DOCSLIB.ORG

Singapore Joint Submission to the UN Universal Periodic Review 38Th Session of the UPR Working Group

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Singapore Joint Submission to the UN Universal Periodic Review 38Th Session of the UPR Working Group Republic of Singapore Joint Submission to the UN Universal Periodic Review 38th Session of the UPR Working Group 15 October 2020 Submission by CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation, NGO in General Consultative Status with ECOSOC And The Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA) NGO in General Consultative Status with ECOSOC CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen FORUM ASIA Participation FORUM-ASIA Lead, Ahmed Adam CIVICUS UPR Lead, Josef Benedict Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Tel: +66 2 1082643 45 Susan Wilding, Web: www.forum-asia.org Email: [email protected] Tel: +41 22 733 3435 Web: www.civicus.org 1. Introduction 1.1 CIVICUS is a global alliance of civil society organisations (CSOs) and activists dedicated to strengthening citizen action and civil society around the world. Founded in 1993, CIVICUS has members in more than 190 countries throughout the world. 1.2 The Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA) is a network of 81 members in 21 countries that works to promote and protect human rights, including the right to development, through collaboration and cooperation among human rights organisations and defenders in Asia and beyond. 1.3 In this document, CIVICUS and FORUM-ASIA examine the Government of Singapore’s compliance with its international human rights obligations to create and maintain a safe and enabling environment for civil society. Specifically, we analyse Singapore’s fulfilment of the rights to the freedoms of association, peaceful assembly and expression and unwarranted restrictions on human rights defenders (HRDs) since its previous UPR examination in April 2016. To this end, we assess Singapore’s implementation of recommendations received during the 2nd UPR cycle relating to these issues and provide follow-up recommendations. 1.4 During the 2nd UPR cycle, the Government of Singapore received 22 recommendations relating to the space for civil society (civic space). Of these recommendations, eight were accepted and 14 were noted. An evaluation of a range of legal sources and human rights documentation addressed in subsequent sections of this submission demonstrates that the Government of Singapore has partially implemented only seven recommendations relating to civic space and has not implemented the other 15. The government has persistently failed to address unwarranted restrictions on civic space since its last UPR examination, specifically related to the rights to the freedoms of peaceful assembly and expression. 1.5 Singapore has yet to ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which imposes obligations on states to respect and protect the freedoms of association, peaceful assembly and expression. Further, numerous recommendations to establish a national human rights institution have been ignored.1 1.6 We are deeply concerned by the ongoing use of restrictive laws, including defamation laws, to criminalise criticism of the authorities by HRDs, journalists and critics and the restrictions on peaceful assembly, including protests held by one person, under the 2009 Public Order Act (POA). 1 Recommendations 166.57, 166.100, 166.101, 166.102, 106.103 and 106.104. See ‘Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review: Singapore’, UN Human Rights Council, 15 April 2016, https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G16/078/42/PDF/G1607842.pdf?OpenElement. 2 1.7 We are further alarmed by laws restricting media freedom and the use of the 2019 Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) to harass the political opposition, HRDs, journalists and civil society. 1.8 As a result of these issues, civic space in Singapore is currently classified as ‘obstructed’ by the CIVICUS Monitor.2 • Section 2 of this submission examines Singapore’s implementation of UPR recommendations and compliance with international human rights standards concerning the freedom of association. • Section 3 examines Singapore’s implementation of UPR recommendations and compliance with international human rights standards related to the protection of HRDs, civil society activists and journalists. • Section 4 examines Singapore’s implementation of UPR recommendations and compliance with international human rights standards concerning the freedom of expression, independence of the media and access to information. • Section 5 examines Singapore’s implementation of UPR recommendations and compliance with international human rights standards related to the freedom of peaceful assembly. • Section 6 contains recommendations to address the concerns raised and to advance implementation of recommendations under the 2nd cycle. • An annex assessing implementation of 2nd cycle UPR recommendations related to civic space can be found in Section 7. 2. Freedom of association 2.1 During Singapore’s examination under the 2nd UPR cycle, the government received four recommendations on the right to the freedom of association and creating an enabling environment for CSOs. 3 Among other recommendations, the government committed to “ensure freedom of association” and “consider the necessary legislations and policies to effectively guarantee the protection of freedom of association.” Of the recommendations received, the government accepted two and noted two. However, as evidenced below, the government has partially implemented one and not implemented three other recommendations. 2 CIVICUS Monitor: Singapore, https://monitor.civicus.org/country/singapore. 3 Recommendations 166.90 (noted), 166.91 (supported), 166.92 (noted), 166.201 (supported). See ‘Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review: Singapore, Addendum: Views on conclusions and/or recommendations, voluntary commitments and replies presented by the State under review’, A/HRC/32/17/Add.1’, UN Human Rights Council, 13 June 2016, https://documents-dds- ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G16/117/87/PDF/G1611787.pdf?OpenElement. 3 2.2 Article 14 of the Singaporean Constitution states that “all citizens of Singapore have the right to form associations.”4 However, despite these commitments legal barriers persist to the effective realisation of this right for CSOs. 2.3 Under the Societies Act the authorities have extensive discretionary powers to limit the right to the freedom of association. Principally, the Societies Act requires all CSOs with more than 10 members to register with the government. According to article 4, the Registrar of Societies can deny a CSO’s application on a number of broad and subjective grounds, including that a CSO’s mandate is “contrary to the national interest for the specified society to be registered” or “is identical to that of any other existing society” or “is in the opinion of the Registrar undesirable.”5 2.4 The Societies Act further includes several vague provisions that can be invoked to dissolve a CSO or sanction its members and employees. According to article 24, the Registrar of Societies can deregister a CSO that engages in activities considered “prejudicial to public peace, welfare or good order in Singapore.” Moreover, people who support or are employed by an “unlawful” society face severe criminal penalties. Article 15 of the law states that “any person who knowingly allows a meeting of an unlawful society, or of members of an unlawful society to be held in any house” may be fined up to S$5,000 (approx. US$3,635), or imprisoned for a term not exceeding three years, or both. In addition, individuals who are members of an unlawful society, or attend a meeting of an unlawful society, can be subjected to the same penalties. 2.5 Constitutional guarantees protecting the right of workers to organise are further undermined by stringent and discriminatory legislative restrictions on trade unions. The government continues to place onerous constraints on the right to organise and collectively bargain. Of serious concern are requirements under the Trade Union Act obliging all unions to officially register with the Registrar of Trade Unions, which has wide-ranging powers to refuse or withdraw a union’s registration on various arbitrary grounds, including on the basis that a union of similar purpose already exists. In addition, under the Trade Unions Act, government employees must seek the explicit approval of the President of Singapore before joining a trade union. 2.6 Singapore has 1.4 million foreigners working in the country, out of a total workforce of 3.7 million. Of these, 981,000 are low-wage migrant workers on temporary visas.6 Foreign workers are allowed to join trade unions but are prevented from holding a number of positions within unions without the authorisation of the Ministry of 4 ‘Constitution of The Republic of Singapore’, https://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/sg/sg047en.pdf. 5 ‘Societies Act’, Singapore Statutes Online, https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/SA1966. 6 ‘The Missing Link in Singapore’s COVID-19 Strategy’, The Diplomat, 14 April 2020, https://thediplomat.com/2020/04/the-missing-link-in-singapores-covid-19-strategy. 4 Manpower.7 In practice, foreign workers have little opportunity to organise to defend their rights or demand improvements in their conditions of work. 3. Harassment, intimidation and attacks against human rights defenders, civil society activists and journalists 3.1 Under Singapore’s previous UPR examination, the government received no recommendations on the protection of HRDs, journalists and civil society representatives. 3.2 Article 12 of the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders mandates states to take the necessary measures to ensure the protection of HRDs. However, in spite of these protections, the Singaporean authorities have used an array of restrictive laws to investigate and criminalise HRDs for their activism. 3.3 Among the laws often used to target HRDs is the POA, which has been used to curb peaceful gatherings or protests even when undertaken by one person (see section 5 for details on the law). 3.4 HRD Jolovan Wham has faced multiple investigations for his activism. In November 2016 he was charged under the POA for his involvement in an indoor public discussion on ‘Civil Disobedience and Social Movements’.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Empowering Possibilities with More Reasons to Smile
    EMPOWERING POSSIBILITESPOSSIBILITIES WITHWITH AA SMILESMILE AnnualAnnual ReportReport 2017/182017/18 INFOCOMM MEDIA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EMPOWERING POSSIBILITIES WITH MORE REASONS TO SMILE INFOCOMM MEDIA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ANNUAL REPORT 2O17/18 021 EMPOWERING POSSIBILITESPOSSIBILITIES WITHWITH AA SMILESMILE AnnualAnnual ReportReport 2017/182017/18 INFOCOMM MEDIA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ABOUT IMDA The Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) leads Singapore’s digital transformation with infocomm media. To do this, IMDA will develop a dynamic digital economy and a cohesive digital society, driven by an exceptional infocomm media (ICM) ecosystem – by developing talent, strengthening business capabilities, and enhancing Singapore’s ICM infrastructure. IMDA also regulates the telecommunications and media sectors to safeguard consumer interests while fostering a pro-business environment, and enhances Singapore’s data protection regime through the Personal Data Protection Commission. FOREWORD IMDA’s inaugural annual report captures our achievements and VISION milestones of the past year, and how it has worked to unify Singapore’s digitalisation efforts. Whether it is providing help for A dynamic Digital Economy and a cohesive Digital Society, driven different industries to jumpstart their digitalisation journeys, or by an exceptional infocomm and media ecosystem. creating new ecosystems, opportunities and capabilities for our digital future, IMDA is moving ahead with industries and people, to be a leading global node in Asia for this digital economy. MISSION Drive Singapore’s digital transformation with infocomm media. VALUES • Integrity • Collaboration • Innovation • Care & Respect 022 EMPOWERING POSSIBILITESPOSSIBILITIES WITHWITH AA SMILESMILE AnnualAnnual ReportReport 2017/182017/18 INFOCOMM MEDIA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Creating Opportunities for More, Developing Nurturing digital talent in our community is CHAIRMAN’S the Next Generation of Future-Ready People a key element of being digitally ready.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2019 Oneapex Limited Annual Report 2019
    ANNUAL REPORT 2019 ONEAPEX LIMITED ANNUAL REPORT 2019 This annual report has been prepared by the Company and reviewed by the Company’s sponsor, Novus Corporate Finance Pte. Ltd. (the “Sponsor”) in compliance with Rule 226(2)(b) of the Singapore Exchange Securities Trading Limited (the “SGX-ST”) Listing Manual Section B: Rules of Catalist. This annual report has not been examined or approved by the SGX- ST and the SGX-ST assumes no responsibility for the contents of this annual report, including the correctness of any of the statements or opinions made or reports contained in this annual report. The contact person for the Sponsor is Mr Pong Chen Yih, Chief Operating Officer, at 9 Raffles Place, #17-05, Republic Plaza Tower 1, Singapore 048619, telephone (65) 6950 2188. Corporate Profile 01 CEO's Statement and Financial Review 02 Corporate Structure 05 Board of Directors 06 Executive Officers 09 Corporate Information 11 Financial Highlights 12 Corporate Governance Report 13 Financial Contents 45 Statistics of Shareholdings 113 Notice of Annual General Meeting 115 Appendix 121 Proxy Form IV ONEAPEX LIMITED ANNUAL REPORT 2019 CORPORATE PROFILE Chew’s Group Limited (the “Company” and together shareholders of the Company to acquire the remaining with its subsidaries the “Group”) was incorporated on issued and paid-up ordinary shares in the capital of the 30 September 2010 and was listed on the Catalist board Company. At the close of offer on 20 November 2018, of the Singapore Exchange Securities Trading Limited Goldhill Trust announced that it owned 78,928,572 (the “SGX-ST”) on 28 February 2011.
    [Show full text]
  • SINGAPORE PUBLIC SERVICE: EMERGING STRONGER from the PANDEMIC Ang Hak Seng and Sueann Soon
    2021 Learning from Crisis Tharman Shanmugaratnam TAKING STOCK OF AN UNPRECEDENTED PANDEMIC Ong Toon Hui and Danny Quah LEADERSHIP AT A TIME OF (ANOTHER) CRISIS Peter Shergold TRANSFORMATION IN THE SINGAPORE PUBLIC SERVICE: EMERGING STRONGER FROM THE PANDEMIC Ang Hak Seng and Sueann Soon AVAILABLE ONLINE AT: www.csc.gov.sg/ethos ETHOS is a publication of the Civil Service College, Singapore. It aims to provide thought leadership, insight and context on a wide range of public policy issues of interest to Singapore. ETHOS is circulated to the policymaking community in Singapore as well as to a select international readership. We welcome contributions, suggestions and Letters to the Editor. The editorial team reserves the right to select, edit and publish articles according to its editorial policy. All correspondence should be directed to: The Editor-in-Chief, ETHOS Civil Service College, Singapore 31 North Buona Vista Road Singapore 275983 Email: [email protected] EDITORIAL ADVISORS Ong Toon Hui – Dean and CEO, Civil Service College, Singapore Danny Quah – Dean and Li Ka Shing Professor in Economics, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy EDITORIAL TEAM Alvin Pang – Editor-in-Chief • Sheila Ng – Deputy Editor • Liza Lee – Senior Editor June Gwee – Senior Principal Researcher • Kharina Zainal – Principal Researcher ©2021 Civil Service College, Singapore The mission of the Civil Service College (CSC) Singapore is to develop people for a first-class Public Service. CSC was inaugurated as a statutory board under the Public Service Division, Prime Minister’s Office, in October 2001. As the public sector’s core institution for training, learning, research and staff development, CSC builds strategic capacity in governance, leadership, public administration and management for a networked government in Singapore.
    [Show full text]
  • Fighting Fake News
    FIGHTING FAKE NEWS A STUDY OF ONLINE MISINFORMATION REGULATION IN THE ASIA PACIFIC Prepared and Written by ANDREA CARSON ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR (JOURNALISM) DEPARTMENT OF POLITICS, MEDIA & PHILOSOPHY, LA TROBE UNIVERSITY with LIAM FALLON Prepared for FACEBOOK, AUSTRALIA A FACEBOOK RESEARCH PROJECT latrobe.edu.au JANUARY 2021 Fighting Fake News: A Study of Online Misinformation Regulation in the Asia Pacific A First Published 2021 By La Trobe University Crn of Plenty Rd and Kingsbury Drive, Bundoora, Melbourne, Australia 3086 © 2021 selection and editorial matter, Andrea Carson This work was funded by Facebook. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. B La Trobe University Table of contents Executive summary ................................................................................................... iv Key findings and conclusions ....................................................................................................................................... v Background ................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 274KB***Fake News, Free Speech and Finding Constitutional
    (2020) 32 SAcLJ 207 (Published on e-First 14 February 2020) FAKE NEWS, FREE SPEECH AND FINDING CONSTITUTIONAL CONGRUENCE In September 2018, the Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods issued a report that recommended new legislation to address the harms of online falsehood or “fake news”. After much vigorous debate in Parliament, the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (Act 18 of 2019) (“POFMA”) was passed on 8 May 2019 and came into effect on 2 October 2019. As expected, POFMA, like any legislation which attempts to curtail the spread of fake news, has attracted much criticism. As the business models of social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter thrive on community engagement and user-generated content, such technology companies lack the incentive to curb the virality of fake news under a voluntary self-regulation regime. At the same time, fake news laws can overreach and significantly restrict the constitutional right to freedom of speech. This article surveys the efficacy of the legislative landscape pre-POFMA in combating fake news and suggests that an umbrella legislation like POFMA is necessary. This article concludes that POFMA, even if perceived to be draconian, is congruent with Art 14 of the Singapore Constitution (1999 Reprint). Nevertheless, such plenary powers are subject to potentially powerful political limits in the electoral process. The final test for the legitimacy of POFMA really lies in how the Government enforces this new law. David TAN PhD, LLB, BCom (Melbourne), LLM (Harvard); Professor and Vice Dean (Academic Affairs), Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore. Jessica TENG Sijie LLB (Hons) (National University of Singapore), BA (Hons) (Yale-National University of Singapore).
    [Show full text]
  • Freedom and Fakes: Authors a Comparative Exploration of Nina Jankowicz Countering Disinformation and Shannon Pierson Protecting Free Expression
    Science and Technology Innovation Program Science and Technology Innovation Program Freedom and Fakes: Authors A Comparative Exploration of Nina Jankowicz Countering Disinformation and Shannon Pierson Protecting Free Expression December 2020 Executive Summary In the United States in 2020, there is no clear plan of action to combat disinformation at a national level. No single body has fully acknowledged their role in the cleanup of the online environment, and disinformation has been politicized. While the American response to online disinformation has been marked by partisanship and gridlock, at least 50 other nations have taken action against it, often to the detriment of human rights and democratic standards. In addition to briefly exploring the existing human rights-based framework for the protections of free speech, this paper compares the development and, where applicable, implementation of efforts to regulate social media platforms in response to disinformation. The four case studies—in Germany, Brazil, Singapore and Ukraine—outlined in this paper provide Germany’s NetzDG law has some basic guidelines and cautionary tales observed from democracies been cited in authoritarian that have already begun their regulatory journeys. countries as fodder for Even governments with benign motivations behind their counter- their own crackdowns on disinformation regulations, such as Germany and Brazil, have run freedom of expression. up against the dangerous normalization of restrictions on speech. Germany’s NetzDG law has been cited in authoritarian countries as fodder for their own crackdowns on freedom of expression.1 Brazil, the country that passed the world’s first online bill of civil rights, flirted with passing harsh fines for the spread of disinformation.
    [Show full text]
  • Covid-19 in Singapore: ‘Responsive Communitarianism’And the Legislative Approach to the “Most Serious Crisis” Since Independence
    Singapore Journal of Legal Studies [2020] 630–664 COVID-19 IN SINGAPORE: ‘RESPONSIVE COMMUNITARIANISM’AND THE LEGISLATIVE APPROACH TO THE “MOST SERIOUS CRISIS” SINCE INDEPENDENCE Darius Lee∗ The Singapore government has called the COVID-19 pandemic “the most serious crisis” that Singa- pore has faced since Independence. However, Singapore did not issue a Proclamation of Emergency. Instead, it adopted a ‘legislative model’ of emergency powers, addressing COVID-19 through ordi- nary legislation, including and especially the new COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Act 2020. Despite the sweeping nature of the powers thereunder, the government has exercised a calibrated approach in its measures, shaped by communitarian norms and high level of responsiveness towards the needs of members of the Singapore community, albeit not without its weaknesses. This article thus makes the case that Singapore’s response to COVID-19 has been characterised by two main features: a legislative emergency in law and ‘responsive communitarianism’ in practice. It argues that COVID-19 has seen the further concentration of executive power where the law is increasingly instrumentalised as a tool towards social and political priorities. I. Introduction The Singapore government called the coronavirus disease (“COVID-19”) pandemic “the most serious crisis” that Singapore has faced since Independence in 1965,1 and “the gravest crisis the world has faced in a century”.2 Even as other states within Southeast Asia such as Thailand3 and the Philippines4 issued declarations of ∗ LL.M. in International Law and Human Rights, Hebrew University of Jerusalem; LL.B. (Hons.), National University of Singapore. I would like to thank Dr. Jaclyn Neo, as well as my anonymous reviewer from the Singapore Journal of Legal Studies, for their comments on this paper.
    [Show full text]
  • IDA Review8final3.Mx
    A VI SION SO IN SPI RI NG TH E FUTURE MOST EXCITI NG ISSN-0219-7286 The proof of great vision is in sharing and experiencing it. IDA leads the drive towards realising Singapore's vision of technology-enabled growth, which is mapped out in the Intelligent Nation 2015 (iN2015) infocomm masterplan. We bring together the public, private and people sectors, creating a powerful synergy that will propel us from the vision towards the exciting future that lies ahead. CONTENTS 2 Chairman’s Message 22 DRIVE IT WITH PASSION 36 LIVE IT WITH JOY 4 IDA Board of Directors Strengthening Capabilities Infocomm for All 7 Senior Leadership Team Bringing Infocomm Singapore to the World Extending the Reach of Public Services 8 Highlights FY2007 10 Infocomm Statistics 28 USE IT WITH FORESIGHT 42 DO IT WITH CONVICTION Work@IDA Digital Media and Entertainment Fun@IDA 12 BUILD IT WITH VISION Education and Learning Infrastructure Financial Services 47 Infocomm Investments Pte Ltd Policies and Regulations Healthcare 48 Singapore Network Information Infocomm Security Small and Medium Enterprises Centre Pte Ltd Integrating the Public Sector Tourism, Hospitality and Retail Attracting and Developing Infocomm Manpower Trade and Manufacturing 49 Financial Statements Transport Trade and Manufacturing Small and Medium Education Enterprises and Learning Society Infocomm Infrastructure and Policy Infocomm Manpower Development Government Services Healthcare Digital Media and Financial Entertainment Services Tourism, Hospitality and Retail Chairman’s Message 2007 has been a good Strengthening Our Infocomm Industry year. We saw much We look forward to seeing many innovations launched for progress in the Next Gen services.
    [Show full text]
  • The Politics of Pofma: Assessing the Validity of the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Misinformation Act
    THE POLITICS OF POFMA: ASSESSING THE VALIDITY OF THE PROTECTION FROM ONLINE FALSEHOODS AND MISINFORMATION ACT Grace Elizabeth Ho, Raffles Institution Supervised by Professor Edson C. Tandoc Jr. & Mr. James Lee Chong Boi, Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information, Nanyang Technological University ABSTRACT In 2019, the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Misinformation Act (POFMA) was enacted to fight against the rapid spread of fake news, which has become more pervasive than ever in today’s post-truth era. It grants the government and its ministers the power to issue directives, or correction orders, to append statements of fact from the government alongside offending pieces of online content, which have been deemed to contain falsehoods. However, the validity of such an act has been called into question by many critics, who fear that it may become a state tool of censorship. Thus, my paper seeks to analyze the validity of POFMA, through creating a typography of the type of content likely to be served with POFMA directives, and evaluating the arguments presented in both offending posts and the POFMA directives. INTRODUCTION In the book “Post-Truth, Fake News And Democracy: Mapping the Politics of Falsehood,” researchers Jannick Shou and Johan Farkas write that proliferation of fake news has resulted in “scientific evidence [being] no longer trusted, with climate change being consistently labeled a hoax; medical evidence [being] sidestepped, as patients search for their own truth online; and “proper” journalism [coming] under attack from fake news farms, troll factories and social bots” (Farkas & Schou, 2019). In today’s post-truth era, fake news has become a tool to sow confusion, with many people being unable to discern fact from fiction.
    [Show full text]
  • SINGAPORE: a STORY UNFOLDING Thomas J
    SINGAPORE: A STORY UNFOLDING Thomas J. Bellows * TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………….2 A. Geography……………………………………………...2 B. History………………………………………………….3 C. Demography…………………………………………....4 D. Economy………………………………………………..7 E. Trade……………………………………………………8 II. POLITICAL SYSTEM………………………………………….10 A. The Developmental State……………………………..10 B. Party History……………………………………...…..11 C. Elections………………………………………………12 D. Democracy……………………………………………16 E. Political Pluralism………………………………….…19 III. KEY INSTITUTIONS………………………………………....19 A. Meritocracy…………………………...………………19 B. Corruption……………………...………………..……25 C. Social Policies and Programs……………………....…26 IV. FOREIGN POLICY……………………………………………28 A. China……………………………………….…………28 B. Malaysia………………………………………………32 C. United States…………………………….……………34 V. CONCLUSION…………………………………………………38 * Thomas J. Bellows holds an MA from the University of Florida and an MA and Ph.D in Political Science from Yale University. His publication focus has been on Pacific Asia. He has lived in both Singapore and Taiwan, and he has traveled extensively throughout Southeast Asia. Dr. Bellows is currently a Professor of Political Science at the University of Texas at San Antonio. I want to recognize the careful work of my Research Assistant, Christella D. Samuel, a Global affairs major. 2CONTEMPORARY ASIAN STUDIES SERIES I. INTRODUCTION This Singapore monograph discusses the major challenges and policies instituted to build a functioning state, respected for its achievements and generally admired throughout the world. Policies, institutions, and adaptation characterize Singapore’s continuing success, led by the People’s Action Party (PAP). Given the vicissitudes of governing, the more recent challenge is the hegemonic rise of China. Singapore’s strategies to maintain a peaceful and functioning security arena in the Pacific is one example of careful adaptation and response. A. Geography An awareness of its unique and distinctive features is fundamental to analyzing Singapore.
    [Show full text]