还押余澎杉于精神病院
如猫捉老鼠玩弄它至死
原标题（直译）：迟来的正义是否定的正义
作者：张素兰 译者：吴振宇
这就是余澎杉(Amos Yee)目前的处境 / The present plight of Amos Yee
 |
图为本文作者张素兰于2014年5月13日热情的推介“8号功能”（Function 8）出版的书——《Youth On Trial 敢向英殖民统治者说不：五一三事件60周年纪念》。
|
[《人民之友》编者按语]本文是一名富有正义感的退休律师张素兰在她个人部落格发表的贴文。她是新加坡“8号功能”组织的其中一名创始成员和重要推手，她对新加坡政府利用不当手段处理余澎杉事件愤愤不平，而写出此文。她曾因在新加坡律师公会担任职务，跟一些著名律师交往，在1987年5月被新加坡政府指控涉嫌“参与马克思主义阴谋以武力推翻政府的活动”而援引内部安全法令加以逮捕监禁，她无端端成为一名未经审讯的政治扣留者。因此，她对少年余澎杉被指控、被虐待的处境感同身受，给予余澎杉巨大同情而发出强烈的心声。
张素兰在2010年出版了她以英文撰写的详尽记述她被逮捕监禁前后过程的回忆录，书名为Beyond the Blue Gate : Recollections of a Political Prisoner by Teo Soh Lung。这本英文书由林康翻译的华文本也已在今年5月面世，书名是：《在蓝色栅门的背后——一个政治犯的回忆纪实》。张素兰在此书中深入揭示了身为律师的她被囚禁时身心的反应和变化，极具触动人心的力量。
一名国际学者、巴德学院鲁斯基金的民主人权和新闻教授伊恩•布鲁马（Ian Buruma）对她的这本回忆录给予最为中肯的评价：“她讲述的故事中，最骇人听闻的情节也许是：一个理论上拥护民主的共和国，由于统治者的妄想症，竟然滥用法律来对付其最为热衷于民主的公民。”看来，这名学者对张素兰回忆录的评语，用来说明新加坡对待余澎杉事件，再恰当不过了。
本文原文为英文，由《人民之友》派员翻译成华文，图片和说明为编者所加。以下是张素兰文章译文全文——
本文原文为英文，由《人民之友》派员翻译成华文，图片和说明为编者所加。以下是张素兰文章译文全文——
2015年6月23日，当余澎杉（Amos Yee）戴着全副镣铐从扣留室走向七号法庭被告栏时，法庭呈现一副万分抑郁的景象。他低着头慢慢的走着，不再是那个向着公共旁听席微笑并充满自信的开朗小伙子。看到我们国家的司法制度将这个年轻人的意志消磨至如此悲惨的状况，真是心痛极了。他坐在被告席上，很多时候都低着头。打从他于2015年3月29日被逮捕那天起，他本身和他双亲的痛苦似乎无穷无尽。而他所犯的过失在任何发达国家都是不会有人在意的，但在号称“第一世界”的新加坡却另当别论。
5月27日，余澎杉因拒绝同缓刑监视官见面，而遭受裁定还押三周，这是让人感到意外的。料想这三周是用以决定余澎杉是否适合判入青年改造所。昨天，他再遭延扣两周，这次还押在心理卫生学院（IMH）。所有的决定不是余澎杉所能控制，而是法官的自由裁量权。他的律师也没有反对这项更长的押候令。在政府眼中，余澎杉和他的父母只是无名小卒，政府可以把余的生命玩弄于股掌之中，就好像猫捉到老鼠后，将老鼠玩弄到它终于死去那样。
我们的司法制度的巨轮好像处在两个世纪前的狄更斯（Charles Dickens）时代一样，沉重、缺乏润滑以及缓慢并无情地碾轧着。在《荒凉山庄》（Bleak House）一书里，狄更斯这样描述法律程序对被告的影响——（那就像）在一个慢慢转动的磨子里被碾成面粉；就像在用文火烤东西；就像被一只只的蜜蜂螫死；就像被一滴滴的水淹死；就像日积月累地慢慢发疯。”是的，余澎杉势必因遭遇这些而发疯。
在当权集团里，没有任何一个人对一个年轻男子和他的家人的痛苦遭遇表现出一丁点的关注。他在他们眼里不值一哂。相反的，他们更愿意花时间来折磨余，逼使他屈膝投降和循规蹈矩。
据报章报道，余澎杉向法院提交保证书，承诺将会撤下那些引起争议的贴文和音像，并且不再进一步传播。这样的保证书会有什么意义呢？那些贴文和音像都已经传遍世界，撤下它们并不能让它们永远消失。但是，坚持取得这份保证书对政府来说是非常重要的。这是因为这将显示政府赢得了这场对十几岁少年的斗争，象征政府的胜利。
在听证会上，有人透露，政府任命的精神病医生温斯洛（Munidasa Winslow） 认为，余澎杉可能患有“自闭症谱系障碍”症（《人民之友》编者注：这是一种广泛性发展障碍，其病征包括异常的语言能力、异常的交往能力、狭窄的兴趣以及固执的行为模式）。副检察司夏宏俊(DPP Hay Hung Chun)则插话提醒，说他曾两次建议余澎杉接受精神病专家检查。奇怪的是，尽管相信余澎杉需要精神评估, 他却什么也没做。在余澎杉还押在樟宜监狱长达三个星期以及5月份还押16天期间，他为什么不确保监狱当局安排心理卫生学院的专家们为余澎杉进行检验？另外，难道温斯洛不正是精神科专家吗？
法官Jasvender Kaur不但没有谴责副检察司不协助法院安排精神病专家为余澎杉进行检验，还下令延扣余澎杉二周，这次是还押在心理卫生学院。这项命令使余澎杉总共面对长达五周的还押期，如果以案例为准，这是比在该罪行下定罪而被判的刑期更长的时间。
为什么法官会作出这样的命令？我以为长达三周还押在樟宜监狱，24小时不间断以闭路摄像机摄录余澎杉在他的牢房里的每分每秒，以及长时间由一组医生、精神科专家或卫生官对他进行面谈，已经足以让任何专家，包括温斯洛，来裁定余澎杉的精神状态。为什么需要勒令另一组精神科专家或医生又一次进行两个星期的观察？如果这还不是刻意延长余澎杉和他的父母的痛苦，那什么才是呢？
我们必须突出余澎杉在押期间遭受的不公平对待。余澎杉的母亲说，他面对一组精神病医生、心理学家、医生等审问长达两周。这种审问是在放风的一小时里进行。这段时间原是囚犯进行社交活动和享受一点阳光的时光。这是囚犯每天在漫长而无聊的24小时里唯一期待的时光。然而，监狱当局却在这个小时内安排审问，真是虐待狂。我能得出的唯一结论就是：这样的安排是故意的，目的是摧毁他的意志。事实上，余澎杉的意志确实因无法再阅读和在24小时照明的牢房内无法入眠以及牢友因被逼关在有闭路摄录机的牢房而迁怒于他而遭摧毁。
还押候审往往比服刑面对更为糟糕的情况。还押者自生自灭，而服刑囚犯有固定活动以填补他的一天。服刑囚犯可以选修教育课程或参加技职培训课程，并允许与其他囚犯共度时间。余澎杉受到关押在24小时闭路摄像机监视的牢房的特殊对待，就是每天23小时在四面墙内，一小时在墙外的囚禁手段。24小时不熄的照明则是用来确保他脑筋越发混乱。囚犯将不可避免地面对失眠，因为他根本不能好好入眠。
一些观察家为余澎杉还押在心理卫生学院两周以进行又一轮精神评估感到高兴。这真是虐待狂。为什么政府任命的精神病医生温斯洛的报告称余澎杉可能是患了自闭症谱系障碍，还不足以让法庭作出决定？法官真的有必要要求另一份报告以确认或争议温斯洛的报告吗？削弱温斯洛专业地位之外，还有什么意图？
余澎杉是否应为犯下两个在任何其他发达国家都是不会有人在意的小过失而遭受五个星期的牢狱之灾？我们是否都生活在狄更斯的时代？一个生气勃勃的年轻小伙子遭遇这样的苦难使人倍感抑郁。这就是我们所谓世界级的司法制度？
JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED
Author : Teo Soh Lung
The entry of heavily shackled Amos Yee from holding room to dock in Court No. 7 on 23 June 2015 cuts a very depressing sight. No longer the cheerful teenager who looked and smiled confidently at the gallery, he walked slowly with his head bowed. It was painful to see this young person’s spirit reduced to such a sad state by our judicial system. He sat in the dock, head bowed most times. His sufferings and that of his parents seem endless since the day he was arrested on 29 March 2015. It was a small matter that would have passed unnoticed in any developed country but not in first world Singapore.
On 27 May, Amos Yee was unexpectedly ordered to be remanded for three weeks after he refused to meet the probation officer. The three weeks were supposed to ensure his suitability for reformative training. Yesterday, he was ordered to be further remanded for another two weeks, this time in the Institute of Mental Health (IMH). All decisions were beyond his control but within the judge’s discretion. His lawyers did not object to the further remand. Amos and his parents are nobodies in the eyes of the State and they can play with Amos’ life like a cat terrorising the mouse before it is finally killed.
The wheels of our judicial system are heavy, unoiled and grind slowly and mercilessly as in the days of Charles Dickens two centuries ago. In Bleak House, Dickens described the effect of legal process on a defendant: “[it’s like] being ground to bits in a slow mill; it’s being roasted at a slow fire; it’s being stung to death by single bees; it’s being drowned by drops; it’s going mad by grains.” Yes, Amos is going mad by all of these.
None of those in power pays any attention to the sufferings of one young man and his family. He is nothing in their eyes. Each will take his or her time to grind him to compliance and surrender.
It is reported in the newspapers that Amos submitted an undertaking to the court to make the offending posts private and not to disseminate them further. What is so important about such undertaking. The posts have gone round the world and privatising them will not make them disappear forever. But this act of insisting on an undertaking is important to the State. It shows that the State has won the battle against a teenager. It is thus symbolic of victory for the State.
At the hearing, it was disclosed that State appointed psychiatrist, Munidasa Winslow is of the view that Amos Yee may be suffering from “autism spectrum” disorder. DPP Hay chipped in to remind that he had already suggested that Amos be examined by psychiatric experts on two previous occasions. Strange that he did nothing despite believing that Amos needs psychiatric assessment. Why didn’t he ensure that the prison authority arrange for IMH experts to examine Amos while he was in remand in Changi prison for three weeks and 16 days in May? And isn’t Winslow a psychiatric expert?
Without reprimanding the DPP for not assisting the court by arranging for psychiatric expert to examine Amos while he was in remand, Judge Jasvender Kaur ordered Amos to be remanded for a further two weeks, this time at the IMH. That order will bring the total jail time of Amos to five weeks, a term much longer than the prison term that would have been meted out to a person convicted of such offences, if legal precedents are to be followed.
Why did the judge make such an order? I would have thought that three weeks in Changi Remand Prison with close circuit cameras recording every minute of Amos Yee in his cell and the hours he was interviewed by a team of doctors, psychiatrists or health officers would have been more than sufficient for any expert, including Winslow, to come to a finding of Amos’ mental state. Why order another two weeks of observation by another team of psychiatrists or doctors? If this is not deliberately prolonging the sufferings of Amos and his parents, what is?
The ill treatment that Amos suffered during his remand must be highlighted. Amos’ mother said that he was interviewed by a team of psychiatrists, psychologists, doctors etc over two weeks. Such interviews took place during the one hour community time when a prisoner is allowed to socialise and enjoy a bit of sunshine. It is the only time a prisoner looks forward to in a long and boring 24 hour day. Yet the prison authority has to be sadistic by arranging interviews during this one hour. I can only conclude that such arrangements were deliberate, aimed to break his spirit. Indeed Amos spirit is broken for he no longer reads and is tired because he cannot sleep with 24 hours lighting in the cell and cell mates who harbour resentment against him for having to sleep in a cell equipped with spy cameras.
A prisoner in remand is very often worse off than a prisoner who is serving sentence. He is left to himself whereas the prisoner serving time has regular activities to fill his day. He can attend educational or vocational courses and is allowed to spend time with other prisoners. Amos Yee’s special treatment by being locked up in a cell with 24 hour close circuit cameras means confinement within the four walls for 24 hours with one hour outside his cell. 24 hour lighting ensure that the mind is disorientated. A prisoner will inevitably suffer insomnia for he cannot sleep well.
Some observers are happy that Amos is now remanded at IMH for another psychiatric assessment. This is so sadistic. Why is the report by the State appointed psychiatrist, Munidasa Winslow that Amos might be suffering from autism spectrum disorder insufficient for the court to make a decision? Is there a necessity for the judge to order another report just to confirm or dispute Winslow’s report? What is the intent besides undermining the expertise of Winslow?
Does Amos Yee deserve five weeks’ jail for two petty offences which in any other first world country would have gone unnoticed? Are we living in the era of Charles Dickens? It is depressing that a bright young lad is made to suffer in this way. Is this our world class judicial system?
On 27 May, Amos Yee was unexpectedly ordered to be remanded for three weeks after he refused to meet the probation officer. The three weeks were supposed to ensure his suitability for reformative training. Yesterday, he was ordered to be further remanded for another two weeks, this time in the Institute of Mental Health (IMH). All decisions were beyond his control but within the judge’s discretion. His lawyers did not object to the further remand. Amos and his parents are nobodies in the eyes of the State and they can play with Amos’ life like a cat terrorising the mouse before it is finally killed.
The wheels of our judicial system are heavy, unoiled and grind slowly and mercilessly as in the days of Charles Dickens two centuries ago. In Bleak House, Dickens described the effect of legal process on a defendant: “[it’s like] being ground to bits in a slow mill; it’s being roasted at a slow fire; it’s being stung to death by single bees; it’s being drowned by drops; it’s going mad by grains.” Yes, Amos is going mad by all of these.
None of those in power pays any attention to the sufferings of one young man and his family. He is nothing in their eyes. Each will take his or her time to grind him to compliance and surrender.
It is reported in the newspapers that Amos submitted an undertaking to the court to make the offending posts private and not to disseminate them further. What is so important about such undertaking. The posts have gone round the world and privatising them will not make them disappear forever. But this act of insisting on an undertaking is important to the State. It shows that the State has won the battle against a teenager. It is thus symbolic of victory for the State.
At the hearing, it was disclosed that State appointed psychiatrist, Munidasa Winslow is of the view that Amos Yee may be suffering from “autism spectrum” disorder. DPP Hay chipped in to remind that he had already suggested that Amos be examined by psychiatric experts on two previous occasions. Strange that he did nothing despite believing that Amos needs psychiatric assessment. Why didn’t he ensure that the prison authority arrange for IMH experts to examine Amos while he was in remand in Changi prison for three weeks and 16 days in May? And isn’t Winslow a psychiatric expert?
Without reprimanding the DPP for not assisting the court by arranging for psychiatric expert to examine Amos while he was in remand, Judge Jasvender Kaur ordered Amos to be remanded for a further two weeks, this time at the IMH. That order will bring the total jail time of Amos to five weeks, a term much longer than the prison term that would have been meted out to a person convicted of such offences, if legal precedents are to be followed.
Why did the judge make such an order? I would have thought that three weeks in Changi Remand Prison with close circuit cameras recording every minute of Amos Yee in his cell and the hours he was interviewed by a team of doctors, psychiatrists or health officers would have been more than sufficient for any expert, including Winslow, to come to a finding of Amos’ mental state. Why order another two weeks of observation by another team of psychiatrists or doctors? If this is not deliberately prolonging the sufferings of Amos and his parents, what is?
The ill treatment that Amos suffered during his remand must be highlighted. Amos’ mother said that he was interviewed by a team of psychiatrists, psychologists, doctors etc over two weeks. Such interviews took place during the one hour community time when a prisoner is allowed to socialise and enjoy a bit of sunshine. It is the only time a prisoner looks forward to in a long and boring 24 hour day. Yet the prison authority has to be sadistic by arranging interviews during this one hour. I can only conclude that such arrangements were deliberate, aimed to break his spirit. Indeed Amos spirit is broken for he no longer reads and is tired because he cannot sleep with 24 hours lighting in the cell and cell mates who harbour resentment against him for having to sleep in a cell equipped with spy cameras.
A prisoner in remand is very often worse off than a prisoner who is serving sentence. He is left to himself whereas the prisoner serving time has regular activities to fill his day. He can attend educational or vocational courses and is allowed to spend time with other prisoners. Amos Yee’s special treatment by being locked up in a cell with 24 hour close circuit cameras means confinement within the four walls for 24 hours with one hour outside his cell. 24 hour lighting ensure that the mind is disorientated. A prisoner will inevitably suffer insomnia for he cannot sleep well.
Some observers are happy that Amos is now remanded at IMH for another psychiatric assessment. This is so sadistic. Why is the report by the State appointed psychiatrist, Munidasa Winslow that Amos might be suffering from autism spectrum disorder insufficient for the court to make a decision? Is there a necessity for the judge to order another report just to confirm or dispute Winslow’s report? What is the intent besides undermining the expertise of Winslow?
Does Amos Yee deserve five weeks’ jail for two petty offences which in any other first world country would have gone unnoticed? Are we living in the era of Charles Dickens? It is depressing that a bright young lad is made to suffer in this way. Is this our world class judicial system?
0 comments:
Post a Comment