History
Emergency Regulations Ordinance
British colonial Malaya introduced the "Emergency Regulations Ordinance" on 7 July 1948 during the Malayan Emergency in response to a communist uprising and guerrilla war. The regulations allowed the police to arrest anybody suspected of having acted "or being likely to act" in a way that would threaten security without evidence or warrant, hold them incommunicado for investigation and detaining them indefinitely without the detainee ever being charged with a crime or tried in a court of law.
Preservation of Public Security Ordinance
The successor to the Emergency Regulations Ordinance, the PPSO, was introduced a result of the 1955 Hock Lee Bus riots by the Labour Party government in Singapore. There was strong opposition to the Labour Party's PPSO by the opposition party then, the People's Action Party. In 1958, Lee Kuan Yew from the People's Action Party accused the Lim Yew Hock government of using the PPSO to stifle political dissent.
Internal Security Act
In 1960, three years after Malaya's independence, the Emergency was declared over. However, the Malayan (now Malaysian) Internal Security Act was passed in its place with much of the same powers. During parliamentary debates, Malayan Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman stated that the ISA would only be applied against only the remaining Communist insurgents. The Malayan Communist Party and its insurgents eventually surrendered in 1989. Nonetheless, the ISA in Malaysia was retained.
When Singapore joined the Federation of Malaya in 1963, the Malayan ISA was enacted in Singapore. Even after its separation from Malaysia in 1965, Singapore also retained the ISA.
In September 2011, the ISA debate was re-opened after Malaysia announced that it was considering repealing the ISA. Former ISA detainees in Singapore and the Singaporean government subsequently debated the legitimacy and relevance of the ISA.
Read more about this topic: Internal Security Act (Singapore)
Famous quotes containing the word history:
“The foregoing generations beheld God and nature face to face; we, through their eyes. Why should not we also enjoy an original relation to the universe? Why should not we have a poetry and philosophy of insight and not of tradition, and a religion by revelation to us, and not the history of theirs?”
—Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882)
“To summarize the contentions of this paper then. Firstly, the phrase ‘the meaning of a word’ is a spurious phrase. Secondly and consequently, a re-examination is needed of phrases like the two which I discuss, ‘being a part of the meaning of’ and ‘having the same meaning.’ On these matters, dogmatists require prodding: although history indeed suggests that it may sometimes be better to let sleeping dogmatists lie.”
—J.L. (John Langshaw)
“The thing that struck me forcefully was the feeling of great age about the place. Standing on that old parade ground, which is now a cricket field, I could feel the dead generations crowding me. Here was the oldest settlement of freedmen in the Western world, no doubt. Men who had thrown off the bands of slavery by their own courage and ingenuity. The courage and daring of the Maroons strike like a purple beam across the history of Jamaica.”
—Zora Neale Hurston (1891–1960)