|
|
|
Point-by-Point
rebuttal to Ministry of Home Affairs’ statement
21
Dec 06
Below is a reply by Dr Chee Soon Juan to the
Ministry of Home
Affairs’ statement dated 20 December
2006.
Point 1: Marking of food trays.
MHA:
It is normal Prisons procedure to record the food consumption of
inmates under close watch. This procedure applies not just to
Chee Soon Juan but to all such inmates.
CSJ: When the
question of the marking was first raised by my wife, Ms Huang
Chih Mei, and sister, Ms Chee Siok Chin, on 4/12/2006, Monday,
both Mr Chandra Kumar (MHA official) and Queenstown Remand Prison
(QRP) Superintendent Hoon categorically denied that prisoners’
trays were marked, unless it’s for vegetarian food. I am
not a vegetarian. If it is the "normal" practice to
mark the food trays of inmates under close watch, why did Mr
Chandra Kumar and Mr Hoon say they had no knowledge of the
marking?
Point 2: Food trays were not marked on
previous occasions
MHA: For Chee especially, the
marking of food trays should not be new as this procedure was
applied to him when he was in prison in Oct 2002 and again in Mar
2006. He had no complaints then about the marking of his food
tray.
CSJ: My food trays were most definitely not marked
on previous occasions when I was imprisoned. Its clearly that the
MHA contradicts itself on this point. First, it says that my food
tray was marked "following Yap's declaration
that he was going on a hunger strike." [emphasis added] But
it later says that my food tray was also marked on previous
occasions on Oct 2002 and Mar 2006. How can this be when Mr Yap
was not even in prison when I was incarcerated in 2002 and in
March this year? Also, why did Messrs Chandra Kumar and Hoon deny
to my family that food trays were marked?
Point 3:
Allowed to choose among unmarked trays
MHA: To address
this and assure him, Chee was allowed to choose among
unmarked
trays from 2 Dec 2006 but he continued to persist in
not eating.
CSJ: This is not true. I repeatedly told
prison officials that I did not want to continue to eat prison
food until I saw my wife. QRP refused to allow my wife to see me
until 4/12/2006 (eight days after I stopped eating the food in
the marked trays). When I was finally allowed to see my wife on
4/12/2006 in Changi General Hospital (CGH), and after Mr Chandra
Kumar gave the assurance that I could select from unmarked food
trays, my fears gradually eased and I agreed to eat the food
served in the hospital. The first time that I was told that I
could choose from unmarked trays was 4/12/2006 (at the CGH) and
not 2/12/2006 (while I was still in prison) as claimed by the
MHA.
It is therefore wholly untrue for the MHA to say that
although "Chee was allowed to choose among unmarked trays
from 2 Dec 06 but he continued to persist in not eating."
CGH’s records would unequivocally show that I had eaten the
food on the same day that Mr Chandra Kumar assured me that I
could choose from unmarked trays.
Point 4: Insisting on
eating home-cooked food.
MHA: He also persisted in his
demand that he would only eat home-cooked meals prepared by his
wife. (Prisons policy, which applies to all inmates, does not
allow this.)
CSJ: Again, it is not true that I insisted on
eating only home-cooked food. During the hospital visit on
4/12/2006, my family was allowed to buy me some biscuits &
packet drinks for me. I consumed these. I clearly indicated that
I didn’t want food that was in marked trays or those
handled by prison officials. To reiterate: After Mr Chandra Kumar
assured that I could choose from trays that were not marked, I
consumed the hospital food.
Point 5: Refusing to eat
hospital food.
MHA: Chee refused to eat even the meals
served by the Changi General Hospital...
CSJ: As mentioned
above, I ate the food served by CGH during my stay at the
hospital. This is easily verifiable in the hospital records.
There was even a CCTV in my hospital room recording this. MHA
should produce this to prove who is not telling the truth.
Point
6: Request for medical records.
MHA: Chee claimed that
he and his family members have repeatedly asked for a complete
set of his medical report but have not received them. This is
certainly untrue. Chee only gave his consent to the authorities
for his medical report to be released to his sister on 14 Dec
06.
CSJ: The facts are incontrovertible. My lawyer faxed
QRP a letter on 13/12/2006 asking for the medical records. My
sister, Ms Chee Siok Chin, also faxed a letter requesting for the
said documents on 12/12/2006. QRP has these faxed letters and
should produce them for the public to see. I, too, asked for the
medical results when I returned to QRP on 7/12/2006. It is
therefore yet another lie for the MHA to say that is "certainly
untrue" that my family and I had repeatedly asked for the
medical reports.
Point 7: No sleep deprivation.
MHA:
On his return from Changi General Hospital, Chee was placed in a
cell equipped with CCTV. The lights at such cells are kept
switched on from 6 pm to 8 am the following day...
CSJ:
First, let it be noted that the prison has admitted to keeping
the lights on in my cell throughout the night and morning hours
(6 pm to 8 am the following morning). I repeatedly complained to
the prison doctor and psychiatrist that the lights at night were
keeping me awake and that this was affecting me tremendously.
There is a reason why we all turn off the light when we sleep at
night – our bodies respond differently to light and
darkness. Keeping the lights on during sleeping hours for a
prolonged period (in my case, for a straight nine nights)
deprives one of proper rest and this affects one’s
health.
Point 8: Prison needs to monitor inmates with
suicidal tendencies.
MHA: [The lights are left on] for
visibility to enable prison officers to monitor inmates under
close supervision, including those with suicidal tendencies or
who may cause self-inflicted injuries.
CSJ: The MHA needs
to come up with more credible answers. Suggesting that I had
"suicidal tendencies" or "may cause self-inflicted
injuries" is complete and utter rubbish. Psychiatrists at
QRP and CGH have examined me, and if the results indicated that I
was suffering from any "suicidal tendencies", they
should produce it. Obviously, the turning on of the lights at
night is just an excuse to deprive me of sleep and affect my
psychological health. Is it not possible for the prison to use an
infra-red camera to do the recording with the lights off?
If
the prison is really monitoring inmates who have "suicidal
tendencies" or "may cause self-inflicted injuries",
why did it not similarly monitor Mr Yap Keng Ho who had announced
publicly that he was conducting a hunger strike while
imprisoned?
Point 9: Sleeping without trouble with
lights on.
MHA: Prison officers observed that Chee's
cell-mates slept without trouble. At his request, Chee was also
given valium and was observed to have rested at least 6 to 7
hours each night. This was recorded by the CCTV camera.
CSJ:
My cell-mates and I had great difficulty sleeping with the lights
on. As mentioned, I repeatedly requested the prison doctor,
psychiatrist and Superintendent to turn off the lights at night.
It is silly for the MHA to continue to argue that my cellmates
and I "slept without trouble" for more than a week
under bright lights when everyone knows that our biological
functions and circadian rhythms are disturbed when the lights are
on at night.
Point 10: Books were not taken away as
punishment.
MHA: When he was referred to the hospital,
Chee brought with him 7 books for his reading while in hospital.
On his return, these 7 books were required to be subjected to
security screening. This is a standard security procedure for all
items, books included, which are brought in from outside into the
prison.
CSJ: These seven books were among the 32 books
that I had first brought with me to the QRP when I was first
taken to prison 23/11/2006. At no time did the seven books leave
the sight of prison officials to and from CGH.
Point
11: Refusing medical assistance in prison.
MHA:
Between 25 Nov 06 and 4 Dec 06, Chee resisted blood tests (to
establish the cause of his purported nausea) and medical
assistance from the prison medical officer and the doctors of
Changi General Hospital.
CSJ: I only refused to have
invasive measures that required needles to be inserted into my
body. This would include the drawing of blood by a syringe and
application of IV drips. During the said period, I repeatedly
requested to be allowed to see my family before I would consent
to such invasive procedures. The prison, however, adamantly
refused to allow me to see my family. However, I continued to
allow my blood pressure to be taken, my ECG to be recorded, and
urine samples to be taken.
At CGH I also agreed to all
non-invasive procedures to be conducted on me (two CT-scans, an
ultra-sound scan, two X-rays, and urine samples). I allowed blood
to be drawn after I was allowed to see my family.
Records
in QRP and CGH would back up my account of the matter. Would the
MHA make public these medical records so that the truth can be
ascertained once and for all? By refusing to disclose these
facts, the MHA is trying to cover up the truth.
Point
12: Strangely resumed eating at CGH.
MHA: Then just as
strangely as Chee had stopped eating on 28 Nov 06, Chee abruptly
resumed eating his meals on 4 Dec 06. He ate his dinner ordered
from a menu of choices at Changi General Hospital.
CSJ:
There was nothing strange about my resuming to eating the food at
CGH. I have said all along that I wanted to see my wife first
before I would resume eating. I consumed hospital food when my
wife was allowed to see me on 4/12/2006. That was also the day
when Mr Chandra Kumar promised us that there won’t be any
more markings on my food either in CGH or QRP.
Point
13: Deciding to eat when returned to prison.
MHA: On
his return to prison, and when he was placed in a cell under CCTV
observation, Chee decided to eat prison meals and behaved well
enough to be eligible for remission of his sentence.
CSJ:
I started to eat prison food after assurance from Mr Chandra
Kumar and Superintendent Hoon that there won’t be any more
markings on my food. I was also threatened that my yard time,
family visits, and even consultation with lawyers would be denied
if I did not eat the prison food.
Conclusion
From
the above it can be seen that the MHA’s statement is
riddled with inconsistencies, contradictions and outright lies.
The Government should provide documents and recordings that it
has in its possession to reveal the truth rather than make
statements that it can neither substantiate nor prove.
|
|
