is an offence.
Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Sir, it is all in the public domain, both in the media as well as captured on the Think Centre website, what happened. It was not a matter of people just going there to speak, but it was an organised gathering. They had organised a gathering of people - in this case about 60 people - to commemorate an event, International Human Rights Day, and which is under Rule 2(a), "to demonstrate". The words were used in the notice which was publicised on the Think Centre website - "to demonstrate" against the abolition of the Internal Security Act.
We have gone through this debate many times in this House, Mr Speaker, and I have made my points very clear, that over the last eight months, more than 800 registrations have been received and people have spoken, people have listened. This is the first time ---
Mr Jeyaretnam: I do not know if anybody goes there now.
Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: It is up to them. It is all there. The Government provides for it. And after six months, in December 2000, there was this first investigation, and we have to see this event in context - what happened, the notice that was talked about which explicitly mentioned: come, run, after running, demonstrate. So it is not just coming to speak and coming to listen to speakers.
Mr Jeyaretnam: One final question is ---
Mr Speaker: Order. Mr Jeyaretnam, I find that you are asking the questions over and over again.
Mr Jeyaretnam: One final question, if I may.
Mr Speaker: All right.
Mr Jeyaretnam: Are we to understand then that the setting up of the Speakers' Corner is a trap?
Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: It only will trap those who think that it is a trap. Mr Jeyaretnam probably thinks it is a trap because at the outset he condemned the Speakers' Corner, both in Singapore and overseas, and said it was a "farce" and only meant for irresponsible people to go and speak. But, ultimately, on 10th December, he spoke. If it is a trap to him, then in his mind it is a trap. But the Government is serious about setting it up. And 800 registrations have been received, thousands of people have gone to listen, and it is still there. It cannot be a trap. It is there for everybody to see, free for everybody to use.
Mr Jeyaretnam: You would not get me there anymore.
