The unjust sentencing by a Singapore court of two Falun Dafa practitioners has exposed some contradictions with regards to the Singapore government's attitude toward Falun Gong and the Chinese Communist Party's persecution of Falun Gong in China.
On the one hand, the judge stated, "This persecution is happening in China. It is about Chinese people, and we are not interested. What happens in China has nothing to do with this case."
On the other hand, by putting Falun Dafa practitioners on trial the Singapore government is signalling its acceptance of the Chinese Communist Parties (CCP's) persecution of Falun Gong. Without the persecution of Falun Gong in China, this case would not have occurred. Can they have us believe that this case is not linked to the persecution?
It is apparent that the Singapore government's position is one of appeasement of the CCP's persecution policies, and we dare to add, it borders on complicity. Within the framework of Singapore's convoluted, complex legal system, there exists more than sufficient latitude in both interpretation and application of the law to allow exploitation for political purposes.
Before Jiang and his regime launched the persecution of Falun Gong in 1999, Falun Dafa practitioners enjoyed the freedom to practise in Singapore. They often held large-scale group exercises, and were never required to apply for permits. After the persecution began in 1999 in China, Falun Gong has been restricted everywhere in Singapore. Practitioners have been harassed or forbidden even normal activities. Police officers have put Falun Dafa practitioners under surveillance, rejected application for permits, delayed or refused permanent residency of Falun Dafa practitioners, refused permission to use public facilities, and have generally interfered with Falun Gong activities.
The media in Singapore has frequently echoed the CCP's slander of Falun Gong while seldom, if ever, allowing the publication of articles defending Falun Gong. It appears that the persecution of Falun Gong was exported to Singapore from the very beginning. The witness police provided for this case is a local woman who, influenced by the media's slandering propaganda, mistakenly believed that Falun Gong is illegal in Singapore. So, when she saw Falun Gong being practised openly in public, she reported the practitioners to the police based on her "social responsibility."
One of the "crimes" for which the Singapore government has prosecuted Falun Dafa practitioners is to "possess and mail unauthorised VCDs." According to Singapore Falun Dafa practitioners, when they apply for a permit for the disc's, all disc's exposing the persecution do not receive permits, but those disc's which simply introduce Falun Dafa in a positive way are allowed.
The facts indicate that this case is closely related to the persecution in China. If there were no persecution in China, there would not be an extension of the persecution into Singapore, and there would be no case. Needless to say, the CCP uses Singapore's dependency on trade with China to pressure the Singapore government and media. The CCP does this all over the world, with varying degrees of success. One has to wonder why Singapore has succumbed to the pressure and behaves in a way that betrays its social conscience.
Singapore, together with Taiwan, Korea, and Hong Kong are known as the "four little dragons" in Asia. Falun Dafa practitioners are widely supported in Taiwan and Korea, and legal procedures have been initiated there to bring the mainland Chinese criminals persecuting Falun Gong to trial. Even the Hong Kong government, now under the control of the CCP, has done less to interfere with Falun Dafa practitioners. Why is it that the independent sovereign government of Singapore chooses to set this example and be the first to align itself with the doomed CCP?
We sincerely hope that the Singapore government can see the error of its ways and once again act like a socially responsible nation!
You are welcome to print and circulate all articles published on Clearharmony and their content, but please quote the source.