Yong was allowed to see his mother through a glass panel on Wednesday. Upon seeing his mother, Yong knelt down and bow to her three times.
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
It is a difficult thing, this Death Penalty, when the administration dishes out such a policy and BLINDLY upholds it regardless of ALL human factors – while they can be so flexible & sensible towards the mistakes of their own as well as the members of their administration.
Democratic I doubt they are, hypocritic is what they portray themselves to be.
Agree. I volunteer to be hung together with any of the Old Fart’s grandchildren if they were to be given the death penalty under the same circumstances.
That said, I took note of the fact that it was revealed during the trial, Yong had done it successfully about six times according to the prosecution’s main witness.
The fact that the witness had been sentenced to 22 years jail on a charge of trafficking in less than 15 grams of creates in my mind a doubt as to whether there had been a trading of life deal in the backroom.
Time and time again we had came across news reports of capital trial drug cases where an amount that attracts a death penalty, had that amount reduced by a decimal point under by way of test reults(conducted by the Government authority) of the purity of the drugs involved, to that which warrants a ten to twenty-five years sentence.
So why would the state machinery let one live and hang another. God knows.
Thanks Rachel. At this point, my heart goes out to Vui Kong’s family and especially his mother.
Are they coping?
Can they? Under the circumstances?
Vui Kong, by the accounts of everyone who managed to see him (his mother, brothers, prison guards) is a changed person. He has changed so much since he embraced Buddhism in prison, that lawyer M Ravi said he seemed so enlightened. “I felt I was in the presence of an enlightened being,” he told us.
Vui Kong loved his mother deeply. It was the reason why he left home at 12 to find work so that his mother need not suffer the abuse of his grandfather. It is also the reason why he worked hard, saved up some money and went to KL when he was only 15.
But in KL, life was hard and he fell into contact with the secret societies which took him in and introduced him to delivering “gifts” which eventually led to his arrest in S’pore.
Vui Kong’s life is one of a young lost boy being misled. His father was never around – his parents were divorced when he was 3. He had no friends till he was 12, when he left that isolated house in the forest of Sabah. The first friends he knew taught him that cigarettes were no different from drugs – they were harmless as everyone was smoking, – the rich, the poor, even the people on tv.
In S’pore law, the testimony of a co-accused can be taken as evidence of guilt. According to a Straits Times report, the testimony of his friend who was caught together with him, was the most damning.
In Singapore law, the judge is not allowed to consider mitigating factors – such as his impoverished background, his abusive childhood, his witnessing of his mother being beaten up, his witnessing of his mother attempting suicide, etc.
All these had a lasting and psychological effect on Vui Kong.
It was because of all these that he lied to his mother that someone had wanted to adopt him as his godson. This was the reason he gave his mother when he left that house in the forest when he was 12.
Imagine: At 12, he wanted to work so that he could bring his mother out of that house.
Yet, he is now sentenced to death.
Judges should be allowed to consider mitigating factors.
Before his trial, the judge recognised his age – 19 – and asked the prosecution if he’d consider reducing the charge to a non-capital one. The prosecution said no.
During his trial, according to observers, everyone in court was surprised with Vui Kong’s naivete and brutal honesty.
Vui Kong deserves a second chance.
If anyone does, it is he.
Had the State taken the trouble to test his IQ? If he is of average intelligence and thus able to differentiate right from wrong and comprehend the consequences of his actions, then the only point that I am willing to concede is that his mother becomes a victim of his crime as well.
If the State insist on hanging him, let the State exercise a degree of mercy by delaying the carriage of justice till after his mother’s passing. She is a very ill woman, No?
I know that’s a radical departure. Perhaps with Lee Kuan Yew’s passing on in the near future, more flexibility can be engaged than the present rigidity of a Lee monarchy.
I agree with #4 Andrew Loh, he should be given a 2nd chance.Let us all pray the Court of Apeal can show some mercy by giving a lighter sentence.
Some heart should be put into this case..
If the government knows how to deem a person below 21 as immature to vote, they should surely know to deem this person too immature to have known the gravity of his crime/s at the time of his offence/s – as well as be HUMANE for once to look into his circumstances and allowing mitigating factors.
Be unbending regardlessly, and the same will shown to you, the administration.
Something is WRONG with the judicial system here,
and my heart goes out to the family of Vui Kong.
In the event, no mercy is shown, my condolences in advance to his dearest mother.
God Bless.
#8,
i agree with you totally. our judicial system needs changes too on top of the policies by the government here.
Do you people know that there are hundreds of thousands of Yong Vui Kong in just Malaysia alone?
So let’s send a message to the syndicates so they can pass it down to their young teenage recruits. That they won’t get capital punishment if they get caught.
Maybe in our present times, parents are adopting a different view on how they should bring up their children judging by the many strong appeals for mercy in this case. The government chalets filled with fresh condoms after a night of occupation by our school going kids including some in uniform could not get any worse if drugs are again free flowing through our system.
#10
I think how our young and youths conduct themselves really HINGES heavily the parents here.
And judging by the many condoms & waywardly acts by our youths, it is reflective of how people here are not able to bring up their kids much to the standards & choice of living some or most have chosen as well as the No Free Lunch upbringing by the state – every man is now for himself only. If you drive, you’ll know what I mean. Society of a nation will only carry the image and character traits of its government.
Also, after 4 decades of hanging up lives from across the causeway, it has undoubtedly sent a clear & brutal signal across to all those Drug Syndicates on our stance over Drugs & its related activities. And by showing some degree of MERCY, it will go some ways in showing that our administration is indeed comprised of Human Beings.. which I seriously hope they are.
To CJ @ 11
Sir, our administration they are not, unless it concerns the existence of their hegemony. You know that better than most people.
But sadly, neither is the penal code and the guidance of preceding judgements. After having it chiselled on the stones of of Commandments, humans detached themselves from it just praying they won’t be facing the very laws they had created.
Anyone who utter words such as Singapore justice is blind or judges here do not take mitigating factors into considerations are either deluding themselves or have sort memory lost or are both.
Recall the time a couple of years ago when some high society, highly connected talents were caught with indulging in cocaine party syndicate networks. The members included one high profile top lawyers/supreme court judge/ the cojoined loin nmp/ AWARE charter writer, mother, father, uncle family heavyweight tag team? The talented internet startup entrepreuener cum singapore tatler editor caught sniffing cocaine?
Anyone remember the sentence? something like 9 months reduced to 6 plus a fine. But the family wasn’t satisfied so they plea for commuting of jail sentences by increasing the portion of the fine.
This is justice in Singapore for you. Remember that – money and power talks here. It helps too if you’re connected and deemed talented.
Local media’s principles ? Forget about it.
How to resolve this issue where one side we have to give this poor guy a chance. On the other hand, by doing this give an excuse for big boss to get more young innocent teenage to delivery drugs to S’pore. So, fellows, what is the best solutions?
法理不外人情
难道人没有第二次机会吗？
何况他已有诚意改过！
怎麽也比有错不知改的人好吧？
其实就算他犯了错，那些被毒品所害的人也许不多，那为河还要重判他死刑？
I think this is really quite a catch 22 situation; we fear to be perceived to be ‘turning the other cheek’ should a condemned man be pardoned execution based on mitigating factors, but earn the title of a Heartless Country for executing the man in question according to book. However, mitigation is much like a gamble, sometimes it works sometimes it does not – but right now given the nature of the offence, it appears mitigation is not even allowed let alone to hope that it will work. In this regard, more RIGHTS should be given to a condemned person to be heard as since the Law here has been set to take away a person’s Right to live.
I think there is no solution that can address both camps, only that more effort should be made to EDUCATE & INFORM the public on Singapore’s Anti Drug Law, because Drug Syndicates can never be totally eradicated.
And so long as poverty exists, there will be no short in the supply of Drug Mules but I feel the demand & use of drugs can be reduced via various means of public education.
14) Yang on December 5th, 2009 3.01 pm How to resolve this issue where one side we have to give this poor guy a chance. On the other hand, by doing this give an excuse for big boss to get more young innocent teenage to delivery drugs to S’pore. So, fellows, what is the best solutions?
The solution is to hang the big boss in front of the poor guy. And then get the poor guy to be an anti-drug ambassador to potential vulnerable offenders.
To 12) Debonerman
If you’re so against drugs being brought into this country, why don’t you stand up against the PAP government for dealing with drug tycoons like Lo Hsing Han and letting him park his millions and billions here?
He the biggest heroin drug producer in the world you know, surely you’d like to get to the root of the problem right? And at the root you’ll find tycoons like Lo in bed with PAP.
The bigger fish eats the big fish. The big fish eats the small fish. The small fish eats the worm. Pray the worm rest in peace. What else is new.
Honestly, a man is only repentant when he face the music but given time, he is back to his old self, thats human. I had a brother committed offence, he was a total repentant, embraced Buddhism during his term and said 1000s of appreciative things to my mom etc. I saw him few months before he came out and glad that he is finally a new man.
The initial few months he was out, he was an angel, then slowly he started to change…. his old nature came back, he no longer says those appreciative thing, in irony, he thinks we owe them things.
Yong, unless he is connected to the government or their servants, there is no chance he would be pardoned or given any chance. Only certain people can be given second chance, but surely not average citizen. In the likes of Durai, Dinesh Bhatia … the newspaper editor who knocked down a kid while talking on the phone etc.
If everyone can think of the consequences seriously, he wont be in such helpless state. But some how i can tell you some people, no matter what you say or do, they wont listen and they treat you like adversary.
I just want to remind all that while it is human that we sympathize with what Yong’s mother or family is going through, we must not forget that Yong had indeed committed a serious crime, and in the eyes of the law unfortunately, a crime is a crime!
Just because he has repented does not means that he is no longer accountable for what he had done…and in this case, it had been proven beyond doubt that he knows what he was doing all this while (see below media report):
“Perhaps most damaging was the evidence of Yong’s accomplice Reggie Gwee Chin Hian, 22, who testified that he had received drugs from Yong five to six occasions between May and June last year. There had also been two past instances when the drugs were not wrapped when Yong passed it to him.”
Perhaps some would question as to how true these evidences and statements were, but I think this is best leave to Yong’s new lawyer, Ravi, to debate and convince the court that it is otherwise.
It is also important for all to consider and sympathize with the family, relatives and friends of drug addicts, who had gone through agonizing moments in trying to relate, help and rehabilitate these drug addicts.
Else we are all just hypocrites (and there are many amongst us), and are blindly allowing our emotions to mask the truth and facts from a crime that Yong had indeed committed!
Irregardless of our views on capital punishment, I think it is cruel and inhumane not to allow for physical contact between Yong and his mother. I am reminded of the case of Australian Nguyen Tuong Van, who was hanged in December 2005. Nguyen’s mom was not allowed to hug him. I wonder how many heartbroken moms are there out there, whose children have been hanged, who were denied the act of huggng their children goodbye for the last time.
For a mere 15g, the PAP govt will not hesitate to kill any drug trafficker caught with it.
But with those Burmese drug barons who produces tonnes of drugs for profit, our PAP leaders has no conscience in wanting to also profit from doing business with them.
PAP hypocrites ?
To: Return To Facts Please,
Ahhhhh.. thank you for quoting from the source which is known for credibility – the Straits Times. Thank you fro quoting from the epitome of accuracy! Wonderful.
Questions for you – and the Straits Times:
1. You said: “…it had been proven beyond doubt that he knows what he was doing all this while ..”
There was no need for the prosecution to prove this (except that it is required by law in capital cases). Yong had admitted it himself. Yong had plead guilty. In fact, Yong withdrew his appeal. Remember? Or are you unaware? Are you just reading the Straits Times, symbol of credibility and responsibility in reporting?
The question is this, which you seem to have missed:
Even if Yong knew what he was delivering was drugs, did he know it would entail a mandatory death penalty?
This is an important question because it the mandatory death penalty is cited as a deterrent to people exactly like Yong.
But obviously, it didn’t deter him.
Why?
Could it be that though Yong might have known it was drugs he was delivering, he in fact did not know that it would get him the mandatory death penalty?
And another question:
is it possible that Yong did not see drugs as harmful?
This is a major question we often do not ask. Is it possible that some of these drug mules, who are mostly illiterate, come from poor families and mixes around with bad companies – AND MOST ARE YOUNG – is it possible that they were taught drugs were not harmful and delivering them would not be a serious offence?
Think for a while. Try and wrap your mind around this – and imagine a time, a place, an environment, vastly different different from the one we’re used to.
This is why the law, as it stands, whic takes away the judges’ discretion to consider mitigating factors is terrible.
Now then. While you may say he was aware it was drugs, the questions are:
1. Are you sure he knew it would attract the death penalty (this goes to the deterrent question)?
2. Are you sure that knowing it was drugs automatically means Yong knew drugs was bad?
Consider questions rather than reports from world-renowned news agencies like the Straits Times.
Ok?
To: Very sure,
So, your brother didn’t change. My sympathies.
But i could show you many others who did – including those who changed and are volunteering to help those now in halfway houses.
What then?
Lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater – that since one person didn’t change, all others should not be given a second chance.
We all make mistakes. We all are not perfect, especially in our younger years. And this is why there are parents, teachers, counselors, elders, mentors.
Why would we need these people in society if we could all live law-abiding lives naturally?
We’re not born to know everything, u know?
This is why second chances are vital.
And please allow me to remind everyone about REMORSE.
I know some of you will scorn this.But lets stop for a moment and consider this:
What if someone is truly and honestly and sincerely remorseful for what he did?
What then?
With the mandatory death penalty, there is absolutely no chance of this – even if the person were truly remorseful.
The law does not allow you to be sorry.
The society which supports such a law is saying, and here I quote Martin Luther King,:
“Make your way to death row and speak with the tragic victims of criminality. As they prepare to make their pathetic walk to the electric chair, their hopeless cry is that society will not forgive. Capital punishment is society’s final assertion that it will not forgive.”
How terrible to live in such a society! Uncivilised even as it calls itself “compassionate” and “gracious” !!
How terrible!
To No. 22 (Return To Facts Please!),
No one is denying the fact that he has committed a crime. We are just pointing out the fact that there can be many other possible punishments for his crime that he committed out of naivety.
Giving him a second chance does not mean wiping away his criminal record or let him go off like this. No, I don’t think that is what we are all trying to achieve here.
Fact is, those who have expressed their concerns about his sentence are trying to express that he should be given a chance to live and repent.
Think about it: what is to be achieve if you send him to the gallows? He won’t be able to show the world that someone who commits such a ‘serious’ crime can show remorse and repent. Are we so cold hearted that we have to die die send people to the gallows without pondering about possibilities of other forms of punishment? Also, why are we denying the death row inmates their chances to see, hold and hug their family members in the absence of the glass panel? I call this ‘punishment’ a torture.
So… our authorities are allowed to commit state murder and torture using taxpayers’ money? Hmm… something to ponder about eh.
I shall not quibble over the sentencing of Yong, or the merits or demerits of the death sentence. Even if I agree with people like No. 22 (Return to Facts Please) that Yong deserves the death sentence for the trafficking of drugs, surely his mom also deserves to touch and hug her son for the last time? Isn’t it cruel and inhumane not to allow for mother and son to touch and hug each other, especially when it might be the last time they are doing so? Where is the compassion?
#13 – Gutless
YOu hit the nail on the head. THere is no doubt the existence of double standards when justice is meted out. Your examples are good.
Can I remind the rest of us about the case when Indonesian maids kill their employer? Mitigating circumstances like the mental health of the maid was the reason why she was not hung. Are authorities afraid of backlash from the INdon govt the same way the Philippines protested against the hanging of Flor Contemplacion?
Don’t forget that Michal Fay ( the American who vandalised a few years ago) got fewer strokes of the cane when Clinton pleaded on his behalf. There are quite a few more cases if you care to recall.
Where is the equality in all these?
Tan Cheng Hua – Yes everyone deserves a second chance, but the law in Singapore does not allow a second chance for capital punishment. If you say the law is unfair, it is. It would give second chance to people that are connected to them. No point asking me, go ask them.
During the time of Van Tuong Nguyen’s execution, we dug few cases on the 15grs that saved the neck of many wealthy Singaporean kids. As already commented, “money talks its way out of being hanged and/or avoid long sentences”…
If the Singaporean Legal system were fair, these type of convictions would be given a second chance in life, unfortunately that is still a dream to come true, to live under a proper “fair Singaporean legal system”, while corruption and inhumane mentality remains within the government, we just have to keep screaming.
Yong Vui Kong is prepared for his next life, the Singapore Legals have dictated a life sentence on the family of Kong, once again Singaporean Death Row is on the spotlight, we need the international media to bring it up front, follow your contacts if you can please.
By executing the drug mule, Singapore is allowing the drug lords to keep doing business and “improving” Singapore’s economy, how much do drugs pay in?… those figures are available to Lee eyes only, what the public ignores it won’t hurt them.
To the Singapore govt, anyone convicted of drug trafficking is not even worthy of his own mother’s embrace. How sad!
The policy of disallowing relatives to hug or touch a death convict during visits is a standard policy and practice across many countries (even in USA and in Japan). So, I do not know why there are people here trying so hard to insinuate and make it look as though it is a “Uniquely Singapore” policy and practice?
Care to write to Obama and Yukio Hatoyama to express your indignation as well?
Guys, you who are trying to convince that this unjust law of a murderous nature be changed or modified to allow the judges to have some flexibility to decide on the death sentence, instead of the present rigid form of mandatory death, my sympathy goes with all of you.
However, I think that this unjust murderous law was enacted during the then PM Lee Kuan Yew’s time, in 1975. And we are aware that he had openly told all of us that he would prefer people to fear him instead of loving him (or words to that effect). So, perhaps this particular law is a by-product and part of his overall strategy or intention to create fear in all of us?
Therefore, I conclude that if at all this unjust murderous law were to be changed or amended, we have to wait for Lee Kuan Yew to die first. So, please be patient. It won’t be long. His time is about to end soon. He is already 86. How long more can he live?
Alternatively, perhaps, instead of pleading for this young man, Yong Vui Kong, to be spared of his life, may be it would be wiser for us to put in our efforts to concertedly, persistently and religiously pray for the creator/initiator of this unjust murderous law to meet his own end first?
Applying pragmatism on the advocate of pragmatism, agree or disagree?
Not being able to let go of POWER all these times, will surely mean, a much harder time letting go of LIFE when time comes for him to ‘go’…
What one does in life as a person, is VERY MUCH like using your Credit Card –
the bills comes at the end of the day….
The thing about law is that, in my personal humble view,
1. law is different in different countries.
2. law is set by different groups of people. In each country, a group of people determines the law.
law is …. ?
There is a massive change underway in the mobile media market as it becomes unshackled from the operators’ portals that have dominated it for a decade, all without having made any significant inroads into the content use of mobile users. The new capped data packages, fuelled by further competition, will see a total revamp of the mobile media market. It will no longer be based on portals but on direct services by content and services providers via open source phones and mobile-friendly Internet-based services. The next step is the continued emergence of m-commerce and in particular m-payment services.
Yang @14
Go after the bosses. If they can do this once, just for once – a trafficker leads police to hang a boss, you will get the bosses thinking thrice of using anybody.
Yong is certainly a scapegoat for both the bosses and the police/prosecutor, not inspite of his simple and poor background but because of it. They BOTH take advantage to put such people down. Its a horrible world we live in.
There are people here who insist that take away death penalty and drug trade will flourish in SG. If it is so effective and good method, why not apply it to all sorts of crimes? If so simple, why need talents to be in Govt?
It is difficult because there are constraints like in all things. A good system and method does not ignore the constraints but will seek to address the problem (in this case stemming drugs) within the boundaries or we call it human rules.
It is WRONG to execute this particular criminal, Yong, period. There is no way this can be right.
10) Debonerman
“So let’s send a message to the syndicates so they can pass it down to their young teenage recruits. That they won’t get capital punishment if they get caught.”
So, if the authorities go after the syndicates when their young teenage recruit gets caught, what message do you think we send?
If this is done, you will get syndicates turning down teenage recruits.
35) Pragmatic Approach To Unjust Murderous Law on December 7th, 2009 8.37 am
It’s actually quite pathetic if you have to invoke our dislike of the old man as he is now, just to get your point across…
40) Discern on December 7th, 2009 10.18 pm
Go after the bosses.
AWESOME idea.
….but you still haven’t solved the problem of jurisdiction. What are your ideas on navigating this part of the issue?
TO: # 41) lobo76 on December 7th, 2009 10.25 pm
” 35) Pragmatic Approach To Unjust Murderous Law on December 7th, 2009 8.37 am
It’s actually quite pathetic if you have to invoke our dislike of the old man as he is now, just to get your point across… ”
You may have disliked the old man, but why should you assume that Poster # 35 also dislike the old man? He was merely stating the facts about the old man as he is now.
Why should you assume that just because you dislike the old man, every other people who criticise him also dislike him? What about a father or mother criticising his/her own children? Is it due to dislike of the person? What about an elder brother criticising his younger brother, or vice versa? Is it due to dislike or hatred on that person? Come on, don’t be so narrow minded!
The only thing pathetic is that you have been asking for facts, and when someone else merely stated the facts, you tried to put him down, just to get your own points/views across!
Where are your facts to substantiate that there was a dislike?
Are you a clairvoyant psychiatrist or some super human being? If you are, you won’t be here, at TOC, spouting your twisted arguments!
Last I checked, this was an English website.
Please write your comments in English.
No. 15 — you have some temerity to come here and write in Mandarin.
TOC what is going on? Accepting posts in all sorts of languages.
Want me to give my two cents worth in Korean.
What a joke.
Editor Note: I think we should not discount someone’s opinion just because of their choice of language and we should allow the benefit of doubt. As I have no idea what the comment says, would aprpeciate if someone could translate, thanks. Ganga
lobo @42
See my reply in “High Court grants rare stay of execution.” Did Malaysia not help detain Mas Selamat (OUTSIDE Spore)? Did we have to send soldiers into Malaysia? Heard of Interpol? How did that work?
Anyway I should not even need to go into this. If the Spore autorities cannot go after the big boys, don’t fry the little ones! What a lousy excuse to hang the runners.
Another point of contention – if the runners deserve the ultimate punishment, how then should the bosses be punished? Double or tripple hanging?
We are fully aware of the draconican laws in Singapore (as well as in Malaysia) and the strength and power of the Singapore Government in wielding the iron arm of the law. The Singapore Government should realise that they will demonstrate even greater power and strength if they are merciful towards Yong Vui Kong
Why so stuborn and not flexible with our law system? A 2nd chance should be given to this young boy.