Settling scores in Singapore
The PAP should think again about this shabby case.

ASIAN politicians are known for being a tough bunch who do not wilt easily under criticism. Why then do Singapore's leaders seem to have such thin skins? Once again Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong, his predecessor Lee Kuan Yew and other colleagues have resorted to action for civil defamation against J B Jeyaretnam, one of the three opposition members of a parliament otherwise dominated by the ruling PAP party. Mr Goh says he needs to refute allegations made in the January election which would undermine his ability to govern Singapore. But it is difficult to grasp just why he and the others should feel so aggrieved.

Mr Goh's party hardly appeared lacking in self-confidence during the campaign when it warned neighbourhoods which supported the opposition that they could lose state subsidies for housing. The initial allegations from which this case stems were not made against the PAP leaders at all: they were made by them against Mr Jeyaretnam's party colleagues Tang Liang Hong who was accused of being "anti-Christian" and a "Chinese chauvinist." This was strong language and could well be regarded as inflammatory. Mr Tang, who says he received death threats as a result, filed two complaints to the police. But a court in May found that in denying the accusations Mr Tang had defamed the prime minister and ten other leaders, and awarded record damages against him. Mr Jeyaretnam now stands equally accused of defamation on the ground that during an election rally he referred briefly to Mr Tang's two complaints. It is altogether a strange tale, which in most democratic countries it would have been part of the political arena and not a matter for litigation.

The US State Department in its human rights report of January 1997 offers some useful analysis. "Government leaders (in Singapore)", it says, "sometimes use defamation suits or the threat of such actions to discourage public criticism" particularly when challenged by opposition leaders. Amnesty International says it is concerned at reports that the government of Singapore has used such suits against political opponents "in a manner that violates their right to freely hold and peacefully express their convictions", and has sent an observer to attend Mr Jeyaretnam's trial. In the light of previous cases against domestic opponents and foreign media, these fears seem well-founded.

The Singapore government claims this is all part of a Western liberal "conspiracy" (presumably now including the State Department) against it. It might do better to reflect that even the most successful little tiger needs to have some regards for its image abroad - especially when the Asian miracle is beginning to fade. Hounding a handful of opposition leaders looks more like weakness than strength. If Mr Goh wishes to display real political confidence, he and his party should drop this shabby and unnecessary case.