atans1

Posts Tagged ‘Criminal justice’

Remember our Sticker Lady? Her English equivalent

In Humour on 28/07/2014 at 4:22 am

Catherine Bolsover

 

Postbox on Sonning Bridge on Friday, October 25th, 2013

When I saw the above photos (link below) I remembered this ST line from some yrs back, “Samantha Lo Xin Hui, dubbed the Sticker Lady for her graffiti at several public areas last year, was yesterday sentenced to serve 240 hours of community service.” There about the same time, a SunT article that reported that HDB residents were complaining of stickers put up by estate agents etc, and I remember “8551 3997″ had been plastering “For Sale” signs in the Siglap area trying to flog $3m properties.

SunT quoted a smart ass lawyer who said these estate agents can get away with it because “Law does not deal with trivae”, so nothing would be done. But then isn’t her behaviour trivae, I tot, then and still do.

But to be fair to the SPF, the English authorities don’t like Sam’s English counterpart:

… insists that his anonymity is necessary because “councils don’t really have that kind of sense of humour” and “take life very seriously”.

“I really don’t want to stand up [and try] to explain to a po-faced and humourless court why I have done things which are essentially humorous and whimsical.

(And I, as Anglophile, tot England was tolerant of harmless eccentrics)

“It would feel too much like school where teachers are always pretending to be angry or disappointed by naughty behaviours which they in reality think are quite funny.”

He says his art is inspired by his belief that people are encouraged to take life seriously “despite the fact that it’s absurd and tragic”.

“We are encouraged to act responsibly, we are encouraged to go off to work every day to, by and large, do something pointless in order to sustain a meagre existence, so that we can go to work again, and are released from this cycle when all joy and spirit has been squeezed from us,” he says.

“We are encouraged to get to our grave safely and responsibly, and if possible with an insurance policy to help with ‘those funeral expenses’. 

“We are encouraged to buy tat we don’t want with money we don’t have.

“What I do is not that.”

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-27884890

Related post: http://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/so-will-spf-prosecute-property-agents-and-money-lenders-for-mischief/

 

Traffic islands on river

Govt, activists score own goals

In Public Administration on 03/01/2014 at 6:09 am

(Or “The govt is its own worst enemy: it can’t communicate the right facts”)

Recently  I blogged on why Scrooge the Grinch government can do more, a lot more to help the manual workers who gift us S$2.5bn++ a year.

But on the use of the deportation law on alleged “rioters”; I’m on the govt’s side with one important caveat.  The cavaet is: What the hell were the police commissioner and DPM Teo talking about?

– [The Police Commissioner] explained that this group is less “culpable” than those who were charged, as the latter were “active participants” in the riot, “violent” and “had attacked uniformed personnel and vehicles, damaged property, and had incited others to do so”. So what did they actually do?

Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs Teo Chee Hean noted that those who were to be repatriated had “impeded the riot control and emergency rescue operations” and that “their actions and conduct had threatened public order,  Did they or did not riot?

I looked up what the official statement and only then I understood why there were deportations, not charges for most of those detained: they were alleged rioters that the police considered should be treated more leniently (those charged can be jailed and caned if convicted).

Group Two consists of 53 persons whom Police has identified to have participated in the riot and who failed to disperse despite Police’s orders to do so. They had knowingly joined or continued to participate in the riot, after being ordered to disperse, impeding the riot control and emergency rescue operations. Their actions and conduct had threatened public order, thus making their continued presence in Singapore undesirable. They were all rounded up in a Police operation in the early hours of this morning. They will be repatriated after being issued a stern warning. They will be prohibited from returning to Singapore.

The Police Commissioner and DPM Teo, scholars both, should be ashamed of their explanations which only made it easier for the activists to attack the govt. And s/o of Devan Nair is not doing doing his job as the govt’s PR man.

Coming back to the deportees, fair enough that they are deported  without judicial “due process” as far as I’m concerned for two reasons.

Firstly, as someone posted on Facebook, ” Rightly or wrongly, deportation is more lenient than jail and caning.” A lot more, so is it fair to insist as the kay pohs do that the courts must be involved in “due process”? One could even argue that the govt is being easy on “alleged” rioters.

Next, given that he has shown himself as a most compassionate chap, I’m sure the Pet minister is ensuring that the ministerial discretion of banishing people from S’pore is fairly exercised, and with appropriate regard for non-judical due process. I’ll go on to assert that he has ensured that the police behave fairly, and with appropriate regard for due process (non-judical), when investigating the cases which result in banishment orders.

Though I must admit charging a few people, then not proceeding with the cases and then allowing them to be given “discharges not amounting to acquittals, then deporting them look slip-shod. They shouldn’t have been charged, juz deportrd. And if, as happened,  they were charged, and the police then realised that officers had made “honest mistakes”, the police should have asked for “discharges not amounting to acquittals”, and then deported them. That would have prevented the usual anti-govt activists from shouting “acquitted but still deported”. Technically, the kay pohs are right, though the govt has a point when it says the “acquittals” did not result from trials, but by the police withdrawing charges. I suspect the police tot, “Heck these guys are not coming back here, so might as well allow discharges amounting to acquittals”: little knowing that the kay pohs would seize on this technicality to agitate against the govt.

Given his track record on looking after the interests of dogs even where a possible dog killer is a FT (example), the HR kay pohs should cut him a lot of slack. Now if the minister was the ACS boy who sneered at elderly, poor S’poreans, I’d agree that the kay pohs have a point about the need of ensuring that justice is done. Hey but this is a most compassionate minister (he loves dogs and, even cats) from RI, not an ACS rich kid. What more do they want?

And there is still the possibility of judicial review, shumething that kick ass, take-no-prisoners superhero M Ravi is pursuing in  several cases. So kay pohs should sit down and shut up.

No trust police and Pet Minister is it? AG should think of suing said activists for making defamatory innuendos about the minister and the police.

By now I’m sure you know that I’m no supporter of using a bit of billions the manual workers gift us to pay for “due process” for the deportees. We have to do right by the manual workers, but there are limits, something the kay pohs seem to refuse to acknowledge. I’m sure in their heart of hearts, they want the detainees to be detained in a 5-star hotel with access to the best lawyers, all at the expense of  us tax-payers. Their ang Moh masters mentors would expect no less.

If the anti-govt kay pohs really cared about the migrant workers they should have been advocating and campaigning from yrs ago that some spare change from the S$2.4 bn++ that the govt gets from the manual workers goes to helping them: without them S’pore would have to pay more, a lot more, for labour intensive jobs. Instead, the said activists want the spare change to be used on judicial “due process”. Some thing is not right about their priorities?

As I pointed out in the earlier piece, there could be a medical insurance fund, and a general welfare fund. BTW, a SDP doctor tells me that the SDP healthcare plan (involving an insurance fund and comprehensive coverage) would cover manual FTs (all FTs in fact) too. Before GG and friends, and TRE readers get upset with the SDP, they should remember that the SDP has also called for a policy of putting locals first and tightening the use of FTs by businesses.

Let me end by returning to said kay pohs: substitute the term “activists” for “management” in the following quote from a famous American psychologist* and you will know why I’m uneasy about their motives and actions: “This is what I get  vaguely uneasy about in the reading on management, namely a certain piety, certain semireligious attitudes, an unthinking, unreasoning, a priori kind of ‘liberalism’ which frequently takes over as a determinant, thereby to some extent destroying the possibility of maintaining the sensitivity to the objective requirements of the actual, realistic situation.”

*Update at 8.43 am on # January 2014:

Think I’m unfair on the activists? Yesterday, I wrote: Here’s an interesting piece from a TRE reader on the appropriateness of the original venue of its seminar on “the struggle for workers’rights”. . I agree with the sentiments expressed within it, though to be fair to Maruah the date of said seminar was on 23 December. Somehow I don’t think that there would be many FTs in the area on a Monday. One of these days I’ll blog on why Maruah and the police deserve each other: both have lousy public communication skills, though the police’s skills iare a lot better than Yaacob’s finest, who only know how to slime.

They may be anti-govt, but we shouldn’t be on their side juz ’cause they got the balls to take on the govt publicly. Their actions and motives have to be analysed and scrutinised, juz like the govt’s, even though we should not hold them to the standards we expect of the govt. They don’t have the resources of the govt.

*Abraham Harold Maslow (April 1, 1908 – June 8, 1970) was an American psychologist who was best known for creating Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, a theory of psychological health predicated on fulfilling innate human needs in priority, culminating in self-actualization. Wikipedia

Where use of ISA-type law will be met by silence from the usual human rights kay pohs

In Footie on 28/09/2013 at 1:59 pm

Update on 22 23 October 2013: Minister explains use of Criminal Law Temporary Provision Act (http://au.sports.yahoo.com/football/news/article/-/19491410/football-match-fixing-witnesses-fear-reprisals/).

(Correction: My friends tell me that the ISA will not be used: It will be the Criminal Law Temporary Provision Act. This too allows dention without trial. Used for drug cases too. Sorry, never was gd at criminal law)

The coming deafening silence of the usual human rights kay pohs will tell us a lot of their prejudices: they are supportive of FT drug mules, and middle class anti-PAP activists. But not working class criminal suspects (no-one is complaining that Vui Kong’s alleged drug lord is held under ISA CLTPA) or those whom the govt alleges are Islamic radicals. Touch a FT or a middle class anti-PAP activist, and the screams will be deafening, even if it’s juz a policeman paying a home visit.

Dan Tan’s home, even his car (a BMW 735) were well known to the authorities, but until they had evidence that a crime had been committed on Singaporean soil the police were powerless to act.

In the wake of the Italian reports, the Singaporeans made requests to police forces in Italy, Hungary, Germany and Finland to share what evidence they had. But cross border co-operation between prosecutors proved painfully slow.

It took months and in some cases more than a year for documents to be shared while approaches to speak to key witnesses have still, in some cases, gone unanswered.

All that time Singapore’s detractors sharpened their knives. The apparent inaction was criticised, with some even suggesting a high-level conspiracy to protect the alleged master match-fixer living in their midst.

Those with knowledge of the investigation say the truth is more mundane. It has simply proved very difficult to find those brave enough to testify against Dan Tan and his powerful syndicate.

The defecting members of the syndicate are too scared to testify in person so the police are hoping to use draconian security laws from the 1950s to keep the suspects in custody.

In the next few weeks all the evidence that has been gathered against the syndicate will be presented behind closed doors to the Ministry of Home Affairs and then an advisory council, before a final decision is made by the president.

If all agree that the suspects should remain under “preventive detention”, then Dan Tan and his associates could be held for years without ever having the evidence tested in a court of law.

Under huge pressure to act, the Singaporeans say they’ve now “cut the head off the snake”.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-24238681

Another case of ang moh tua kee. Can our Home Team be blamed when our human rights activists adopt the prejudices of their ang how mentors?

Before going to court, test sincerity of govt

In Public Administration on 26/08/2013 at 4:51 am

”The government remains committed to explain any issues arising from this tragic incident and to do whatever it can to assist the family,”said a statement from the Ministry of Home Affairs.

Well, Dinesh’s mother should test the sincerity of the govt by asking for details (beyond what has been already provided, not much it seems) that she wants to know. If the govt fails to give her satisfaction, then she should proceed further with her application to the court for the inquiry to her son’s death to be reopened. She should “suspend” for the time being her court petition.

Recently, I blogged that his family had the right to know more, that it would be gd PR for the govt* to provide them with more details of how he died (but that I doubted it would: bad PR seems to be a Hard Truth for the govt)), and that the family should try a non-legalistic way of finding out more.

Well, since the govt has said it ” remains committed to explain any issues arising from this tragic incident and to do whatever it can to assist the family”, they should test it. If there is no satisfaction, then go the legal route with M Ravi their action man, superhero, “kick ass”, “take no prisoners” lawyer** who loves to fight cases on constitutional grounds***. He once advised TRE to fight a request to remove an allegedly defamatory article on constitutional grounds. Another lawyer helped resolved the matter to the satisfaction of everyone involved. But when it’s time to go to court, its good to have M Ravi as your lawyer. He’s a tenacious, brave terrier. If you respect or admire, especially for his pro bono work, him buy his book. It’s the least you can do.

Perhaps, the family should approach Peter Low’s law firm to supplement the efforts of M Ravi. I’ve been told that Peter Low’s firm helped resolve a cartoonist’s row with the AGC on charges of “scandalising the judiciary”. The cartoonist apologised and removed the offending articles. M Ravi was also involved in this case.

Backgrounder on Peter Low: http://www.straitstimes.com/the-big-story/case-you-missed-it/story/62-year-old-lawyer-shows-no-signs-slowing-down-20130501. I don’t usually commend ST articles, but this one doesn’t play the DRUMS, not even a riff. People whose views I respect, praise him for his effective, quiet way of getting issues involving human rights or dignity resolved fairly. No posturing or wayang from him.

Horses for courses. Or a time for everything****. Plenty of time to “whack” the govt, if the family cannot get the info it wants by simply asking. And going the legal route, isn’t exactly a sure way of getting the info they want, at least going by M Ravi’s track record in winning cases: not gd.

And if Tey, the legal academic, is to be believed, the judiciary isn’t a check on the executive  http://yawningbread.wordpress.com/2013/08/18/book-legal-consensus-by-tey-tsun-hang/. He was jailed after a court found  he had “corrupt intention and guilty knowledge” in a relationship, an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act. He had had sex with a student. Even he admitted that this was in breach of the academic code of conduct, after initially saying he would defend his “academic integrity”, which at the time I tot would mean that he would say in court, “I didn’t have sex with her”.

*Giving more info would help the PM rebuild trust with the masses.

**Think I exaggerate? This is what TOC reported M Ravi as saying, “The AG’s response is shocking to the conscience in view of the demands of natural justice and the plea by the family to open the inquiry. Dinesh’s family was devastated to hear the AG’s decision.

“The Coroner is wrong in law to discontinue his inquiry as there was no finding into the circumstances of Dinesh’s death. There is no information as to how the other 7 officers were involved in Dinesh’s death. In fact, it is the AG who should be calling for a full inquiry in the public’s interest and not Dinesh’s mother having to do so.

“This is a serious human rights violation and this marks a black day for human rights in Singapore.”

This is the part of the response in parliament (much earlier) to questions on what had happened: Following the conviction of the senior prison officer on 19 July 2013, MHA has been in touch with the family of Dinesh Raman and their lawyer to discuss the family’s concerns, as well as the matter of compensation. AGC has informed the family and its lawyer in writing that the Government accepts liability and will compensate the family. As discussions are on-going, I am not able to provide details.

http://geraldgiam.sg/2013/08/death-of-inmate-in-prison/

***The funny thing is that he, like me, did our legal education in England. S’pore’s constitution was certainly not taught or analysed in any great detail there in my time, and I’m sure in his time.

****Ecclesiastes 3

To every thing there is a season,
and a time to every purpose under the heaven:
a time to be born, and a time to die;
a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted;
a time to kill, and a time to heal;
a time to break down, and a time to build up;

a time to cast away stones,
and a time to gather stones together;
a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;

a time to rend, and a time to sew;
a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
a time to love, and a time to hate;
a time of war, and a time of peace.

Quadruple confirm: Public servants don’t do cost-benefit analysis

In Financial competency, Humour, Public Administration on 04/06/2013 at 5:12 am

Former NUS law professor, Tey Tsun Hang, was sentenced to a 5 months’ jail term and ordered to pay a penalty of $514.80 by the court yesterday. He was convicted of corruptly obtaining gifts and sex from former student Darinne Ko.

Last week, the former chief of the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF), Peter Lim Sin Pang, was convicted by a District Court for corruption. He was on trial for abusing his position to obtain sexual favours from Ms Pang Chor Mui in return for favorable consideration of her company’s tender bid for business.

Also last week, the Ministry of Home Affairs said disciplinary proceedings against the former chief of the Central Narcotics Bureau Ng Boon Gay would remain suspended until a final outcome in the criminal proceedings. Mr Ng was acquitted of corruption charges in February. Mr Ng was accused of obtaining sexual favours from IT sales manager Ms Cecilia Sue in return for furthering the business interests of her two employers. The MHA spokesperson also said that the prosecution was studying  the written grounds of decision and assessing whether to file a Petition of Appeal.

Even though Gay was acquired, all three public servants paid a high price for being a bit (very cheap actually) cheap when it came to sex. In return for a few freebie trysts, they ended up spending very serious money on lawyers , and damaging their reputations and earning capabilities. I mean who will want to employ two soiled police scholars and an academic who proclaimed his academic integrity* when he was charged?

Then there was ex-Speaker of Parliament, “Mangoes for Laura” Palmer. True he wasn’t charged and never paid lawyers’ fees, but the guy was castrated in public: within a few hours he fell from “tua kee” to zero you-know-what.

Obviously, they didn’t do cost-benefit analysis. If they had been, they could have realised that the costs of being cheap on sex was higher than if they had paid for it. They would have realised that paying for sex was less risky for their careers and reputations. Based on legal fees of $500,000 a case (and I’m being conservative given the size of the legal teams), even if each man charged had sex 100 times (and the reports indicate that the frequency wasn’t that high), the cost would be $5,000 a session. And these were with aunties! Not slim, tall Vogue model-types.

If these senior public servants, didn’t use cost-benefit analysis on such an impt, personal matter, what are the chances that public servants use cost-benefit analysis when analysising or making decisions for us the masses? Yup, highly unlikely.

Anyway, these four cases illustrate the ancient Chinese saying of, “Kill a cock to frighten the monkeys”. Here four cocks were “killed’ to remind public servants that free sex is not a benefit of service. Never mind, public servants can afford to pay for sex, juz like they can afford to buy $5m to S10m apartments from a TLC, even when the TLC expresses concerns that it can sell some of these apartments. And if the MDA chairman and CEO may have problems with their personal cost-benefit analysis (what with QE possibly being reversed, with knock-on effects for S’pore property, and KepLand’s remarks on selling its apts), can ministers and the public trust that the MDA has done its cost-benefit analysis on its new media regulations? It could be telling that the Manpower minister replaced MDA’s CEO at a Talking Points programme on the issue of new media regulation? BTW, where was the water engineer**, Yaacob?

Note (Last three lines added two hrs after first publication, after reading FT etc)

——

*I tot he was going to deny that he ever had sex with his student. It has been part of Western academic tradition since the times of the Greeks that sex with students was taboo. There was a lewd Roman joke that Socrates never had sex with Plato despite both being gay because Plato was Socrates’ pupil. The Romans didn’t do gay sex.

**See the * at end in link on what I mean by “water engineer”.

Todds: When grief overwhelmed

In Public Administration on 24/05/2013 at 5:45 am

So the Todds’ have moved on out from the inquiry and are leaving S’pore, saying they no longer have confidence in the system.

Bet you once out of S’pore, they will bitch loudly about the hearing and withdraw Mrs Todd’s apology for calling the court system “corrupt”. I’m sure they will allege that Mr Todd was intimidated into apologising on her behalf.

Prior to their moving on, they suffered a few blows to their credibility.

Their expert, Edward Adelstein, 75, a deputy medical examiner in Missouri, contradicted Singapore police findings that Shane Todd killed himself, but admitted his conclusions were based on pictures of the body and circumstantial information.

“The cause of death of Dr. Todd was strangulation by a ligature around his neck,” Adelstein said in a written statement admitted as evidence Tuesday at the inquiry, adding that “I would rule his death a murder — a homicide.”

He said Todd was “a very dangerous person” to the two Asian companies (Institute of Microelectronics where he worked ana Huawei, the Chinese tech company that Washington politicians love to hate), and asserted without offering any evidence that “they had him killed” and well-trained “assassins” may have been involved*. Adelstein said Todd could have been disabled with a taser — an electronic device designed to stun — and killed with an arm lock before being hanged**. This explanation could take care of the inconvenient fact  the well-built 31-year-old’s body did not show evidence of a struggle.

Sounds like something from a Fu Manchu & the Yellow Peril movie, updated of course, to take account of the rise of Chinese economic power, with its plans to replace the US as hegemon.

Note that in an October 2012 report, Adelstein had said that Todd was killed by “garroting” but at the hearing the doctor said he was speculating at the time.

Before the above, there was the issue of the hard drive.

Now that they will no longer testify, it will not be possible for them to be asked if they allege that they found the hard drive, something that they told the Financial Times according to its story. The FBI’s evidence is that the hard drive is the same as the one the S’pore police handed over to the Todds, now we know in the presence of US embassy officials.

I wasn’t too surprised that the Todds moved on quickly out of the inquiry after these comments reported on Saturday: Tai Wei Shyong, the senior state counsel for Dr Todd’s inquiry, welcomed Mr Bonner to give evidence in this inquiry.

“If he (Bonner) wishes to give evidence, we would be happy to accommodate that and we would have to apply to the court to see if the court would be prepared to hear his evidence. The state would be happy to make the application because we want the full story about this case to be told.” CNA

Mr Bonner was one of writers of the Financial Times article and if the Todds were ever to deny that they said they found the drive, he could contradict them. I had heard runours that they were going to say when they were called to give evidence that they had not told the FT that they found the drive. Anyway, this convenient avoiding of giving evidence, may not work. District Judge Chay Yuen Fatt said that the statements taken from them would be used as evidence, so maybe we can still learn if they said anything in their statements about how they got the drive.

Whatever it is, it is very rare for this writer to agree 100% with a PAPpy minister (even if like me he loves dogs), but Shan is correct here in his comments on the Todds’ behaviour.

RIP Shane Todd and may the Todds reconcile themselves to the circumstances of his death even if they think he was murdered.

—-

*Where to find such an Assassin?

1. Must be Stronger and Bigger than Shane to bring him down and hang him single handle-ly after bringing him down !

2. Must have great computer skill to hack into his computer.

3. Must have so much time to alter his browser history 19 times to show that he visited suicide sites?

4. Must be able to to complete all the above task in as short duration as possible so that nobody notice !

Is there such an Assassin ?

Is the Assassin so free and dumb to stay in the crime site to hack the ocmputer after killing him?

Wouldm’t it be easier to take the computer and hard disk away?

(TRE reader)

**Two certified forensic pathologists from the US who provided expert opinions have confirmed that Dr Shane Todd’s death was consistent with asphyxia due to hanging.

The two pathologists, Dr David Fowler and Dr Valerie Rao, took the stand in day eight of the coroner’s inquiry into the death of the American researcher.

They also dispelled theories by the Todd family’s expert witness Edward Adelstein that Dr Todd could have died because of a taser or a carotid armlock, which is a neck chokehold.

Dr Fowler said Dr Todd’s body had shown no signs of taser marks or vertical scratch marks up and down his neck – which would have indicated a struggle to remove the chokehold.

They also corroborated the evidence of two Singapore forensic pathologists that the discolouration on Dr Todd’s hands was due to a pooling of the blood in the limbs that occurs after death.

Both were also of the opinion that based on all information they had access to, they believed Dr Todd’s death to be a suicide. CNA

Doubtless, there will be TRE readers who will point out that they were paid by the S’pore govt. Doubtless these readers voted for Tan Kin Lian in 2011, and s/o JBJ at the Punggol East By-election.

How many more chances do the law-breaking M’sian FTs want?

In Humour, Malaysia, Public Administration on 19/05/2013 at 5:17 pm

So Lim Kit Siang of the PAP DAP is calling “Give M’sians arrested in S’pore a second chance”? Anwar’s gang wants to cause problems here, like what they are doing in M’sia? (“Pro-Pakatan Rakyat groups have vowed to overthrow the Barisan Nasional government this year through a massive street rally”)*

Since our police had already used a light touch on M’sian FTs who broke the laws on public demonstrations here, “Apa lagi Kit Siang mahu?”

Despite the police warning that it would take action against illegal demonstrations by FTs, some M’sian FTs ignored the police warning and 21 were arrested on Saturday 11th May. (Bet you these FTs  tot that  since DAP was conceived as PAP Clone, they can do what they like here because it is a PAP govt here. And anyway, because Kit Siang is a devotee of one LKY, sure can chum siong. Taz how politics and cronyism works in KL. And the irony is that the protestors want to change the system.)

Well the police had already shown a light touch with the first demonstration at the same spot (Merlion Park) on Wednesday, 8th May. There were on that day about 100 protestors according to the local media, but only nine (9%) were arrested and then warned by the police.

To show that S’pore is not a place for FTs to “import their domestic issues from their countries into Singapore and conduct activities which can disturb public order, as there can be groups with opposing views”, the police should have rounded up all the protestors on that day and deported all of them.

Back to the 11th May protest: the constructive, nation-building media did not give the numbers who protested on Saturday. Were the 21 arrested, only 9% of those who protested illegally: same proportion like Wednesday? Again they were only warned.

To be fair to the police,  those who took part in both demonstrations will have their passes to remain here revoked. The police should have arrested all the protestors on Saturday, and deported all of them.

Apa lagi mahu? Show some gratitude that the police used the light touch, Kit Siang.

Here’s some interesting (and valid bar one) comments from TRE readers on”the light touch”:

– you can take the foreigner out of their country but you cannot take their country out of the foreigner. why is the pap gahmen granting equal if not more privileges to new citizens and prs compared to true blue singaporeans in terms of subsidized housing, scholarships and cushy jobs?

hey Must be charge for the illegal assembly. We are having different ethic all over the region in this tiny country, if the recalcitrant Malaysian are to let go with a slap on the wrist, next the Pinoys will start protesting here with the issue back home,then the Bangladeshi,then…depot them & charge hard!

They should do their protest in JB. Not in Singapore’s soil. They come to earn a living so that is all to it. Why bring grieviences here? And some even begin to talk of Malaysia’s politics at work places.

Malaysian PR and work permit holders most of them are trouble makers. They are neither this nor that….sort of person. Cursing malaysia when they are here…back in their country curse Singaporean for being stupid etc…

I’ve worked with them for decades and the earlier batches were ok when they came… work hard marry our women and raises up family. And personally I have met their children and they performed NS and adapt to our system well. Mixed with other races and all that. But the same cannot be said by the recent batches of them. Ungrateful lot…shooo shooo shoo back to malaysia….true blue local born Singaporean don’t give a shit to Malaysia’s politics! whether Anwar be the PM of Malaysia or PM of Sungai Buloh or rot wherever pls when you come to work place don’t bring your shit politics here in Singapore

And here’s another reason to be tough: possible M’sian Chinese and Indian interference in S’pore’s politics.

And police investigate Singapore Writers and those mentined here

 “Is this a political website or one about writing & Singapore Writers? Why is it always posting about Malaysian politics?

 Singapore Writers: Good question. Thanks! This is a space for writers. And not only are lots of our better senior writers and veteran paid-up members like Catherine Lim, Ranjan Nair etc etc with Malaysian backgrounds but our rising stars like Serene Wee, Nat Sim etc are also from Malaysia (though they studied in SG).

 So important to keep abreast with political developments …”

 SG Writers is full of commentators, like this from Rajan Nair [TRE reader alleges that he is based in KL, being a S’porean-born PR who went home to avoid NS.]

“Some time around the late 1980’s the PAP lost its bearing and started to accumulate reserves for the sake of accumulating. Which was why they introduced an elected President with executive powers to “protect” the reserves in case a future non-PAP Govt squanders it away …

Note the president of Singapore Writers is an ex-RI rugby captain**in the 60s who stood as a WP candidate alongside  JBJ, Francis Seow in the 1998 GE. A quick check of Facebook shows that Rajan Nair , Serene Wee and Nat Sim are always criticising S’pore (not juz the PAP but TJS, TKL, WP, SDP etc) via Facebook. Gals, if S’pore so bad, pls go home: Rajan Nair moved on from here, join him. And M’sia too is bad, migrate.

*Anwar’s PKR is very friendly with our very own SDP. PKR, PAS and PDAP are members of PK, the opposition to the BN govt.

**Know him. Played rugby with him in the mid 70s during NS. Smart guy (He waz guy credited for thinking up the by-election strategy for the 1991 GE).but prone to conspiracy theories, and now thinks St Andrews is better school than RI. Still a political animal, despite his protestations. Last yr, he tried unsuccessfully to turn a celebratory function of ex-ST journalists, into a bash-the-PAP session. He failed. And rightly so: they were there to celebrate a strike comrade’s book, not play politics.

Related posts on the strike book:

http://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/02/03/wanted-expertise-on-organising-a-legal-strike/

http://atans1.wordpress.com/2012/11/26/when-devan-nair-was-jedi/

Another gd reason why Todd’s parents are suspicious? And US pushy?

In Public Administration on 03/04/2013 at 6:40 am

Something bothered me about the way the police was handling the Shane Todd case (other than the hard drive that his parents alleged they found). But I couldn’t place my finger on what was it that was bothering me..

Then last Thursday, I read this: An inquest into the death of exiled Russian tycoon Boris Berezovsky is due to open later.

Mr Berezovsky, 67, was found dead on Saturday on a bathroom floor at his home in Ascot, Berkshire. BBC Online on Thursday 28th March.

Then I knew what had been bothering me: the length of time it was taking the inquest to be held prior to the FT report in February. The inquest in the UK was happening less than a week after the death, Shane Todd’s inquest date is almost a yr after his death.The coroner’s inquiry into the death of American researcher Shane Todd will start on May 13 … Last June, 31-year-old Dr Todd was found hanged in his Singapore apartment in what appeared to be suicide. CNA on 26th March.

Although, I didn’t do crime or death when I was practicising law many yrs ago, I didn’t remember ever hearing it taking so long for an inquest to be held in the late 1970s. And those were the dark agges: it could take three to four years before the High Court heard a case. Between JBJ and LKY, this was sorted out in the late 80s.

I asked around and was told that is that it is very unusual for an inquest to be held almost a year after the death. A more typical response is several months after the incident: http://singaporenewsalternative.blogspot.sg/2010/01/singapore-coroners-inquiry-into-death.html. The delay is not usual especially as it had been classified as “suspected suicide”. Usually, the investigating officer wants to close the file ASAP when it is classified as “suspected suicide”. The case of a lady who jumped to her death was cited to me: the inquest was held about three months after her death.

Only, cases classified as “suspicious” take a long time to reach the inquest stage, the investigating officer having satisfied himself and his superiors on the cause of death.

So the parents, and the US senator and the govt, have reasonable grounds to put pressure on S’pore to move on the case: it wasn’t just the external drive. Of course, the delay could have due to the parents causing the police grief with their queries. Still, the fact that the FT reported the story in late February, and the US senator and govt intervening soon afterwards, makes one wonder if the inquest was called in response to US pressure. And that leaves one wondering why a “suspected suicide” took so long to reach the inquest stage.

The SPF have plenty of explaining to do. There is the

– reason for classifying case as “suicide” but sitting on an inquest call;

– if there was a need to investigate further, why the classification was not changed to “suspicious”;

– missing the external drive; and

– changing its mind on FBI help.

And all this in a case that involves the hegemon’s concerns (reasonable or otherwise) about “reds under the bed”. The FT reported recently that more than a quarter of US companies surveyed by the American Chamber of Commerce in China say they have had trade secrets stolen or compromised through cyber attacks on their China operations, And involving a S’pore govt research institute that gets US research money but was trying to do a deal with a Chinese co that the US has been targeting for yrs: suspecting it of being an arm of the Chinese govt with a mission of stealing secrets from the West (rightly or wrongly)

I don’t envy the investigating officer and those who secured the premises. Nor the administrators at the research institute responsible for the proposal to the Red company and selecting Todd to work on the project.

Related post http://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/03/20/what-the-pope-can-teach-our-pm-and-police/ When TRE republished this, shumeone posted this rebuttal to the parents’ conspiracy theory:” If SPF secure the hard drive in the first place, this conspiracy will be covered up and not known to the world. By the time USA found out, they will be screwed really hard by China.”

So will SPF prosecute property agents and money lenders for “mischief”

In Political governance on 26/03/2013 at 7:42 am

“Sticker Lady”, who is alleged to be behind the stickers and “MY GRANDFATHER ROAD” graffiti painted on several roads last May, will be charged in court today together with her alleged accomplice, the police said yesterday.

The two, graffiti artists Samantha Lo, 26, and Anthony “Antz” Chong, 30, will be charged with mischief and not vandalism — which would have been punishable with a fine of up S$2,000 or jail of up to three years and caning for men. Mischief carries a lighter maximum punishment of a fine or a jail term of up to two years, or both. Today.

Right, so can I expect the police to charge the property agents and money lenders who put up “ugly’, “non-artistic” stickers in my neighbourhood? It should be a cinch arresting these mischief makers as they displayed their mobile phone numbers prominently. Details in the post I wrote earlier last year — see below.

Their offences are worse because they are not easily removable (they used industrial glue to put up their stickers).

But somehow, I doubt the police bother about these property agents and money lenders.

BTW, I’m impressed that minister shan, in his capacity as MP, took the trouble to write to the police, on behalf of these artists. Nice of him. So unlike, George Yeo’s ladies from hell who once took the attitude that “the law must take its course”.

—————–

If SamL’s a vandal, are these not vandals too?

The police took the antics of the Sticker Lady very seriously, explaining a few weeks ago how the police had to divert substantial resources to identify the culprit behind the case saying, “vandalising public property is a very irresponsible act”. And that it cost money, time and effort to clean up after her.

Err so how come nothing has been done in my private housing estate since then to clean up acts of vandalism that would put the lady to shame, and to arrest the culprits?

It’s not as though it would be difficult to identify the vandals. They left their telephone numbers behind.

Let me explain. Within a 50m of my home, property agents and money lenders have been sticking up ads prominently displaying their telephone numbers. These are pasted on the public property, on electricity boxes, They read

Legal Loans : 90158055/ 84692899

Legal Loans : 93910045/ 98955254

Legal Moneylender: 90158055/ 93910045

Urgent buyer [of property] …/ Serious doctor …: 82855947

They make the place look like a slum (OK, OK I exaggerate a lot, but the public property has been turned into free ad billboards for money lenders and property agents at no benefit to the taxpayer). And have no artistic merit at all. They are juz black print on white paper.

I can understand the importance of zero tolerance policing and the arrest of the Sticker Lady in the context of zero tolerance policing. I cannot understand why property agents and money lenders are exempt from zero tolerance policing rules. Nor why these stickers are not removed. In M’sia, property agents and money lenders pay the police bribes to ensure they are allowed to put up illegal ads. Same here too? After all, if ex senior Home Team leaders are accused of offering contracts in return for sex, what should junior officers do?

Or is it OK to put up “commercial” stickers that deface public property but not arty-crafty scribblings? Or are property agents and lenders different? Like Woolly Wally Woffles’s employee who escaped prosecution, they work for the rich?

Penultimately, a wicked tot. If the money lenders and property agents are arrested, will “The PAP govmin are bastards” netizens (Andrew Loh, SG Hard Truths and Fabrications about the PAP are not in this group of “The PAP are always wrong”) rush to their defence saying, “The ads are so artistic. They are great examples of minimalist chic: black on white”.

Finally an apology to Sam the Sticky Lady. When I read the ST report where her dad described her as being traumatised by her arrest, I tot, “What a spoilt brat who thinks that she entitled to break the law with impunity. Thinks S’pore is her grandfather’s property when she is not a Lee or Tan”. But in view of the revelations of the culture of deceit and fakery at STOMP, ST could be misrepresenting the facts about how she felt on being arrested.

http://atans1.wordpress.com/2012/06/27/if-samls-a-vandal-are-these-not-vandals-too/

CHC: A prophecy

In Corporate governance, Humour on 13/07/2012 at 7:51 am

First some recapping:

– CHC mgt says:

“The people currently in the news are our pastors and trusted staff and leaders who have always put God and CHC first,” he said. “As a church we stand with them and I believe fully in their integrity.”

“The S$24 million, which went into investment bonds, was returned to the church in full, with interest… The church did not lose any funds in the relevant transactions, and no personal profit was gained by the individuals concerned.”

– And Geriatric Geisha’s hubbie says : “Kong Hee insisted on his integrity” and “Please know that there are always two sides to a story. I look forward to the day I caun tell you my side of the story in court.”

Going by the above comments by management and Kong,  and the failure of CHC  to appeal against the findings of the Commissioner of Charities, I prophesy that when the court finds him and the other four guilty as charged (Yup I think the court will find them guilty as charged), CHC management, Kong and the other four will simply say,”It was an honest mistake. We know what we did was in accordance with the wishes of the God of prosperity, and we thought it was legal under S’pore’s law. It seems we were badly advised on the latter.”

Based on the words of mgt and Kong, and the failure to appeal against CoC’s findings, the basis of the charges against the Famous Five, it would seem that the factual findings of the CoC is not in dispute.

While there are good legal, and financial (lawyers are expensive and Auntie Sun needs money for her Hollywood lifestyle) reasons not to appeal the CoC’s findings of fact, but to use the coming trials to contest them, the very public assertions of the accused “integrity”, no monies lost, and the deafening silence on the findings of fact by CoC leads me to conclude that

– at the trials, the “pureness” of the motives (saving souls via Auntie Sun’s Hollywood lifestyle and work) will be stressed in the hope that this will lead to their acquittals, and

– if it doesn’t, then they will spin “It was an honest mistake. In our desire to save souls, we unwittingly broke the laws of Caesar for which the five of us will go to jail. Pass the plate round, we need to pay the lawyers and the rent of Auntie Sun’s Hollywood mansion.”

Err someone should ask CHC mgt abt their God’s mansions and how come Auntie Sun and Kong (remember his prnthouse in Sentosa Cove): “In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.”

Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s

In Uncategorized on 06/07/2012 at 6:02 am

(Or “CHC members: Why should tax-payers subsidise Sun Ho’s Hollywood life-style?” or “We are subsidising CHC in Crossover Project”)

In this, I pointed out, among a few other things, some in favour of CHC members, some against, that CHC members were wrong in thinking that CHC’s money could be spent as they wished: that it was not their grandfather’s money. This post expands the point I was trying to make because based on their media comments, some CHC members are showing a great deal of entitlement over spending taxpayers’ money over Sun Ho’s Hollywood life-style and Crossover Project. 

Maybe, they don’t realise they are using the money of other S’poreans, who may not share their idea of Christianity, or who may believe in other gods, or even no god. 

Methinks the members of the City Harvest Church in expressing their love and support of Kong, the other four accused and Geisha Sun are forgetting what Jesus is reported to have said in Luke 20:25,  Matthew 22:21 and Mark 12:17 about the relationship that should exist between the church and the state. Luke’s version reads, “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar’s, and unto God the things which be God’s”.

In this saying, Jesus was establishing  the limits, regulating  the rights, and distinguishing “the jurisdiction of the two empires of heaven and earth” according to a famous American biblical commentator of the 19th century  http://www.preteristarchive.com/Books/1810_clarke_commentary.html

I’ll try to explain the relevance of this quote to the CHC situation.

CHC management and members are saying that how the money spent by the five is a CHC internal affair and nothing to do with others, implying that the Commissioner of Charities should leave them alone: it’s their money and if they want to spend it on their Auntie Sun and her hollywood buddies so be it.

But the problem with this view is that the status of a charity is granted not by God but by Caesar (the state).

CHC could have opted not to become a charity, but it chose to register as a charity (presumably because it was greedy for — OK taking advantage of — the tax benefits and reputational branding of being a charity). It becomes subject to the Commissioner of Charities, and all that entails.

It is no longer a private organisation, and the laws and regulations relating to charities applies.

In return for the tax benefits and seal of gd corporate governance that CHC gets by being designated as a charity, it has to play by S’pore’s (Caesar’s) laws, and in particular, the laws and regulations that CoC’s enforces. These include not “misusing” (as defined by Caesar’s laws, not the laws of God as understood by CHC) the charity’s funds . It cannot pick and choose which laws and regulations it has to obey.

Not their grandfather’s money.

Because of the exemptions from tax that a charity and donors get, the tax-paying public is subsidising Geriatric Gyrating Geisha’s Hollywood life-style and music performances. This explains how the state subsidises a charity, any charity.

As Christians, CHC church members accept that it’s either God’s way or the highway to Hell. Likewise they must accept that by becoming a charity, CHC and its managers have to obey the laws of Caesar. And that if the managers fail to “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s”, they will be punished by Caesar’s courts. At least there are courts. Their God is prosectuor, judge and executor (OK, also the defender).

“For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind: it hath no stalk: the bud shall yield no meal: if so be it yield, the strangers shall swallow it up,” as Hosea 8:7 says.

No wonder other Christians are worried. CHC members should listen to this lady and “sit down and shut up” before they upset other S’poreans with their sense of entitlement that other S’poreans must subsidise Auntie Ho’s Hollywood life-style and Crossover Project.

CHC management and members, and Kong and his Geisha seem unable to appreciate that hard times for the many mean greater scrutiny of the few who flaunt living in Sentosa Cove penthouses or Hollywood mansions, especially when the former are subsidising the latter’s lavish life-style.

They shouldn’t forget that one reason why the PAP government is unpopular is because of its perceived indifference to the widening income gap. And remember, the PAP ministers don’t show-off their life-styles unlike Auntie Ho.

In a coming post (hopefully next week), I will prophesie  that Kong and the management of CHC are preparing the way to take a course of action more usually associated with a certain political party.

CHC: Charity, Denial & Persecution

In Accounting, Humour on 29/06/2012 at 6:08 am

(Or “Answering some issues raised by the CHC case”, or “Can’t blame CHC members from being defensive” or “Netizens rushing to crucify before hearing the evidence”)

One question that has been asked on the internet, “What happens if all the members of City Harvest Church sign a resolution giving retrospective approval to what the pastor and the others charged are alleged to have done? Can they escape the consequences of the charges and the Charity Commissioner’s findings?”

The answer is: Even if all the church members agree to give their retrospective approval, nothing changes. By becoming a charity, CHC becomes subject to the Commissioner of Charities, and all that entails. It is no longer a private organisation, and the laws and regulations relating to charities applies. After all by becoming a charity, CHC deprives tax benefits: in return it has to play by the law and the Coc’s regulations. These include not misusing the chariy’s funds. Cannot suka suka choose what to obey. Not their grandfather’s money: it’s the money of Harry’s Law. Harry’s Law is more like obeying God: cannot pick and choose what to obey. It’s either God’s way or the highway to Hell. Same for Harry’s Law.

Another question raisen on the internet is, “Has the CoC defamed a CHC executive committee member?

The man is in denial. CoC is justified in giving details of its findings. Only if he can prove that at least one of the CoC’s findings is wrong, can he win a defamation suit.

Are the church members supporting Kong and the others in denial, and too defensive in defending Kong, wife and friends?

Those netizens who are anti-CHC, Kong, the others charged, Auntie Sun and the “prosperity” gospel can reasonably argue that the members should accept the CoC’s findings.

But as the appeal process has not even begun, church members can reasonably point out that their support does not mean they are in denial.

They are waiting to see the evidence. After all, netizens are always telling S’poreans that, “The PAP government is always wrong, never ever right”. So why should it be any different in this case? Because netizens don’t like pastor Kong, Auntie Sun, the CHC, and the “prosperity” gospel, so everyone got to trust the PAP govt that it does no wrong

And anyway, only charges have been filed against the pastor and friends. They have yet to be found guilty, and the law says that a person is innocent until proven guilty. And the bar is very high: beyond reasonable doubt, not on the balance of probabilities. The latter is the standard the CoC uses in his investigations.

So those who want to scourge, give gall wine, crown with thorns, crucify and spear CHC, Kong, the others charged, Raunchy Auntie and the “prosperity” gospel, hold your instruments of torture and death. Bit too early to drag them to slow and lingering deaths by dragging them behind Satan’s chariots.

Let Harry’s Law pass judgement first.

Seriously, it’s sad to see so many netizens waste and squander the after-effects of the unmasking of STOMP’s (and SPH’s) fabrications. Juz because they don’t like Kong, wifey, friends and the “prosperity” gospel doesn’t mean they should behave like the journalists and editors of the constructive, nation-building media at their howling, baying, snarling best. 

Only the PAPpies will be happy: netizens are vigilante comboys and cowgals that S’poreans have to be protected against.

If SamL’s a vandal, are these not vandals too?

In Political governance on 27/06/2012 at 6:01 am

The police took the antics of the Sticker Lady very seriously, explaining a few weeks ago how the police had to divert substantial resources to identify the culprit behind the case saying, “vandalising public property is a very irresponsible act”. And that it cost money, time and effort to clean up after her.

Err so how come nothing has been done in my private housing estate since then to clean up acts of vandalism that would put the lady to shame, and to arrest the culprits?

It’s not as though it would be difficult to identify the vandals. They left their telephone numbers behind.

Let me explain. Within a 50m of my home, property agents and money lenders have been sticking up ads prominently displaying their telephone numbers. These are pasted on the public property, on electricity boxes, They read

Legal Loans : 90158055/ 84692899

Legal Loans : 93910045/ 98955254

Legal Moneylender: 90158055/ 93910045

Urgent buyer [of property] …/ Serious doctor …: 82855947

They make the place look like a slum (OK, OK I exaggerate a lot, but the public property has been turned into free ad billboards for money lenders and property agents at no benefit to the taxpayer). And have no artistic merit at all. They are juz black print on white paper.

I can understand the importance of zero tolerance policing and the arrest of the Sticker Lady in the context of zero tolerance policing. I cannot understand why property agents and money lenders are exempt from zero tolerance policing rules. Nor why these stickers are not removed. In M’sia, property agents and money lenders pay the police bribes to ensure they are allowed to put up illegal ads. Same here too? After all, if ex senior Home Team leaders are accused of offering contracts in return for sex, what should junior officers do?

Or is it OK to put up “commercial” stickers that deface public property but not arty-crafty scribblings? Or are property agents and lenders different? Like Woolly Wally Woffles’s employee who escaped prosecution, they work for the rich?

Penultimately, a wicked tot. If the money lenders and property agents are arrested, will “The PAP govmin are bastards” netizens (Andrew Loh, SG Hard Truths and Fabrications about the PAP are not in this group of “The PAP are always wrong”) rush to their defence saying, “The ads are so artistic. They are great examples of minimalist chic: black on white”.

Finally an apology to Sam the Sticky Lady. When I read the ST report where her dad described her as being traumatised by her arrest, I tot, “What a spoilt brat who thinks that she entitled to break the law with impunity. Thinks S’pore is her grandfather’s property when she is not a Lee or Tan”. But in view of the revelations of the culture of deceit and fakery at STOMP, ST could be misrepresenting the facts about how she felt on being arrested.

ST misreps yet again

In Footie, Media on 24/06/2012 at 6:18 am

(Or “Four unexplained mystries in WofflesGate”) 

So Germany beat Greece, and are into the Euro semis, which reminded me that even footie facts are misrepresented by the nation-building, constructive ST to promote government’s FT is “betterest” policy (See below. To be fair, ST published the rebuttal. Balls-up or subversion? Or someone with a conscience?). Is nothing sacred? What next? Footie scores get misreported? More likely is that goals scored and saves made attributed to players that fit ST’s agenda of nation-building, constructivism.

I am exaggerating? Look at an ST report of WofflesGate: [in relation to the incident in September 2005,] . . . Wu got Mr Kuan, then 76, to tell police that he was the driver of a car speeding at 95kmh on Lornie Road. Mr Kuan is said to have lied again about a speeding offence committed at 9.45am on Nov 10, 2006. The car was then travelling at 91kmh on Adam Road.

The speed limit in both instances was 70kmh and involved Wu’s car. Court papers did not state who the actual driver was.

The court heard that a notice was sent to Wu to reveal the identity of the driver. Concerned that he would accumulate demerit points were he to accept liability for the speeding offences, he roped in Mr Kuan, then a maintenance technician in his clinic. Now 83 years old, Mr Kuan was also described as a close family friend of the doctor. He has not been charged.

The report makes it clear implicitly that Woolly Wally was the driver by stating that hr was concerned about getting demeit points.  Yet we now know that both the Attorney-General’s Chambers and the Law minister said that investigations were ongoing, as to who the driver actually was; and that the case has not been concluded.

Funnily, ST has not retracted its story. Nor have the authorities asked for a retraction. These are four  mysteries that need to be explained to convince S’poreans that the rich are not different.

———

Read the u/m in ST Forum about two weeks ago.

Go for local football talent

CONTRARY to what the report (‘Talent mining in the sports world'; May 25) implies, Germany does not have an official programme recruiting foreign-born footballers.

Circumstances that led to Polish-born strikers Miroslav Klose and Lukas Podolski representing Germany differ completely from the mechanics of Singapore’s Foreign Sports Talent scheme.

Klose moved to Germany at age seven, while Podolski did so at two. Both are therefore home-grown German players.

The only non-native player recruited by the Football Association of Singapore (FAS) who can be considered home-grown is Daniel Bennett, who came here as a toddler.

Many Singaporeans rightfully question the ‘Singaporean-ness’ of foreign sports talent, something that even Bennett himself is concerned about.

He was quoted two years ago in the Singapore Armed Forces Football Club official website as saying: ‘I am more Singaporean than many of the other foreign players who took (up) citizenship more recently, as I grew up here and it’s my home.’

Apparently concerned by the excessive use of imported players contravening the spirit of the game, football’s world governing body Fifa tried to introduce regulations in 2008 to restrict such usage.

Unfortunately, the FAS remains stubbornly persistent with its push to recruit more foreigners. It claims foreign sports talent plug the gaps in its youth development programme (‘Change of heart by NSAs'; May 28).

Our national football administrators should find answers to why, after almost two decades of S-League football where would-be Lions play with and against foreign players weekly, and years of employing foreign technical directors, the FAS is still struggling to develop quality international-level talent.

It is impossible to prove, but perhaps native and home-grown players strive harder for their country.

Michael Ang

Why AG has a good reason to appeal Wally Woffles’ sentence

In Political governance on 18/06/2012 at 5:08 am

Netizens are up in arms over Wally Woffles’ $1000 fine. There are several reasons for this, and I will explore a darker reason later this week, I hope.

I was annoyed by his comment as reported in ST (remember this is the newspaper that is perceived by many as having an agenda when reporting the news) that he believes “many people similarly did not know that this is an offence”. I take this to mean that he still doesn’t realise the seriousness of what he did (in spirit helping to pervert the course of justice) and is not repentant. In fact, he comes across in the ST report, as saying,”This is not an offence that even merits me paying a ‘peanuts’ of a fine.” Why he was such a Wally to behave in such a perceived manner could be due to sheer arrogance or stupdidity or both. And anyway only a Wally would talk to the media: sit down and shut up is my advice when approached by a ST or SPH report.

In view of his unrepentant attitude to in spirit perverting the course of justice, this is a good reason for the Attorney-General to change his mind and appeal the sentence. The AG’s Chambers had earlier said that it was not going to appeal the sentence because a fine is “within the norm of usual sentences” under that charge.

This appeal is not throwing meat to the snarling beasts of the internet jungle, or handing over someone to the vigilantes from cowboy towns: but a proper and proportionate response to a unrepetent criminal (if ST is to be trusted) who in spirit perverted the course of justice.

But it would seem that the AG would do no such thing. SIGH, it would have dispelled the notion that the rich are different. Gd responses to the official spins coming from Law Minister and AG.

 

 

What price human dignity or safety?

In Political governance on 03/04/2012 at 5:58 am

(Or “It’s official: cheating is “bigger” crime than brutal assault”)

I tot of these headlines last Saturday as I read that a High Court judge allowed a $400,000 bail set by the lower court for each of the three directors of Profitable Plots to be reduced. He ordered bail for two amg moh FTs – John Andrew Nordmann,  and Timothy Nicholas Goldring – to be cut to $200,000 each, while Singaporean Geraldine Anthony Thomas, Nordmann’s wife, had her bail reduced to $150,000.

All three were still at Singapore Changi Prison, where they have been remanded since they were each charged in the Subordinate Courts with 86 criminal counts of abetment for conspiracy to defraud investors of US$2.42 million on investments related to an industrial lubricant called Boron early last week. They are trying to raise funds to post bail, it is understood.

The defendants’ lawyer had asked for bail to be reduced to $15,000 each because the three had not absconded and had abided by bail conditions during investigations. But the deputy public prosecutor  disagreed, rightly, saying that the situation is different now that the three are charged in court. The three pose as flight risks given the size of the losses and that they, if convicted, may be jailed for up to 10 years per charge.

One can only wonder why the authorities placed such a low value of around $12,000 bail, I believe, per ang moh FT, in the case of the ang moh FTs who brutally beat up several S’poreans at Suntec City in 2010. It was set so low, that two of them tot it smarter to run away and forfeit their money, when they were allowed to travel overseas.

Why the discrepancy between the dollar value of a crime and its consequences on human dignity or safety is what the Home Affairs minister and DPM should be asking the relevant people in Home Team and other relevant agencies.  The minister had said in parly in March,”If there were any lapses or negligence, the police will take appropriate disciplinary action against the officers involved. We expect the internal inquiry to be completed next month.” Hopefully, he would now ask them to explain why the authorities placed such a low value on human dignity and life. But pigs would fly first, I suspect.

This is S’pore and money talks. Remember the MP who said that he could only respect those earning serious money?  Dr Lim was reported by the Chinese press in 2011 as having said:“If the annual salary of the Minister of Information, Communication and Arts is only $500,000, it may pose some problems when he discuss policies with media CEOs who earn millions of dollars because they need not listen to the minister’s ideas and proposals, hence a reasonable payout will help to maintain a bit of dignity.”

True he finally apologised saying, “Dignity cannot be and must not be measured purely in monetary terms”. But boy did he twist and turn before he decided to apologise.

No I’m not exaggerating. Minister Teo was asked about the assessment of foreigners for flight risk, the measures taken to prevent such foreigners from absconding and the criteria applied in the assessment of whether extradition proceedings against such foreigners who have fled jurisdiction will be commenced. In reply, he said that there is a standard set of procedures for the handling of accused persons, whatever their nationality, from arrest, to investigation, to charging them in court, and to police bail (Emphasis added).

Better to beat up a S’porean by bashing his head against a pillar, than cheat a S’porean of his money is my understanding of the way the two cases were handled and the minister’s words seem to confirm that my interpretation is reasonable. BTW, he tried to deflect blame from Home Team and the other authorities saying that the court had the final say in deciding bail. Err who makes the request in the first place, minister?

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 211 other followers