Saturday, December 5, 2009 11:14
TOC Editorial: Media’s silence on Yong Vui Kong a national shame
In Main Stories, Top Story • 5,867 views • 121 Comments
Choo Zheng Xi/Editor-at-Large
Yong Vui Kong’s story will now be familiar with regular readers of The Online Citizen and the activist community, but alien to many Singaporeans who will go about their daily lives without batting an eyelid.
This is largely the fault of the mainstream media, which have completely failed in their duty to explain what Vui Kong’s case means for individual Singaporeans. This needs to change.
The justice system distinguishes between civil law and criminal law. Civil law is enforceable between individuals, whereas criminal law is enforced by the State. In the latter case, the State moves to punish acts deemed injurious to society. It acts on society’s behalf, through statutes passed by our elected representatives.
When the State brings its criminal jurisdiction to bear, it acts on behalf of you and me. If Vui Kong is hanged, he will be hanged in your name and mine.
Singapore’s head in the sand
The national media has given minimal attention to Vui Kong’s case and the obvious issues it raises about the fairness of the mandatory death penalty.
While the mainstream media is sometimes unfairly criticized for its conservative reporting and commentary, its’ see-no-evil attitude to glaring defects in our criminal justice system crosses the negligent into the realm of the unconscionable.
Forums and activities conducted by local anti-death penalty campaigners have gone unmentioned, and there is no national dialogue about the whether the mandatory death penalty is defensible.
Why has the national media not initiated a debate into a practice which the UN Special Rapporteur on arbitrary executions says is prohibited by “almost every judicial or quasi-judicial human rights body in the world”[1]?
Our national media has blatantly failed to highlight countries across the Commonwealth that have invalidated the mandatory death penalty. A strange silence for a press that delights in comparing Singapore to other countries when it comes to economic indicators.
Consider that as far back as 1983, the Supreme Court of India in Mithu v. State of Punjab held that “The legislature cannot make relevant circumstances irrelevant, deprive courts of their legitimate jurisdiction to exercise their discretion not to impose the death sentence in appropriate cases, compel them to shut their eyes to mitigating circumstances and inflict upon them the dubious and unconscionable duty of imposing a preordained sentence of death”.
Judgments from the Privy Council[2] (to which our Courts still cite as persuasive authority) to the Constitutional Court of South Africa[3], to the Inter-American Commission[4] and the Supreme Court of the United States of America have all disapproved of the mandatory death penalty in one form or another.
How can such worldwide opposition to the inhumanity of the mandatory death penalty across different legal cultures and jurisdictions be met with deafening silence in our mainstream press?
Excellent legal reporters like Ben Nadarajan and K C Vijayan have suddenly gone mute, just when their voices might really matter. The Online Citizen’s 18-year-old reporter Koh Yi Na put them to shame with her coverage of the recent High Court’s stay of execution.
Why it matters
Thanks to the mainstream media’s silence, the vast majority of Singaporeans haven’t been given an opportunity to debate whether or not we believe 19 year old Vui Kong should be put to death. Put to death without regard for his lack of a prior criminal record, his tragic family circumstances, the possibility that he can be reformed, or whether or not an alternative punishment might suffice.
Singaporeans need to be asked to weigh two competing visions of our criminal justice system and decide which best represents our values: a compassionate Singapore where a second-chance is possible and punishment fits both the crime and the criminal, or a zero tolerance one-size-fits-all system of vengeance.
The mainstream media has suppressed Vui Kong’s personal story of socialized corruption and eventual personal repentance, suppressed mention of his boyish frailty in the face of impending death, closed its eyes to his painful personal journey that ended on death row, a journey out of Sabah originally inspired by love for his mother.
The mainstream media has perpetuated precisely what the mandatory death penalty seeks to do: de-individualize those it condemns. Vui Kong is just another common criminal, to be treated with absolutely no difference from a seasoned drug trafficker with criminal convictions to his name.
Singaporeans need an opportunity to debate whether they feel this is just.
The answer matters because if the hangman places his noose around Vui Kong’s neck and forever separates him from his mother’s embrace, the State is acting in my name and yours.
For more details on the status of Vui Kong’s case, see TOC’s report on the stay of execution granted by the High Court here: http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/12/high-court-grants-rare-stay-of-execution-appeal/. The Court of Appeal will be hearing Vui Kong’s appeal this coming Tuesday at 10 am.
[1] Philip Alston, Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary and arbitrary executions, 20 January 2007
[2] See Reyes v The Queen, [2002] 2 App. Cas. 284 (P.C.), and Queen v Hughes [2002] 2 App. Cas. 259 (P.C.)
[3] See State v. Makwanyane 1995 (3) SA 391
[4] See Downer and Tracey v Jamaica, where the Inter-American Commission held, after looking at common law jurisdictions and human rights authorities, that “a common precept has developed whereby the exercise of guided discretion by sentencing authorities is considered to be a condition sine qua non to the rational, humane and fair imposition of capital punishment” and incompatible with provisions of the American Convention on Human Rights.
Related posts:
121 Comments
CJ
The treason of reason | The Online Citizen
[...] Read: Media’s silence on Yong Vui Kong a National Shame [...]
Bee Tai Buck
Unfortunately most internet savvy singaporeans do not read political or social blogs to find out about this. Trust me, most are eating laksa, mee siam , char kway teow, mee soto, wantan mee, bee hoon and nasi lemak and downing with kopi siew dai mai hum and reading only the MSM.
really 1st world citizens.
The journalists are under executive order not to elaborate on the issue, as it will reflect badly on the inhumane system of law under the purview of the PAP government.
MSM is PAP’s national paper. Should change from Straits Times to Sicken Times.
To be expected
Not just this case but MSM also never publish much on bad and negative things on all areas, be it crime, politics, business, economics or social matters.
Even if they are published, it will be a watered down version, emphasing more pros than cons.
What do you expect? Why do you think licence for newspaper publishing are so tightly controlled and also govt linked?
They will control anything if possible and practical, unless cannot be controlled, like the Internet.
Debonerman
“The answer matters because if the hangman places his noose around Vui Kong’s neck and forever separates him from his mother’s embrace, the State is acting in my name and yours.”
I find myself in unfamiliar territory. Put my name down.
I tell you this, at his age or to be more precise 22 onwards, I have had many opportunities offered to make easy money the illegal or immoral way. I could have been rich.
I am today, a middle age poor man angry with Lee Kuan Yew and his dogs. But every morning I can look into the mirror and not flinch and scream when I am shaving. On the caveat I had not cut myself of course.
Ben
“The Online Citizen’s 18-year-old reporter Koh Yi Na put them to shame with her coverage of the recent High Court’s stay of execution.”
Kudos to Yi Na , TOC, and Zheng Xi. You guys put ST and its lapdog reports to shame.
VS
On the basis of the death penalty , I vote against the PAP.
lausmarty
This law was made for convenience and effect, and remains today as it truely reflects the state of our social development.
Despite the facade of a modern society, we still fall short in the department of thinking as humans in a civilise society.
The fear of setting a precedent, and the cost of the consequences should not be in my opinion have the strenght of validity of an earlier time when our resources were quite different.
XP
you’ve gotta look at things from their point of view; if debates and discussions about laws and policies (involving singapore) were to be given free reign in the media, or anywhere else, and citizens become accustomed to questioning or pushing for changes within our judicial system, then this would not be beneficial to the government.
why? because with such a mindset cultivated within the brains of singaporeans, they’ll take it to other causes like campaigns for disabled peeps to get subsidised fares, or call for more transparency in the way the government does things. a disastrous alternative, if you ask me.
what is putting themselves to shame when the saving of a national upheaval is in question? besides, they’ve been shamed on innumerable occasions, this one wouldn’t make a difference anyway.
“Thanks to the mainstream media’s silence, the vast majority of Singaporeans haven’t been given an opportunity to debate whether or not we believe 19 year old Vui Kong should be put to death.”
Is it fair to lay the blame squarely on the MSM? Zheng Xi starts off with the important point that, because criminal law purportedly expresses our society’s shared moral code, every one of us is responsible when a person is put to death in accordance with that law.
However, the rest of the article then apparently suggests that, because of the MSM’s silence, the average Singaporean is somehow excused (wholly or partly), by the mere fact of his or her ignorance, from complicity in Yong Vui Kong’s impending death. In other words, we assume that we aren’t guilty unless we knew about and somehow intended Yong’s death (and the surrounding circumstances).
Why are we giving ourselves what is effectively the benefit of a high ‘mens rea‘ standard, when, by contrast, Yong has been condemned to hang on the basis of a presumption that he knew he was trafficking in illegal drugs? Does the gross negligence of the MSM somehow exonerate us from our own culpable omissions?
Legislative change can only come when enough of us accept personal responsibility for every death sentence meted out under the Misuse of Drugs Act on our behalf.
nonsense
What is truly amazing is that Yong maintained he did not know the contents of the 2 wrapped parcels his boss instructed him to bring across the causeway. Whether this was/is true or not, there don’t seem to be the benefit of doubt given. And there was no mention that Yong’s boss was tracked down and taken in for questioning to establish reasonable doubt.
Yong may be in fact innocent although stupid. But stupidity does not equate death. How many would open up wrapped items given by bosses to carry over as gifts to clients or businesses. Although ignorance of the law is non excusa, but surely truth is more important here when it involves executing someone.
The arguments hold true that even if proven consciously guilty, given his young age and circumstances, doesn’t there exists alternate punitive measures for such cases. We are humans not robots.
Our current system of world class “in”justice is a by product of a regime that weighs pride in having ABSOLUTE control to play god. This is a given.
And it’s a tragic fact, most Singaporeans are so fat cat bred and culled into oblivion to care less about anything, let alone far removed from their own well being.
However one looks at it, Singapore went from once, hero to ZERO!
Andrew Loh
la nausee,
We are not saying that we are not complicit. I think the editorial’s reference to “in our names” says this.
In an earlier article for TOC, Zyberzitizen wrote about this in the Amara Tochi case.
Debonerman
Bleeding hearts had never built a country.
VS
… whereas heartless men have destroyed many.
VOTE OUT THE HEARTLESS PAP.
TantheSingaporean
Our laws on drugs trafficking is conviction based on PRESUMPTION.
and sentencing for exceeding a certain limit is MANDATORY.
Judges have no room to consider mitigating factors when passing
sentence.
Certainly these are major flaws in our laws and need to be changed.
The rightful thing is to abolish capital punishment.
David
Main stream media should close down immediately. It has no credibiity to exist and its news are mainly one-sided coverage to make PAP feel good and make citizens feel bad. Who would want to continue watching when Singaporeans were badly advertised under the name of main stream media? Now they are coming after us for donations again to cure their diminishing revenue!
David
Going AWOL from army is also a serious offense, and we have not heard LHL’s son being severely punished. Two judiciary systems, one for PAP and one for Singaporeans. Power is now coming into our hand, we still need a cooling day to think who disadvantaged the most?
fae
Should rename Straits Times to States Times. At least its more honest.
Zheng Xi
La nausee,
Thanks for your well thought out comment.
I didn’t intend to make the point that there was less of a duty on the average Singaporean to oppose the mandatory death penalty because of the MSM’s failure.
In the abstract, I completely agree with you: it’s every Singaporean’s civic duty to take personal responsibility and seek this information out, and then oppose this law.
The reality, however, is that the MSM has an important role to play in raising public awareness: it plays an important societal function in initiating public debate, and in the case of the mandatory death penalty it has failed to do so.
I recognize the moral cogence of your argument, and if I had more time would personally like to develop it further. But for the time being I’d like to put some pressure on the people who can most make a difference but aren’t: the media.
fae
last time the media was VERY INTERESTED in using a past case to make the lawyer Ravi look bad with articles even citing that Ravi’s mother had committed suicide from depression and so on.
maybe they’ll get interested again when they find more mud to sling on him.
cbl
Ref: TOC Editorial: Media’s silence on Yong Vui Kong a national shame
As a Singaporean, I do not think is the sole responsibility of the local media to highlight any criminal cases especially involving the death penalty. Zhengxi, just hope that none of your loved ones are addicted to controlled drugs.
Dispassionate citizen
I’m sure if this case is highlighted in the mass media, the judicial system will have alot to answer for! I’m a mother and I’m very angry that the state is putting down young boys without proper consideration and assessment of the other issues which has led him down this path!
Rachel Chang Bai Lan
I feel helpless knowing this and the situation where many singaporeans will never know about this execution case, except maybe only when he is already executed?
people are asked to be kind in campaigns. So why is the press not reporting this?
I can feel the pain in Vong. The pain of seeing her mother feel so much pain.
Rachel Chang Bai Lan
sorry, i meant his mother . Vong is a Male Malaysian citizen, if I am not wrong. I saw a video where his brother pleaded for his case to a civil society group in singapore. Did Malaysiakini reported on this?
A Tan
“When the State brings its criminal jurisdiction to bear, it acts on behalf of you and me. If Vui Kong is hanged, he will be hanged in your name and mine.”
Fine by me that he is hanged.
Edgar
Kinder gentler society my friggin foot.
Mr. E
we should hang some real con-men instead.
Ruthlessness Is The Downfall of All Leaders
Yes, I fully agree with those who say, “VOTE OUT THE HEARTLESS PAP!”
The time for all the talking is over. Now is the time to act, and act we must be fast, quick and sharp to the point.
VOTE OUR THE MERCILESS PAP!
Triple Threat
If this boy is executed, be sure that we will take revenge on his behalf by kicking those heartless clowns out of office. Reason is simple – if they are so heartless to this boy, they are also be heartless to Singaporeans. Why do we need a heartless government for? Are we putting our lives in danger if we vote them in? Of course not! This is preposterous!
Vote for change. Vote PAP out.
ronin
Sorry, but it is hard to have sympathy for a drug trafficker. Drugs destroys the life of not only the abuser, but also his entire family.
Yong knew what he was doing. His under-privilege family background should not be used as an excuse to get a lighter sentence. Afterall, most drug traffickers come from similar family background
Jiekai Koh
The more fundamental question is whether or not hanging any drug trafficker is the right thing to do. Perhaps it is easy for us liberals to focus on the typically sad personal life story of most small time drug pushers. But can you seriously look a drug addict’s family in the eye and tell them that we should let this boy free because he too is in some way a victim? When hard drug addiction has genuinely screwed up the lives of many people and their families?
There is absolutely no way the anti-death penalty campaign against executing people for drug trafficking is going to make headway until its campaigners can persuade the public that there isn’t going to be a bigger drug addiction problem when we stop killing drug pushers (big or small).
Kappa
I agree with Mr/Ms Laughter above in that voting the PAP out will not necessarily lead to a change in the death penalty, but hanging people isn’t the only deterrent.
Instead of voting out the PAP, perhaps changing the gomen from the inside, changing the mindsets of the next generation of leaders, would be more effective.
Still, the vote is still the most obvious method of showing whether we support them or not.
Zefly (aka Joshua Chiang)
“The most recent survey of research findings on the relation between the death penalty and homicide rates, conducted for the United Nations in 1988 and updated in 1996 and 2002, concluded: “…research has failed to provide scientific proof that executions have a greater deterrent effect than life imprisonment. Such proof is unlikely to be forthcoming. The evidence as a whole still gives no positive support to the deterrent hypothesis”.”
Nowhere in the world is capital punishment applied for drugs trafficking (whether you sell 15 grams or a ton of dope) other than the “wonderful” confucian societies of china singapore hong kong
When these confucian lot get into power, all of them will act similarly–the value of a human life is almost nil
Tell me if the above 2 statements i made are wrong, and i will come and lick your feet for 2 hours
Don’t u realize the universal response of Singaporeans, to anything about politics, can answer even that?
“If having the death penalty allows me to walk safely in the streets at 3am in the morning, so be it.”
tom
Singapore Laws are always double standards.
Penal Codes in S’pore are cater for two groups of people.
One is for the rich.
The other is for average people on the streets. (This group from the street will be always assume guilty unless otherwise)
S’pore has a “well known” puppet president + yes man Judges.
That why S’pore Court is known as Kangaroo Court.
When T.T. Durai is convicted of fraud in NFK. How long do he to serve in the jail and where is he now? From last heard of him, he got a job in Dubai with 5-figure monthly salary.
When some Executives or foreigners caught on drug what is their penalty? Few months of jail & they are now free like a bird.
The amount of drug use as evidence Can Always Be Alter to determine the case. (depending what is the background of this person)
If Mr. Yong has a “Sultan of Malaysia as sugar-daddy”, he would not even be charged in the first place.
Loyola
Most Singaporeans would thrive in a neo-conservative state.
Tan Cheng Hua
To: Jiekai Koh,
You said: “Perhaps it is easy for us liberals to focus on the typically sad personal life story of most small time drug pushers.”
And why is that a bad thing, especially in Singapore, where drug traffickers are dehumanised into just statistics? In fact, I think sites like TOC should bring out more of the stories behind the people behind drug trafficking.
This is the first step, in fact, in reminding everyone that what we are talking about here are humans. Kids, really. Teenagers. Perhaps when we realise this, we will take more seriously the things we say, the considerations we ponder and the laws we create.
So, what is wrong about focusing on the “typically sad stories” of the traffickers?
What is wrong when to focus on them and their stories when they are the ones who will be hung – while the drug lords get away with doing business with our govt and indeed are given state dinners, red carpets and even allowed to be hospitalised in our hospital when they are about to die while the young they exploit are mercilessly hung at dawn, that ungodly lonely hour?
What is wrong with telling their stories?
Perhaps only when people, the public, knows these are just mules, exploited as foreign workers are exploited, being illiterate and naive, perhaps then we will all use some of our hearts.
What is wrong?
Toolang
To balance any biasness in the report and comments, I suggest TOC reporters should also interview family members and spouses of drug addicts whose family lives were ruined and wrecked to the core because of the so called ant drug traffickers had influenced, tempted, lured, etc, to indulge some of them in drug consumption. At the same time, TOC should also solicit the views of those family members and spouses affected and see whether they support/do not support the death penalty for drug mules. They are in fact the victims themselves and their views are more credible and worthy for consideration rather than those arm chair critics. You, I, our spouses and children can walk the Singapore streets safely each time is not through the divine blessings. It is through the efforts of some one who bother to do the dirty jobs for us! They can behave like the 3 wise monkeys, see no evil, hear no evil and do no evil. In the end, who is the wiser and which system do you prefer? You need not go far to experience it. Take a trip to some of the ASEAN countries and see for yourselves.
rizal
Death Penalty for the trafficking of drugs is against the core principle of justice ,Eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth, and therefore against the religious beliefs of most Singaporeans.
The justification given for this non-violent crime is that if a person smuggle in drugs to singapore in the amounts ranging from 15g to 1.2 kg, it would “destroy” 1000 lives in singapore which makes him worser than a murderer . Its kind of like that movie ‘minority report’ ,but without psychics to be able to foresee the future. This is UNACCEPTABLE. The burden of proof is on the court for not being able to prove that the illegal drugs brought by the drug traffickers WILL, with absolute certainty, destroy/kill a person and his entire family in the future. Even if the drugs do destroy a person’s life as proven by a supernatural psychic(u know who i’m talking about) ,drug traffickers would not be responsible for the death/addiction of a person but rather the person himself for taking drugs. Does it make sense for alcohol,cigarette or poison traders to be responsible to the death/addiction of the people who consume it when the blame is at the consumers? This is clearly the problem with the way you people think. You believe that the providers are accountable for the suffering of those who created their own suffering. News flash! No humans shall carry the burden of sin of another.
Latest scientific study by ‘The Lancet’ had shown that Cigarettes and alcohol do more harm than many illegal drugs like cannabis, LSD, ketamine & estasy. Yet we are murdering people who smuggled these drugs while the import of cigarettes and alcohol is perfectly acceptable . The laws that we have now with regards to drugs are criminally outdated.
http://biopsychiatry.com/tobacco/risks.html
The other justification is that it deters drug trafficking. There are plenty of countries that doesn’t punish drug traffickers by death yet are able to maintain a low drug crime rates (Turkey,greece,france).
Furthermore, plenty of studies & statistics had shown no correlation between the death penalty and murder rates. Don’t get me wrong, i’m not against the death penalty for murder in which the accused has been PROVEN to be guilty.
Who in their right minds would smuggle in drugs to singapore while knowing that he/she could be punished by death if caught?
1) Dumb people who were exploited by a drug lord to smuggle drugs, either aware or unaware that he is smuggling drugs
( It is sad how people are duped into becoming drug mules and thus had to die due to the ludicrous judiciaries that penalized drug trafficking by death. There are singaporean women on death row in countries like china right now for such cases. Unfortunately the government has made no intention of protesting against it : (
2) Desperate people who are coerced to smuggle drugs in order to pay off debts to a violent loan shark, or a drug lord
3) People who are in desperate need of money and was influenced by the drug lord’s sweet talk
The dumb unsuspecting drug mules get killed while the brilliant drug masterminds get away with it.
Andrew Loh
Toolang,
Would you like to help us do what you suggested?
Drop us an email at: theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
Oxford Dude
My personal thoughts: we really need to move away from retributive justice to reformative justice.
Budamaxx1952:
The death penalty was abolished in Hong Kong by the British in 1993. The British didn’t trust China with such an instrument. Even before then, executions had been suspended for decades. The last execution in Hong Kong was in 1966.
Since 1993, there hasn’t be a clamour from Hongkongers to reinstate the death penalty. Those ‘Confucian’ people seem quite happy to live without it.
love
where is love and compassion ?
Poverty drives the desperate to extreme. ? is there a defination for love ? who is to say someone should die becos they act out of desperation ?
the typical conventional family with 5 big fat kids driving in SUVs or MPVs, buying more and thowing away more , poluting the enviroment and teaching their children God knows what values? is that not a crime to earth ? is there a bench mark ?
not the poor kid . please dont !
Discern
Posts 26, 31, 40 and all who are against drug abuse:
Please bear in mind that all others who argue against the death penalty dished out to Yong are not necessarily unaware of the damage drug abuse can cause.
Traffickers bring the drugs from someone somewhere outside SG to someone somewhere inside SG. I don’t think I am too wrong in saying usually traffickers are not the ones who own the drugs and not the ones peddling them in the streets. The former and latter groups will not put their own lives at stake as they are rich and powerful. Cunningly, they will make use of a certain group of people – people like Yong, people who are desperate, vulnerable, not very clever and unaware of the severe punishment. Worse, they may use them as decoy.
You hate drug abuse yet you want to kill this important key informer and witness, and continue to let the supplier try the next mule or use him/her as decoy, and continue to let the peddler push the illegal drugs on the streets of SG. Why don’t you call for the authorities to change the law so that your concerns can be genuinely addressed.
If SG is genuine against drugs, why have they never used the trafficker as lead to hunt for both the supplier and the street peddler? Why are there no big posters at immigration to warn about the death penalty? Why not give immigrants a chance to declare the drugs if they are carrying them to escape the death sentence? Why let them even try and bring the damn thing in? Is this a trap just to catch traffickers and execute them? Then the authorities are playing with our lives too because some may escape the trap and get through.
Don’t you feel Yong is as much a victim as the drug abusers themselves? I mean victim of the drug lords and the system. Remember he is only 19, very easily manipulated and vulnerable at this age, so much so that you cannot even vote until you are 21. People are taking his background into consideration because not only is he young, with his background (not much education, no father to guide him and poor), he is very vulnerable to trust someone who can supply his needs. It is not just about his sad story, it is the circumstances that led him astray.
If you sincerely care about lives being ruined, why do you not care about Yong’s circumstances leading to his life being ruined?
RW
“The national media has given MINIMAL (emphasis my own) attention to Vui Kong’s case and the obvious issues it raises about the fairness of the mandatory death penalty”
i am reading it as the mainstream media did give it some coverage- probably bland details about the execution of somebody.
So perhaps the issue here is mainstream media gave BLAND coverage rather than IGNORE the issue totally.
The reason why i stress the distinction is to point out that the issue was brought up and people just brushed it aside. So the lack of response of the singaporean public, in my opinion, is more because they DON’T CARE, rather than they don’t know. of course, i can be wrong if the speaker’s corner event turns out to be a big event.
my point is sometimes we think since pple on TOC share a similar view, this is representative of the general ‘common’ public. And all the better, if the mass media is fettered and heavily edited. That will allow us to continue IMAGINING a unified public opinion, that cannot manifest itself because the govt is all powerful and suppress this ‘unified’ public opinion.
the truth is– sg is not just govt versus citizens. citizens themselves have differing opinion on issues. If you look at countries where citizens can express the opinion, you seldom see unified opinions. In rare issues Singaporean did register their opinion (e.g. Serangoon Garden FWs, AWARE saga), we see singaporeans are split in their opinion on issues. even in this issue, we can see splits between those who focus on the criminal and those who focus on the crime.
so my bottomline is this-
the censorship on mainstream media is an excuse to imagine a suppressed, but yet unified public opinion. Zhengxi’s article seems to suggest the lack of attention to the issue is because the public had no opportunity to debate the issue. But my contention is since it was published, readers read it and yet made no noise about it, maybe the problem isn’t the media but our opinion of public opinion.
anakin
this guy not ang mo mah, so who cares? Remember the german girl caught with drugs on death row? so much presure from German gahmen and then hey presto, the chemical composition of the drugs she was carrrying was less than the death penalty limit. Justice Singapore style…..Rich and powerful can siam….
Pungfu Kanda
The MSM is a farce.
How many times has the woeful, dull and deplorable ST run leading articles (replete with their customary finger wagging tone) imploring society at-large to be more gracious and kind.
Well, time they took their heads out of their asses and (it won’t happen…but one can still hope, right?) direct their collective quills against this government, whose hypocrisy is really a galling sight to behold.
A government who laments its peoples’ lack of graciousness and yet hangs boys. Nice.
lalaland
lol…straits times is constantly controlled by Lee & his dogs…how do you report on stuff that is bad for their image? They stamp it out before it gets published. If people can think properly and well, the best thing to do is just to vote them out in the next election. PAP has ruled for long enough and their reign can be seen as deteriorating.
lobo76
47) RW on December 6th, 2009 10.09 am
I haven’t been reading the ST for a long time, so I do not know if there was in fact overage. But if there was, then it is enough. I don’t want it to turn into a Amanda knox /Meredith kercher case (in Italy). I tot that one was over sensationalized.
problem isn’t the media but our opinion of public opinion.
100% agree. People are getting over conceited that they are somehow always the ’silent majority’. I never knew how they came to that conclusion.
lobo76
p.s the same with what some of the MIW says really… who are always claiming that they have the ‘majority’ on their side.
Ω李
First off I am against the death penalty for drug trafficking, when there is a good chance of rehabilitation and imprisonment is a far more apt punishment. I am not against the death penalty as the ultimate punishment for heinous crimes per se.
However the problem here is that Yong is a foreigner; I am not sure the Singaporean taxpayer should pay for his rehabilitation. I can imagine the hordes of foreigners over-flooding the local jails especially in land scarce Singapore. If Singapore has extradition treaties with other countries, it could ship them back to their home country to serve out their sentence.
IMHO, drug use is about demand and not supply. Curbing demand should be the number one priority of the government; one can never remove the supply.
“Hard” drugs such as heroin and cocaine are not as profitable in the long run as “party” drugs and the sale of “party” drugs are usually of a voluntary nature, not one borne out of addiction. Despite the assumption that there are diminishing profits for “hard” drugs and the very high risk and disincentive of the death penalty, still people smuggle them into Singapore and one would assume still continue to do so. I wonder who can afford the astronomical prices of these hard drugs.
Tan Cheng Hua
To: RW (#47),
You said:
“Zhengxi’s article seems to suggest the lack of attention to the issue is because the public had no opportunity to debate the issue. But my contention is since it was published, readers read it and yet made no noise about it, maybe the problem isn’t the media but our opinion of public opinion.”
That’s a simplistic way of looking at it.
In Singapore, especially, public opinion is shaped by what is presented by the state-owned media. Remember this: The TV stations, the newspapers, the radio channels, each and every one of them is state-owned.
So, being state-owned, it means the govt has a vested interest. And in this state of vested interest, of course the govt wants the media to say what it wants it to say!
And in turn, what the media says affect public opinion.
So, this is why you do not see an outcry over the death penalty. The mandatory death penalty for drug trafficking, especially.
No outcry because the media does not highlight the flaws in the system. Flaws which have been pointed out by lawyers, insinuated by judges, highlighted by activists, by the United Nations, by all sorts of people.
And when these are not brought to the public’s attention, of course the public will not know. And when they do not know, they may not be upset enough to cause a public outcry.
So, I agree with Zheng Xi’s piece.
The media is fundamentally at fault.
And indeed the media’s silence on these issues is akin to an act of violence against our conscience.
This is especially so when such a flawed system and laws are being used to put teenagers and even low IQ people to death.
It is indeed unconscionable.
Tan Cheng Hua
To: #53,
You said:
“However the problem here is that Yong is a foreigner; I am not sure the Singaporean taxpayer should pay for his rehabilitation…”
Perhaps sometimes we should look beyond the narrow, and selfish, scope of being “Singaporean”, or “we vs them”, of “they” and “us”. Indeed, we should look beyond the narrow window of economics and the dollar sign.
And consider that we are all humans.
It exactly such consideration that is lacking in our current law on the death penalty – a lack of mercy and compassion, because we are looking at the dollar sign – how much it will cost the state and taxpayers if traffickers were given life sentences instead of a swift hanging.
It is this which makes us a cold-blooded, unfeeling, selfish, hypocritical “compassionate” and “gracious”, “first-world” society.
We want the shell but we do not want the substance.
It is sad when S’poreans start wondering if taxpayers should pay for the rehabilitation of foreigners caught in our flawed system.
It is very sad, indeed.
For they were caught and put to death by an unjust and flawed system.
Aren’t we then responsible for their rehabilitation?
Or do we want to just kill them?
Just kill them and get it over with?
Tan Cheng Hua
INTERESTING NOTE:
Our foreign minister, George Yeo, has met the Burmese Prime Minister many times, both here and elsewhere.Burma is known as one of the top producers of drugs in the world. And it is also known that billions of dollars are generated by these drug lords for the Burmese junta.
The question thus is:
Knowing that Burma is one of the world’s top producers of narcotics, has George Yeo ever brought this up with the junta? And if he did, why are there virtually no news reports or govt statements about it?
Or is George Yeo too busy sucking up to the junta and too busy naming flowers in their honour?
Second question:
Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong earlier this year visited Burma and met with top general Than Shwe.
Did GCT raise the issue of drug production with Than Shwe?
As far as news reports go, there was nothing mentioned about this at all.
So the question is:
Why are we not doing more to ask the junta to stop production of narcotics or at least to let them know of our concerns? Why are our senior ministers not doing this when they have such “close” personal relationships and contact with the very top people responsible for a major part of the world’s drugs production?
Why do our ministers prefer to kill small-time traffickers than to raise the concern with the drug lords themselves, at least?
Why?
Ω李
“Aren’t we then responsible for their rehabilitation? Or do we want to just kill them?
Just kill them and get it over with?”
Please read the rest of my comment. I mentioned something about extradition. If Singapore was not so intransigent on international norms of extraditions even among it’s allies.
Should Singaporeans rehabilitate these foreigners, give them citizenship to make use of said rehabilitation or return them to their home countries after rehabilitation? Can you imagine the fiscal cost for doing so for a de-facto refugee program which ENCOURAGES drug trafficking?
The only viable solution is a non mandatory death sentence for drug trafficking regardless of nationality and EXTRADITION.
Ω李
“Why are we not doing more to ask the junta to stop production of narcotics or at least to let them know of our concerns? Why are our senior ministers not doing this when they have such “close” personal relationships and contact with the very top people responsible for a major part of the world’s drugs production?”
I dont understand why Singapore should have a close relationship with Burma in the first place. Not as if Burma is a primary source of trade.
Ω李
As to ST giving minimal coverage, the mainstream media of Malaysia is eerily silent.
Absolutely NO MENTION at all whether be it in the Star etc. or the vaunted online mouthpiece of the “people” Malaysiakini.
fae
Actually doesn’t it seem like the only way to abolish the death penalty is to vote out the PAP government?
Œ
This case does not seem to affect citizens.
It does not hurt their pockets.
It is not their business.
Thus, i wonder would singaporeans in general attend this about human rights.
If I do not attend, am i expecting singaporeans in general would attend?
I feel sad for the family of mr Vong as I wonder how would he be Rehabilitated if he were to be Executed?
Suzie Pong
At least passersby at Hong Lim would be able to know something about this case which , as i heard, and i do not buy the news due to poverty, this execution case was not reported in the MSM of singapura.
But expect rain. bring a lolly. Would the CNA MSM show up there like the other time when there was a petition for transport or something where people scared to sign the petition after seeing video cameras and reporters there on the scene surprising the people?
Ω李
If the Malaysians (especially of the same ethnicity and the opposition party) dont even care one of their own is about to be executed in Singapore, why should we? How come no Malaysian is even aware of Mr Yong Vui Kong? Where is Malaysiakini, Shin Min, NST, the Star etc. and their pool of reporters?
Remember Mr Nguyen Tuong Van? He is a Vietnamese immigrant, yet the Australian government had done all it could for a wayward citizen.
Ω李
The main human rights story in Malaysian media whether be it MSM or online is about a Malay transgendered woman who is facing deportation from UK. Nice to see where their priorities lie.
And Mr George wants the Singaporean online media to emulate Malaysia. Nevertheless if it were to do so, TOC would see a spike in readership and generate a nice steady income.
lockeliberal
Dear Cheng Hua
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/07/090907fa_fact_grann?currentPage=all
Interesting read and yes the article was bought to my attention by Zheng Xi himself. Frankly I feel the arguments and rationale put forth by the Anti Death Penalty people are a about 99 cents short of a dollar.
Cheng Hua , Do u see the US in bed with Afghanistan and Pakistan. Everyone hobnobs with or closes blind eye when dealing with foreign affairs and suspected drug lords
They need better poster boys, someone whose guilt can be in doubt and who can be proven innocent, not plead economic circumstances as an excuse or mitigating plea for Vietnamese and Malaysians.
How many people out there will be willing not only to protest which is easy but go forth and reopened convicted cases in the search for innocence for people on death row to bring doubt and change to the present system as a first step ?
Locke
Ω李
I am surprised that the Democratic Action Party (DAP) of Malaysia have kept so silent on this issue.
They have always been at the forefront of protecting Malaysia’s marginalized minorities and their human rights. Surely Mr Lim Kit Siang has enough clout and popularity to save this young man, unless he doesn’t want to. Or at the very least register some kind of protest to the Singaporean embassy.
It is very sad that the Malaysian public will ever know that Mr Yong ever existed.
Alan Wong
Why can’t we put ourselves in the shoes of Yong, his siblings or even his mother. Just imagine the fear, despair, the suffering and sadness if we happen to face the same destiny as them. Why can’t we be a humane society and spare the young chap his life and give him a chance to repent.
Mr. President, why can’t we forgive him just once for his mistakes ? Why do we need to be so cruel ? You can still continue to enjoy your million dollar salary.
Law & Order
Why can’t we put ourselves in the shoes of those victims that Yong’s drugs had caused, their siblings or even their parents. Just imagine the fear, despair, the suffering and sadness if we happen to face the same destiny as them. Why can’t we be a rational society and and realized that this young chap had ruined many lifes and that he should be accountable for the crimes he had committed.
Mr. President, we’re glad you have uphold justice and ensure no future drug traffickers will dare to risk their life for quick money. It’s not about creulty but getting justice done, and we are glad that we have paid you million dollar salary precisely to uphold the integrity of Singapore’s law and order.
Ω李
I can understand why a racist Malaysian BN government and their mouthpieces would not want to even try to save one of their minorities, but when DAP and gang, so-called democratic socialist activists don’t even mention Mr Yong or acknowledge his existence, much less appeal for clemency shreds to pieces any legitimacy that it has.
JayF
“35) Budamaxx1952 on December 5th, 2009 10.41 pm
Nowhere in the world is capital punishment applied for drugs trafficking (whether you sell 15 grams or a ton of dope) other than the “wonderful” confucian societies of china singapore hong kong
When these confucian lot get into power, all of them will act similarly–the value of a human life is almost nil
Tell me if the above 2 statements i made are wrong, and i will come and lick your feet for 2 hours
HK doesn’t HAVE the death penalty. Their legal system has more or less remained based on English Common law.
Indonesia and Malaysia also has the death penalty for drug trafficking. And they’re Muslim!
Hope your tongue isn’t too sticky.
lockeliberal
With crime situation in Malaysia, I am afraid that the DAP as politicians will not be championing the abolition of the death penalty strongly. Some of them might believe in it, some of them might campaign for it but the parties as a whole will not make to much noise about it.
Locke
Ω李
The point being about selective reporting is not just confined to ST. At the very least, Singaporeans are aware of such an incident if they read ST’s small articles carefully.
If Malaysiakini does not even publish A SINGLE WORD about Mr Yong’s fate at all, what kind of journalism is that? It is even worse than Utusan. It is up to some compassionate Singaporeans to speak out for one of THEIR citizens that committed the crime. So much for emulating Malaysiakini.
Therein lies the difference between Singaporean opposition and Malaysian opposition. I rest my case.
Ω李
Malaysiakini’s coverage on Malaysian human rights:
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/118792
“M’sian transsexual fighting deportation in UK to be punished
A Malaysian transsexual fighting deportation from Britain will be punished for bringing “great shame” on the country, Malaysian authorities said according to reports today.”
Malaysia Boleh.
RW
54) Tan Cheng Hua on December 6th, 2009 12.05 pm
“No outcry because the media does not highlight the flaws in the system. Flaws which have been pointed out by lawyers, insinuated by judges, highlighted by activists, by the United Nations, by all sorts of people.
….
The media is fundamentally at fault.
And indeed the media’s silence on these issues is akin to an act of violence against our conscience.”
———————————
Somehow, I am disheartened by the way you read the situation.
You seem to suggest that it is not enough that mainstream media says a 19 year old is going to be sentence to death, the mainstream media SHOULD tell the general public it is wrong.
the difference is– it is not enough to give Singaporeans facts, we should interpret the facts for them, tell them it is wrong.
Shouldn’t people be able to form opinions on their own, knowing that a 19 yr old drug trafficker is sentenced to death?
If you believe in the public’s capacity to form opinions, the logical conclusion is they don’t care. But if you want to believe that everyone is against the death penalty, it is necessary to assume that the public is stupid, dependent on mass media- so we can exonerate and excuse the public for their silence.
ya lor, I read of this story first from TOC then followed it on newspapers :)
Debonerman
Just food for thought okay?
If you were to find out that your girlfriend or sister or daughter or wife or mother is hooked on drugs and is secretly prostituting herself to support their illicit drug habits. Would you still be so sympathetic?
If you were to find out that your boyfriend or brother or son or husband or father is hooked on drugs and is secretly prostituting himself to support his illicit drug habits. Would you still be feeling the same compassion?
If you were a hardcore junkie now? How would you see this issue? Lament the loss of another source of supply?
A-pap-thetic
During the Tian An men incident, people from every city in the world were out on the street demonstrating their anger against the slaughter of students.
S’poreans too were out on the street—but it was in front of the Bank of China; withdrawing their savings.
That is what 50 years of mind control do to the populace—fearful, heartless,a-pap-thetic ,selfish.
Our retribution will come one day.
As an aside—the case for lowering the voting age to 19 has been made in this case—-old enough to face the death penalty; old enough to vote..
Ω李
There are many prostitutes who DONT take drugs. Why conflate the sex trade and drug trade? Frankly it is very insulting to insinuate other people’s relatives will resort to prostitution because of drugs, maybe a personal story for Debonerman?
Hardcore junkies can always take the first cheap coach or airplane for a narco-holiday. If they can afford the super high prices of Sg street cocaine etc, what is stopping them from going to the source Burma directly or to some other place where they are more available?
And the Malaysian public has NO IDEA of the pending execution whatsover, much less “interpretation of the facts”. Fantastic. Logically who would give a damn? Someone is going to die tomorrow and it aint my friend/relative. Moreover the guy is a Malaysian drug mule and the Malaysians are very accommodating about it. The people who do give a care have no political agenda as there are absolutely NO political points to score, quite the contrary in fact.
I wonder what about people who are not cautious and leave their bags unattended while holidaying, since the burden of proof is on them. Someone earlier mentioned that the death penalty will deter the next trafficker, but they keep using the same line every time the next drug trafficker gets caught.
lobo76
74) RW on December 6th, 2009 10.07 pm
You seem to suggest that it is not enough that mainstream media says a 19 year old is going to be sentence to death, the mainstream media SHOULD tell the general public it is wrong.
True. I brought up the Amanda Knox case as a parallel in the other thread I think. Basically, the Italian press were sort of the ones who ‘told’ the jury (as they were allowed to talk to their friends and read the newspapers, etc) who to convict.
Maybe Amanda Knox IS guilty..but I am quite disturbed at the powers of the press in that case.
lobo76
In the end, it is a double edged sword Choo Zheng Xi is asking for. If he wants the press to have the ‘power’ to influence what he think is the ‘right’ things, there will come a times when they will influence the ‘wrong’ things …
at the moment, the MSM only influences ‘political’ issues that more or less directly involved the MIW (and I think more of us are getting wise with regards to that). I certainly do not wish that they have ‘power’ that tell people what they should think on other issues.
Loyola
Putting ourselves into the shoes of drug addicts and victims of the drug trade does not exclusively mean we must support the death penalty.
Because we oppose hanging him and rather sentence him to imprisonment does not equate to a lack of empathy or understanding of the other side of the coin.
neutral
There are thousands of Vui Kong out there. As are thousands of drug addicts and their suffering families.
My heart goes to Vui Kong but did you ever consider, what will happen if you open this can of worms? The cartels will use those “Vui Kongs” out there to bring drugs into Singapore. Those “Vui Kongs” will agree, knowing that they will not die if caught, they will gain much if they succeed.
We should instead use Vui Kong’s sentence to educate the other “Vui Kongs” out there, to ensure that they do not follow the same path. Do not let his life be in vain.
neutral
I will suggest people read “The Merchant of Venice”.
The law is the law. You don’t brush aside the law just because you think it is morally correct / incorrect – that is lawlessness.
It is there for a reason ( excluding extreme places like i don’t know, somalia, etc? )
Jackson
I think it’s a pity to hand him because there’s a difference between him knowing and not knowing what is the penalty for drug trafficking. If he knows and yet still do it then he really deserve it. But if he don’t know and yet do it, then maybe he deserve a second chance.
Ω李
“We should instead use Vui Kong’s sentence to educate the other “Vui Kongs” out there, to ensure that they do not follow the same path. Do not let his life be in vain.”
They keep saying that drug trafficker after drug trafficker. Singapore police is not God. Who knows how many who DON’T get caught?
“But if he don’t know and yet do it, then maybe he deserve a second chance.”
Doesnt matter either way. Still a death sentence.
The Singapore Daily » Blog Archive » Daily SG: 7 Dec 2009
[...] are against capital punishment – TOC: Media’s Silence On Yong Vui Kong A National Shame – The Asia File: Why Singapore hides the human face of the death penalty [Thanks Ben] – [...]
The Singapore Daily » Blog Archive » Daily SG: 7 Dec 2009
[...] are against capital punishment – TOC: Media’s Silence On Yong Vui Kong A National Shame – The Asia File: Why Singapore hides the human face of the death penalty [Thanks Ben] – [...]
Zheng Xi
Hi neutral,
Have you actually read the Merchant of Venice? I happen to have taught it.
The point of it is that justice must be tempered by mercy, the mercy Antonio showed by allowing Shylock to keep his property. In fact, it proves precisely the opposite: Shylock’s straightjacket reliance on the black letter of the law in demanding a pound of flesh ultimate results in his downfall.
Zheng Xi
Debonerman
Merchant of Venice is like an ancient scripture. Irrelevant in the contemporary running of laws in a country, especially a small one. My two cents. Treat it as such.
I believe a life should be valued. And I believe a person should have a choice in his life or death situation.
But the question I keep asking myself each time I see a person hanged because of drug trafficking:
- Why do we care so much for this ONE person when there are MANY people who become outcasts and social ills because of the drug traffickings and abuses? Why?
The moment Vui Kong trafficked in drugs, be it 15g or 100g, he has just signed away his life. He knows it. And I’m sure he is aware of the risks.
I do support capital punishment for the good of the others. Again I stress I value life itself. But from the point of law, I see more good from that punishment than harm. If you have gone overseas, even in Australia, you would have hoped the government implemented such a capital punishment, if not caning.
One may argue what about human rights? I can ask when my house is broken into because someone had to fuel his drug addiction, where are my human rights because most of the time, you can’t find these culprits? Or even a senseless death because these drug abusers stabbed a loved one just for a few dollars sake. Where are my rights then?
A good answer is when you see Meng Tu by Daniel Wu, Andy Lau and Louis Khoo. This will give us a glimpse of what drugs can do. Especially to the victim’s families.
Vui Kong has turned over a new leaf. That much I do not doubt. Sometimes a crisis will force people to change. God bless his soul. And I am sorry if he had to pay for his crime.
As my Kaffein-nated blog underlining theme puts forth:
“To me, the opportunities that have passed us by sometimes don’t make U-turns. Just ask the father-to-be missing the birth of his new-born child; or the daughter reflecting on the times she could have made time for her mother while she was still alive; or the man who kept waiting for the right time to propose to his girlfriend. Moments are only fleeting. They are best treasured now.”
Sometimes we don’t have U-turns. For this I support the law. I have said again: The moment Vui Kong trafficked in drugs, be it 15g or 100g, he has just signed away his life. He knows it. And I’m sure he is aware of the risks.
I wish Vui Kong all the best.
Kaffein
OriginalResonance
Inviolability of life is a fallacy.
Jezebella
I am generally in support of the death penalty, particularly for cases such as murder.
But for Yong’s case, I think he should be given a chance to start anew partly because he’s so young, and probably ended up the way he did because of ignorance.
Ω李
My parents’ house was broken into when I was a child (that’s right in Singapore) by a rational poor man who never got caught and didn’t appear to be a drug addict.
In fact violent crime is also correlated with alcohol.
Something for people to think about.
Debonerman
I hope all you opponents of the death penalty against “minors” will reflect on your stand when one of your loved ones is beaten up and killed by young gang members because of “mistaken identity”. Or becomes a link of the death trail that leads to sons and daughters being hooked on drugs and further on, leading to trafficking to sustain an ever increasing level of addiction.
What goes around do really comes around. I am heartless? I had a choice. I did not take it. I valued the consequenses it would have had on my family. If one is not brought up right, deprived of an education to absorb the right values and unable to make reasonably sound judgements, then he risked being weeshumined! What more when we are talking about being on the wrong side of dragonian laws!
That’s just the way it was, the way it is now and the way it ought to and will ever be.
OriginalResonance
All objectivity derive from cultural relativism.
Zefly (aka Joshua Chiang)
Interesting. I just finished reading this book where the writer was in Cambodia. He met a Cambodian who shared with him how he survived under the Khmer Rouge. His brother was caught stealing food from an equally starving neighbor and summarily executed. His family was well educated by the way (but they had to hide the fact). Fully rational guy. If he stole from the neighbor he would have deprived said neighbor of food, and the neighbor could die from starvation.
Food for thought.
OriginalResonance
If he had starved to death, you won’t be able to read a book that got you waxing lyrical about. It’s always easy to step up to the pedestal with hindsight.
Zefly (aka Joshua Chiang)
please read post more carefully. Brother stole food from neighbor cos family starving. Neighbor also starving. Brother caught. Executed by Khmer Rouge for stealing. Who’s right who’s wrong?
Zefly (aka Joshua Chiang)
It’s always easy looking for quick fixes to very complicated problems.
OriginalResonance
First of all, I’m not ashamed of my pragmatism. And secondly, you did not present your point clearly. Instead of ending off with “food for thought”, it would be better if you just asked what you’re asking now i.e “who’s right who’s wrong”. Just some food for thought for you.
Zefly (aka Joshua Chiang)
Oh I love pragmatism too because it produces results. Where’s the pragmatism in having a deterrence in place when studies after studies have revealed very little effect of death penalty on drug use? And are there any statistics that show overall volume of drugs trafficked into Singapore have dropped as a result of death penalty in recent years?
It’s always easy to be proud of irrationality which one mistakes as pragmatism.
anon
Zheng Xi,
The MSM work hand in glove with the govt on many issues.
The day will not come when citizens of this red dot rise up in a popular mass uprising because the govt make sure the conditions for such an event does not occur.
The only way available is to fight a guerrilla war, a hit and run and concerted psychological warfare via every means available. Sensational is the keyword. Public embarrassment, the objective.
Ω李
Hey man the Singapore MSM at least reported this.
The Malaysian MSM and alternative media totally blocked it out, so that the Malaysian public can continue to live in ignorant bliss.
OriginalResonance
Since when did I claim that death penalty is an effective deterrent? I was defending my support for the stealing of food from the starving neighbour when I interpretated your anecdote as an endorsement for altruism with the reward of not starving your neighbour through your actions. Hardly a reward or motivation for me. I’m an ethical egoist. But I digress. Crux of the matter is that I didn’t even mention a thing about the dealth penalty.
Lee Loong Bia
103) Ω李 on December 7th, 2009 6.30 pm
“Hey man the Singapore MSM at least reported this. ”
Are you sure Ω李?
Malaysia need not report on this case as much as singapore MSM need to report it as this case is in Singapore. Even if sg MSM reports it, its only expected they do so.
To everyone who’s taking shots at Malaysiakini for not reporting on Yong’s case, here you go: http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/119173
neutral
Hi Zheng Xi
:) Yes, the book is teaching “Justice ( in this case, the law ) should be tempered with mercy”.
However, you don’t see the judge over-ruling the law just because to extract “a pound of flesh” is downright cruel?
Believe me, my heart goes out to Vui Kong but you don’t change the law ( as extreme, unfair, unmerciful, heartless as it may seem ) as and when you like.
If the law can change, what gives the assurance it will not be changed for any other cases?
True, pity his youthful age but age is no defense for crimes committed. What about the “lives” of families broken by addiction to drugs? Who is to give them their “justice”?
Zheng Xi
Hi neutral,
I don’t think anyone’s arguing that Vui Kong shouldn’t be punished. The issue here is the proportionality of punishment, and having a debate over whether or not an alternative punishment would be preferable to a mandatory death penalty.
The problem with the mandatory death penalty is that it doesn’t allow judges the discretion to consider the circumstances in which the crime was committed in deciding on punishment, hence its disrepute in almost every legal jurisdiction in the world. The law regularly makes distinctions based on the circumstances of the criminal, that is what mitigation is for.
I personally agree that there are crimes so heinous that they might mandate the death penalty, I am not a complete abolitionist. But Yong Vui Kong cannot be sentenced the same way as a hardened serial killer. That is inimical to justice.
Political SalesMaN
Those people drugs trafficking ruin their Family, How about those Goverment selling Arms to the Junta for killing their own Citizen and ruin many Family. Ther’s no different.
zeroth
that poor boy … pity .. but i think its going to be a dead end for him .. there is no ambiguity over his deeds under our laws .. he must die for it .. simply because the drugs he carry causes death to others ..
Perhaps too, after his death, we will start to debate on our laws .. laws are constantly rewritten .. better and better i hope .. and sometimes .. it is rewritten in blood .. but it will, perhaps, come too late for him ..
I used to be a teacher at a low end sec school .. where the majority of my students are of the malay community, mostly of dysfunctional families (can we have the editor start a post on how we can help them plz? i sincerely would like to hear the views from our online singaporeans)
I had a male malay student by the name of HJ belonging to this group, i still remembered how i painstaking taught him in Science, moltivated him towards his studies and it emerged that he cleared his N levels good enough to enter higher nitec.
Yet a month ago, i received news that he died of drug overdose in combination with alcohol. He has been struggling between life and death for weeks in the hospital, amidst visible pain and agony ..
Perhaps some would say it was his mistake, or even mine, for not educating him well on the dangers of drug abuse.
Regardless, it was a heart wrenching to receive the news.. So much efforts .. such a tragic loss of life ..
*sorry editor, i re read my post and corrected some errors
Say no to nonsense
Hey neutral,
I remember you… Have a nick call “neutral” but often posted comments that are not so neutral…
Firstly, we need to determine whether such a law is applicable in the first place. We have murderer walking away with a jail term, so what makes you think drug trafficking must be warranted with a death penalty? In fact, I think majority of the countries don’t practise that! So, why is Spore’s law so unique and special? Should it remain to be so just because it used to be so, or should we review and revise as and when it is appropraite?
I suppose, this case is the perfect example for the media to report, for the garment to reaccess this vintage law. Instead of mandatory death sentence, why not make it to be a case by case basis?
No one argues that this is not a crime and he should be let off scot free… but the argument is… is the punishment too harsh?
Remember, this young man (who was only 19 when caught) was just being make use of by the drug syndicates… Our law will end up killing many young and ignorant people… while the syndicates continue to be left off the hook… and they will continue to do what they have been doing… and we will end up killing even more people.
Are all these killing neccessary? Is there a better way to deal with this issue?
I hope you think over them carefully… before readily jumping to the tune of the media and garment again.
Petition for clemency of Yong Vui Kong denied « Jacob 69er
[...] Dec 5 update: Read Rachel’s post Updates on Yong Vui Kong and TOC’s Editorial: Media silence on Yong Vui Kong a national shame. [...]
Moby
It is easy to send a person to hang in the gallows
Even easier to reject a pardon by a mere letter
I suggest that those who do, should go watch the hanging in person
Face up to what you did. And see the taking away of a human life with your blood-stained hands.
Maybe their thoughts might change.
OriginalResonance
It is even easier to send a pig to the abattoir. It’s gruesome though to witness the slaughter of a pig. Therefore we should stop eating pork.
Vegetarian
OriginalResonance @114
This is why I stopped eating meat. Even my 10 yr old decided to become a vegetarian because he does not want animals to be slaughtered for our enjoyment.
It is precisely why it is wrong to punish Yong with death. People like yourself want him dead just to appease yourself, no other reason for it. We thought the Roman gladiators have long gone.
OriginalResonance
Did you inform your 10 year old that plants feel pain too? Or did you inculcate the values of superficiality to him i.e plants don’t express pain saliently, so it’s ok to eat them?
neutral
Hi Zheng Xi
thanks for taking the time and your thought provoking replies :)
hmm…just a thought, how about if the case was about “a 40+ year old man with starving wife, parents, in-laws and 3 kids to support “.
Will age be against him or for him?
But it is not to say that i disagree completely with you. Perhaps the mandatory death penalty should still stand but like now, there should always be an avenue for appeal? And if things should be found otherwise, a more fitting sentence should be administered?
cc: Say no to nonsense
It seems that anyone who has differing opinions is “with the media and with the govt”. – perhaps this is the reason why a cooling off period is being proposed.
saiber
SUB JUDICE, somebody should go look this up. Might explain the MSM silence. Am surprised that the TOC writer didn’t take that into account
Say no to nonsense
Hey Neutral,
“It seems that anyone who has differing opinions is “with the media and with the govt”. – perhaps this is the reason why a cooling off period is being proposed.”
That is not what I think… In no way did I suggest that.
Your tunes are too distinctly similar to media and garment… that is why I link them together. At the same time, from what I saw of your other articles… you are definitely far from neutral IMO.
However, if I am wrong in my analysis that you are acting neutral when you are not, my apology for my misconception about you.
A true Malaysian
Hi friends,
This topic is hotly debated in “Black & White”, a popular Malaysian blog. Please visit,
http://blackandwhite999.blogspot.com/2009/12/news-that-wont-attract-attentionyong.html
Why I support the death penalty and a second chance for Yong Vui Kong | The Online Citizen
[...] http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/12/toc-editorial-media%e2%80%99s-silence-on-yong-vui-kong-a-nationa... [...]
This is ONE reason I gave up on STRAITS TIMES; selective publishing.