Valencia fans’ thwarted Peter Lim protest highlights Singapore’s Achilles heel
Yellow, in the West, is the colour of optimism and happiness.
Those traits were what Spanish couple Dani Cuesta, 34, and Mireia Saez, 30, had hoped for their beloved Valencia CF when they unfurled a bright, lemon-coloured banner with three words — “Lim Go Home” — in front of a building in Singapore.
The slogan, directed at Valencia’s Singaporean billionaire owner Peter Lim, was a peaceful cry for Lim to leave the club following years of mismanagement.
Yet it was a mild act in comparison to their counterparts in Spain where Los Ches aficionados have not only held up large signs but also ignited flares at the team’s Mestalla Stadium.
Unfortunately, in draconian Singapore, even the tiniest forms of protests are punishable by law.
Yellow, as Cuesta and Saez found out, can also mean sensationalism and excess.
Their passports were confiscated at the airport for the alleged offence of “taking part in a public assembly” under Singapore’s Public Order Act (POA). The law requires a police permit for public demonstrations of support, including by an individual, for any cause.
More than meets the eye
Whenever I reveal my nationality, I am often greeted with envy. Common refrains include — “it’s so safe”, “you have the world’s best passport”, “must be great living there”.
Granted, Singapore’s rapid transformation from a third to first-world country cannot be ignored. As a citizen, I have enjoyed numerous benefits including first-rate education, access to healthcare and visa-free travel freedom.
But it is far from the utopian paradise most believe exists in the tiny south-east Asian nation about half the size of London.
For Singaporeans, the right to freedom of assembly, widely considered a basic human right, is severely curtailed. The government employs repressive criminal and civil laws to prosecute critical voices.
In March 2021, member of parliament Louis Ng was investigated by police for posting social media photos of himself holding up a self-explanatory apolitical sign — “support them” — alongside food hawker stall owners. His crime? According to the POA, unlawful assembly.
Later that year, civil rights activist Jolovan Wham was also tried under the POA for holding up a placard in front of a police station containing a smiley face drawing. Wham was expressing solidarity with two young climate activists summoned by police for questioning.
Complaisant locals argue the country’s low crime rate is evidence that strict laws like the POA help keep Singapore safe. They demand foreigners, like Cuesta and Saez, to respect their laws.
But the larger takeaway should be to question the necessity for such a harsh law. Was Cuesta and Saez’s orderly protest, while admittedly unwise, a genuine threat to Singapore’s public safety?
Like Ng and Wham, their intentions were pure and their actions frankly innocuous. The goal was merely to draw attention to Lim.
Why Valencia fans hate Peter Lim
Since taking over Valencia in 2014, Lim has plunged the club into destitution. Initial promise was quickly wiped out by nepotistic decisions like exclusively signing players represented by football super-agent Jorge Mendes and hiring the vastly inexperienced Gary Neville as manager.
While both were Lim’s close connections, Mendes’ signings mostly flopped as debts accumulated and Neville oversaw the club’s worst win percentage in La Liga history.
In 2019, Copa Del Rey-winning head coach Marcelino was sacked after falling out with Lim. The next year, Valencia’s best players — Ferran Torres, Rodrigo, Dani Parejo, Geoffrey Kondogbia — were sold to balance the books.
That was when Libertad VCF, a fan-led movement to regain control of their club, was formed with the tagline “Lim Go Home” popularised. Until today, Lim still owns the club.
As lifelong Valencia fans on their honeymoon to Singapore, Cuesta and Saez sensed an opportunity to amplify the voices of their fellow supporters.
Instead, they ran into an authoritarian juggernaut that even forced the club into releasing an official statement. While they underwent a harrowing ordeal, their efforts were not in vain.
Besides furthering their cause, the Spaniards have shone a bright light on Singapore’s often invisible flaws beneath the facade of perfection.
Death penalty for drugs
Another “fake news” law introduced in 2019, the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA), has been deemed by Human Rights Watch as a restriction on free expression.
Instead of its intended purpose, POFMA has been enacted on numerous occasions to prosecute differing opinions, labelling criticisms as false or misleading.
Lawyers for Liberty, a human rights law reform initiative, have had their content blocked for claiming that prisoners on death row in Singapore’s Changi Prison are executed brutally.
Yes, capital punishment still exists in Singapore. According to Amnesty International, since 2022, at least 15 people have been executed for non-violent drug offences. The exact figures are unknown.
Singapore law specifies those caught trafficking more than 500g of cannabis or 15g of heroin be given the death penalty.
Yet, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that countries that still employ the death penalty should reserve its use only for the most serious crimes.
On October 4, authorities executed Mohamed Azwan bin Bohari for drug trafficking. A day later, local anti-death penalty activist group Transformative Justice Collective was issued a POFMA notice for their reporting of Azwan’s case.
The right to oppose
The power of protests should not be underestimated. In 1955, Rosa Parks’ refusal to give up her bus seat eventually led to the desegregation of buses; a huge step towards racial equality in the United States.
Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights protect the right to express opinions through public demonstrations and freedom of assembly.
As a first-world nation that is supposedly democratic, Singapore, a de facto one-party state, must do better.
Cuesta and Saez were eventually let off with a formal warning without any charges filed.
But political opponents of the incumbent People’s Action Party have not been as fortunate.
Terry Xu, chief editor of sociopolitical media outlet The Online Citizen, has relocated to Taiwan. Charles Yeo, a lawyer and opposition politician, has claimed asylum in the UK.
Yellow, to the Singapore government, is as ambiguous as it can be.
