May 3: Letter by Matilda Gabrielpillai
Most of you probably know how the EGM went. WE WON!!!!!!!! For those who want the inside story, here are some highlights:
We started gathering from 10am, forming lines for registration, which started a little after the scheduled 12 noon. The two parties could be distinguished, with the old AWARE’s group given a folder and badge with the we-are-aware logo. The other side wore red t-shirts that said “Pro Women, Pro Family, Pro Singapore.”
The meeting started after 2pm with the new exco behaving like policemen. They tried from the outset to limit our voice by shutting off the mikes until their president had made her speech. But our side, Braema, Margie, Dana, Halimah and others led us in a protest. (It turned out later that the exco had instructed the sound tech company to turn off the mikes on us!) As they introduced the exco members, we booed till we were hoarse. Earlier, they tried to make NMP Siew Kum Hong go over to the associate members’ section but he insisted that he could stay as he was our legal adviser, especially considering they had their legal advisers from Rajah and Tan. They had also prohibited the media from the meeting, but some journalists became instant members and got entry that way.
We were proud of the AWARE old guard. The exco thought we were there to listen to them! We interrupted their self-gratuitious speeches consistently with points of order, but they kept coming at us to stop speaking and listen to them.
At one point, one of the exco members, Sally Ang, screeched at us to “SHUT UP AND SIT DOWN!!!” She was forced to apologise, and eventually gave in, only to further harangue us to behave ourselves! She looked and sounded like a thug.
The atmosphere was raucious rather than tense. We were somewhat tense when the exco introduced their legal counsel Rajah and Tann. But they eventually turned out to be one of the day’s surprises. They were even-handed, fair. They explained that the AWARE constitution did not provide for a vote of no confidence, so that legally the exco did not have to resign even if our vote succeeded. But they stressed that this was their legal opinion and that it could be challenged in a court of law. As the meeting drew on, they clarified that they were AWARE’s counsel, not the exco’s.
But otherwise, it was fun. And cathartic. All the feelings and thoughts I had had throughout this saga were expressed today. We women were not taking orders from anyone but ourselves! We forced the exco to stand down other matters to get straight to the vote of no confidence.
Here are some highlights from speeches given to support the vote of no confidence:
- Zaibun Siraj, an AWARE founder member and former president, testified to her disappointment with the exco’s behaviour, and her fear that all AWARE’s good work was going to come to naught under this exco’s watch. An academic teaching a feminist course testified that AWARE had a great reputation internationally. She found this out on the academic circuit of conferences. She hoped the new exco would not tarnish its good name.
- Immediate Past President, Constance Singam, wanted to know where these exco members had been at crucial points of AWARE’s history, when AWARE was fighting for female civil servants to get equal medical benefits, for better protection of women against domestic violence, to lift the quota on female medical students and for government to recognize women as equal heads of households, etc.
- Braema Mathi and other members of AWARE’s CEDAW shadow report sub-committee asked if the exco had any understanding of UN requirements of the CEDAW report when they made the decision to dissolve the sub-committee.
- One woman spoke of their inability to grasp the difference between NGO culture and Corporate culture, and the inappropriateness of their style in handling matters. She referred us to the exco’s attitude that they were not answerable to members or the general public.
- One woman approached the matter of whether they had spent more than $20K in organising the EGM. She pointed out that under the AWARE Constitution, the exco needed permission from members before spending more than $20 K a month. Josie Lau and company finally admitted to spending $18K+$5K alone on hiring the Suntec City hall.
Later in the meeting, they were forced to say that they had spent $90K in convening the EGM (incl. lawyers fees, security services, and a professional scrutineering consultancy to count the votes)! It was pointed out to them that, had they cared to seek help from the old guard, they would have learned about cheaper premises, and that volunteers would have done pro-bono work with regard to providing other support services. Founding AWARE member Margie Thomas said she had offered help with logistics several times but was turned down. She also said that she could have helped them obtain a quorum for a meeting to approve the expenditure.
They were accused of having acted unconstitutionally. It was also suggested that they might find themselves paying for the difference out of their own pocket! Yeah!
- One woman attacked their lack of understanding of feminism. She linked this to their blinkered perception of discrimination against women as an issue as well as their poor attitudes towards gay women. She suggested they should bone up on feminist theory before taking on leadership positions in AWARE. Another woman said their rhetoric was all wrong, and that they needed to improve their command of the English language.
- Chitra Sankaran pointed out that it was just not the feminist way to discriminate against any minority, be it of sex, race, class or sexuality. She referred to the exco’s ambivalent attitude towards gays.
- Poonam spoke of how she had started AWARE’s legal clinic in the early 1990s, and how the exco’s installation of CCTV as well as the constant presence of the exco husbands at the AWARE centre were threatening to abused and other distressed women who used AWARE’s services.
- The loudest cheer of the evening was given to a woman who went up to declare that as a Singapore woman, she would not want Dr. Thio Su Mien as her feminist mentor!
Comic relief for the day was provided by Dr. Thio, who imposed upon us several times. She begun early in the event, trying to impress upon us what a great feminist she was because she was the first female dean of the law faculty at NUS! We failed to see the connection she was making. We heckled all through her stupid speeches. But the exco got real touchy about that, and wanted us to respect our elders!
Also providing comic relief were some male supporters of the exco, including Josie Lau’s husband, Dr Alan Chin, who actually referred to us as a “congregation” twice, and then switched to calling us an “assembly.”
We were scolded by these men for not behaving as women should!
A member of AWARE’s male chapter tackled the exco’s statement that AWARE’s move to give men voting rights was a mask to usher in homosexual activists. He announced that the only masks he wore were SKII, which he shared with his wife.
The voting took place at about 4pm. While we waited for the votes to be tallied, we continued to point to the failings of the exco. When Josie said that speakers could only speak once and for three minutes only, the old guard had to quit speaking for a while. However a long line of new members formed to speak in their stead, each one more eloquent , more passionate than the next!
The results were announced at 8pm. You should have seen the exco’s facial expressions change when the voting sheets were delivered to their table at the podium. At last, Jenica Chua’s smirk took a rest. Josie looked like somebody had clobbered her over the head. Maureen Chua looked like she had died–and had found out she wasn’t going to heaven.
The results: 1,414 for us, and 762 for them!
Margie Thomas demanded they resign immediately. They wanted to consult their legal counsel. Who advised them that legally they were not bound to do so, but that in such situations, it was usually considered common sense and courtesy to resign.
Siew Kum Hong said they had not lost in a court of law but in the court of public opinion.
Other lawyers on our side also pointed out to their legal counsel that in the AWARE Constitution, the will of the general meeting prevailed over that of the exco. Thus, within the constitution, they had to resign because we had voted for this.
The crowd kept chanting “Resign! Resign! Resign!”
We were kind and Constance Singam told them to take five minutes to deliberate among themselves off-stage.
They did not return after about 15 minutes. We were just about to move a motion that they had “abdicated” their position when they sent word they were returning.
But once again, they went MIA. So we made a motion rejecting them as our exco, and proceeded to elect a new exco.
Dana Lam (President), Chew I-Jin (VP), Joanne de Cruz, Hafidah, Margie Thomas, Ching Wi, Constance Singam as Immediate Past President, and a few others now form the new exco.
You should have seen Constance Singam on stage with the new exco–she was happy as a child is with a new toy, waggling her hands, waving at us! What a welcome change from the woman who had cried more than a week ago about the loss of trust and respect at AWARE.
In the midst of the election, Josie and Maureen returned to find their place at the podium taken, and their replacements being nominated! Josie said she had come to “graciously” resign. Then they left.
The old guard feted the newer members, and thanked them for their support. They were gratified to find many eloquent voices among the younger members.
After the meeting, many of us, including the old guard, convened at New York, New York, for dinner and yam sengs.
What a day! We went home psyched, knowing that anything is possible in civil society if we all put our mind to it. We witnessed the courage, the passion, the eloquence of our society. Let nobody say henceforth that Singaporeans are politically apathetic.
But then again, we’re not expecting the upcoming national general elections to be more exciting than today’s EGM!
Comments are closed.