“…if some people want to organise a rally against Pink Dot or against the LGBT cause, we will impose the same rules.”
With barricades being imposed, identity checks in place, and a fiery debate about advertisement banners, this year’s Pink Dot event has certainly been marred with controversy.
Despite these setbacks, the pro-LGBT event will still go ahead this Saturday at Hong Lim Park at 5PM.
With tighter security measures, a general feeling of ostracisation still lingers among Pink Dot supporters, and this has prompted Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam to reiterate the government’s neutral stance just a few days before the event.
In an interview published by LGBT counselling and support group Oogachaga two days ago, Shanmugam spoke to volunteer counsellor Bryan Choong and took the opportunity to defend the government’s position on the stringent security checks at this year’s event.
“The government has repeatedly said we do not take a position on Pink Dot. (We are) Not for, not against. We have rules on where you can express your viewpoints by way of a public coming together.” “The government will apply the rules fairly to all.” “Likewise, if some people want to organise a rally against pink dot or against the LGBT cause, we will impose the same rules.”
He also addressed concerns of harassment against LGBT sponsors brought up by Choong, stating:
“When lines are crossed, the police will take action, and I think that message will have to go out to everyone. You can’t threaten physical, armed violence just because you disagree with somebody.” “Anyone who crosses the line, in terms of harassment, in terms of assault, in terms of threats against any group, the government is very strict…That’s not the way we have discussions.” “…They are free to do so (disagree) under speaker corner rules, but no violence.”
Unhappiness Among The Community
Understandably so, the announcement of new security measures had stirred unhappiness among Pink Dot Supporters.
Unlike past years – where there were no major incidents – this year’s gathering will have physical barricades erected around the park. In addition, there will be checkpoints where bags and identity cards will be checked.
In fact, according to TODAY, there will be over 60 security and auxiliary police officers stationed for the event.
In response, Shanmugam also elaborated on a separate Facebook post on Tuesday by pointing out the current security situation, and how it threatened large scale and sensitive events like this year’s Pink Dot.
“In view of the current security climate, increased security measures are absolutely required. We have seen terror attacks overseas, at rock concerts, festive markets and sporting events. Any large public gathering, with high profile, will be an attractive target.” “Pink Dot event will attract a large crowd and it would be irresponsible not to take security measures seriously at such events.”
Greater Legal Issues
Shanmugam is clearly taking a neutral and safety oriented stand towards the issue, but do all Singaporeans buy Shanmugam’s reasoning?
While there was no major criticism against Shanmugam’s statement towards the event, many took issue with the government’s stance at large.
For some supporters online, they felt that the ultimate statement of neutrality lied in abolishing 377A, a section of Singapore’s Penal Code that criminalises homosexual sex.
This particular legislation – imposed during the colonial period – has been the core of Singapore’s pro-LGBT argument, with many arguing against its old fashioned and barbaric rationale.
Interestingly, the Singaporean government has openly declared that 377A will only be selectively enforced, with Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong even calling it an “uneasy compromise” he will “have to live with”.
Another netizen pointed out other legal disadvantages the LGBT community faced, such as the inability to apply for public housing, which might affect the livelihood of young couples.
One netizen took a moral stance, stating that the act of doing nothing equates to doing something.
Does Shanmugam Have A Point?
That said, with Singapore terrorism alert levels at an all time high, Shanmugam may have a valid point in regards to security.
This particular netizen had no issue behind the event, and certainly agreed with the priority of security.
In fact, just today (29 June), reports have come in from Britain that a 19 year-old teenager has been hit with a terrorism charge for allegedly threatening to kill people at an LGBT Pride event.
Also, there was last year’s horrific Orlando Club shooting, where the self-radicalised Omar Mateen killed 49 people in a gay night club in what was America’s worst mass shooting in their history.
One netizen took a unique perspective, as he sympathised with the Home Affairs Minister’s stance and pointed out the potential political risks that Shanmugam was taking with the interview.
Assuringly, there also seemed to be some progressive responses from the slightly more conservative netizens in Singapore, who criticised any form of harassment towards Pink Dot supporters and took a more passive stance.
Safety, Above All
Regardless of the nature of the event, safety is definitely a key issue when it comes to large scale events like Pink Dot. Last year, Pink Dot’s attendance was 28,000, which according to their spokesman, actually exceeded Hong Lim Park’s venue capacity.
While the extent of and means to achieve that safety is definitely debatable – as seen in this year’s event – one cannot afford to belittle the value of it.
To be fair, security has been tightened at places all around Singapore. This has included crowded public events such as the recent Singapore vs Argentina football friendly, the Geylang Serai Bazaar and public spaces like Boat Quay.
As long as accomplishing that safety does not compromise the message of love that Pink Dot aims to pursue, that is all the security it needs.