I do not know that 4 persons actually protested to CPF for being non-transparent. I would participate in the protest if our government actually allows it. Read these paragraphs from http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/HI01Ae01.html
"In a recent attempt to test the limits of this constitutional guarantee, four people tried to mount a silent demonstration in front of the headquarters of the government-run Central Provident Fund (CPF) in August 2005. They wore T-shirts emblazoned with slogans calling on the CPF to be more transparent with pensioners' funds while standing in complete silence. Soon thereafter, 40 or so police officers in anti-riot gear confiscated their T-shirts and demanded that they disperse because they were a "public nuisance".
"Three of the four silent protesters mounted a court challenge against the government for denying them the freedom of assembly. However, Justice V K Rajah dismissed the suit, ruling that the police could reasonably have deemed the words on the T-shirts and placards as "insulting and/or abusive apropos those responsible" for managing the CPF, a public institution, and that their being stationary in front of the building represented harassment. "A persistent course of conduct for a sustained period of time can constitute harassment," the judge ruled.
No comments:
Post a Comment