The "Leeway" for promoting democracy is not easy for Singapore JP/7/SALMI

The "Leeway" for promoting democracy is not easy for Singapore

Hanys Salmi Kuala Lumpur

Of the 84 seats in Singapore's parliament, 82 are occupied by representatives of the People's Action Party (PAP). The other two are given to appointees blessed by the government. There is no better description of the actual nature of Singapore's democracy than this. Not surprisingly, former prime minister Goh Chok Tong refused to answer the criticism which opposition leader Chee Soon Juan directed at him during a U.S. National Endowment for Democracy meeting in Washington in June.

As of Aug. 12, when Lee Hsien Loong took over as the third prime minister, Singaporeans overseas, as well as those great politicians at home began to have the hope that -- as promised by Lee during his swearing-in ceremony at Istana -- the country would now see "a more open society."

That promise sounds nice, but bringing it into reality requires a great deal of sacrifice by the ruling party. And Lee himself may not like that kind of sacrifice. World history does not have any precedence of a ruling party willingly relinquishing its grip on power.

Now, the question: What kind of an open society will Premier Lee introduce? What kind of leeway would Lee apply to redefine the political system, and to what extent would changes be allowed?

In the political lexicon, an open society is the outcome of -- and not prelude to -- democracy. And democracy is not about landslide victory. It is more than just a matter of economic pie- sharing. It is a tradition of equal treatment, fair representation, freedom of expression, policy transparency, social justice and the respect of human rights.

There must be better respect of the civil rights of opposition politicians, and they must never again fall victim to government meddling in the legal proceedings involving those advocating freedom of expression. If Muslims cannot wear their scarfs and other religious symbols at school, democracy becomes hypocrisy. If foreign lawyers cannot defend legal cases involving Muslims in Singapore, autocracy is being mistaken for democracy. These are the issues the new premier needs to address properly.

In an open society, which the new premier envisages, the mass media must have the freedom to express whatever they want and not be caged or conditioned to exercise self-censorship, as is currently the case. Because it is the role of the media that would provide the kind of political education needed to realize Premier Lee's dream, of creating a more open society.

Analysts agree that, in spite of Prime Minister Lee's lofty promise of promoting democracy, Singapore cannot easily do it at its own initiative due to the web of politico-business interests that are part of the country's political culture.

Singapore needs external persuasion. ASEAN has all along pressured Myanmar to open itself up to democracy, release Aung San Suu Kyi and other political figures. But ASEAN is not likely going to do likewise to Singapore, due to its reliance on Singapore's investments, bilateral assistance and port facilities for international trade. So what? Shall we allow Singapore to remain as it is with its "autocratic democracy", while prodding other countries around it to promote democracy?

Singapore seems to have been destined to be an exception. It is the world's only country where a tragic lack of freedom of expression and democracy is being satisfactorily compensated for with outstanding economic progress. As a result, the country's social capital is solely built on economic calculations.

If Lee is serious about promoting an open society, the starting point is amending the notorious Internal Security Act. This must be seen as a need rather than obligation or pressure, because in the next 10 to 20 years when Lee steps aside, Singapore needs a stable government built on a healthy balance of power, which should rightly involve participation from all segments of society. And that time span is even too short for the nurturing of a healthy democracy.

But then how? Would his father Lee Kuan Yew and senior minister Goh Chok Tong agree? I assume that as long as his octogenarian father is still around, Prime Minister Lee may not be able to find the leeway that is needed to reform the society significantly. The maximum that could happen is that the prime minister might lay down the foundations for change, and then put it on hold awaiting expediency.

Opposition camps are still being treated as political foes rather than political sparring partners. But there is still some hope that perhaps after Lee Kuan Yew is out of the picture, the younger generation politicians -- with Lee Hsien Loong becoming the spearhead -- could redefine Singapore's version of democracy to conform with that of the rest of the world.

The writer is an analyst at a Kuala Lumpur-based research company. He can be reached at hanyssalmi@malaysia.com.