Tan Eng Hong

Tan Eng Hong, or Ivan, was interested in other cultures and the arts from a young age. As a result, he pursued a career in the tourism industry rather than attending university and receiving an advanced degree. When he was not working, he spent his free time in other creative endeavors, including the theater.

Ivan always knew that he was gay, which was a particularly acute problem for him when he enrolled in the mandatory military service. When male citizens register for National Service, they are required to undergo a mandatory medical examination to determine their medical status, known as Physical Employment Status (PES). The PES is used as a guideline for vocational placement. The men then serve a 22- or 24-month period as Full Time National Servicemen (NSFs), either in the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF), Singapore Police Force (SPF), or the Singapore Civil Defense Force (SCDF).

Based on Ivan’s PES, he was selected to serve as a gunman in the SAF. Ivan disclosed that he was gay to his sergeant. Generally, following a confession of homosexuality, a soldier is sent to a psychologist for a medical review and is ascribed a label of “302.” The term “302”  is widely known as the medical code classification from the Singapore Armed  Forces  Directory of Diseases that pertains to The protocol for the medical review is as follows: a doctor first asks the conscript whether they have had sex with men. The doctor then asks a series of even more probing questions pertaining to their sexual preferences, wherein the conscript is asked whether they cross-dress, are the man or woman, have anal sex, or play an active or passive role. 217

In the second stage of the medical review, one or both of the conscript’s parents answer questions about the son’s sexual preference and gender status. 218 When Ivan declared that he was gay, his sergeant  tried to send him to jail for forty days, and accused him of attempting to get out of his gunman duties. Ivan was then sent to different departments in the Army and ended up as a clerk in the manpower office. For the last quarter of his time with the Armed forces, he was released from serving as a reservist, which in Singapore can last up to the age of forty, because of his 302 status.219 After Ivan’s time in the military, he initially revitalized his career in the tourism industry. In his thirties, however, Ivan began working as a massage therapist. He found such work rewarding in that he was still in the service industry but also able to work creatively, finding respite from the difficulties that he faced in life. These difficulties came to a head when Ivan was arrested and charged under Section 377A. He contacted M. Ravi, one of Singapore’s most preeminent human rights attorneys. As a staunch lawyer for social change, Ravi saw the case as involving a human rights issue, and immediately took it on without regard for the act committed. Ravi strongly protected Ivan’s identity and advised Ivan to refrain from speaking with the media or other people about the case. However, it was impossible for Ivan to hide the fact that he had been arrested for “gross indecency.”  His family expressed disappointment when they discovered the charges, and others asked whether his actions brought on difficulties at family gatherings, such as during Chinese New Year. Many of the members of his Church, his friends, family, and other lawyers strongly encouraged him to drop the case and to stop contacting his lawyer. The local gay community, popular bloggers, and leaders all criticized Ivan and his lawyer for pushing forward, and the other man who was caught in the toilet stall with Ivan dropped the case. Ivan continued, despite the criticism and pressure he faced from his friends, family and community and never claimed that he was pursuing the case for anyone but himself. He harbors some resentment over the way the system treated him and believes that things can improve.

=See also=


 * Gary Lim
 * Section 377A of the Singapore Penal Code

=References=

of Sing., with Tan Eng Hong (Apr. 7, 2013).
 * Tan Eng Hong v. Attorney-General, [2013] SGHC 199 (H.C.) (Sing.).
 * Interview by Dr. Saroja Dorairajoo, Dep’t of Sociology at the Nat’l Univ.

=Acknowledgements=

This article was written by Roy Tan.