Zoroukah

Don’t Be Swayed So Easily Singapore!

admin — Sat, 19 May 2012 04:13:24 +0000

~By John Chan Chi Yung~

The PM and the rest of the PAP would like all to keep in mind that they have changed many policies and taken many actions to address ‘our concerns’ (but which are more correctly problems that they themselves caused).

If you feel that various members of the PAP, especially the PM are sincere about changing the PAP then remember that they always came across as sincere, year after year, even while causing us so much real suffering.

But if they were really so, we wouldn’t have the problems we face today. If the PAP has truly changed, it would acknowledge all the unethical policies still in force and remove them.

For one thing, the PM will resign as the head of the People’s Association and he will admit that the PA has been used as a political tool for entrenching the PAP at the grassroots level even after a constituency has voted for their opponent.

That it was biased against the opposition by banning opposition MPs from being grassroots leaders of their own constituency, banning opposition events but allowing PAP ones, disallowing opposition MPs from attending events by their own grassroots leaders etc.

Then what about their policies of cutting bus routes from opposition wards? What about making opposition ward residents 2nd class citizens by interminably delaying needed upgrading work in their estates? To make it worse, the PAP justifies their actions with half-assed rationales that they get away with because they control parliament with manipulation, suppression and intimidation.Such policies are the height of unfairness and bullying and are the mainstay of PAP policies.

Fundamentally, the PAP is rotten to the core and for all the displayed sincerity and displayed desire to help Singaporeans, it and its MPs cannot be trusted because they condone their own unethical behaviour, stay silent on it, justify it, and persecute those who stand up against it.

Oh how they change their tune according to the winds of change even while insisting they never sang otherwise. Oh how they pledge to change even while denying any mistakes. Oh how they speak of remorse even while trying to silence their critics.

But heed them not, for that’s all they are, words. It must be remembered that any action taken now was forced upon them, however much they deny it.

We all must remember that much remains unfair, many remain suffering and many wronged remain unavenged.

We must all remember that there can be no moving on when the culprits have not been caught, when they have not been made to compensate and when they have not been punished.

For they have not changed from their own conscience, they have not truly repented and for many, they have not even been chosen. They were forced upon us by the cost of forgoing seemingly desirable ministers (who often have to be replaced by others and who have resigned.) and last minute gerrymandering.

Many wrongs remain unredressed, so Singapore do not be so easily swayed by honeyed words spoken year in and year out, do not be forget who and what brought about this state of affairs and do not vote for the PAP.

Remember, there is no Republic of Hougang or Aljunied or Potong Pasir. There is only the Republic of Singapore and we will all live and die together, as real families should.

_______________

Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com

Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/theonlinecitizen/~3/sQjAVIwq_LQ/

Postponement of Event to 2 JUNE 2012

admin — Sat, 19 May 2012 04:13:20 +0000

Home Main Stories Postponement of Event to 2 JUNE 2012 –>

~ By Funtion 8 Maruah ~

Postponement of Event to be held on Saturday, 19 May 2012 at Speakers’ Corner, Hong Lim Park

We have been informed by the police on the evening of Tuesday, 15 May that the exemption granted under the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act to Speakers’ Corner, Hong Lim Park has been revoked with effect from 16 May to 26 May 2012 because of the upcoming by-election. A police permit is therefore required for our event on 19 May 2012.

Owing to the short notice and uncertainties in obtaining a police permit, as well as the prospect of inconvenience to our guests and contractors should the permit be refused, we are sorry that our event at Speakers’ Corner, Hong Lim Park, has to be postponed.

We deeply regret that a by-election in the single-member constituency of Hougang, has disrupted and inconvenienced Singaporeans from enjoying activities at Hong Lim Park which is not part of Hougang.

We will now hold our event on SATURDAY, 2 JUNE 2012 at 3.00 p.m. The programme remains unchanged and, we hope to continue receiving your support.

We are aware that this notice may not be read by all our guests and members of the public who have made plans to be at Hong Lim on 19 May 2012. As organisers, we will be at Hong Lim to meet those who may turn up because of our inability to reach them.

The organisers,

Function 8 Limited and MARUAH

Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com

3 Responses to “Postponement of Event to 2 JUNE 2012”

That could be too late if hg is lost.
Sigh…

Reply
So the Hougang by-election is truly a national event and not just a local event as LHL and the what his name told us otherwise. So amazing! Just like kids!

Reply
The papies are afraid that this event would result a greater impact of losing votes by the pap bi elction in HG, thats why they would permit this to carry during this period, its dirty kiasu of the miw…pui!

Reply

–>

Twitter

Twitter Feeds
twitter2id(“twitFeed”);
twitter –>

Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/theonlinecitizen/~3/a62ONLUdlTk/

Yaw Shin Leong apologises and urges voters to support WP

admin — Sat, 19 May 2012 04:13:09 +0000

Home Main Stories Yaw Shin Leong apologises and urges voters to support WP –>

~ By Kumaran Pillai ~

Yaw Shin Leong finally breaks his silence and has written a letter to the residents of Hougang to support the Wokers’ Party in the upcoming by election on the 26th of May 2012. The Hougang SMC seat became vacant after he was expelled from the party in February this year. Below is a copy of the letter that he had sent to his supporters earlier today.

Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com

49 Responses to “Yaw Shin Leong apologises and urges voters to support WP”

and skponggol with loose74 were parthorin in the ponggol smelLEE river who kept harpin that yaw been seein ms saw all this while

Reply
- @looes74
  
  Please la. Stop your nonsense. Youalking is wasting ppls time. YSL no matter.
  
  Just watch this number 64.8%. Come 26 May 2012, the new ‘shock therapy’ number will be 80% !
  
  HUAT AH !
  
  Reply
  - Why not say 200% support WP? Another idiots! I am not going to tied down with blid loyalty to any party
    This time Low Thia Khiang must lose for the benefit of all singaporeans
    It would scare any political party including PAP out of daylight
    I am not happy of you, I sack you
    That’s why more more singaporeans getting more more stupid
    Watch Spitting Image……Look at all the stupid voters such as these
    Guys gals,
    We enforce the idea that there is no such thing as safe seat even for the teochew enclave such as hougang. If Low Thia Khiang must “die” politically, so be it
    
    Reply
    - Dude Low Thia Kiang not even contesting how to loose. How WP loosing benefit Singaporeans??? More FTs, Higher GST good for Singaporeans?
      
      Reply
This is how to graciously admit your mistake and accept responsibility. And still not take it personally from the party that sacked you.

Unlike some one by the name of Sajeev.

Reply
- Agree with you!
  
  Reply
- What the F? He didn’t even say what the hell he do wrong?
  Did he or did he not screw the char wor in the political party?
  So Workers’ Party members can screw people right because they are oppies
  I REST MY CASE!
  
  Reply
  - I’m looking at YSL’s action at another angle.
    Looks like he doesn’t mind being thrown all the stones and receiving all the swearings and curses against him alone for his mistakes, rather than spilling the whole story and naming names under pressure, causing the other woman and her family’s reputation more ruin.
    And more, he has even written a letter of apology and encouraged hougangnites to vote for his former peer.
    In ‘hiding’ as some may accuse him of, he could have just let out the other woman’s name easily, but he chose to continue to protect that woman from all the bad publicity.
    Perhaps if it were to be you , you’d waste no time in naming also the other woman hoping that she and her family would share part of the bad light in order to lighten yours.
    I see that by not saying anything more now, YSL has actually repented and is giving an opportunity to the woman and her family to have a new beginning.
    Anyone trying to probe further has wicked and self-serving agenda.
    I bless YSL and his wife, and the other woman and her family a new beginning and happiness ever after.
    
    Reply
YSL, right thing to do. At least you show your loyalty and cause for the opposition. Nothing personal with the party.

Reply
Yaw Shin Leong, your apology now, almost at the eve of the by-election, smells of electioneering rather than a sincere apology. If you wanted to apologise sincerely to the residents of Hougang, you should have done it right from the start. Not wait until the by-election, caused by you by the way, to say you are sorry. You are wasting taxpayers’ money because the by-election has to be held. So, don’t pull such a stunt at this time. WP says Hougang residents has another chance to vote for their MP…is that really what they meant? I think WP is asking for itself to be given another chance instead…after picking the wrong person called Yaw Shin Leong.

Reply
I admired Yaw for coming out to do the necessary. He is human like all of us. Those who still insist of casting stones at him are hypocrites who think themselves as self righteous. Remember 3 fingers point back at you.

Reply
- Agree. A little late but better late than never. He has put party before self in this act. Unlike his other comrade.
  
  Reply
Why remind people of him again?

From within?

If wp lose how?

Reply
At the very least, Yaw knows his past behaviour is inappropriate and deserves to be expelled……it is a measure of his manhood that he didn’t blame anyone else for his wrong-doing.

Reply
to be fair,at least yaw’s sexual hiatius was a mutually consenting ‘love’ affair unlike the underaged sex/prostitute scandal where sex was transacted.
it is good to see yaw regretting and repenting his socially irresponsible act which would have been less impactful if he was not a public servant,an MP.
let’s not confuse YAW with the WP.
YAW was a WP but WP is not YAW.

Reply
YSL apologising now smells of under hand dirty tricks by you know who. Why this opportune timing and why employment of “the kiss of death” tactic…

I think Singaporeans these days are not so easily swayed by such cheap old tricks.

Reply
- Sure or Not,
  Really? Judging from the stupid voters at TOC even in hougang, WP would probably win big. So what! Maggie won big even the whole nation sunk. Stupid voters! Puke! Puke!
  
  Reply
  - Such are the “Typical Traits” of Pap Supporters/Members.
    First they try to “impressed” on you by “disguising” as “Educated, well read and gentleman”
    But when they start losing…..jus like loose74…they “showed”their “True colors”.
    DC is probably ( infact 100% ) the same.
    “Wolves in Sheep’s skin”……all of these Pappy Clowns
    
    Reply
This is deja vu. Lee Hsien Loong too apologized on the eve of the vote for the express purpose of swaying voters with hollow words.

Reply
He told on internet that he voted pap before.

No one who care abt wp would want to be on spotlight again.

He voted pap.

Reply
Even when YSL screw around he knows that his act is not as bad as the screwing by pee and pee. He is wise, of the two, he rather be screwed by the public than allow the pee and pee to screw his fellow citizens and his children.

Reply
The timing of apology shows YSL is not sincere. It could be part of LTK’s strategy – to pay the way for YSL’s eventual come back.

I still prefer WP under the late JBJ. The current leadership of WP, to say the least, only know how to find excuse to run away from important issues, like no comment, it is an internal party matters etc : a sad display of irresponsibility.

Reply
- They’ll be breathing fire the next week. And then after the results, they will return to being their usual underperforming selves.
  
  The worse part is that Singaporeans will call that underperformance “constructive”.
  
  Reply
  - and disappear until the next GE right?
    
    then say always here for you…
    
    Reply
Dun think there was any complaint about his work as an MP from residents of Hougang.

Yes, his alleged adulterous life is morally wrong and as an MP, he should not have done what he did. Then again, as Lions said this is “a mutually consenting ‘love’ affair”. Not a crime.

Now he has come out to apologise for the incoveniences which he caused, some question the timing…I think Yaw showed that he is remorseful and he agreed with his sacking by his party.

His choice of this timing showed his continuous support for Hougang’s residents as well as the WP and PEH.

“smells of electioneering” ? – yes … “a sincere ” ? – yes… imo.

Reply
The People’s Action Party candidate Desmond Choo said that he can be voice of younger voters in Hougang, and called for them to ‘step up and say, we want a change.’

THAT IS THE BIGGEST BULLSHIT EVER HEARD.
Desmond Choo will be a small cog in the big wheel of the Pappies.
When thy tell him to jump. he will ask.. HOW HIGH, SIr?

DONT BE FOOLED VOTE OPOSITION OR YOU WILL PAY AND PAY.

Reply
The timing of this apology is very interesting. If Mr. Yaw is truly apologetic, he could have done this way before the by-election was called. It is hard to tell his real intent but being repentant is certainly not one of them.

One thing that he has succeeded in doing though is to put his name, and by extension, himself, back into the spotlight. If he really wanted to go quietly into the night and to build a private life, this letter should not even be written, certainly not at this point of time. He is not helping the WP in anyway, whatever he might profess.

Reply
His action is Damaging WP once more to come out and remind people of his boo boo.

While people may want to harm WP, my support for WP has increased because i see that people are hurting WP.

The more we must bring justice to this country.

Reply
I dissected his words.
I tried very hard but could not find any sincerity in his words.

regards
Mole

Reply
Letter is fine and he does not need to explain-Only govt ctrl main stream media want and imply all sorts of things.
Focus should be peng Huat Wp, Hougang higher Percentage for WP as National referendum on PAP aftr GE2011. Always think PAP fed Ferrari PRc Driver when think of Desmond as that is what you will get and more if otherwise.

Reply
Tomorrow so called married woman or 2 would come fwd claiming YSL slept with them tomorrow.True or not he is no more news and of Hougang or WP’s concern as FOCUS shld be Peng Huat Of WP and Straight fight with Desmond Choo. MIW claiming to treat this a local issues, but digging hard on scandals to shoot dwn WP and YSL, affairs will continue till 26 as desperate and more to loose esp LHL with whole court fiasco over his delayed response.Plus referendum -pple more unhappy PRC Driver-foreigner issues.All not going right so many new devpts to come…..

Reply
MSM repeatedly repeatedly brought up YSL in so many if not all of their coverage of by-election news in the last few days.

Even if this is going to cost WP some votes especially from Women, it only makes us the 40% more determined to see the end of pap.

Reply
YSL should have said “i will not confirm or deny if i have cheated my wife, but i can confirm never cheat people of Hougang.”…

if YSL cheated the people of Hougang in any way, he would have to swim out of S’pore with a rubber tire in the dead of the night, cos PAP govt would have ringfenced him in S’pore! =D

Reply
千古罪人 !

Reply
The big question for the election this month is whether the voters keep their eye on the ball and judge Workers Party by what policies and track records they advocate and not be thrown off the track by red herrings. Has any astute reader ever ruminated whether YSL is a vile, low-down Trojan horse from beginning to end?

Reply
So, whose apology is more sincere?

LHL’s or YSL’s?

How about those ex-pap ministers and mps who never apologize for their crimes?

Reply
@Pap forever’s disciple -’
They don’t one of them AWAL with plenty of money another one committed sucide the others just go to jail.

Reply
Did he served the residents of Hougang or deceived them…broke faith with them. I won’t take his apology seriously. Has he apologised to Angela’s family?
Anyway, it took the suggetion of Minister Khaw Boon Wan which he apparently heeded and apologised.
But its too little too late.

Reply
Sporeans can say whatever they want. End of the day WP will win big. Hougang will go back
To WP . Sporeans are looking for change in 2016. I don’t think sporeans can continue to pay
Half a million for a hdb house.

Reply
@Harold
what can we expect from Hungry Ghost month (Kor tai) stage performers.
All I hope for is that at the end of this season husting they bring back with them all their ardent supporters to their abyss.
Then Singapore can sustain our economy by replacing these cretins with better quality foreigners.

Reply
YSL 生为WP人,死为WP魂! 妙哉!

Reply
He forgot to “Cry” and “Knee down”.
He should have learn a thing or two from PM Lee during the 2011 election.
It may have helped.
But I guess everybody realised that they had been “fooled” once.
Once Bitten, Twice shy.

Reply
From now till 26 May, i expect the name ”YSL” to be Repeatedly Disseminated and enter the ears and eyes of citizens over and over again.
So, women are the ones who will easily be swayed to vote against WP .
There WILL BE lost votes due to the honorable YSL.
Eat your hearts out.
YSL has gone down in history forever as the one who …. WP.
YSL, you da man!
Women will vote against WP!
hahahaha!!!!! There is nothing wp can do from now till 26 May.
The 40% will become 30%.

Reply
GOOD FOR NOTHING GUTTER GARBAGE !!!!!!!!!!!

Reply
and was low thia khiang or sylvia lim made god-parent?

Reply
Now that Yaw has apologised for a failing in his private life; Clinton did worse.
Where is CHOO WEE KHIANG who was convicted in court–any apology?
Maybe the NEPHEW should apologise on his behalf; since UNCLE not man enough.

Reply
@looes74, Potent questions for you as aren’t you indiscrete, superficial and inconsiderate! Let me teach you and others like you some soul searching thing about being human that one like @Pap For Soul @PAP Forever doesn’t have also What would YOU HAVE DONE WHEN…

1. You’ve been nationwide and worldwide in the www by controlled State MSM too as having commited sexual misconduct in indiscretions linked to women you know who are also named. No real evidence emerged and you felt sad for those ladies.

2. You did do something wrong but not as reported. Or you didn’t and you are up against such a MSM in your homeland while being a member of a political opposition party and duly elected MP too. You are in the public eye.

3. You have a wife who supports you and holds you dear whether you have indiscretions or not. And you have to consider her feelings too. Your children’s and parents too.

4. You know you can’t fight such an pungent insidious MSM up for graps for “dirt” issues to be flaunted against opposition parties. As you surely know what LKYism stands for from what it has declared, esp. in the late Francis Seow’s book “To Catch a Tartar”!

5. I have more but I think that 4 is enough to fill up your small brain for until it has grown up.

Reply

–>

Twitter

Twitter Feeds
twitter2id(“twitFeed”);
twitter –>

Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/theonlinecitizen/~3/0E3Cu26EE9Y/

Majority of Singaporeans will not be directly affected by inflation. Who do we believe?

admin — Sat, 19 May 2012 04:12:43 +0000

~By Jen~

Inflation

Some of us know the difference between truth and half truth and the meaning of “spin” which is why we read carefully between the lines when it comes to news related to politics. For the uninitiated, spin is defined by Wikipedia as “a form of propaganda, achieved through providing an interpretation of an event or campaign to persuade public opinion in favor or against a certain organization or public figure. While traditional public relations may also rely on creative presentation of the facts, “spin” often, though not always, implies disingenuous, deceptive and/or highly manipulative tactics.^“

In the global political arena, what we often hear (especially from the more powerful/aggressive/deceptive politicians) falls somewhere along the continuum of truth and spin. But what does one call something that falls outside of spin and half-truth, sounds utterly unbelievable and is contrary to what we experience in reality? Is there even any politically correct term for it? Or should we just call a spade a spade – that those politicians who say such incredulous stuff are either out of touch with reality or deliberately spinning a far-fetched tale for their own agenda.

Recently, many Singaporeans were stunned (to put it mildly) when Deputy Prime Minister Tharman said the “average Singapore” will not be affected by the high inflation after the latest set of Consumer Price Index (CPI) figures for March was announced. This led many Singaporeans to dispute this claim both in the mainstream media and online. The bigger shock came today when the news reports on what the Government said in Parliament yesterday regarding inflation raised even more disbelieving brows.

The TODAY newspaper’s headline (15 May, 2012) screamed “Majority of Singaporeans will not be directly affected by inflation” while the Straits Times front page today quoted the Minister of State for Manpower Tan Chuan-Jin as saying “the Government does not expect the current high levels of inflation to persist in the years to come”.

And the Government also took pains to point out in Parliament that the current food price increases (based on their CPI calculations) are nowhere near the peak of 2008 when prices soared nearly 8% due to bad weather and global shortage. I am not sure what their point of mentioning this was. Was it to tell us to be thankful or was it a distraction tactic? So what if the prices shot up 8% in 2008 and the current increase is lower compared to back then? What consumers are fretting over is that prices are still rising since that sharp 8% increase! And if we were to compare with 5 years ago (2007), the price percentage increases would have gone up by much more isn’t it?

Every average person whom I have talked to from the aunty who makes my favourite teh tarik to the taxi-driver say that they are feeling the pinch of inflation every single day. Most Singaporeans who pay their own bills would know just how hard inflation has hit them. The list of prices increase seems to get longer every day – the infamous housing and car/COE prices, the higher charges for public transportation (yes including taxis as they are a commonly used form of public transport), petrol, car-parking, healthcare, vitamins, medicine, groceries, food and electricity and water bills.

Adding to the confusion of “is inflation going up or easing off” are the different reports we have been reading in the media. Straits Times carried a report on May 8 with the headline: “Singapore inflation worrying: ING Bank economist”. This senior economist had warned that inflation in Singapore may accelerate even faster if it is not capped at a reasonable rate. He highlighted inflation as a key worry for Singapore after the rise in the CPI hit 5.2 per cent in March.

On May 12th last week, ST ran another report with the headline “Prices likely to go up before adjusting”. It quoted various leading economists who held the common view that “Higher inflation is likely to stick around for a few years as Singapore’s economy undergoes restructuring to raise productivity”. And in TODAY newspaper (published on May 15th), the report said the economists it had interviewed “disagreed” with the Government’s view that most Singaporeans would not be directly affected by inflation. (here)

I have heard that with statistics, it’s like a bikini, what you don’t see or don’t know is more interesting. With all these contradictions, people are starting to question just how accurate is our Consumer Price Index and how is it computed? What goes into its basket of goods and how accurate is the weightage given to each item?

According to the CPI for March 2012, food inflation was only 2.7% – which doesn’t jive with what many consumers are experiencing. When questioned, the official explanation given was that the weights given to different types of food in the CPI basket are supposed to reflect the dining habits of the average Singaporean consumer, based on the results of a Household Expenditure Survey last conducted in 2007 and 2008. In addition, prepared meals account for around 60 per cent of the food basket in the current CPI. Based on this information, the basis for the CPI food inflation computation appears outdated. For one, that survey is too old and for another, I would have thought that the rate of eating out has gone up and people are cooking less at home due to their hectic work schedules.

Another bugbear for many of us is that the CPI excludes the cost of housing which would have pushed the index sky high if it were included. The official explanation for the exclusion? House purchases are excluded because they count as both a consumption expense and an investment expense. And the official rationale goes on that while consumers use the house for shelter, which counts as consumption, the house is also a capital asset that can be bought and sold later on (presumably at a profit?).

To quote Minister Lim Hng Kiang when explaining in Parliament why most of us ‘lucky’ folks will not be ‘directly’ affected by inflation: “The two largest contributors to CPI inflation are expected to be imputed rentals on owner-occupied accommodation and car prices. Together, they will account for more than half of the inflation this year. As the majority of resident households in Singapore own their homes, they do not actually incur rental expenditure. Likewise, the majority of resident households will not be directly affected by the rise in COE premiums as new car buyers make up a small proportion of all resident households. “

What was that again? I am not versed in political speak but I think he is trying to say – “You own a house you are ok, you don’t own a car you are also ok?” Hmm, what about those who can’t afford to own a house? What about the young people who are worrying if they can afford to buy their dream home in future? What about the higher cost of almost everything from food to healthcare? What about the daily bills that many are struggling to pay? And aren’t Singaporean car owners citizens too?

So many questions and so few answers. Is inflation easing or climbing higher? Are most Singaporeans affected by inflation or are we not? Who should we believe – the economists or the politicians?

I don’t know about my fellow Singaporeans but I am not swallowing any spin or numbers that don’t add up. Meantime, I will continue to trust what I can see and what I am paying everyday out of my own pocket.

Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com

Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/theonlinecitizen/~3/dtT0t0JIdIA/

Face Palm: Obvious Facebook comment is obviously by a S’porean

admin — Fri, 18 May 2012 10:08:07 +0000

Face Palm: Obvious Facebook comment is obviously by a S’porean

Posted on 18 May 2012

Pin It

Therefore, a campaign to dissuade obvious Facebook comments is a top priority for Singapore now.

This uber-creative photo is taken by a local photographer, Eugene Soh:

Credit: Eugene Soh’s Facebook

The context and what it proves?

Maxwell Food Centre’s infamous chicken rice feud is completely mashable with the world’s most iconic and recognisable board meeting pose.

And that Singapore’s got some pretty fine talent to conceptualise this.

Needless to say, this photo is going viral online.

However, like how peaceful, quality time in the crapper is rudely interrupted by a knocking on the bathroom door or by the sound of forceful love-making in the next stall, an obvious Facebook comment threatens to urinate on everything.

Check this one out, which was posted not long after the above photo went viral:

We hereby urge the Media Development Authority to look into this issue of Singaporeans littering Facebook with obviously obvious comments.

Instead of wasting time watching porno flicks and then advising the public-at-large not to watch them or coming up with some harebrained, all-encompassing online code of conduct, MDA needs to take immediate, definable and localised action against obvious Facebook comment contributors.

Or else, there might not be enough Face Palms to go around.

This post was written by:

New Nation – who has written 386 posts on New Nation.

Contact the author

Even Jesus facepalmed himself at the comment.

Article source: http://newnation.sg/2012/05/face-palm-obvious-facebook-comment-is-obviously-by-a-sporean/

The Hougang Divide

admin — Fri, 18 May 2012 04:07:52 +0000

~ By Ghui ~

Recent events have given Singaporeans an opportunity to make up for lost time in the exercise of their democratic rights. From having virtually no opportunities to head to the polling station, Singaporeans now find themselves in the throes of election fever for the third time in less than eighteen months.

On 26 May 2012, Hougang residents will get the chance to elect a new MP, their old one having served less than a year before being sacked for his alleged extramarital affairs. This by-election is like no other we have ever had. Then again, much of what we have now achieved has been unprecedented.

Encouraged by a resurgence of political awareness, Singaporeans from all walks of life have arisen to reassert their rights. Most notable was Vallama Marie Muthu who mounted a David-versus-Goliath challenge by filing an application to the High Court to order the Prime Minister to call a by-election in Hougang, and to declare that the Prime Minister does not have “unfettered discretion” in deciding whether or when to call by-elections. (here)

Somewhere between Vallama’s efforts, Workers’ Party insistence and the government correctly judging the shifting ground sentiment towards fair play, the much clamoured for by-election has now been called.

As the debate heats up, the battle lines have increasingly been drawn between the “regional issues” side and the “national interests” camp.

To those in the “regional issues” group, the Hougang election is simply a local election. To them, Hougang voters should not be distracted by national concerns. As veteran MP Mr Charles Chong has said: “I won’t say national issues have been resolved, but many issues have been discussed. So this by-election is not emotional. It will be much more local, rather than national.” (here).

To those who advocate that the upcoming election concerns the nation at large, or the “national interests” group, the Hougang by-election cannot be simply dismissed as “local”. Proponents of this view argue that since Singapore is so tiny, it would be artificial to differentiate “local” concerns with “national” ones.

Others have reasoned that since elections are so few and far between in Singapore’s history, every election would be in the collective interest of all Singaporeans. Besides, don’t national matters affect Hougang residents too? (here)

National vs Local

Neither the Workers’ Party (WP) nor the People’s Action Party (PAP) has issued official statements in relation to this. All we have thus far are hints from individual members of these parties as to what the parties involved might feel.

Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam has said: “This by-election is a local election and that it is about who is the best representative for Hougang residents, who can best help them solve their problems on the ground”. WP chief, Low Thia Kiang has, on the other hand, indicated that it is not a clear-cut distinction between where local matters start and where national agenda ends. (here)

Reading between the lines, it would seem to appear that while the PAP considers the Hougang by-election merely “local”, its opponent, the WP, regard the same as both localised and collective.

An MP’s role

It is easy to get caught up in popular sentiment and react to issues emotionally in light of what can be construed as a politically tumultuous year for Singaporeans. Perhaps then, instead of focusing on whether a by-election concerns the country at large or is limited just to Hougang residents, we should go back to basics and clarify the role of a Member of Parliament.

While MPs are responsible for speaking up for their respective constituencies, let’s not forget that elected MPs also form Parliament. In our system of government, the government is collectively and individually responsible to Parliament. If the government does not have the support of the majority of MPs in Parliament, either along party lines or by coalition, it will have to step down. Parliament’s main functions are manifold and include taking decisions in relation to law‐making and financial control. (here)

Theoretically therefore, an MP plays a dual role of not just acting as a representative for his constituency but also as an advocate for larger national interests as well.

Consequently, it would be simplistic to pigeonhole the Hougang by-election as either “national” or “local” for in truth it is both. This has nothing to do with what the parties currently in the Hougang contest tell us, but with the dual nature of what MPs are supposed to be – local care-takers of their constituencies, and at the same time a representative of their constituents for the national agenda, in the formation of government and policy-making.

Perhaps the results of the by-election would not change things for now. Either way, the PAP would still hold the majority of seats in Parliament. But if we were to think that way, then in truth, nothing would ever change. As Confucius once said, “a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step”. So if Singaporeans are sincerely clamouring for government accountability, then every vote will literally count!

Of course, it is not for non-Hougang residents to tell Hougang’s voters how they should vote. But at the end of the day, while the vote itself may be local, its repercussions will inevitably be national in nature.

Accountability

As already discussed, MPs represent not just their constituencies but are essential to the formation of government itself.

The results of the ballot box are the surest way of ensuring accountability and whether we like it or not, the outcome of this by-election will either affirm or reject.

The party that claims eventual victory can be assured that it has done a good job and be spurred on to do even better. The party who is defeated can then learn from its mistakes and do a better job next time.

Good governance requires accountability at all levels and a by-election is as good a time as any to reinforce that mantra.

Can Hougang residents really neatly divide between local accountability and national accountability? Then again, why should they?

Indeed, Hougang voters have the unique privilege, warranted or not, to clearly vote for an MP according to what an MP should be voted for. This by-election can be seen as setting the benchmark for how voters should always evaluate their candidates – can they deliver on the ground, and at the same time contribute to the bigger national picture? This should be the key question that Hougang voters need to ask of both Desmond Choo and Png Eng Huat.

The YAWn Saga

By now, Yaw Shin Leong is a household name. In less than a year, he has gone from victorious underdog to pariah in one fell swoop. As his colleagues fought for accountability from the government, his ill-advised liaisons provided fodder for the idiom “pot calling the kettle black”. The media went into a frenzied overdrive and the mud slinging began.

The details of Yaw’s private life became gossip for public consumption as the PAP seized its golden opportunity to undermine the WP’s procedure for candidate selection. Never mind that Yaw had to date been a good MP. (here) Accountability was the catchphrase of the day and in his refusal to come clean to the public about the private details of his life, he became the first victim of the accountability he preached.

I did not agree with Yaw’s sacking but at the end of the day, I respected the WP’s ability to gauge public sentiment. By dismissing Yaw, they publicly proved their commitment to accountability. Something, which to date, the PAP has been perceived as unable to do.

Does the PAP really want to set an example for character assassination? Will its own candidates stand up to the rigorous standards it is claiming that the WP does not possess? It is a dangerous game to play in our present day of social media and every dog has its day.

The PAP continues to use Yaw’s indiscretions to discredit the WP but in all honesty, this trump card is fast becoming stale. The more they assert Yaw’s infidelities, the more voters are reminded of the WP’s firm stance in accountability.

Closing the Conundrum

Bearing in mind the nationwide furore that erupted over Yaw’s extramarital scandals, which in turn triggered the necessity for this by-election, can we really hand to heart call this by-election purely “local”?

Given Vallama Marie Muthu’s courageous actions, which captured the public’s, imagination and the number of articles that have been written about whether or not such by-election is required by law, is it really accurate to limit this election to an “Hougang only issue”?

As a result of the events that have set the “to call or not to call a by-election” wheels in motion, the entire nation is now invested in the process. Singapore is keenly watching how both parties react and perform. After all, the current scenario is singularly exceptional in our political history and will set a precedent for the future.

The vote may belong just to Hougang but the entire country has an interest in its outcome.

Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/theonlinecitizen/~3/G7quEhO5GNk/

Ben Pwee: Vote with the national political agenda in mind

admin — Fri, 18 May 2012 04:07:47 +0000

Home Main Stories Ben Pwee: Vote with the national political agenda in mind –>

~By Benjamin Pwee~

Benjamin

We are happy to see Hougang residents having a chance to exercise their vote again, in the coming Hougang by-elections. This is testimony to elections being the constitutional right of every citizen of Singapore, for the common man to choose his own leader and parliamentary representative.

We wish all political parties contesting in the Hougang by-elections a fair, friendly and gentlemanly fight, and for all voices to be heard, regardless of skin and political colour.

We also encourage residents of Hougang to use this by-elections as an indication of the people’s choice, one year after GE2011. The past year has seen major issues raised in GE2011 becoming more acute, with more voices being expressed across the spectrum in civil community. These include national transportation, elder and medical care, inflation and rising costs, influx of foreigners, housing needs, and others.

We ask Hougang voters to vote with the national political agenda in mind, and not see this as just a local parochial by-election. Represent the rest of Singapore with your vote, to send a strong signal to the ruling Party that business cannot be as usual anymore.

We wish all candidates the very best, and may the best Party win.

The Independents

- Benjamin Pwee

- Wilfred Leung

- David Tan

- Mohamad Hamim Bin Aliyas

- Juliana Binte Juwahir

- Ting Tze Jiang

_____________

Photo Credit: Shawn Byron Danker

12 Responses to “Ben Pwee: Vote with the national political agenda in mind”

I like this guy, not only because he speaks with reason and logic, he also wears ADIDAS!

Reply
“We” is who?

Reply
- “We” is Pwee!
  
  WEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!
  
  Reply
- Stupid question! We is we lah, his family and/or his party. Cannot meh?
  
  Reply
- We are the 40% and lets increase it to 80% this by election.
  
  Reply
The WE is
The Independents

- Benjamin Pwee

- Wilfred Leung

- David Tan

- Mohamad Hamim Bin Aliyas

- Juliana Binte Juwahir

- Ting Tze Jiang

Reply
On a friend’s wall : 爱欲其生，恨欲其死。

Because some people just hated the PAP, they want every Singaporean to hate the PAP as well. They want the Hougang residents to hate the PAP as well. They want the Hougang residents to vote for the WP not because they support WP but because they want to see PAP lose.

Do these people really care for the residents of Hougang? No.
Do these people really care for the town of Hougang? No.

Dear Hougang residents, these people don’t care about your life. They don’t care about Hougang. Most of these people don’t even live in Hougang. All they care about is their hatred for the PAP. They just want to make use of you to help them achieve their objective.

Because they hate the PAP, they want the PAP to fail.
爱欲其生，恨欲其死。Do you want that to happen?

Will you listen to these people or will you listen to your heart? The vote is in your hands. Vote wisely.

Reply
- the other side of the coin…
  
  Because some people just love the PAP, they want every Singaporean to love the PAP as well. They want the Hougang residents to love the PAP as well. They want the Hougang residents to vote for the PAP not because they support PAP but because they want to see WP lose.
  
  Do these people really care for the residents of Hougang? No.
  
  Do these people really care for the town of Hougang? No.
  
  Dear Hougang residents, these people don’t care about your life. They don’t care about Hougang. Most of these people don’t even live in Hougang. All they care about is their love for the PAP. They just want to make use of you to help them achieve their objective.
  
  Because they love the PAP, they want WP to fail.
  爱欲其生，恨欲其死。Do you want that to happen?
  
  Will you listen to these people or will you listen to your heart? The vote is in your hands. Vote wisely.
  
  Reply
- Leave the Hougang Resident alone and respect their choice on who they are voting.
  Let them decide who can help them reclaim back their rights and privileges of being a Singaporean; who can reinstate back our Home that has been infested with foreign locusts.
  
  Reply
The people who support PAP have something to gain, while WP supporters only use their heart and soul to suppoort. That makes the difference between the supporters of the two sides.

Reply
I like Benjiamin and his team, I think they combine with NSP or Chia Li Tik and form a potent force or even SDP.
This country needs people them, although elites but they chose to serve the people instead of being a pappy.

Reply

–>

Twitter

Twitter Feeds
twitter2id(“twitFeed”);
twitter –>

Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/theonlinecitizen/~3/HL1bEqdpJuo/

TOC Statement on Photo Misuse

admin — Fri, 18 May 2012 04:07:28 +0000

Home Top Story TOC Statement on Photo Misuse –>

“The photo you see below, taken by TOC photographer Chan Zhijian Jeremy, was reproduced without credit on Occupy Singapore’s Facebook page. This photo was used to create the impression that the PAP’s Mr Desmond Choo was refusing to shake the hand of the WP’s Mr Png Eng Huat. This was done with no reference to a separate photo, which shows Mr Choo shaking Mr Png’s hand.

While TOC’s Jeremy Chan was unable to capture the moment when Mr Choo shook Mr Png’s hand, we regret that our photograph was used to create the incorrect impression that the handshake never happened.

The second photo was originally reproduced on Mr Brown’s website, and TOC is currently attempting to verify who it belongs to for crediting purposes.

12 Responses to “TOC Statement on Photo Misuse”

DEY?????????????????????????????

Reply
This is nothing………The Shit Times does this sort (and far worse) of smear campaign all the time !!!

Reply
Err…, apology fail.
Photographers watch politicians like a hawk.
You tell me they don’t have that 2nd photo up there?

How about saying what you really wanted to do there TOC…

Reply
- TOC is attempting to make an UNBIASED STAND between the 2 candidates.
  Rather than just showing 1 picture which does not tell the whole story.
  
  Reply
  - “TOC is attempting to make an UNBIASED STAND between the 2 candidates.
    Rather than just showing 1 picture which does not tell the whole story.”
    
    BC, your understanding of “UNBIASED” is fail.
    Rather, I think the word you are looking for is “fabrication”.
    
    Based on your approval of such practices, I could take a photo of Chen Show Mao mid-blink in parliament and declare he was sleeping.
    
    Intention is everything.
    Dictionaries are helpful too.
    
    Reply
TOC, lame excuse. why post the 1st photo which puts Desmond Choo in a bad light in the 1st place?

Reply
What’s the big deal TOC ??
The Shit Times showed them shaking hands.
The TV replays showed them shaking hands.
It is not that the TOC photo on a little known facebook page is viewed by millions of Singaporeans.
This is really making mountains over molehills.

Reply
- Not sure if unaware of own hypocrisy….
  
  Or just stupid.
  
  Reply
Amnesty International and the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network are appealing to the Singapore authorities to stop the execution of Yong Vui Kong, to establish a moratorium on the death penalty and to suspend executions.

Sincerely yours,

Donna Guest

Asia Deputy Director International Secretariat

Amnesty International

M. Ravi

Counsel for Yong Vui Kong
ADPAN member

4
Categories: Community, Main Stories

32 Responses

Lily
16 hrs, 38 mins ago
I have a nephew, he is 17, still behaving like a child. We have to constantly remind him to behave and not get himself into trouble with the law, we don’t think he is aware of the punishment if caught for whatever wrongdoing. Yong was only 19 when he committed the offence, just 2 yrs older than my nephew. Whenever I read about his news, I feel very sad, such a young healthy man and yet days are numbered, and I think what if it is my nephew (whom I love so dearly) is in his position? Please, he doesn’t deserve to die so young, please give him a second chance…

Sarah
16 hrs, 36 mins ago
we need to do this en masse to protest against the inhumane death penalty especially in this case

Ask This Powerful Lady For Help – PM’s Face Beside Hers
16 hrs, 10 mins ago
she can help complain without being charged for false allegations at http://eastcoastlife.blogspot.com/2007/06/wah-very-bold-hor-lie-to-dpm-lee-hsien.html

“I don’t think then DPM Lee Hsien Loong read my email. My emails and letters tend to stop at certain level. And I believe whatever complaints to Ministries would always be stopped at certain levels if you go through the proper channel. So, since PM Lee Hsien Loong has closed my case, should I go see his father personally? I think I will ………………… ”

either her scandalously serious allegations are true and all these ministers/persons named should be investigated or CPIB should charge her for false allegations/complaints

she dares write this way:

http://topmleehsienloong.blogspot.com – blatant misuse of PM’s face/photo n claiming endorsement for more than 5 years for her scandalous/defamatory n seditious allegations against ministers/persons/dialect groups without being sued by PM nor being charged for false report of corruption and so on – she even threatened PM by wanting to tell his father LKY abt PM at eastcoastlife

Not to worry when we look here – which is worse?

Reply
Ask This Powerful Lady For Help – PM’s Face Beside Hers
16 hrs, 10 mins ago
she can help complain without being charged for false allegations at http://eastcoastlife.blogspot.com/2007/06/wah-very-bold-hor-lie-to-dpm-lee-hsien.html

“I don’t think then DPM Lee Hsien Loong read my email. My emails and letters tend to stop at certain level. And I believe whatever complaints to Ministries would always be stopped at certain levels if you go through the proper channel. So, since PM Lee Hsien Loong has closed my case, should I go see his father personally? I think I will ………………… ”

either her scandalously serious allegations are true and all these ministers/persons named should be investigated or CPIB should charge her for false allegations/complaints

she dares write this way:

http://topmleehsienloong.blogspot.com – blatant misuse of PM’s face/photo n claiming endorsement for more than 5 years for her scandalous/defamatory n seditious allegations against ministers/persons/dialect groups without being sued by PM nor being charged for false report of corruption and so on – she even threatened PM by wanting to tell his father LKY abt PM at eastcoastlife

Not to worry when we look here – which is worse?

Reply
Hey you smart-alecks out there! I come out in defense of TOC although I am understandingly disappointed that some of my positings were deleted by TOC who are now regulated by Pm as a political orgazisation.

Don’t you all see TOC’s photo merely showed Mr. Png offering his handshake to Choo and Png’s is already ONE UP on Choo in public courtesy initiative at the very leas!. So what’s all your pro-PAPpy and anti-TOC WP HOO-HAHs about? Because.. did you all even note Choo’s clear facial expression all the way of awe in disbelieve as Png was some 2 steps below him and even when he clasps Png outreached hand, he was in utter surprise if not shocked! never expect LKYism and it’s followers to initiate even an expression of common courtesy. It is because they think that they are indeed “doctor know alls”. That’s at least in our maligned poltical arena not true of what Oxford defines poltica to be. So please look up your dicky!
And even to slef-promote as a cut-above the rest of any other world leaders too! There are mulitple books to proove this is so. As even one was personally promoted in Russia. To me it tells of one so self-righteous that teaching anyone else in the human race is a must! Meaning “none is cleverer than me”?

Reply

–>

Twitter

Twitter Feeds
twitter2id(“twitFeed”);
twitter –>

Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/theonlinecitizen/~3/vZaDGvcQ-VA/

International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia (IDAHO)

admin — Thu, 17 May 2012 16:06:43 +0000

Home Community, Main Stories International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia (IDAHO) –>

~ By Maruah ~

10 Responses to “International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia (IDAHO)”

Can they get married and buy a house from hdb? Just wondering..

Reply
Obama “came out” which got him on newsweek front cover with a halo over his head. Repealing S377A would only be symbolic but one that I agree with. Decriminalising it is the right step. However, de-criminalising and advocacy is 2 separate issues.

It is vital to encourage family thru male-female marriages otherwise there will no longer be a next generation. I seriously doubt Singaporeans will ever vote in a Government that will encourage same sex marriages and put hom*s*xuality on the same footing as male-female marriages.

Reply
- Surrogacy(i think this is illegal in SG too) and adoption will give babies/next generation. Marriage inequality doesn’t which generally bars all gay couples from openly raise kids.
  Discriminating against them would do only force a minority of gays and lesbians to get into horrible relationships and make ingsignificant amount of children compared to the possiblilty of kids that the community will have if they have marriage equality.
  Equality and advocacy are 2 separate issues, equality being ‘ you are free to be who you are ‘ while advocacy is ‘ you SHOULD be this’. The former is freeing, the latter is limiting.
  
  Reply
I agree that people should not be discriminated against based on who or what they have sex with.
That said, none are free if they cannot legally have sex with animals, vehicles, children, their siblings and parents or marry multiple partners.
End discrimination for all

Reply
- JayF – You cant equate this with beastiality or paedophilia. Children and animals are not able to give consent and will be open to abuse wheres 2 consenting adults can consent to something and no one is hurt.
  
  Reply
- I don’t know about incest and polygamy, give me a valid and sound reason to ban it. Otherwise i’d say go for it if you want to.
  For paedophilia, beastilty and objectophilia(with objects, duh), there is no consent/possibility of consent from both parties. Note: kids can’t give consent, neither do animals and inanimate objects.
  
  There are laws that should go, there are some that should stay, until you actually look at the reasons that justify the laws and agree with the rationale, you can never say that a law is justified.
  
  Reply
Most societies still draw a difference between pedophilia, necrophilia, incest, animal sex and consenting sex between adults.

Can’t bar sex totally. Literally no future either.

Reply
I am phobia of Communicable Diseases.
With the news about TB by the msm, then only i got to read more about TB.
Most singaporeans have not seen any news about TB cases uptill about 5 to 10 years ago. I mean, TB was generally UNHEARD of in singapore!
But recently the news said that there is a growing concern as many cases are diagnosed.
My QUESTION to Politicians is this :
ARE FOREIGNERS ENTERING SINGAPORE REQUIRED TO GO FOR LATENT TB INFECTION TEST?
YES / NO ?
if any of you thinks you are any smart or intelligent, why cannot you give me a conclusive answer?
why are you afraid?
why are you incapable?
why are you speechless?
why are you so bloody smart?

yours
Tony Nathan LSS

Reply
Down with this sort of thing.
These movements are insidious, trying to pervert our intrinsic desire and capability to express love.

Guys can have good guy friends, they can really love each other in the highest spirit of fratenity and companionship.
They don’t have to stick it into each other.

These movements try to portray our natural disgust at such behaviour as something that is outdated and primitive, unacceptable in ‘modern society’.

Stand up against such perversion. Help a gay today, help him fight against this unnatural notion that he can only express love through sexual intercourse with another guy.

Fight for human rights, fight against homosexuality and unhuman behaviour.

Reply
- Nope, your stance is trying to pervert their intrinsic desire and capability to express love. You obviously got it all mixed up, but i forgive you.
  Romantic love and platonic love are two different things, if you don’t know the difference, then i guess you would be confused because you would want to stick it up there with all your friends. Can guys be good friends with girls and really love each other in the highest spirit of fratenity and companionship, yet still not stick it up ‘there’? if so, what makes you think that gays and lesbians cannot? What you say here is suggesting that they do not know the difference between the 2 loves stated before, but i beg to differ.
  In fact, it IS unnatural. Homophobia is not found in nature, period. Want to know what contributes to homophobia? They are ignorance, religion and male chauvinism.
  lol
  lol lol
  
  Reply

–>

Twitter

Twitter Feeds
twitter2id(“twitFeed”);
twitter –>

Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/theonlinecitizen/~3/_b53aIlGm_g/

OPEN LETTER: CLEMENCY FOR YONG VUI KONG

admin — Thu, 17 May 2012 16:06:30 +0000

~ By Amnesty International~

AI Index: ASA 36/2012.002

Mr. K. Shanmugam

Law Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs

The Treasury,
100 High Street, #08-02
Singapore 179434

Dear Minister

OPEN LETTER: CLEMENCY FOR YONG VUI KONG URGENTLY REQUESTED

Amnesty International and the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) urge Singapore’s Cabinet to advise the President to grant clemency to Yong Vui Kong, a young Malaysian who faces imminent execution for drug trafficking. Clemency granted by the President, following advice from the Cabinet, is Yong’s last hope.

On 4 April, Singapore’s Supreme Court rejected Yong Vui Kong’s third and final appeal submitted by his lawyer, M. Ravi. The appeal argued that Yong Vui Kong was subjected to unequal treatment before the law when the Attorney-General’s Chamber decided not to prosecute the alleged mastermind of the drug operation, a Singaporean who was Yong Vui Kong’s former boss. He remains free from prosecution now that all 26 charges against him were withdrawn by the Attorney-General’s office. Yet his former employee, Yong Vui Kong, has spent almost four years on death row and now faces imminent execution.

Yong Vui Kong was 19 when first arrested in 2007 for possessing 47g of heroin. In 2008 Singapore’s High Court sentenced him to death under the Misuse of Drugs Act – which provides a mandatory death sentence for anyone caught with over 15g of heroin. The law strips the judiciary of discretion to pass a lesser sentence, or to individualize the sentence in conformity with the degree of culpability of the accused.

In 2005 the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions said that Singapore’s execution of another prisoner sentenced to death for trafficking heroin, Nguyen Tuong Van, would violate international legal standards relating to the imposition of the death penalty. “No international human rights tribunal anywhere in the world has ever found a mandatory death penalty regime compatible with international human rights norms,” the Special Rapporteur stated.

In resolution 2005/59, adopted on 20 April 2005, the UN Commission on Human Rights urged all states that still maintain the death penalty “to ensure… that the death penalty is not imposed… as a mandatory sentence”.

Amnesty International and ADPAN urge Singapore to follow the worldwide trend among common-law countries to ban the use of the mandatory death penalty. The US Supreme Court struck down mandatory penalty in 1976, ruling in Woodson v. North Carolina that “fundamental respect for humanity … requires consideration of the character and record of the individual offender and the circumstances of the particular offense.” In 1983, the Indian Supreme Court ruled that the penalty was unconstitutional in Mithu v. Punjab, stating that ““[t]he legislature cannot make relevant circumstances irrelevant, deprive the courts of their legitimate jurisdiction to exercise their discretion.” More recently, in Attorney-General vs Kagula, the Supreme Court of Uganda in 2009 struck down the mandatory death penalty because it prevented courts from considering all specific circumstances of the defendant and of the crime.

Yong Vui Kong’s case has sparked widespread concern around the world. In his own country, Malaysia, Foreign Minister Anifah Aman and Malaysian legislators requested the Singaporean authorities to grant clemency in 2010.

The President of Singapore can only grant a presidential pardon upon the advice of the Cabinet. Clemency for a death sentence has only been granted six times since independence in 1965. Amnesty International and the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network call on you and other members of the Cabinet to ensure respect for international legal standards by recommending the commutation of Yong Vui Kong’s death sentence.

Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases and without reservation. ADPAN is an independent regional network comprising lawyers, NGOs and civil society groups from 24 countries including Singapore. It campaigns for an end to the death penalty across the Asia-Pacific region.

More than two-thirds of states have abolished the death penalty in law or in practice. Death sentences and executions are decreasing globally and in Asia. Out of 41 countries in the Asia-Pacific, 28 have abolished it in law or in practice. Five out of the 10 ASEAN-member states have also abolished the death penalty in law or in practice. Singapore is one of the few remaining countries in the region that still carries out executions.

Amnesty International and the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network are appealing to the Singapore authorities to stop the execution of Yong Vui Kong, to establish a moratorium on the death penalty and to suspend executions.

Sincerely yours,

Donna Guest

Asia Deputy Director International Secretariat

Amnesty International

M. Ravi

Counsel for Yong Vui Kong
ADPAN member

Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/theonlinecitizen/~3/yFCgTB1hnyY/

Zoroukah

Don’t Be Swayed So Easily Singapore!

Postponement of Event to 2 JUNE 2012

3 Responses to “Postponement of Event to 2 JUNE 2012”

Leave a Reply

Yaw Shin Leong apologises and urges voters to support WP

49 Responses to “Yaw Shin Leong apologises and urges voters to support WP”

Leave a Reply

Majority of Singaporeans will not be directly affected by inflation. Who do we believe?

Face Palm: Obvious Facebook comment is obviously by a S’porean

Face Palm: Obvious Facebook comment is obviously by a S’porean

This post was written by:

The Hougang Divide

Ben Pwee: Vote with the national political agenda in mind

12 Responses to “Ben Pwee: Vote with the national political agenda in mind”

Leave a Reply

TOC Statement on Photo Misuse

12 Responses to “TOC Statement on Photo Misuse”

Leave a Reply

International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia (IDAHO)

10 Responses to “International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia (IDAHO)”

Leave a Reply

OPEN LETTER: CLEMENCY FOR YONG VUI KONG