Page 1 of
4 Singaporean cyber-dissident speaks
his mind By Martyn See
SINGAPORE - Robert Ho is arguably
Singapore's leading cyber-dissident. In late 2001,
Ho was arrested in his home for allegedly posting
"inflammatory" articles online during the general
elections, representing the first-ever case of its
kind.
In 2002, after an as-yet-unspecified
article(s) was posted on the soc.culture.singapore
newsgroup, police entered his home, seized his
computer and served him a summons to attend an
investigation.
Three weeks later, he was
forcibly taken to a police station by officers who
entered his home without a warrant or a charge. In
2005, on returning from a
shopping mall where he had distributed flyers
alleging electoral fraud, he was again apprehended
and his computer seized.
In all, he has
been arrested an additional three times since
2001, and on repeated occasions the authorities
have remanded him at a mental institution. He has
yet to be prosecuted for any of the alleged
offences, although a criminal-defamation case is
still pending from 2002.
While other
critics, including international publications,
have yielded to defamation threats from
Singapore's political leaders, Robert Ho has
emerged from his arrests and detentions even more
recalcitrant against the establishment.
In
Singapore's political cyberspace, where fear of
surveillance and potential libel suits have
compelled many dissident netizens and bloggers to
post articles under pseudonyms, Ho continues to
stick his neck out by disclosing his real identity
online.
Fellow
blogger and independent filmmaker Martyn See
interviewed Ho via e-mail and telephone last
month. A longer version of the interview was first
published at the blogspot singaporerebel.
See: In 2001, you became the
first person in Singapore to be arrested for
posting an article on the Internet. What happened?
Ho: On November 16, 2001,
about 11:15am, eight serious stern men rang my
doorbell and came into my flat. They quickly
searched my entire flat, asked for my computer and
took it as well as every single computer-related
device from printers, floppy disks, CD-ROMs [and]
modems to cables.
They then took me away
to the CID [Central Investigation Department]
Police Cantonment Complex. Being arrested and
having all my entire computer system confiscated
was quite unnerving and disconcerting. The
handcuffs were locked on so tight I suffered a
pinched nerve in my left wrist for weeks after.
At the CID, I was questioned for hours,
during which I dictated my statements to [police
official] Soh Kien Peng. I finished the statements
around 14:05pm, pleading not guilty in summation
to the charge of posting in soc.culture.singapore
my article entitled "Break the law and get away
with it, like PAP", posted on October 19, 2001.
This article is also posted in "Singaporeans for
Democracy" at www.sfdonline.org. [This was a
reference to the ruling People's Action Party.]
After my statements were recorded, edited
and signed, I was taken to a cell where I was to
spend the night on the bare floor. The next
morning, I was driven to the Subordinate Courts,
where I awaited my turn for the judge to deal with
me. We accused were processed like an assembly
line, with each one getting very limited time or
attention. Singapore efficiency, if you like.
When my turn came to plead, I tried to
tell the judge that I wanted to claim trial and
ask for release on bail, since my offense was
probably bailable, being merely an [online]
posting in a newsgroup. She was impatient, there
being about 100 accused to process that morning
before her lunch. I spoke into the microphone that
she should not treat me on the basis of "once a
madman always a madman", but I was sent to the
Institute for Mental Health (IMH) for observation
anyway.
In IMH, the doctors see us about
once a week, so it took about three weeks before
the doctor assigned to me could finalize his
report, which was "fit for trial", which is
another way of saying that I was not mentally ill.
The charge against me was "incitement to violence"
for asking voters to enter the polling stations
without authorization. That this was a trumped-up
charge, with very serious jail terms.
At
trial, after I was released from IMH ...
prosecutor Han Ming Kuang read the psychiatrist's
report on me, but only the old historical parts
and not the conclusion, which is that I am fit for
trial, to show that I was unfit for trial! Who
would believe the truth of my mental state: a
[public prosecutor] and the Straits Times or the
psychiatrist who saw me? I was told beforehand by
Soh that the charge would be dropped, and that
once released from court I was to avoid reporters
and leave the courthouse. So I left the
Subordinate Courts, collected my entire computer
system back from the CID, and went home without
giving any interviews to reporters.
[Prosecutor] Han took so long to read all
the old historical parts that the judge told him
testily to stop. But Han continued anyway. The
next day I knew why. He was reading not for the
court, but for the Straits Times reporters
present. The next day's Straits Times carried a
large report of Han's readings to give the
impression that I was mad and that was why the
charge was dropped. At that time, Han Fook Kwang
was editor, now chief editor I believe, of
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
