标签

夏后算账篇

     张素兰            选举局

张素兰:我是否能够期盼获得一个公平和独立的调查?

秉公处理

转载自:https://www.facebook.com/sohlung.teo/posts/10208607869648032

网友们、朋友们,您们好

我在过去几天一直保持沉默。在此向所有关心我的网友们和朋友们表示歉意

2016年5月31日,我的电脑和手机都被警方拿走了。他们要让我无法对外联系。我没向别人借一台手提电脑,那是因为我不要给朋友们造成不便。但是,想到自己已经几天没与朋友们及家人保持联系的缘故,我不得不向朋友借了这台平板电脑

首先,我在此感激大家亲切的慰问、发表公开声明以及提供各种形式的帮忙。我非常高兴的获悉,大家所展现的这种精神并不因为这次事件而感到恐惧

2016年6月2日下午,我接到了律师传来的信息,警方准备归还我的电脑和手机。但是,我坚决不同意他们在来信中的第二段所说的如下文字

“无论如何,假设您的当事人现在愿意与我们合作,亲自到警署来协助警方从电子设备里获取所要的资料,以及您的事人已经接受的问讯,和提供一份声明并签署这份声明。警方是准备归还这些物件的。”

警方上述的声明是在影射我不与他们合作。这是完全不确实的指控

我在2016年5月28日星期六晚上9.55分收到他们的信件后,我在2016年5月31日星期二早上10点到广东民路中央警察局大厦报到了。对于选举局指控我在冷静日当天在网上发表得那4篇文章涉嫌破坏选举条例,我向警方做了全面的口供声明。我否认选举局的这一切指控。现在明显的事实是我没有违反任何的法律。我告诉他们,这是宪法赋予我的言论自由与表达权利

他们问我,是否还有其他人与我共同使用我的脸书(Facebook)户头。我告诉他们,我是唯一使用和管理这个头的人。我当时预计这场问讯时间最长将耗时一个小时。结果是长达2小 时。这时候已经是过了中午时分。我提出要求吃午餐休息。负责问讯的警官最初答应我可以吃了午餐后继续问讯。但是,我想,她可能是向上级请示后随即告诉我, 她必须完成记录我的口供声明。后来,她说,这是警方的规定,必须把我的声明打印出来并念给我听后。如果有任何错误需要修改的话(他们会进行修改)。我可以在午餐过后回来签署

那份声明终于打印出来并念给我听了。在完成了这项工作后,她接到上级的进一步指示。她说,她需要拿走在我家里的手机和电脑。我提出抗议,因为我的手机和电脑与这4份上载到网上的文章毫无关系。我已经承认了这些文章是我写得了,因此绝对没有需要再去检查我的电脑和手机。接着下来,有更多的警官进来审讯室恐吓我

他们告诉我,如果我拒绝交出我的手机,他们将逮捕我,并把我的手铐上手铐带我到家里拿走我的电脑。他们举出了刑法程序法令第34和35款。在这条法律项下,在调查过程中他们有权拿走我的个人物件,因为我被指控涉嫌的罪行是属于“可被逮捕的罪行”,同时,他们不需要申请搜查令。当时在审讯室里有4-5名 警官,还有更多的警方人员站在审讯室外面。这是违背了我个人的意愿的。我被他们押出了审讯室,并上了一辆在楼下停车场等候的警车。他们让我坐在后座两名警 方人员的之间。他们一名是调查官,另一名是女性警员。警车前座是两名男性警官。我就这样被他们载回家。当时我还没吃中餐呢

当警察车抵达我家的停车场,我发现又有另一辆警察车早已经在我们的前面抵达了。车上有4名便衣警察。他们自我介绍自己是证据搜查组的成员。接着7-8 名警官跟随着进入我居住的单位。对我来说是非常幸运的,我的律师张缓蓉小姐和她的朋友们已经比警方人员提早到达我家

证据搜查组进入我家的第一个任务是在大门口外向我屋子的客厅拍照。他们要求在场的每一人必须靠边站,以便他们可以在没有障碍物阻挡的情况下拍摄整个房子的景象。这就是地地道道赤裸裸地侵犯我的个人隐私权。我个人的客厅与上载在脸书(Facebook)的那4篇文章有什么关系呢?警方拍摄客厅目的是什么?这是不是为了今后可以再来我家进行抄家

我现在要求给予一个说法?我将会指示我的律师要求他们归还拍摄我家的所有照片和在警方的摄像机里的数据卡原件

在拍摄完客厅后,警方开始拍摄我的电脑。他们取出了电脑的中央处理器(CPU)。他们把中央处理器的每一个端口都封死,并装进了一个袋子里。接着,他们向我要手机。我的手机不仅仅储存着脸书的应用程序。我的手机开机是自动链接到我的邮箱、电话联系号码、Whatsapps和其他各种应用程序。在警察署时,我已经要求删除把手机里的所有应用程序和邮件。但是他们不允许。我到家后,他们同意我进行删除了。我删除了所有的程序和电话联系号码。我甚至有挥之不去的感觉,尽管我删除了所有的信息和程序,警方还是可能会有办法获取这些删除掉的资料

最 后,他们就转回来要拿走我的手提电脑。当他们一踏进我家时,我就告诉他们,我的手提电脑与我的脸书没有任何关系。在我录取口供时,我告诉他们,我是使用桌机或者手机上网浏览脸书网页的。调查官对我说,假设我可以证明并没有使用手提电脑上载文章到脸书,他们将不会拿走我的桌机,但是,他们过后又改变主意了。 警方人员坚持必须拿走桌机。在这一点上让我感到非常愤慨!他们又再一次食言了!这并不是他们第一次食言。他们把桌机的端口封住后又装进了一个袋子里

在我家进行抄家的警方人员共有7-8人。这是极其令人感到恐怖的。他们都是使用相机和录音机设备。对我来说,这是一个极其恶劣的经历。我在想,我期望今后不会再有人和我一样有如此的经历。我相当肯定鄞玉林一定和我一样是面对同样的经历。他和他们的父母一定会受到创伤的

当我今早离开家里前往广东民路时,我根本没有想过警察会利用调查破坏国会选举法令为借口到我家进行抄家,同时在我家里进行拍照。我为此感到震惊

在这些执法人员离开我家时,我和我的朋友们尽最大的努力采取了保护我的朋友的隐私工作。我们重新设置密码、删除所有的联系电话号码、最后删除我的Gmail 和雅虎的户头,我已经失去了数千封电子邮件和档案资料。我也删除了其他的应用程序。抢救和保护我朋友的隐私是我在脑海里首先想到的问题。

我与律师朱正熙联系过了。我问他,警方将需要长的时间才归还我所有的设备。他说,按照程序,他们将会在3-12个月之间归还。显然,要等到警察证据搜查组完成搜查我的设备里的资料前,我必须要购买一台新的电脑

经过多次思考,我决定把的电话卡装进我的旧手机,这样最低限度家人及朋友们可以和我联系。我去了新电信询问。我问他们,在不影响我的脸书户头情况下,如何终止我的手机。他们给我的意见是,我可以支付35元手续费暂时终止我的手机户头。就这样,我(暂时)终止了我的手机户头。我希望证据搜查组不会篡改我的联系人。我也同时询问了手提电脑的价格,它们的价格都很昂贵

尽管警方通知我将会归还我的设备,我不会为此感到高兴。因为他们的作为已经造成了我的不便。我也不会感到兴奋,因为我怀疑我的设备已经被人篡改了。所以,我 必须购买一台新的桌机、手提电脑和手机。但是,我将在下个星期取回我的这些设备。我可能会被要求进行另一轮的问讯。我现在对这一切感到疲惫不堪了

警察国

新加坡是不是一个警察国家啊?政府拥有太大的权利了。他们可以使用法令手段,侦查犯罪为借口,闯入我们的私人生活、进入民宅、拍照和录像。他们所做的这一切不会受到任何处罚。但是,我们啥事都没做,却继续让他们剥夺了我们的隐私权?我们是不是完全没有权利啊

我们已经失去了很多基本权利了,这些基本权利包括了言论自由、表达自由和结社自由。那是因为我们过去没有警惕这些问题。过去我们相信我们的政府。我们现在必须自己决定,我们是不是要站起来维护自己的权利?还是让政府继续通过和实施各种这法令/法律来侵犯我们的利益,知道我们一无所有

当选举局和警方发表在2016年6月2日联合声明,确定自己的行动的合法性,实质上是做了基本上已经是错误的行为已经能够成为了他们的第二本性了。选举局向警方报案投诉 鄞玉林和我。警方本来应该要调查有关的投诉和决定我们是否已经能够造成了涉嫌犯罪,但是,在他们尚未完成有关这方面的调查前,警方却与选举局站在同一条战线上了

 13332960_774039332732467_419715080810113827_n

 

Soh Lung Teo

CAN I EXPECT A FAIR-MINDED AND INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION?

e59ca8e8939de889b2e79a84e6a085e997a8e5908ee99da21

https://www.facebook.com/sohlung.teo/posts/10208607869648032

Hi Everyone!

My apologies for being silent for the past few days. The police took away my computers and mobile phone on Tuesday, 31 May 2016. They incapacitated me. I didn’t want to borrow a laptop because I didn’t want to inconvenience my friends. But the thought of not being in touch with friends and relatives for so many days caused me to borrow this notebook.

Thank you for all the kind messages, public statements, offers of help etc. It is good to know that many of you are in such great spirits and not at all intimidated with all that has happened!

Last evening (2 June), I received news from my lawyers that that the police are going to return my computers and mobile. I take strong objection to paragraph 2 of their letter which said:

“However, if your client is now willing to co-operate by attending personally at the station to assist in the extraction of the relevant information, the Police are prepared to return the items provided that all the necessary information has been retrieved and after your client has been interviewed and has provided a statement and signed the same.”

The Interrogation

The above statement implied that I had not been cooperative. This is totally untrue. Following the receipt of their letter at 9.55 pm on Saturday, 28 May, I attended the interview on Tuesday, 31 May at 10 am at the Central Division, Police Cantonment Complex. I gave a full statement regarding the four postings on Cooling Off Day as the Election Department had alleged that I had breached the Parliamentary Elections Act.

I denied then, and now categorically state, that I have not infringed any law. I told them that it was my constitutional right to free speech and expression.

I was asked if there were other users of my Facebook account. I told them that I was and am the sole administrator. I had expected the recording of my statement to take an hour at most but it went on for two hours. As it was past noon, I asked for a lunch break. The investigating officer initially agreed that I could take a break and then resume after lunch. However, I think she was instructed otherwise subsequently and said that she had to complete the recording of my statement. Later she said that it was police protocol that the full statement be printed and read over to me but I could sign it after lunch and after correcting any errors.

The statement was subsequently printed and read to me. It was after that was done that the investigating officer received further instructions. She said that she had to seize my mobile phone and computer at home. I protested because my mobile and computer have nothing to do with the four postings. I had already admitted that I was responsible for the posts and there was absolutely no necessity for them to examine my computer and mobile phone.More officers then entered the room to threaten me.

They told me that if I refused to hand over my mobile, I would be arrested, handcuffed and brought home to have my computer seized. They cited sections 34 and 35 of the Criminal Procedure Code which allegedly justify their right to seize properties in the course of investigation because the offence I was alleged to have committed was an “arrestable offence” and no search warrant was required. There were 4 or 5 officers in the room and more outside. Against my wish, I was escorted out of the interrogation room and into a waiting police car at the ground level carpark. I was led to the rear passenger seat and sandwiched between the investigating officer and another female officer and driven home. In the front seats were two male officers. I still did not have lunch.

The Raid

Reaching the car park of my block, I discovered that another police car had arrived before us and there were four plainclothes officers. They introduced themselves as the forensic team. Seven or eight officers then followed me to my flat. Fortunately for me, my lawyer, Ms Jeannette Chong-Aruldoss and friends had arrived earlier than the police.

The first thing the forensic team did when they entered my flat was to photograph my living room from the door. Everyone had to stand clear to the side so that the entire room was unobstructed. It was clearly an invasion of my privacy. What has my living room got to do with the four postings on my Facebook? What do the police intend to do with the photographs taken of my living room? Is it their intention to raid my flat in future?

I DEMAND AN EXPLANATION NOW. I WILL INSTRUCT MY LAWYER TO DEMAND THAT ALL PHOTOGRAPHS OF MY LIVING ROOM BE RETURNED TO ME AND THE ORIGINALS IN THE POLICE DATA CARD BE DESTROYED.

After photographing the living room, the police then proceeded to photograph my computers. They removed the CPU, pasting seals over every port. They then put it into a bag. Next they wanted my mobile phone. My mobile phone contains more than just my Facebook application. Turning on my mobile automatically leads to emails, contacts, Whatsapps and various other applications. While at the police station my request to delete applications and emails from my mobile phone was not allowed, I was permitted to do so at home. And so I deleted these programs and contacts even though I have the nagging feeling that the police would be able to access whatever information and programs I had deleted.

Finally, they turned to seize my laptop. When they first entered my flat, I had told them that my laptop had nothing to do with my Facebook. In my statement given to the investigating officer, I had said that I used either my desktop or mobile to access my Facebook. The investigating officer said that if I could show them that I did not use my laptop for Facebook postings, they would not seize it. But they then changed their minds. The police insisted that I should hand over my laptop. I was very angry at this point because they had again broken their word. It was not the first time that they had done so. They sealed up the ports and placed my laptop into another bag.

The raid carried out at my flat by seven or eight police officers was terrifying. Many of them used cameras and recording devices. It was an ugly experience and I wish that no one will ever need to go through what I went through. I am quite sure that Roy Ngerng had undergone the same experience. He and his parents must have been so traumatised.

When I left my home in the morning to go to the Cantonment Police Complex, I never thought that the police would use the excuse of investigating an offence under the Parliamentary Elections Act to conduct a raid at my home and take photographs of my flat. I am shocked.

After the law enforcement officers left my flat, my friends and I did our best to protect the privacy of my friends. We changed passwords to email accounts, deleted contacts and finally removed my entire Gmail and Yahoo accounts. I lost several thousands of emails and archival materials. I also deleted other applications.


Salvaging and protecting my friends’ privacy was uppermost in my mind. I checked with my lawyer Choo Zheng Xi as to how long the police would take to return my properties. Precedents showed that it could be between 3 to 12 months. It was obvious that I would have to buy a new computer after the forensic team had gone through my devices.

After some thought, I decided to fit my old mobile phone with a phone card so that at least, family and friends could still contact me. I went to Singtel to enquire how I could disable my mobile without affecting the Facebook account. I was advised that I could terminate my account and pay about $35 or temporarily suspend my card at $10 per month. The effect of such suspension would be to temporarily disable my mobile. I therefore suspended my account and hope the forensic team would not tamper with my contacts. I also check on the price of laptops. They are costly.

Although the police informed me that they would return my equipment, I am not rejoicing because I have already been inconvenienced. I am not thrilled because I suspect that my devices have already been tampered with. So I will have to buy a new desktop and laptop and a new mobile phone. But I will collect my devices sometime next week as I will probably be subjected to another round of interrogation. I am too exhausted for that now.

Police State?

Is Singapore a police state? The government has too much power. It can use the law to intrude into our private lives, enter premises, take photographs and videos of our homes on the pretext of investigating crimes. It can do all these with impunity. But do we do nothing and let them continue to deprive us of our privacy and rights? Are we so powerless?

We have lost many of our fundamental rights such freedom of speech, expression and assembly because we have not been vigilant in the past. We have trusted our government. We have to decide now if we want to stand up for our rights or let the government continue to pass laws and enforce them against our interest till we are left with nothing.

When the Election Department issued a joint statement with the police justifying their action (The Straits Times 2 June), doing something fundamentally wrong has already become second nature to those in power. The Election Department had lodged a police complaint against Roy Ngerng and me. The police are supposed to investigate the complaint and decide if we have committed an offence. But even before completing its investigation, the police have already stood together with the Election Department.

相关链接网址:

1.张素兰:《咱们的警察部队是干啥的? What is happening to our Police Force?》

https://renminglishiziliaoaku.wordpress.com/2016/05/31/

2.TOC:《鄞玉林和张素兰现在面对警方广泛的调查 Roy Ngerng Yiling and Teo Soh Lung are now being extensively investigated

https://renminglishiziliaoaku.wordpress.com/2016/06/01/

3. Function 8严厉谴责政府滥用权力对付个别公民及公民社会组织 Function 8 condemns use of gov’t powers against individual citizens and civil society groups

https://renminglishiziliaoaku.wordpress.com/2016/06/01/

  1. 朱正熙律师:我对警方的许多感到失望

https://renminglishiziliaoaku.wordpress.com/2016/06/01/

 

5.工人党就“冷静日调查事件”发表声明

 https://renminglishiziliaoaku.wordpress.com/2016/06/01/

 

  1. 民主党发表声明:要求平等对待冷静日

https://renminglishiziliaoaku.wordpress.com/2016/06/01/

7.鄞玉林:《民主就是集体强奸》

https://renminglishiziliaoaku.wordpress.com/2016/06/02/

8. 武吉巴督补选冷静日违例事件 警方充公涉案电子器材进行调查

http://www.channel8news.sg/news8/singapore/20160601-sg-cooling-off/2837302.html

9.新加坡社区行动网络发起联署声明;停止所有对张素兰和鄞玉林的调查行动

https://renminglishiziliaoaku.wordpress.com/2016/06/02/

  1. 视频录像网址:警方人员在搜查张素兰家https://www.facebook.com/jeannette.aruldoss/videos/10201742041470598/

11.陈华彪:心字头上一把刃

https://renminglishiziliaoaku.wordpress.com/2016/06/02/

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements