Singapore Democrats

Re: [color=red]Mr Gandhi Ambalam, a co-defendant in the trial, also made the same point...“The difference in treatment adds to my concern if we can get a fair hearing,” Mr Ambalam pointed out.[/color]

Judge Toh Yung Cheong, go back to school - and I don't mean law school - if at this point in your career, you still haven't learn the first thing about [b]procedural fairness[/b], a key criterion for a fair trial.

I know any number of "N"-level holders who can do a much better job of it and take home, deservedly, that big fat paycheck of yours.

i hate to point out the obvious - there are no judges in Singapore, only kangaroos and clowns.

What surprise me, and should be an interesting study for Harvard for our Singapore's judicial system, is such that no matter how much a person study in law school, he / she can be turn into hypocrites, to toe POLITICAL agenda rather then dispensing real justice for the public.

Sorry but I have Zero Respect for these supposedly highly educated legal trained individual. In my ranking, prostitute rank higher then them, at least prostitute make an honest living addressing basic human needs.

Agree 100% with you Dick.....I have no respect nor credibility for/in the whole judiciary- from the CJ right down to the magistrate and DPPs.....all are tainted somehow. Sad, very sad for us all.

When is change coming?

the SDP is really doing us citizen
tremendous good work by [b]exposing
the dark side of the ruling regime[/b]

what breaks my hearts is that till
today, there are still tonnes of people
who blindly support the PAP, flowing
along with disgusting hypocrisy, turning
blind eye to basic human dignity

for a better tomorrow and for the sake
of our next generation, we must wake up
to the truth.

we must build our nation on truth and integrity. authoritative regime demeans basic human dignity. and i really means dignity for us citizen and common folks.

God bless the SDP

I hpoe this gets printed even though it is only tangential to the topic under discussion here. It is so patently obvious, just as in the case of Judge Toh Yung Cheong in this matter, that incompetence is a particularly valued professional trait in the PAP establishment that includes judges.

Take the case of the recent statement by the PAP government that the fourth prime minister is NOT going to come from the current cabinet for instance. I will state from the outset that I don’t enjoy the fact that I have to write as if a PAP victory in not only the next GE but the one after that is a [i]fait acconmpli[/i].

a. ALL of Singapore’s cabinet members top the list of the world’s most highly paid politicians, justified on the grounds that by Lee Kuan Yewe in his referring two European countries – I remember only Denmark – as having “mediocre” governments. Only after ALL of them in the list comes the Chief Executive of Hong Kong. Yet despite this legendary competence that demads the very best remuneration in the entire world, the PAP can still not find the next prime minister from within its ranks.

b. In the 2000 elections, the PAP trotted out seven of its new candidates hyping them as The Magnificent Seven. (I can’t remember two of them – PAP magnificence is indeed that forgettable – but the remaining ones are Tharman, Vivian, Balaji, Eng Hen and Boon Wan.) All of them are still in the cabinet almost two elections later. Yet, despite comprising one-third of the cabinet, the fourth prime minister still cannot be drawn from such magnificence.

c. Sometime last year (or perhaps even earlier this year), Lee Kuan Yew crowed that the individuals comprising the current cabinet constituted the BEST cabinet that he has seen in his entire political career. Best, or bestest cabinet ever, and still not capable of thowing up Singapore’s fourth prime minister.

Yet, very ironically, it is this same cabinet complete with superlatives, that provides the evidence that we actually only have CRAP in the cabinet.

Under a mediocre government there would have only been 1 PM and 1 DPM at the most. But in Singapore’s BESTEST EVER CABINET IN HE WHOLE WIDE WORLDI, we have 1 PM, 2 DPMs, 2 SMs and 1 MM – a total of six people, four in excess of the global norm – all doing the PM’s and his deputy’s job.

Is that what the PAP would like us to believe is their competence? And just how much does the six men’s incomes cost Singaporean taxpayers?

What gives? Are they or they not the bestest in the world and paid accordingly? Or have we all been taken for one long merry-go-round on the issues of ministerial incomes and the link to their competence?

Why isn’t the fourth prime minister of Singapore NOT going to be drawn from the current cabinet?

When the time to come for drastic changes in the Government administration; let’s drag these Judges clowns to trial.

We must punish them to show the world and our Singaporean that the law has finally existed treating everyone with fair and equal justice regardless of rich or the poor.

I don’t mind to volunteer to work as national security with couple of friends (everyone are welcome to join forces) for FREE to block all EXIT until these notorious people is punish accordingly.

Singaporean, please help to change our way of life in unfair/biased treatment from current LKY- government.

We must show LKY who will be the last to laugh and who will the first to feel the unbearable pain.

[b]A Change We Must……[/b]

Those Singapore Judges studied in Harvard University are supposing a smart people, but why they are not as smart as they seem.

I think we should feedback to Harvard University about their past Singaporean student, whether do they honestly earn the Degree.

Singapore Government so-called Harvard graduates fail to prove their intelligence miserably; this is very disgraceful and embarrassing to the prestige school name like Harvard University.

I searched the entire article to figure what problems SDP would face with the postponement. Not unexpectedly, there were none.

SDP should stop whining and try to portray itself (yet again) as being victimized. If there are constraints that the defence faces with the change of date, then state so. SDP puts itself in court through its own handiwork - - if it wants fairness, stay out of it.

People can see through that SDP member are trying to portray unfairness in court as an excuse for the likely conclusion - - a guilty verdict.

We hardly read about the SDP’s antics in court because nobody is interested to write about them. Ironically, the only sources are SDP’s own articles. This is just another example.

[b]My advice to SDP is to act more maturely and concentrate on the substance of the case.
[/b]

Hello, hey beat it. you are such a jerk. He had to stay on for father-in-law's funeral. Which part is it you find it hard to understand. What the...?!? Why can't you leave the dead person away from politics. Where is your "compassion" as a human beings. There is a "time-out" for "paying the last respect" you call yourself a chinese don't you know a filial piety? Are you eyeing for a minister post? we could see thru' but please don't go so low. Be a spineless man like a worm. No matter how good your command of English is, you are a terrible man without a conscience pure EVIL

[quote=BryanT]I searched the entire article to figure what problems SDP would face with the postponement. Not unexpectedly, there were none.[/quote]

If there are problems that SDP faces with the postponement, why would they post it here for the authorities themselves to read? What a lack of wisdom by BryanT, tsk tsk.

[quote=BryanT]SDP should stop whining and try to portray itself (yet again) as being victimized. If there are constraints that the defence faces with the change of date, then state so. SDP puts itself in court through its own handiwork - - if it wants fairness, stay out of it.[/quote]

What the SDP does is not a crime or reacted to in such manners in most other democratic countries. The SDP is being victimized, and no one from the SDP asked to be brought to court. In fact, it took more than a year for the case to even be brought to court by the AG. SDP's presence in courts helps to highlight the continued repression in Singapore.

[quote=BryanT]People can see through that SDP member are trying to portray unfairness in court as an excuse for the likely conclusion - - a guilty verdict.[/quote]

SDP's portrayal of unfairness in court helps show us what is really going on in terms of the state's handle on our civil and political rights. And sorry BryanT, you say 'people' but it's mostly you viewing things this way through your own bias.

[quote=BryanT]We hardly read about the SDP’s antics in court because nobody is interested to write about them. Ironically, the only sources are SDP’s own articles. This is just another example.[/quote]

We hardly read about any cases regarding SDP because of the state and slant of the local media. Do you know how many articles are published in Malaysian newspapers with updates on political court cases? Doesn't matter, because even if you did know you would still respond based on your preconceived notions and bias.

[quote=BryanT]My advice to SDP is to act more maturely and concentrate on the substance of the case.
[/quote]

[b]My advice to BryanT is to act more maturely and concentrate on the substance of the case.[/b]

I hear that Jufrie Mahmood also experienced quite a similar incident involving this same judge. He is being charged with two alleged immigration offences and this same judge Toh is prisiding over the case. During the trial the lawyer representing him, Mr Chia Ti Lik, gave the judge ample notice that he would be away in the US and would not be available when the trial resumed and asked for a deferment.

The judge flatly rejected the request and poor Jufrie who is not legally trained had to conduct his own defence for two days.

Can Jufrie expect a fair trial? Judgement will be passed on 20th November 2009.

If this is the kind of judges we have in Singapore, then we can say goodbye to justice and rule of law.

It looks like a state organ such as the judiciary is mangled beyond recognition to serve the interests of an autocratic regime steeped in corruption, nepotism and cronyism.