[Huliwang]

This is what happens in US situation.
There is no law in Singapore or US that say that a person has to 'obey" everything a police officer says.

When interacting with the police, it is governed by law. Hence, it is logical for person to ask the police which law is being applied when he is asked to do something.

When the police goes into the Cheers and tells customers to go away, they disrupt the business. Do they have this right? Under what law?

Those who have the mentality that police are all powerful and can command us in the interaction are mistaken.

As for the comment that the "Cheers employee is trying to be funny" . I suggest you watch the video again. Initially, I had the same impression. But if you watch carefully he is confused over what the police can and cannot do by law in the situation:

1. Why does the police have to talk to him during workinv hours and at a time when he has to run the business? They can arrange to talk to him later when he is no longer at work.

2. The police did not at anytime explain the situation clearly. Like why they are talking to him.

3. The police were quick to threaten him with warning (in less than 1 min) when the man sought clarification. In the interaction the police was condescending in that they acted like the man had no rights and cannot sought clarification.

4. Section 65 requires the man to be a suspect or seen committing a crime to be arrested for not providing name and address.

5. The assertion that a person MUST coorperate with the police is WRONG. He is not LEGALLY required to do so. He only need to meet legal requirements. A person has the right not to cooperate with the police.

6. If Cheers wants employees to surrender all their rights when police appear and simply obey the police, they have to get employees to sign off their rights and train them to be obedient to coorperate with authorities.

7. If employee did not break the law, he should not be sacked especially when he was in the midst of doing his work duties when police came.

Where is the video on that Cheer case which I have not seen? I only see a couple of videos posted by you on US police. You wrote so much craps for what? I inferred from reading some posts that this case involved a simple case of police officer asking the Cheer employee to identify himself by showing his ID because he appeared suspicious, and he was reluctant to cooperate for unknown reasons.  
What is so difficult, or harm will happen to him to show the police his IC so that the law enforcement officer can move on? All it takes is just a few minutes and no delay will incur to his "busy" work as you invented with your creative imagination. He is obviously trying to be a smart ass or trying to be funny by obstructing the law enforcement work by questioning and probably delaying the police in pursuing of the real criminal who might escape because of his hindrance. ....