Netizens have criticised Home Affairs and Law Minister K Shanmugam after he stated that the police had assessed the large gathering of taxi drivers at Changi Airport on 13 February as a “pre-planned dialogue.”
Some argued that if not for the upcoming election, the authorities might have taken a different stance on the legality of the gathering.
Shanmugam said on 4 March that police had assessed the gathering of premium taxi drivers at the airport and determined that it did not constitute an offence.
The minister explained that the gathering was a “pre-planned dialogue” to discuss concerns over new minibus services at the airport, and said there would be no further investigation into the incident.
The gathering was triggered when Changi Airport Group (CAG) and Woodlands Transport introduced an eight-seater minibus service on 1 February to cater to growing demand for larger vehicles.
A Woodlands Transport ground manager allowed these minibuses to park at the ground transport concierge counter, which is an area meant for premium taxis and maxi-cabs.
Unhappy with the arrangement, some ComfortDelGro and Prime Taxi drivers retaliated by refusing to pick up passengers between 9am and midnight on 13 February.
From 4pm to 7pm, about 50 drivers gathered at the holding area in an attempt to voice their concerns to CAG representatives.
The National Taxi Association (NTA) was also present at the meeting, and following the talks with the taxi drivers, CAG suspended the minibus trial immediately.
Leniency due to general election?
Many netizens commenting on Facebook posts by The Straits Times, TOC, and Mothership.SG suggested that the government was being lenient towards the taxi drivers due to the upcoming general election.
Some speculated that the investigations were discontinued to avoid any actions that might affect the incumbent party’s support among taxi drivers.
One commenter wrote that the government “can’t afford to offend such a large group of service providers” with the election approaching.
Comparison to past incidents
Some commenters compared the taxi drivers’ gathering to past incidents where people participating in a peaceful assembly ended up being penalised by the authorities.
They specifically referenced a 2020 incident in which authorities fined Singaporean activist Jolovan Wham for holding up a cardboard sign with a smiley face outside a police station in a one-man protest. He later served a default sentence in protest against the penalty.
Some commenters raised concerns about consistency in law enforcement in different cases, with some suggesting that the outcome would have been different if the gathering at the airport had involved individuals from opposition parties.
One netizen wrote: “I am extremely disturbed by the arbitrary decisions made by the government on laws in Singapore. On one hand, Jolovan Wham can be arrested for being a ONE man protest but when you have 50 taxi drivers, it suddenly becomes permissible. How come?”
What type of large gathering qualifies as ‘pre-planned dialogue’?
Several netizens expressed skepticism over the police’s assessment that the taxi drivers’ gathering was a “pre-planned dialogue,” questioning how such a large public gathering could even be considered permissible under the law.
Some questioned whether the taxi drivers had permit or license from the police to hold such a large gathering at the airport, arguing that the size of the gathering should have rendered it unlawful.
One user wrote: “I am confused , gathering of more than how many person in public need to apply permit, but this is ok?”
Another commenter opined that the incident seemed more like a “planned protest” by premium taxi drivers expressing their dissatisfaction with the CAG rather than a pre-planned dialogue.
The post Netizens sceptical as police classify large taxi driver gathering as ‘pre-planned dialogue’ appeared first on The Online Citizen.
