Why MDA?

To Singapore With Love, directed by Ms Tan Pin Pin is about Home, the longing for home to be more precise.

The film is not about the MCP or a call to join the MCP which no longer exists. Neither does the film glorifies the deeds of the MCP. For the MDA to issue a “Not allowed for all ratings” or “Banned” in short, is disappointing and irrational.

MDA claims:

“The individuals in the film have given distorted and untruthful accounts of how they came to leave Singapore and remain outside Singapore. A number of these self-professed “exiles” were members of, or had provided support to, the proscribed Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) … two of the individuals in the film conveniently omitted mentioning the criminal offences which they remain liable for, like tampering with their Singapore passports or absconding from National Service.” – See http://www.mda.gov.sg/AboutMDA/NewsReleasesSpeechesAndAnnouncements/Pages/NewsDetail.aspx?news=639.

In the penultimate paragraph of its press release, MDA said:

“The individuals featured in the film gave the impression that they are being unfairly denied their right to return to Singapore. They were not forced to leave Singapore, nor are they being prevented from returning. The Government has made it clear that it would allow former CPM members to return to Singapore if they agree to be interviewed by the authorities on their past activities to resolve their cases. Criminal offences will have to be accounted for in accordance with the law.”

It is sad that a film is banned just because the officials dislike what the interviewees said. Surely, a detailed press statement from the government is sufficient to rebut the claims of the interviewees. Further, the government controls the media and it is capable of churning out more films like “The Days of Rage” to counter the narratives of the interviewees who are now in their 80s.

The government have till today, failed to explain why after the September 1963 election, it had deemed it necessary to arrest so many people including three elected MPs of the Barisan Sosialis and imprisoned them for years under the ISA. It was because of the arrests together with hundreds of others under the ISA that year, that elected MPs Wong Soon Fong and Chan Sun Wing who appeared in the film became political exiles. They had put their heart and soul helping Lee Kuan Yew win the 1959 election. They had stood for election and won in September 1963 but had been denied their rightful seats in the legislative assembly. They and others, including He Jin, a prolific writer, told their stories in a calm and uncomplaining manner. Their love for the Singapore is evident from what they say and do today. They follow Singapore’s progress closely, reading newspapers daily and watching news on television.

“To Singapore With Love” is not just about the politicians and members of the CPM who left Singapore soon after Operation Cold Store and the general election in September 1963. It is much more. Indeed, the “star” in the film and the most reflective interviewee is Dr Ang Swee Chai who touches our hearts with personal stories of courage and sacrifice of her late husband, Francis Khoo, a young lawyer who fled Singapore when his friends were arrested in February 1977. They were accused of being “Euro-Communists.” Dr Ang and Francis were married just two weeks before the arrests.

Dr Ang herself was imprisoned and left Singapore to join her husband after her release. Legally, she has not committed any crime and should be able to return to Singapore without conditions or being subjected to the humiliation of giving statements of her past. But she has not been able to obtain a Singapore passport. In the interview, Dr Ang reflected on the hardship that befell her family and that of Francis. Francis’ mother missed her son and wished that he could return. But upon receiving a letter from Francis explaining why he had rejected the thought of returning because he didn’t want to “squeal” on his friends, she accepted the fate that she would not be able to see him. Like many other exiles, both Francis and Swee Chai were unable to return home to visit their parents when they became seriously ill and died.

MDA’s comment on the crimes of the exiles, in particular, the reference to Tan Wah Piow’s escape from enlistment after serving a one year prison sentence on a false charge for “rioting” is interesting. Many Singaporean males have failed to enlist. Surely the penalty cannot be 40 years of forced exile and the loss of one’s citizenship by the use of a law enacted chiefly to deprive him of citizenship in 1985.

Finally, the film touches on the lunatic chase of Ho Juan Thai, a Nantah graduate and former president of the Nanyang University Students’ Union. He was a candidate for the Workers’ Party in the 1976 general election. He left Singapore suddenly when the secret police went after him for something he allegedly said during the election rallies. He had to use up his parents’ life savings in order to escape. Like Francis, he too had to do menial work in London. The film shows him with his two young children and wife. He spoke of his life, marrying late and wishing his elder son could return to Singapore to do national service!

Singapore will be 50 next year. Singaporeans have matured and deserve to see this film depicting people who were active in attempting to shape Singapore during their youth.

Let’s hope the MDA will reconsider its decision should an appeal be lodged.