Forum organisers let off with warning

Singapore. February 2, 2000.

Four organisers of a public forum last year were orally cautioned by police for their activity. The following article recounts the events.

AFTER 90 days of investigations, the police decided to let, four Singaporeans off the hook for organising a forum.

Instead James Gomez, Daniel Chew, Melvin Tan and Michael Cheng were orally cautioned for organising the first in a series of political talks entitled, Youth and Politics in Singapore last October 99.

They were also informed the Attorney-General's office decided not to prosecute them.

The comedy-drama unfolded after the Think Centre and some Socratic Circle members initiated the Politics21 (P21) series to raise awareness and supplement the S21 process.

The government launched S21 initiative has called for its citizens to practice active citizenship and shape the Singapore that they want to live in.

The P21 committee launched the announcement of their activities on the Internet and had sort to register participants for its various programmes through its website.

Most of the 70 people that registered for the first talk did so online or with forms sent to them. But about 10 people, students and plain-clothes undercover types, turned up at the door without prior registration. By allowing these people admittance into the talk, an offence allegedly took place.

Gomez was informed 25 days after the talk that there had been a complaint lodged with the police against their activity and was advised to apply for a licence for future events.

When he asked who lodged the complaint, Gomez was told the police did not have to divulge the information unless the case went to trial.

This began the process of taking statements at the Tanglin police station over a period of two months by Chief Investigation Officer, ASP Deep Singh.

Statements were taken from the an office representative where the forum was held, several forum organisers, the speakers at the forum and even proposed speakers who were invited but either declined or could not make.

The thrust of the investigation was to determine whether there was a pre-meditated and willful action on the part of the organisers to put together a public talk without a licence.

At the heart of the problem was the P21 committee's use of the Internet to create awareness, invite people and have them register online.

The openness of the Internet did not give these first-time organisers the control they desired to keep their activity "closed-door." Thus, the event under investigation was classified a public talk. Under existing law, the application for a public enterntainment licence is necessary when trying to harness the potential of the Internet to bring people together physically.

A sub-plot in the investigation was to determine the modus operandi of the group: how they meet, who was the "leader", how speakers were invited and by whom, determine the registration of the Think Centre, establish the source of funding and whether anyone in the group had direct connection with any local opposition political party or with a "foreign power".

This "drama" was finally brought to a close the morning after the groups' third forum was reported in the local media.

The four individuals were summoned to Tanglin Police Station and a "warning" was issued.

Gomez was "warned" because he was the "chief", according to DSP Goh Lum Khiong and the while the other three, Chew, Tan and Cheng were "advised" for helping to organise the first event in the series without a licence.

The group's request to take a picture of this "warning" session, which took place in DSP Goh's office was declined.