Letter to UN Human Rights Office for South-East Asia ( July 1, 2017)

From: Yan Jun
Sent: Saturday, 1 July, 2017 10:32
To: ohchr.bangkok@un.org
Cc: PM Office (pmo_hq@pmo.gov.sg) <pmo_hq@pmo.gov.sg>; Hong Kong Customs and Excise Department (customsenquiry@customs.gov.hk) <customsenquiry@customs.gov.hk>; agc@agc.gov.sg; CPIB (CPIB_Info@cpib.gov.sg) <CPIB_Info@cpib.gov.sg>; Alejandro Ponce (The World Justice Project) <aponce@worldjusticeproject.org>; Liao Ran (Transparency International) <rliao@transparency.org>; Sofie Arjon Schutte (U4 Anti-corruption resource centre) <sofie.schuette@cmi.no>; Srirak Plipat (Transparency International) <srirak@transparency.org>; Yuri Fedotov (United Nations Office on Drug and Crime) <yury.fedotov@unodc.org>; 'Freedom House' <info@freedomhouse.org>; Human Rights First <feedback@humanrightsfirst.org>; info@article19.org; information@ishr.ch; Jennifer Jokstad <jokstad@un.org>; mail@globalwitness.org; 'Mayda Chan (International Amnesty) ' <mayda.chan@amnesty.org>; 'Mickey Spiegel (Human Right Watch)' <spiegem@hrw.org>; 'Phil Robertson (Human Right Watch)' <RobertP@hrw.org>; Lian He Wan Bao <wanbao@sph.com.sg>; Lian He Zao Bao <zblocal@sph.com.sg>; news@theindependent.sg; Shin Min Daily (shinmin@sph.com.sg) <shinmin@sph.com.sg>; The Online Citizen (theonlinecitizen@gmail.com) <theonlinecitizen@gmail.com>; The Straits Times (stforum@sph.com.sg) <stforum@sph.com.sg>; Voices (Today) <voices@mediacorp.com.sg>; Hong Kong Journalists Association (hkja@hkja.org.hk) <hkja@hkja.org.hk>; Ming Pao (mingpao@mingpao.com) <mingpao@mingpao.com>; Oriental Daily News (news@odn.on.cc) <news@odn.on.cc>; SCMP (letters@scmp.com) <letters@scmp.com>; Singtao Daily (localnews@singtao.com) <localnews@singtao.com>; The Standard (editor@thestandard.com.hk) <editor@thestandard.com.hk>; Taipei Times (letters@taipeitimes.com) <letters@taipeitimes.com>; Taiwan news (service@taiwannews.com.tw) <service@taiwannews.com.tw>; The China Post (webmaster@mail.chinapost.com.tw) <webmaster@mail.chinapost.com.tw>; United Daily News (newspro@udn.com) <newspro@udn.com>; 'Apple Daily' <news@appledaily.com.tw>; Asia times <special@atimes.com>; Jon Fasman (Economists) <jonfasman@economist.com>; Keith Bradsher (New York Times) <kebrad@nytimes.com>; 'Linus Chua (Bloomberg)' <lchua@bloomberg.net>; Patrick McDowell (The Wall Street Journal) <patrick.mcdowell@dowjones.com>; 'Philip Bowring (The South China Morning Post)' <philip@bowring.net>; 'Reporters Without Borders (RWB)' <asia@rsf.org>; Rico Hizon (BBC) <ricohizon@gmail.com>; Roberto Coloma (Agence France-Presse) <Roberto.Coloma@afp.com>; 'Seiff Abby (Freelance Corrrespondent)' <aseiff@gmail.com>; 'The Huffington Post' <scoop@huffingtonpost.com>; Reform Party <Unknown>
Subject: Protests and grand corruption in Singapore

Dear The UN Human Rights Office for South East Asia,

I refer to my letter of 17 March 2017 (see below). That letter was copied to the UNs. I would appreciate it if the UNs pays attention to my protests against the institutionalized corruption in Singapore, or the basic right to freedom of speech and expression in Singapore.

My earlier letter

In that letter, I mentioned my continued protests against judicial corruption in Supreme Court. On March 27, I went to Orchard Road, the retail and entertainment hub of Singapore, to stage a protest but cancelled it at the last minute because of technical issues.

At that time there were serious concerns in Singapore about fake news (see here). It was clear that my corruption allegations could be easily treated as fake news if no hard evidence was provided. For that reason, I have prepared a YouTube video “Why should PM Lee Hsien Loong resign over abuse of power?” and explained in detail how the Singapore government has managed to engage in grand corruption and at the same time maintain its reputation of being corruption free (See here for video and here for transcript).  All information is on my blog (http://2helixsg.blogspot.sg/ ).

My continued protests

It seems to me that United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime has agreed with Transparency International on its legal definition of grand corruption (see here). As explained in my video, the Terrex issue, or the Terrex conspiracy, is a typical example of grand corruption. In this corruption case, the Singapore Prime Minister knowingly and voluntarily joined the political conspiracy to violate China’s sovereignty in an attempt to rescue its unsavoury reputation.

To support my YouTube video, I will stage a protest at the central square outside Raffle Place MRT station at 12 noon on July 3, 2017. I encourage the Attorney-General’s Chambers to take legal action against me if the government denies my allegations against the Prime Minister.

My allegations of abuse of power

After my protest, I will inform the international community that the Terrex issue is a conspiracy. I will also request the Singapore government to justify this serious violation of international law and the grand corruption in Singapore. I think it is necessary to let the international community know the institutionalized corruption in Singapore because the corruption situation cannot change from within.

I copy this letter to the famous Corruption Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB_Info@cpib.gov.sg) so the UNs and the international press can see clearly whether the CPIB is in a position to handle a grand corruption case directly involving the prime minister of Singapore, or the officer to whom the director of the CPIB reports.

Singapore Prime Minister will address the abuse of power claims made by his siblings in the Parliament on July 3, 2017 to protect the integrity of the government (see here). I hope that the PM adheres to the equality before the law and mentions my allegations of abuse of power against him on the same day and address this issue later in public. Selectively addressing allegations of abuse of power in the parliament is itself an act of abuse of power. 

Thank you.

Regards,         

Yan Jun

(Singapore NRIC: S7684361I)

From: Yan Jun [mailto:medp1128@hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, 17 March, 2017 15:41
To: Gan Kim Yong (Minister for Health) <gan_kim_yong@moh.gov.sg>
Cc: IMH QSM (IMH) <qsm@imh.com.sg>; The AGC(SG) <agc@agc.gov.sg>; Mayda CHAN (International Amnesty) <mayda.chan@amnesty.org>; Freedom House <info@freedomhouse.org>; Human Rights First <feedback@humanrightsfirst.org>; Jennifer Jokstad <jokstad@un.org>; Mickey Spiegel (Human Right Watch) <spiegem@hrw.org>; Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (South East Asia) <ohchr.bangkok@un.org>; Phil Robertson (Human Right Watch) <RobertP@hrw.org>; The International Service for Human Rights <information@ishr.ch>; Lian He Wan Bao <wanbao@sph.com.sg>; Lian He Zao Bao <zblocal@sph.com.sg>; Shin Min Daily <shinmin@sph.com.sg>; The Independent (SG) <news@theindependent.sg>; The Online Citizen (Singapore) <theonlinecitizen@gmail.com>; The Straits Times <stforum@sph.com.sg>; Voices (Today) <voices@mediacorp.com.sg>; Apple Daily (TW) <news@appledaily.com.tw>; Asia times <special@atimes.com>; Gopalan Nair (Blogger) <nair.gopalan@yahoo.com>; Jon Fasman (Economists) <jonfasman@economist.com>; Keith Bradsher (New York Times) <kebrad@nytimes.com>; Linus Chua (Bloomberg) <lchua@bloomberg.net>; Patrick McDowell (The Wall Street Journal) <patrick.mcdowell@dowjones.com>; Philip Bowring (The South China Morning Post) <philip@bowring.net>; Reporters Without Borders (RWB) <asia@rsf.org>; Rico Hizon (BBC) <ricohizon@gmail.com>; Roberto Coloma (Agence France-Presse) <Roberto.Coloma@afp.com>; Seiff Abby (Freelance Corrrespondent) <aseiff@gmail.com>; The Huffington Post <scoop@huffingtonpost.com>; Reform Party <info@reform.sg>; Singapore Democratic Party <sdp@yoursdp.org>; Workers' Party <hammer@wp.sg>
Subject: Feedback and an inquiry

Dear Minister for Health Gan Kim Yong,

1.      I refer to Dr. Amy Khor’s parliamentary speech on 10 March 2017 regarding improvements in community care for mental health (See here).

Dr. Amy Khor ‘s plan

2.      Dr. Khor highlighted two measures in her plan: first, the selection and training of the Front-line staff members from Housing and Development Board (HDB), National Environment Agency (NEA) and Singapore Police Force (SPF) to identify and respond to people with mental health issue; second, the strengthening of “post-care” support for the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) patients.

Purpose of this letter

3.      I am writing to give feedback to the Ministry of Health (MOH) on Dr. Khor’s plan and inquiry about whether the after-care support is applicable to me, a post-discharge patient from the IMH. 

4.      After my public protest in April 2016 against judicial corruption in the Supreme Court, the police raised the question whether I was suffering from delusional disorders. I was subjected to a standard psychiatric evaluation by the IMH but the official report released on 27 April 2016 gave a negative answer.

5.      In November, Dr. Dhanesh Kumar of the IMH reversed the official report and diagnosed me with “delusional disorder”, without even conducting a psychiatric interview. The IMH has deliberately refused to justify its opposing diagnoses and has declined to respond to my two complaints made in May and December 2106.

My continued protests and my question

6.      I certainly will continue my protests until the government handles my corruption allegation in public. The police are in a position to treat me as a post-discharge patient and provide me with strengthened psychiatric support under the present plan so my voice can be effectively silenced.  

7.      When police arrest me for “illegal” protest activities in the future, both the police and I face the same difficulty in having a reliable psychiatric report regarding my mental health to rely on. I understand that there are large numbers of government critics who have been put in jail all over the world. 

My suggestions

8.      With regard to the Front-line staff members, I am concerned about the legal basis for the active identification of people with mental illness and the false-positive identification rate.

9.      An ordinary person can easily recognize patients with severe psychiatric disorders and for those with mild mental illness, they always prefer to keep their mental conditions private because they are frightened about professional and personal discrimination.

10.   I graduated from medical school and lived with hospitalized patients in the IMH for one month. I am quite sure that that no matter how much training they receive, officers from HDB, NEA or SPF are unable to correctly identify people with mild mental disorders on the one hand, and to keep false positive rates reasonably low on the other hand.

11.   With regard to the support for discharged patients, I would suggest that the MOH pays at least equal attention to support provided by the IMH to its inmates in respect of psychiatrists’ professional competence and integrity. 

12.   Regarding the diagnosis on me of “Narcissistic traits, Querulous behavior"” made on 27 April, the IMH didn’t respond to my written challenge but hide the name of the psychiatrist and the grounds of his diagnosis to me. Regarding the diagnosis of “delusional disorder” made in November, the IMH refused to justify the serious breach of ethical guidelines committed by Dr. Dhanesh for not obtaining my informed consent for treatment.

13.   In addition, the IMH, the MOH and the Singapore Medical Council have acquiesced to my claim of patient abuse that I suffered during my detention in the IMH. So the authorities’ consent to my claim of patient abuse in psychiatric care can be reasonably inferred on the basis of the authorities’ obligations to respond to complaints (See here).  

The root cause

14.   Because of a lack of freedom of speech and of the press, this unpleasant situation is maintained or may have been improved to some extent without making my alleged misconduct public.

15.   There is a widely accepted justification for restrictions on freedom of speech and expression in Singapore, by which freedom is treated as “a liberty of being able to walk the streets freely, particularly if you’re a woman or a child, at any time of the night” (See here and here). This justification is false because such freedom/liberty/safety is founded on the assumption that the government upholds people’s fundamental right against arbitrary arrest or detention by the police.

16.   The fact is that the government has turned a blind eye to this fundamental right to cover up a serious mistake made by a top government official 30 years ago. The Supreme Court’s bias in favor of the government in my suit is the root cause of my corruption allegations and protests. 

My request

17.   I would appreciate it if the MOH responds to my questions raised in paragraph 3 and 7.

18.   The IMH has every detail of my complaints and criticisms. Recently I informed the international community that the government may have deliberately caused the Terrex detention issue (See here). If IMH stands by its diagnosis of delusional disorder made in November, please request them for their comments on my analysis of Terrex detention issue.

19.   Thank you.

Regards,

Yan Jun

(Singapore NRIC: S7684361I)