Excerpt from Alex Au’s website, Yawning Bread:
To give a new twist to an old saying: Justice unevenly applied is justice denied.
Alan Shadrake, in his new book, Once a Jolly Hangman — Singapore justice in the dock, shows how uneven it is. It’s a tour de force covering cases from the early 1990s to nearly the present, many of them ending with the prisoner meeting Darshan Singh, Singapore’s hangman for the last half-century. But some of them do not meet this fate, and therein lies the twist.
When clemency campaigns are mounted and the occasional blog takes an interest, the story centres on a particular death row prisoner and for a particular crime, and understandably so. However, the result is that while we see a particular case, we seldom have the opportunity to see how the death penalty is used across a number of years.
With the release of this book, we cannot now say we can’t take in the bigger picture. Once a Jolly Hangman allows us to compare how one case was handled with another that had similar circumstances or gravity. What emerges is a very unflattering pattern of inconsistent “justice”, the dispensation of which is compromised in three important ways:
1. When foreign governments have clout over our economic interests and are willing to use that clout, their citizens will not face the death penalty;
2. When local citizens come from rich, well-connected families, or when a case threatens to involve others from this stratum of society, a way is found to avoid having them face the death penalty or even severe penalties;
3. When the state is convinced that an accused who is poor and “low-class” is guilty, and provided that exception no. 1 above does not apply, due process is less important than putting him on the fast-track to the noose.
What this book shows is that defenders of capital punishment in Singapore have no basis to make their critical assumptions. If anything, the cases recounted by Shadrake show an unevenness, almost a capriciousness, that should make Singaporeans hang their heads in shame.
Read Alex’s full write-up on Yawning Bread.
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
reminds me of the case of the SPH editor getting only a day’s jail for killing some pedestrian…..justice is definitely served unequal here in singapore.
Great write-up.Looks like they either have to ban the book or sue.
Easier to ban.So now everybody wants to read the book.
Remember Michael Fay’s discount on strokes by GCT?
And she was on her mobile phone while driving.
The German girl who was caught with lots of ganja was a class act by the CNB & courts.(off to Germany, proberly still smoking)
Lincoln Chen the ex owner of Zouk was another class act, he was caught with 25,000 pills.(off to HK, back to partying)
Then the Judge’s boy & his team of junkies.(off to Sweden, maybe stopping over in Amsdertam, but who cares in Sweden anyways)
Vui, still praying and poor Tochi last heard in heaven.
No wonder Singaporeans are full of fear because there is injustice at every corners in Singapore under the PAP. And PAP is trying hard to cover them up by banning this and that.
You’d think the Law Society in Singapore could at leadt have the balls now after the coverage abroad and after this book to raise some interest in moving something! But no balls there…booo
i am sad about this issues A COMMISION OF ENQUIRY must done to find out the truth
What’s perhaps sadder than the revelations of the book (as summarised by Yawning Bread) is that people like myself do not find it surprising!
Sad sad sad!
Sigh sigh sigh!
Shame shame shame!
Wah, who remembers Emperor Qin Shi Huang who burned many books? I am seeing the same thing happening soon in modern times. hehe
Makes sense. Thats normal human behavior when the checks and balances are not there. Dang!!!!
Nicolas
So what if he burned book? The official Chinese version of history reveres him as man who first united China.
The winners write the history books.
So.. how is this different from any other punishment? If the same study was done on other punishment, would the findings be much different?
If not, then what is so special about death penalty in this regard?
I suggest that Singaporeans who have access to the book and have read it, to pass it on the the next singaporean and to the next…its like “chain-reading”. Resistence is not futile.
I think the govt should change the law concerned and save the troubles of doing those kind of things.
China emperor Chin Shi Huang is considered a despot in history.
Singapore had to sell our principles just to get a British Citizen – Michael McCrae – to be extradited from Australia for a double murder at Orchard Towers.
The Singapore Government had to assure the Australian Court that the Britisher will not face the death penalty, even when he had committed pre-meditated double murders on one Singapore Citizen and one China national residing in Singapore.
In place of the death penalty, Michael McCrae was sentenced to 24 years in jail.
Compare this with the death sentence given in the Kallang body part case – when the Singapore factory supervisor found guilty for killing and dismembering the body of his lover and working colleague – who was a China work permit holder in Singapore.
The Singapore Citizen was sentenced to death and hung within 15 months of the sentence.
Justice ?
Can there be justice when it is controlled by politicians with vested interests to control all events in Singapore ?
When legislations are passed without any thoughts for the interests of citizens, and when the separation of powers are not respected – can there be justice pre-determined by politicians in Parliament and in Government ?
When justice is selectively tweaked to suit the political agenda that color each case – can there be justice ?
When punishment exceed the gravity of the crime – can there be justice ?
When the judiciary are not allowed to exercise any discretion and wisdom in determining the appropriate dispensation of justice, with their hands tied to be only mere executors of legislations deliberatly designed and determined by legislators to achieve their own political and social agendas – can there be justice ?
Yes, they always “contradict” themselves