As countries around us move further away from the authoritarian regimes of the past, the difference in terms of political progress between Singapore and other countries starts to increase and the desire for change among an increasing segment of the populace will increase. 2 decades ago, Taiwan & S. Korea were under martial law and dictators so were Indonesia and the Philippines. Today these countries are full blown democracies and citizens have greater freedom of speech, right to assemble to speak up against injustice and free press. Their govts have also undergone several peaceful transitions. Economic development has continued at the same pace if not faster after these countries move away from authoritarian rule. Corruption and crony capitalism in general declined in these countries. As these countries move ahead, Singapore tries to preserve its political system with little change. The refusal to repeal the ISA and replace it with a more suitable anti-terrorist act is symbolic of this refusal to change.
This old video (courtesy of The Online Citizen) from 1990 is interesting in several ways. Lee Kuan Kew explained that the detention of the Marxist conspirators was decided by the next generation of leaders led by Goh Chok Tong. He than praised them for it by saying "Singapore would have been a different place" if they had not acted. A very young James Gomez then stood up to ask if the Singapore would consider abolishing the ISA given the region had become much more stable. Lee then tried to justify the ISA by saying that it was recently used on a group that was hoarding firearms - this is a bit strange as a justification because firearms are illegal in Singapore and these people could have been arrested and jailed under some other law. Lee then went on talk about how we were not yet a nation and hardly a community so these powers were needed to stifle "destructive" groups before they gained so much influence and power before they become mainstream groups.
Whenever laws are enacted to for the purpose security, there is a reluctance to repeal them because some people will argue that society will become less secure. That is why Malaysia's move to repeal the ISA is perceived as a bold step even when most countries provide a safe environment for their citizens without such a law. Most fringe groups are intercepted and stopped through intelligence operations that will yield sufficient evidence for a court case. There is a real risk of the ISA being abused by a bad govt to stifled legitimate opponents and used to preserve a power structure no longer beneficial to the ordinary citizens. Psychologically, the existence of such laws that are closely associated with police states, creates a climate of fear among citizens. 21 years ago, a young Arts and Social Science student in NUS asked Lee Kuan Kew about the need to keep the ISA. Today, many more young people are asking the same question. ISA symbolises the refusal of the present govt to begin moving away from our authoritarian past now that times have changed. For the hundreds of thousands of Singaporeans who want political progress, the existence ISA symbolises the frustrating lack of political progress. At the end of the day, as we fall further and further behind other countries support for the PAP will simply erode. The PAP has to remember that one-off economic transformation that made the people accept some form of authoritarianism is over.