garota: June 2005

Dash for the (air)bus

QF538 SYD-PER 1925 hrs

Even after the numerous, numerous flights of the last 2+ years, it seems that there are just some things I never – or perhaps, subconsciously refuse to – learn. Like arriving at the airport at least 30 minutes (I know, I’m terrible) before my flight (domestic, of course).

Take today.

[Ed: Yes, I realised the formatting is wonky. I'm looking into it..]

1610    Still on yahoo with benjipc
1748    Start packing
1813    Do the put-toiletries-into-itty-bitty-containers thing
1815    Crap. Gotta hurry up.
1830    Still dare to happily eat my cereal
1838    Fuck! How did I take so long? [Flurry of mobile keypad sounds] [on speaker, while dressing] "… Kensington. To domestic airport. 1 person. Yes, ring on my mobile please. Thanks!"
1844    Settle key (literal) issues with housemate; hug housemate goodbye. "Erh… are you running late?" "[Lol] Yah. See how lor. I try to worm my way, as always. I’ll call you when I’m back home – I got your Sing number right – yup – ok bye!"
1850    [Downstairs] Cab still not here. [Flurry of mobile keypad sounds] "Hi! I called for a cab and it hasn’t come… " [4 agonising minutes later] "The address was recorded wrongly. Your cab is looking for you now, [garota]." "Thanks heaps!"
1856    "Yup, domestic airport. Can I ask a favour of you – go as fast as you allow yourself to."
1906    Departure/Arrival signs come into view. "Hey, you’re pretty good!"
1908    "Thank you so much – don’t worry about the change!"
1909    Need. Boarding. Pass. Queues everywhere. Crap. Ok. Just go straight in to Security. Don’t care.
1911    [Baggage check guy stops me.] "Whoa! You sure you can bring in such a big bag in?" Ok. Just tell a white lie. You have no choice. "Well, sure, I’ve done it before…"
1913    [Another baggage guy lifts my backpack suspiciously] "Is this yours? – You’ll need to come round the front and scan it again because you’ve got a laptop inside." Sigh. Not once. Just give it up already.
1915    Sign overhead: QF538 PERTH – FLT CLSED Fuck!! Keep moving, keep moving… [Excessive noise from wonky wheels attract strange looks.]
1916    [At the gate counter itself] “Hi! I was told to show my photo ID..." Damn, another white lie.
1917    "Oh dear. Your baggage definitely needs to be checked in. [A few seconds later, handing boarding pass to me] No worries, we’ve taken care of it – you’re good to go. Enjoy the flight!"
1918    "Will passengers [garota] and … please proceed to Gate 10 for immediate boarding."

***
And now it’s 2127 Sydney time. Listening to Ella’s Gone With The Wind, on Qantas’ top-notch hi-tech headphones. Did you know it works with a laptop too? – Catch being you can only hear from one side because of the 2-pin airplane headphone jacks. [Note to self: I need to get me a decent pair.] Dinner of coriander chicken was alright (by airplane food standards). I should get some sleep. (You can tell by my rambling here.) It’s been … 30 odd hours since.

Looking forward to ed con, QC, Nic and Mie.

Update: After being asked my travel plans one too many times, I’ve decided to paste the old Trotter Calendar back up – with updates on the next 6 weeks. Nah.

[More..]

QOTD

Heard over the pacific from an unnamed ~~WASP~~ WAAJHM:

To compete with lesbians, one must be great.

Update! SIA is flying me - all the way to London! London, baby!! [A little sheepish to admit this, but - FRIENDS fans know what I'm talking about.]

LONDON, BABY!!!

ps. the pics - Little Ben and Big Ben. What, I couldn't resist.

Homophobia

- and other such skeletons in many a politician's closet (pun fully intended).

I was quite alarmed to hear about the escalating homophobia in Poland, which has reached rather violent proportions this week. It does not look good: efforts to ban Polish LGBT organisations; a "normality parade" endorsed by Polish officials - after banning Poland's gay pride march; gay bashing - and now, shooting - at gay venues.

The intensity of the climate has forced Polish LGBT organisations to plead to Europe for help. In their statement:

[More..]

The strangest thing just happened

I was foraging for stuff on Morgan Spurlock (whom I suspect is surreptitiously climbing onto my Hero list), and fortuitously stumbled on the blog of the man himself! It’s not hard to find – 3rd hit googling ‘Morgan Spurlock’ – and I couldn’t fathom how I hadn’t sought, and devoured, it sooner. Like, totally awesome. You don’t understand – this is like finding a non-franchise café in Manhattan. Or ~~freedom of speech~~ snow in Singapore.

Gold.

[More..]

Interview with ABC Radio

Thanks for all the emails and SMSes re the interview. It’s been cropped a fair bit for the program, but here, as requested – the transcript. I’ve left out the bits by Jimmy Koh, Daryl Fong and others. Nah.

***
Richard Aedy: Back in Australia, among today’s international students, it seems there are growing grievances about the quality of the education that they’re getting for the tens of thousands that they pay. And in some states, that’s compounded by other issues – like a refusal to give international students concessions for public transport.
…
Me: The bureaucrats assume that international students are these rich punks who can afford the ridiculous fees that they put on us, and so therefore we must be able to afford that little bit more for transport. And that’s actually a really inaccurate assumption. There are many, many international students whose families are from a poor background. So they’ve invested a lot, basically, in sending their children here.

The irony is how much they go on about internationalising education more, attracting more international students, having a more diverse community. But when you put that against a simple thing like transport concessions, it doesn’t have to take that much away from the $5.9 billion that international students contribute to the Australian economy. And yet, [this] – it’s something that’s pissing international students off, honestly.
…
Fees is probably the largest consideration for most international students. The thing is, we have an ESOS Act (which stands for Education Services for Overseas Students), and that is supposed to protect us from increasing fees midway through our programs. Now, a couple of universities (at least) have tried to circumvent that by including this disclaimer, that fees are subject to changes, in the Certificate Of Enrolment.

Jonathan Gadir: So basically what we’re talking about is, in the middle of a course, suddenly the university says to you, oh sorry, the price [has] gone up.

Me: Yes. A lot of international students, and their families, save up an entire lifetime of savings in order to send their kid here. And [Australia’s] not a cheap place to live in. The cost of living is high. The bulk of international students come from China, India and South East Asia, where the currency exchange is not favourable, and the cost of living is a lot lower. So to come from that context to [Australia] is a big leap and it’s a very big financial strain on a lot of them.

JG: Is Australia becoming a second-best option, given these things?

Me: Yes, increasingly so. In the past, Australia used to be a good combination of low cost and fairly prestigious degree. But now with the increasing costs, they’re becoming on par if not more [in costs] than some UK and US universities – that’s the perception among many Asian countries, in light of the increasing fees – that they can get a comparable, if not higher quality education, elsewhere.

Technorati: Australia, international education, higher education

[More..]

Is the law gender biased?

I am offended by this article. (Pasted in full - free online access to ST ceased.)

Further than arguing for gender equality under criminal law, it seems in fact to be anti-feminist and misogynistic, in the way it (often) focuses on what women "can get away with" to a greater degree than on the current legal imbalances themselves.

It is one thing to argue for gender-neutral language in our criminal statutes, and another to say that we should not let women "continue reaping the benefits accorded to women of yesteryear" - a regrettably misogynistic conclusion to the article.

Which is a pity, because I thought the first half of it made good points that were (IMHO) rather well-supported with evidence, particularly wrt the case for (legal) protection for under-aged boys and female-male rape.

On a totally different, much happier note: I got 1.5k from UNSW to go to Scotland! *delirious whoops of joy* Am seeking the other 1.5k from the Sg High Commission here and SIA. Wish me luck.

Oh, and also - my interview with ABC radio on international students was aired on monday morning. I'm sorry I didn't put it up here earlier! :P

***
19 June 2005
The Sunday Times

Is the law gender biased?

By Ben Nadarajan

TWO young mothers who pitched their stillborn babies from their HDB flats - one from the window, the other down the rubbish chute - were punished recently.

Teenager Hafshah Ansari was given a two-year probation while undergraduate Koh Kailin got off with a warning.

Both were initially accused of infanticide. But the charges were later reduced because Hafshah's baby was already dead before the 17-year-old disposed of the body and Koh, 23, gave birth prematurely to what is medically classified as still a foetus.

Infanticide is rarely committed here. Since 2002, there have been only four cases.

This rarity could be down to the fact that only a mother who kills her child who is under a year old can be charged for this offence.

If found guilty, she can be jailed for life, or given up to 10 years' jail and a fine.

But if it was the father who killed his baby, he would be up for murder - a capital offence.

Some people have questioned the double standards. Why is the mother allowed to get away with just a jail term when the father has to pay with his life for the same crime?

Lawyers suggest that this 'concession' arises from the traditionally held belief that mothers suffer the most mental stress before, during and after birth.

The section of the Penal Code which deals with infanticide explains that mothers will be given this special allowance because the 'balance of her mind was disturbed by reason of her not having fully recovered from the effect of giving birth'.

Post-natal depression affects about one in every 10 mothers, especially if the birth was premature.

Fathers, on the other hand, do not go through the same physical, psychological and hormonal changes that mothers do.

But the Singapore courts have always held the view that a person who is mentally ill at the time of the offence, but knows that what he did is wrong, is as responsible for his actions as any normal person.

Only the mentally unsound or the retarded can get away with a crime.

So this concession given to mothers seems a bit out of sync with the courts' stance.

There are also other gender distinctions made in other sections of Singapore's legislation.

The law basically expects and states clearly how a man should behave sexually, that he must refrain from saying a woman sleeps around and that he must maintain his wife during marriage and even after a divorce.

But it says little about a woman's conduct.

If you're female, you could have sex with an underaged boy, engage in 'unnatural sex' with another woman, or seduce a married man - and get off scot-free.

God help the man who commits any of these.

Can a woman rape a man?

UNDER the section of the Penal Code regarding rape, the wording in the legislation says that only men can be rapists.

But Gleneagles Medical Centre's consultant urologist Peter Lim said it is 'clearly possible' for a woman to rape a man as well. He feels it's time to move away from the traditional notion that only men can be the aggressor.

The problem of such a change in mindset is that the word 'rape' still carries the idea that violence is involved.

'There are some views that a woman cannot rape a man because she cannot overpower him physically, like a man can a woman,' said Dr Lim.

And there are those who believe that a man who can have an erection must have enjoyed the rape and thus cannot claim later to have been forced.

But Dr Lim feels that a woman can commit 'intellectual rape' by using her position of power to force a man to have sex with her.

For example, a female boss can threaten her male subordinate to either take her or take a hike.

'Such rape could be seen as more reprehensible because it involves a calculated planning of the offence,' Dr Lim said.

It is also harder to prove that a man was raped as there is not likely to be any noticeable abrasion or bruises to the male organ.

But cases overseas have shown that the courts there do think women are capable of rape.

Just two months ago in Norway, a 23-year-old woman was jailed for nine months for raping a 31-year-old man at her house.

No protection for underage boys

BUT even if we accept the view that grown men should know how to protect their own manhood, what about young boys?

The Women's Charter protects girls under the age of 16 from being sexually exploited by men.

The Penal Code also says that a man who has sex with a girl under 14, even if the act is consensual, is guilty of rape.

But boys are generally left to fend for themselves. There is no law to protect boys against the sexual overtures of an older woman.

Even for laws against incest, although offenders of either gender can be jailed for up to five years, a male offender can get as long as 14 years' jail if he had sex with a relative who is under the age of 14. Again, for the woman, there's no added punishment.

The only legislation which briefly covers the sexual well-being of a young boy is in the Children and Young Persons Act, which bans sexual exploitation of all children.

So if a boy says 'yes' to an older woman, even though he may not know exactly what he's getting into (pardon the pun), the woman cannot be touched by the law.

Recent cases overseas suggest that boys barely out of puberty are becoming easy prey for some women.

Take American Mary K. Letourneau. A decade ago, the then 34-year-old teacher took her 12-year-old pupil under her wing and initiated him into the joys of sex.

The pair recently got married upon her release from prison after serving a seven-and-a-half-year sentence for second-degree child rape.

But who can say that Mr Vili Fualaau knew what his teacher was doing to him when he was only 12?

In fact, Mr Fualaau sued his school for psychological trauma after the affair came to light, accusing the authorities of not intervening despite knowing of the relationship.

More recently, in Tennessee, physical education teacher Pamela Turner was charged with raping a 13-year-old boy.

Though no similar scandal has been reported in Singapore, young boys are clearly also vulnerable to being exploited for their bodies as young girls are.

So what's stopping them from getting the same kind of protection from the law?

Veteran criminal lawyer Subhas Anandan feels the Penal Code must be fair to all.

'What is good for the goose is also good for the gander,' said Mr Anandan, the president of the Association of Criminal Lawyers.

'The Women's Charter already provides enough protection for women. Other legislations like the Penal Code must look after everyone.'

No such thing as lesbian sex?

MUCH has been said last year about Singapore's definitions of 'unnatural sex'.

But what I find most unnatural about it is that while it is a crime for a man to engage in 'unnatural sex' with another man, the law is notably silent with regards to lesbian sex.

It also outlaws any acts of 'gross indecency' between men, but yet again, keeps mum about any such acts between women, as if it was unthinkable that women could do anything indecent.

As for the law on oral sex, there have been recent cases where men, who had women perform fellatio on them, were convicted.

But no one seems to be able to answer this question: Can, and will, a woman be charged if a man performs oral sex on her?

Some might argue that having oral or anal sex - both deemed to be 'unnatural' by the law - should not be considered a crime.

But if the men are going to get jailed for engaging in the act, then it is unnatural that women can share the pleasure but skip the pain.

Review of sex laws

THE Penal Code is currently being reviewed after a passionate debate in Parliament last year about our archaic sex laws.

Senior Minister of State for Law and Home Affairs Ho Peng Kee acknowledged to the House then that these laws were drafted in '19th century language'.

Certain MPs also pointed out in Parliament that laws governing sexual offences should not be 'gender specific'. For example, one MP pointed out that a woman who seduces a married man gets away with just a bad reputation, but a man who does likewise to a married woman gets thrown in jail for up to two years.

There are others.

The law allows a woman to flash at a man, yet expects her to be mortified when a man returns the favour. A man's modesty cannot be insulted, only a woman's can.

And under the Defamation Act, any suggestion that a woman is unchaste or adulterous is a strict no-no. If you say that of a man, who cares?

But Associate Professor Ho feels that Singapore shouldn't go overboard in making provisions non-gender specific. 'This is because in sexual matters, men are normally still the aggressors. Our laws need to deter them, not the women.'

Yes, laws are there to protect potential victims.

But it has no reason to protect would-be perpetrators, which is what some of our laws seem to do by specifying that only men can commit certain crimes.

Most of these laws were enacted at a time when society viewed women as the weaker gender who needed protecting. Surely, Singapore has advanced sufficiently to accord both men and women equal protection under the law.

It is time to update our laws to reflect this societal change.

Let's not allow modern women to continue reaping the benefits accorded to women of yesteryear.

Technorati: gender, law, Singapore, news

[More..]

Wheels A-turning

I had to break the hiatus sometime.

Just got back from my meeting with Jennie Lang, Exec Director of UNSW International. I am half a step closer to wrangling the 3k odd that I need to fly myself to Scotland. Couple more hoops I'll have to jump through, but I think I can do that.

I was actually quite pleasantly surprised to find out that John Ingleson, DVC International, is a keen bean on social and global responsibility issues. That'll give my case that much more sale.

Think I'll focus my pitch on 2 prongs: poverty and fair trade, and access to education. Bringing up my involvements in the Oxfam Fair Trade campaign, as well as Student Rights Watch, should help. And of course, the prospect of representing UNSW in a "really positive, pro-active way", to quote Jennie.

An interesting option Jennie suggested, was to gather some intelligence on international students at Stirling Uni, or even Edinburgh. Sounds like it could be an interesting little expedition.

***
Dinner last night with Alvin was great. It's encouraging to see other Singaporeans who care about broader social issues. He talked about possibly bringing Oxfam to Singapore, a prospect which totally psyches me. We'd need to somehow try to clear the way around the Societies Act. I can't see how Oxfam would be controversial though.. well, perhaps except for 3 letters - F.T.A.

And perhaps SIF may need some pacifying, if they perceive a threat to their overseas development projects (although I don't see why that should even be an issue, the fact that they get government funding - no matter their claims of being 'non-government' - notwithstanding).

Possibly a greater concern (to the establishment, of course), may be of opening the floodgates for other global NGOs like, Greenpeace, or worse, *gasp* Amnesty?

Interestingly, we got to talking about Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia's Earth Institute, and director of the UN Millennium Project. A familiar name I've been seeing over the last few days reading up on my possible options for the AIESEC development traineeship.

I am still debating the validity in justifying existing trade practices as part of the whole 'stage development theory' thingamajig. Sachs actually argues that they are a necessary evil. In the course of all this, I am gonna have to attempt reconciling development action with development thought. Considering the diversity - and in many cases, conflict - of the latter, reflected in divergent outcomes on the former, however, I am forced to question the plausibility of resolving this potential cause for many sleepless nights. Gah.

Anyhow, some other random updates:

Student Rights Watch now has a webmaster (go Jit)! And we're continuing to draft our constitution.

The Fair Trade campaign strategy is finally crystallising. I still say we need to make a comprehensive flow-chart action-plan type thing.

I am now representing Human Rights Watch on the AMUNC CHR, which should confer me a greater measure of relevance. Bubbling with anticipation.

I got the money to go to Perth - woohoo! Thanks to Mike and the lovely UNSW Ed Department. Decision to speak at QC still pending.

The development traineeship is now looking less like Latin America, and more like Eastern Europe. Checking my options.

Recently re-established friendship with an ex. I'm glad not to have lost her.

Recently re-established friendship with a long lost friend. Amazingly, it'll be a decade, come next December.

Recently got an amazing package from (as Adrian would say) 'one time love of [my] life'. The words on that postcard still have me stumped.

Still working on that last paper. May the metaclorians (and all other determinants of the elusive force) be with me.

[More..]

Tastes Good

Ah yes, the sweet taste of freedom.

Well - almost. Save for 1 more paper, topic on which I really am passionate about, you know, really. It's just a matter of sitting mah (not-so-) sweet li'l self down to it. Lol.

I have some updates. But I'll get round to it at a later stage.

For now, I am zonked, but blissed (sic). 2 seconds after my head and pillow merge, my vision shall dissolve into a light, warm sea of *happy*.

boa noite, meu amigos. (and don't bother trying to correct my grammar - your sake, more than mine. lol.)

Sexual Orientation: Genetic, Not Heretic

I just had to post this one up.

Researchers in Vienna have found a single gene responsible for sexual orientation - at least with fruit flies.

The IHT reports 030605:

"We have shown that a single gene in the fruit fly is sufficient to determine all aspects of the flies' sexual orientation and behavior - it's very surprising,"said Barry Dickson, senior scientist at the Institute of Molecular Biotechnology at the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna and the paper's lead author.

Update: I'm also compelled to include a quote from Michael Weiss, chairman of biochemistry at Case Western Reserve University in the US. His comments are (potentially) significant for the way forward in political discourse on sexuality, in our decreasingly secular society:

Hopefully this will take the discussion about sexual preferences out of the realm of morality and put it in the realm of science.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out in the media: churches, GLBT groups, politicians, US, SG.

Credits to Ben for the scoop.

Technorati: science, genetics, homosexuality, GLBT, LGBT

Democratisation Of The Media

The issue of the nascent 'democratisation' of what used to be conventional media by the exponential eruption of the blogosphere has - inevitably - come under the spotlight.

In the US, the Institute for Politics, Democracy, and the Internet is questioning the legitimacy of granting bloggers an exemption from electoral campaign legislation that would effectively allow direct access to candidates.

Commentary worth a read at Daily Kos.

And over back home, the AFP reports that censored Singaporeans are taking to the internet for free speech. (Of course, recent events have undoubtedly thrown the extent of that claim into question.)

***
Anyway. I'm supposed to be in hibernation.

Technorati: internet freedom, blogosphere, politics, media

A Eureka Moment

Reading for a politics course sometime back, I came across a description of conservative ideology. What struck me were the uncanny connections I could draw to the landscape back home. It's quite a chunk, so I'll just give you the gems:

[More..]

ST correspondent held

[Ed: Re-updated 030605 0818 AEST]

The latest scandal in the international press world has hit home once more.

ST’s Hong Kong-based foreign correspondent on China, 程翔 | Ching Cheong, has been held in Beijing for ‘stealing state secrets’.

A CURRENT AFFAIR

Tons of news reports covering this, but some which brought out a few different nuggets here:

The Guardian’s article, more descriptive than most

Washington Post’s, with some chronology on Ching Cheong and more factual details

CNA’s, which surprisingly (by Singaporean press standards) acknowledged China’s censorship relating to 赵紫阳 | Zhao Ziyang¹ and Tiannanmen. Which is more than can be said of ST's own coverage.

The Standard’s, with Ching’s wife calling him ‘stupid’ and reckoning this a scare tactic to silence the media. I agree (the latter* more than the former).

Forbes’, on Singapore’s shock

The Times’, on China’s foreign ministry stating Ching’s admission to spying (I find this suspect.)

RSF’s, calling on UK and Singapore to ensure Ching’s release

Also, coverage within the blogosphere by Singapore Ink and Simon World. Links galore at Singapore Angle. | Also, a fairly succinct descriptive by Elio Diodati, with almost enough links to rival Singapore Angle.

*Update: The IFJ agrees. So does New Century Net (via Singapore Angle.)

[Ed: On a technical point, I am confused by articles reporting that this is the first instance of foreign corro capture in China, and others that it is the 2nd. (What about Zhao Yan²?) Enlightenment welcome.]

EYES WIDE SHUT

I found the Singapore MFA’s press release the most scanty excuse for a statement at all, on this. Elsewhere, the following ST statement is appearing ubiquitously --

..The Straits Times .. said in a written statement Sunday that it had been told by the Chinese Embassy in Singapore that Ching “is assisting security authorities in Beijing with an investigation into a matter not related to the Straits Times."

On the Singapore side of the issue, I am disappointed by 2 messages which seem to be a priority for SPH and MFA (see also Forbes article):

i) that Ching’s detention is based on work that has nothing to do with the Singapore government
ii) that the Chinese foreign ministry has not contacted the MFA, hence lack of information provided by SPH

The first seems to be making the point that such dubious activities must, of course, not be linked to Singapore’s institutions, thus absolving Singapore’s authorities of all responsibility for this poor unlucky journalist. (Note the quote above came from the Chinese embassy in Singapore, not SPH. However, the manner in which it has been reproduced by SPH leads me to hold my stand - cf. Izydata's correction on Ink.) It also seems a contradictory follow-up to Singapore’s alleged shock on the matter.

More significantly, however, I take issue with how even a seemingly illustrious testimonial (see below) of Ching seemed to imply that such investigative journalism may just be rightly considered illegal by the Chinese authorities, and whatever other law-of-the-land deferences that may be, well, deferred to.

'We are shocked by this new accusation,' SPH said in a statement.

SPH said: 'We have no cause to doubt that in all the years that Ching Cheong has worked with us, he has conducted himself with the utmost professionalism.

-- from Forbes article, link above

As for the second – I fail to see how such a lack of intelligence-gathering initiative should be reflective of a government, a national publication for which a correspondent has been ‘acting in the best interests’. For all my tirades about our nationalistic (many say propagandistic) mouthpiece media, this would’ve been one opportunity to protect those who contribute to that mouthpiece. He is kaki-lang - one of ours - for crying out loud.

In concession to SPH, however, I must also state that SPH has tried to obtain permission from Chinese authorities to visit Ching, although in vain. Also, Simon has quoted from a source that ST has tried .. to secure [Ching's] freedom.

THE BLACK GESTAPO

The Peking Duck captures my sentiments on this too well:

There are all kinds of excuses we can come with as to why this is okay, and why we should just let it go as an "internal matter." But I don't see it that way. Reading this article made me sick, and hearing in my head all the pre-rehearsed excuses of the apologists just makes me sicker.

What's your definition of a police state? Does China qualify? To me, it is where people are afraid to speak because the police have the power to arrest and hold them at will, as Stalin's secret police and the Gestapo did. Is this an examnple of the behavior of an enlightened government or of a police state -- or of something in-between? The question is sincere. I generally choose not to refer to China as a police state, as there are aspects of the country that seem to go against the classic definitions. But each time I read stories like this, I am forced to reconsider.

***
Update:

THE ADVOCATE

The CPJ has spoken. Their latest media release condenses many of the most pertinent quotes and details on the case. Vincent Brossel at RSF reiterates my suspicion at Ching's 'confession' to espionage, and indicates a possibility that a confession was wrangled out of Ching under some manner of duress:

.. [Brossel] says [RSF] questions the means by which the government might have obtained a confession.

"When you detain someone for a month and you put pressure on his family, you put a lot of pressure on him, it's obvious you can get some confession," said Mr. Brossel.

-- VOA 310505

I suspect it may have more to do with a mangling of Ching's words, based on dubiously constructed questions and (correspondingly) dubiously interpreted answers. Or perhaps I give too much credit to gaol civility in China. Gah.

MEET JOE BLACK

I'm perturbed by China's foreign ministry's adamant denial of any link whatsoever to Zhao Ziyang and Tiannanmen. But the more likely motives of the Chinese Censorship Party are thinly disguised in light of 2 things:

i) their non-disclosure of the foreign agency they accuse Ching of spying for
ii) their refusal to detail the charges against Ching

-- which they justify with a most egregious statement:

Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan, asked at a news conference for details of what Ching was accused of doing and for which country he was accused of spying, would say only: "We have full evidence to support this case."

-- AP 010605

What's even more unnerving, however, is that SPH is taking the same line. The following interview excerpt between SPH's ed-in-chief Cheong Yip Seng and BBC's Julian Marshall, via Singapore Angle:

BBC: According to the Chinese authorities, he was in Guangzhou where he travelled to collect secret papers linked to the former Chinese leader, Zhao Ziyang.

Cheong: I have absolutely no idea that this had happened. As I said, this came as a complete surprise to us.

BBC: You don't think this is connected in any way with the editorial line that maybe your newspaper takes on China?

Cheong: I do not believe that to be the case. In fact, our editorial line on China can give no cause for action of this kind.

Looming bleak:

SDUT reports Hong Kong 'spy' reporter may languish in China custody "for months before he is tried on espionage charges";

LA Times' prognosis is even darker - Reporter May Face the Death Penalty.

This disturbs me greatly because of the implications of such a precedent, for press freedom in China:

China has never jailed a journalist working for a foreign publication. It usually detains them briefly and deports them on charges such as spying.

-- Times Online 310505

How low can you go?

HOPE FLOATS

On the up, though - thankfully - some good news sees ST stepping up:

Straits Times editor Han Fook Kwang, who was heading for Hong Kong yesterday from a newspaper conference in Seoul, said: 'We have engaged lawyers and will be making legal representation on Ching Cheong's behalf.

"I met his wife Mary last Friday to assure her of our full support and will be meeting her again tomorrow to discuss the latest development."

SPH has engaged one of China's largest law firms, the Jun He Law Offices, to assist Mr Ching and his family.

-- Asia Media 010605

I think this is very encouraging, particuarly for establishment-skeptics such as myself.

As warm a fuzzy it may be to see ST/SPH not devoid of compassion or a sense of justice, however, I think these developments are more revealing of the underlying complexities surrounding China's relations with "the relevant countries" - and the future of those relations.

It's not quite the same, but - brings back memories of the good ol' Michael Faye days, no?

Technorati: media, press, China, Singapore

¹Zhao Ziyang is a former CCP leader who opposed the use of force against protestors at Tiannanmen Square in 1989, and was subsequently put under house arrest for what was the last 16 years of his life.

²CJP News Alert: Chinese authorities are leveling new accusations at Zhao Yan to continue holding him indefinitely.

[More..]

garota

Wednesday, June 29, 2005

Dash for the (air)bus

Monday, June 27, 2005

QOTD

Sunday, June 26, 2005

Homophobia

Saturday, June 25, 2005

The strangest thing just happened

Wednesday, June 22, 2005

Interview with ABC Radio

Is the law gender biased?

Wednesday, June 15, 2005

Wheels A-turning

Tuesday, June 07, 2005

Tastes Good

Saturday, June 04, 2005

Sexual Orientation: Genetic, Not Heretic

Democratisation Of The Media

Friday, June 03, 2005

A Eureka Moment

Wednesday, June 01, 2005

ST correspondent held

not-so-fine print

About

your bit

Trotter Calendar

Links

follow the breadcrumbs

vault