since when Singaporeans get to choose?

Anyway, I’m totally confused by the utterances of the PS of the Law Ministry as to facts or fictions, truths or untruths, justice or injustice, partiality or impartiality, propaganda or propriety, security of tenure or slavery of mercenaries, freedom of mind or mind control, independent judicial decisions or induced judicial decisions, non-corrupt government or non-collusive government, highest standard of integrity or highest standard of innuendo. You’re street smart to draw your own conclusions.

“Singapore … society”, what a great picture of Singapore and Singaporeans standing tall in the world of morality, freedom, tranparency, wealth, incorruptible leaders and public servants, free and fair unrigged elections, nepotism-free, etc. “Singapare therefore cannot allow those who carry no responsibility for Singapore’s future to dictate its political and legal system” and it was exactly its own concerned and responsible citizens who unearthed its own backyard of decades-old human bones.

I don’t buy the West democracies would be so interested about a tiny red dot. Why didn’t Singapore get rid of all the western MNCs, technologies, western educational systems and lifestyles, western culture and inculcate and imbibe its own ancient multi-cultures and lifestyles? Is the PS wearing sari or sarong kebaya or what?

How come the PS, MM’s office is in the hiding since LKY was the one badly mauled and defamed by the malicious, unfounded damaging Report of the IBA-HRI and perpetuated by the WSJ. If I were LKY, I’ll leave no stones unturned to bring both to their knees and annihiate them to unprecedented bankruptcies, first of its kind in world history, since scurriculous allegations of corruptions are made and ministers, (particularly himself) officials are defamed and will sue to clear their name. Do they have their name intact now on the world stage? If not, soon they’ll navigate towards the axis of evil by the West.

I feel sad for Prof JK, perpetual Minister of Law and 2nd DPM, one of my former schoolmates in post WWII years at the most notorious primary school in Singapore, involving ex-schoolmates in the Sunny Ang’s and Pulau Senang’s cases.

Whether the judiciary is independent depends on people believing in the system instead of doubting and fearing it. The system will not work if people do not believe in it.

Besides, we hardly have good examples that it is independent, rather we had more solid examples and history it is not independent.

In the eyes of the ruling party, the answer is obviously yes!

“Singapore ministers and government officials are held to the highest standards of probity and integrity.” Hmm… interesting.
“This has been recognized by international agencies like the Property and Environment Research Center and Transparency International.”
Ok i will research on the credibility of that organisation. If they are part of the New World Order, then of course they will grade you high, because you “the garment” are part of their organisation, you play along too well, a good follower of the New World Order.

Disclaimer:
Please kindly research on this, I am not to be trusted.
Thanks
Cheers

I agree. IBA must be sued or LKY and PAP has no credibility. Please sue IBA to maintain the integrity and credibility of the ruling party. It is not about the oldman anymore, it is about PAP as a government.
Singapore’s integrity is at stake and some organization is trying to do us in, so sue IBA.
Don’t move on now, sue IBA the way you do James Gomerz. Don’t let down the 66.6% of citizens that vote you.

There is not such thing as Western or Eastern standard of human rights.
Human rights are universal and agreed upon by all signatories to the UN charter.
Even Confucius commented that “Tyrants are more fearful than man-eating tigers.”

How can this be when the judges were appointed on a 2 to 3 years basis after
age 55 ?

1. If this is true then why are the charges contained in the diskett Alan Ng handed to President Wee Kim Wee not reveal and properly investigated by the CPIB ? It may be of interest that Alan Ng was charged for insider trader, six months later. Whether he is targeted to silence him, I leave it to the judgment of the reader. He was found guilty and sentenced.

2. If this is true then why was the intense rumours in well connected and well informed circles of a $300 million kickback in the building of the first MRT line costing $4 billion, not thoroughly investigated ?

3. If this is true why was the purchase of apartments by MPs before the official launch in the hot property market of the early to mid 90’s, not investigated ?

Since when they ever ask us?

Still using this Eastern/Western talk? Isn’t that a little passe?

Singapore will continue to fall!

Keep up your good work, Press Secretary, Ministry of Law!

I would surely love to see their facial expressions when fielding all those questions being thrown at them. All my life here, I have yet to have the luxury / fortune that other people have in their own countries in witnessing a serious debate or discussion being conducted between our “leaders” and the general public on important issues in the national media – again for the general public to judge on the quality of response by both.

Who is more protected, complacent and in the comfort zone? The “leaders” or the public ?

In fact, IBAHRI acknowledged this fact – its point pertained to the security of judges’ tenures AFTER age 65. On pg 55 of the report:

“The Chief Justice, Attorney-General and Supreme Court judges enjoy security of tenure until 65 years of age. However, after age 65 years they hold their position at the will of the President. This is of significant concern, and casts doubt on the independence of all decisions made by judges. From the date of their appointment, the possibility that the extension of their tenure may later be decided at the will of the Prime Minister affects the appearance of all their decisions.”

This is just typical of the Government’s responses to criticism – attack a straw man version of the criticism and try to obfuscate the issue and divert attention with red herrings and recycled rhetoric.

Wall Street Journal, The Economist, and other major publications should work with IBA or IBAHRI to organize a live debate with our Law Ministry. The major TV networks should telecast the debate ‘live’ and allow phone-in participation.

The question is whether the self proclaimed world class talent in our govt is the real deal ? LOL

“Singaporeans will choose for themselves the shape and norms for their society.”

Should be

Singapore PAP will choose for themselves the shape and norms for their society.,,,

Really? We can oppose our government? We have freedom of Expression? How far a degree can we express ourselves? How come I am still so ignorant about my given Rights.

Somebody please tell me I am not in a twilight zone.

I like this….speaking on our behalf….without consulting us first. Do we really know or is it just fed to us via the media???

“We see no virtue in becoming a society where anyone can freely publish untruths without having to back them up in court.”

But it is ok for them to do it on behalf of Singaporeans??? How ironic.