Should SDP be happy with this exceptional verdict?

[zeroo]

The kangeroo has left the court!

Bastard son Bob Sim Kheng Hwee of Blk 171 Stirling Rd,

Bastard pappy running dog mole send by your pappy master baey lan kang to stir shit here and create discord among opposition supporter, why dont you go get a job to earn a living instead of lazing at home the whole day surfing the net and posting such nonsense, and shamelessly still taking pocket money from your elderly parents. Why dont you stop beating your father and scolding your mother laucheebye

 

[TeeKee]

Oi can you please stop starting a flame war in a beautiful thread like this?

 

[Ramseth]

This Judge just sealed his career in Pulau Ubin.

Yeah man, looks like this District Judge John Ng is either planning to resign or looking for Pulau Ubin as his next district.

Will be like history repeating itself...as in the case of JBJ a Judge acquitted him, subsequently he was demoted and disappeared from Court scene....KNN

You mean Michael Khoo. Not disappeared. He went into private practice and became Senior Counsel. Last high profile case was when he defended T.T. Durai against SPH represented by Davinder Singh SC.

 

[leetahbar]

Nope. Read it from SDP website:

http://yoursdp.org/index.php/news/singapore/2881-breaking-news-judge-acquits-sdp-leaders

Goh Meng Seng

ah seng,

sdp is made up of a bunch clowns who are also petty resentful trolls. when the court charges them, they comprain. when the court free them, they comprain too.

how to please petty people? right, left, centre - they also comprain. maybe a kick to their bottoms would stop all their loudhailings and noisy rantings.

 

[Perspective]

To the SDP the judgements handed down have always been on frivolous and weak grounds. Hence to echo the technicality for a reverse case like this presents a dilemma and stating that it misses the bigger picture isn't of much relevance since all of them did, they have argued.

A "baby-step" would not occur in a PAP's "kangaroo court", unless it was not and it would show up that SDP had misjudged the judiciary.

Overall, it presents a dilemma for SDP.

Actually if I were them I would argue that the courts needed one case to acquit them to be used to justify that all other cases they were charged for was fair and that the courts are independent. Surprised that they did not come up with this instead went for all technical details.

It's also presumptous to assume the judge will be condemned. SDP had been acquitted of another charge of illegal public speaking in Yishun/Woodlands before '06. It wasn't publicized and the judge is still there.

 

[TeeKee]

ah seng,

sdp is made up of a bunch clowns who are also petty resentful trolls. when the court charges them, they comprain. when the court free them, they comprain too.

how to please petty people? right, left, centre - they also comprain. maybe a kick to their bottoms would stop all their loudhailings and noisy rantings.

Do you have to be violent?

Is it true that you have multiple clones here and used them often?

It is not very good to distort public opinions, that tantamount to lying!

And it is sinful to lie!

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

It seems that the one who posted this reply has become SDP's spokeswoman in this forum?

Anyway, the argument provided by SDP below is flawed. First of all, the Constituition is never in question because SDP did not apply for any permit for a "procession". If SDP did not treat the "walk" as a "procession", what constituitional right are they talking about?

If they view the walk as a procession and they did not apply for any license according to the law (well, regardless of whether they think it would be approved or not), then SDP apparently has shown its own mischieve in not following the law under the Constituition. How could one who refused to follow the law under the Constituition to argue that the Constituition is their source of power?

Thus, I think the judge's judgment is fair. Uncle Yap's defence is on the right track whereby he argued that the walk is just a walk and not a procession. The judgement has helped to clarify on what constitutes a walk vs a procession. In fact, it has clearly legitamized the many other political activities that all opposition parties have been carrying out for the past decades: walking in groups to sell newspapers/newsletter and distributing flyers and national flags...etc.

The only why SDP could cite the Constituition as their cause and defence is when they apply for the permit but rejected and yet, they still carry out their procession. The police will have no choice but to round them up and charge them. This is because SDP has made a very clear political statement that they are having a procession, not a walk. The police has refused to grant them a permit but they went on for the procession anyway.

Then, this will really constitute a "Non-Violence Action" aiming to challenge unfair law/treatment by the police/administration.

Thus, I would say that Lamei, please use your own brain to stop and think for a while before you write in this forum. If you are acting as SDP spokeswoman even though you claim that you are not a SDP member, so be it. But if you are just using other people's writing as the basis of your opinion, then better think twice.

1 up to Uncle Yap! He has finally succeeded in getting the whole administration embarrassed due to their unprofessional and bias dealings.

Goh Meng Seng

answer to the thread starter question...

http://www.yoursdp.org/index.php/pe...nothing-to-be-elated-about-nothing-to-despair

<table class="contentpaneopen"><tbody><tr><td class="contentheading" width="100%">Judge's decision: Nothing to be elated about, nothing to despair </td> <td class="buttonheading" align="right" width="100%"> </td> <td class="buttonheading" align="right" width="100%"> </td> </tr> </tbody></table> <table class="contentpaneopen"> <tbody><tr> <td class="createdate" valign="top"> Wednesday, 07 October 2009 </td> </tr> <tr> <td valign="top"> Chee Soon Juan

DJ John Ng

Before we pop the bubbly and celebrate the acquittal of my colleagues by District Judge John Ng over the protest walk on 16 Sep 07, it is important to examine the Judge's reasoning behind his decision (read the full Judgement here).

Judge Ng had ruled that the Miscellaneous Offences Act (MOA) under which the defendants had been charged was not unconstitutional. He wrote that "There was no basis for the defendants to attack the constitutionality of the legislation."
</td></tr></tbody></table>

 

[TeeKee]

It seems that the one who posted this reply has become SDP's spokeswoman in this forum?

Wah I tot you all opposition arg ka leow with one another...

still got time to screw each other on small trivial matters like this?

like that Spore where got hope?

 

[scroobal]

It does reinforce the notion that they are not into mainstream politics but closer to an NGOs with human rights as their central agenda.

This is where I think that Chee should be upfront with his followers as he is not eligible to contest. He should really sit down and explain what it means to them in a GE.

Clearly the "constitutional argument " has no purchase in contemporary politics is any country let along the voting public. Its does however resonate with NGOs and funding foundations with a similar bent.

It also explains why the young are attracted to it.

Anyway, the argument provided by SDP below is flawed. First of all, the Constituition is never in question because SDP did not apply for any permit for a "procession". If SDP did not treat the "walk" as a "procession", what constituitional right are they talking about?

 

[Nice-Gook]

The judge got instruction lah.From the kangaroo king lah.A leopard never change it's spot lah....This legal episode is another facade of LKY as lawyer lah....Just like the Israelis strategy in any battle of never cornering your enemy for it may fight for it's life lah..Same same lah...This verdict is for statistical purpose lah.For the consumption of Obama administration lah.See,! peesai judge can order against the gahman what !; sort of stick it in the glaring eyes of the international legal fraternity lah...

Loose a chow battle to screw SDP big time lah....When a tiger stoop ;it's not a cowardly posture--it's a sign of a pending attack TO KILL.

 

[Ramseth]

Wah I tot you all opposition arg ka leow with one another...

still got time to screw each other on small trivial matters like this?

like that Spore where got hope?

You thought only, if Meng Seng and Lamei sits together at the same table, Singapore becomes nuclear power by default, i.e. successfully tested nuclear detonation.

 

[flkyflky]

Oi Mad Man Yap.... now you want to pretend to be a JAG lawyer ar? Bloody hell, see you cry in court now so tough!

Your saw your own papa mama cried in court may be. But UY laugh all the way even in jail.:oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo:

 

[jw5]

The verdict is neither interesting nor unusual.
All it proves is that in this world, there are some people who see it necessary to have a sense of right and wrong and be able to maintain a sense of justice and fairness if they are in a position to. Of course, there are also people who don't, but that is a debate for another occasion.
What is interesting however, is what happens next.

 

[Perspective]

It does reinforce the notion that they are not into mainstream politics but closer to an NGOs with human rights as their central agenda.

They and their supporters have never denied that. Based on what they have said, they do so on the basis of wanting to stand in for the nearly absent NGO role.

 

[TeeKee]

You thought only, if Meng Seng and Lamei sits together at the same table, Singapore becomes nuclear power by default, i.e. successfully tested nuclear detonation.

so did you just let out a Freudian slip that we are already nuclear capable?

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

Dear Uncle Yap,

I think you have taught the local police and the AG chamber a very valuable lesson in the rule of law. They should thank you instead of thinking of embarrassing themselves and the whole legal system again by appealing against this judgement. Everyone could see that this is a FAIR Judgment. To challenge against a FAIR Judgment is the most stupid move to make.

I really admire your determination and undaunted spirit in getting things right in Singapore, although personally I do not believe this is an effective political move. All the best to you.

Goh Meng Seng

Tuesday, October 06, 2009

<!-- Begin .post --> 5 Activists ACQUITTED of Procession Charge for WB-IMF Anniversary Walk 2007




Related Blog Post

JUDGMENT PDF FILE

This afternoon at court 19, at about 2:45pm 5 activists including Mr. Gandhi Ambalam; Miss Chee Siok Chin; Mr. John Tan; Mr. Chong Kai Siong & myself were found not guilty for procession without a permit from WB-IMF Annivesary Walk Event dated 16.Sept.2007 (LKy old dog thief's birthday), by district judge John Ng.

This is the first breakthrough in our 3 year plus of non-stop litigations with famiLEE LEEgime involving more than a dozen cases.

I already posted my defense submissions & replies in PDF file format online. Basically I came out with defense arguments that the event was a Walk instead of a Procession and everyone have the rights to use road to convey themselves from a place to another lawfully, a permit is not required as the walk is different from a procession in that walk is casual and without fixed formation & sequence & order etc. It was evidential that the activists and reporters and bloggers etc were just walking on the sidewalks in very normal ways not different from the common users of road (pedestrians). Therefore I argued that a procession was not formed up, nor had been identified nor noticed by members of public. :-)

For the very 1st time in opposition history under famiLEE LEEgime such acquittals had been seen, and all the 5 defendants were found not guilty. I am not sure however if famiLEE LEEgime's AGC will appeal against this acquittal no not. :-)

I was prepared this afternoon to return to my Changi Hotel / Resort to have a few days of vacation. Now however I am back to work... :-( so boring...

Sammyboy.Com Thread

Chinese Blog Post on this



posted by uncleyap at 4:07 PM

 

[LaMei]

It seems that the one who posted this reply has become SDP's spokeswoman in this forum?

Thus, I would say that Lamei, please use your own brain to stop and think for a while before you write in this forum. If you are acting as SDP spokeswoman even though you claim that you are not a SDP member, so be it. But if you are just using other people's writing as the basis of your opinion, then better think twice.


Goh Meng Seng

by gms standard;

posting links from SDP website = SDP spokeperson???

Ex-colleague's personal opinion (very potential SDP's & NSP's candidate) = SDP's opinion???

Makapaa = spokesperson for ST, TOC, SDP, WP, etc & etc????

Thread name : Should SDP be happy with this exceptional verdict?

My reply : read SDP's article by CSJ : Judge's decision: Nothing to be elated about, nothing to despair

Fancy a moron trying to teach me how to think and write..sheesh..

 

[LaMei]

You thought only, if Meng Seng and Lamei sits together at the same table, Singapore becomes nuclear power by default, i.e. successfully tested nuclear detonation.

I have to disagree with you my dear..

I won't stoop myself to his level..

 

[LaMei]

They and their supporters have never denied that. Based on what they have said, they do so on the basis of wanting to stand in for the nearly absent NGO role.

Perspective..

SDP has also been defending against those who accuse them of not speaking up for bread and butter issues. TBT, which is protest / campaign against the rising cost of living in SG and SDP's recent objection to the closures of wet market ( link : http://www.yoursdp.org/index.php/news/singapore/2869-sdp-opposes-closure-of-wet-markets) are but some of the examples that clearly show otherwise.

Like many ignorant S'poreans, I used to think what the hell with human rights and democracy..ever since my involvement, I begining to realise the importance of human rights and democracy, without which, we got no voice against all the unfair policies / rules..

Unlike me, many S'poreans do not have first hand experience and exposure to realise this. Hence the misconception about SDP..

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

It does reinforce the notion that they are not into mainstream politics but closer to an NGOs with human rights as their central agenda.

This is where I think that Chee should be upfront with his followers as he is not eligible to contest. He should really sit down and explain what it means to them in a GE.

Clearly the "constitutional argument " has no purchase in contemporary politics is any country let along the voting public. Its does however resonate with NGOs and funding foundations with a similar bent.

It also explains why the young are attracted to it.

Dear Scroobal,

There is nothing wrong to have human rights as the central agenda for a political party, if and only if there are lots of human rights issues in this country that affect the basic needs of the citizens. But this is not the case in Singapore even though I do agree that the monopoly of power by PAP has caused certain "human rights issues" in terms of deterence to political competition.

PAP has used administrative means to limit political rights to its political opponents while keeping the masses happy with economic progress. This is a matter of divide and rule. What affects PAP's political opponents may not be relevant to the masses. eg. locking up PAP's political opponents for decades has little impact on the masses' progress in other areas.

As I have stated earlier, SDP has to strategize to preserve its strength for electoral battles instead pushing all its supporters and members towards NVA which may result in disqualification from electoral contests.

The reason why "Constituitional Argument" has no market in Singapore's politics is basically because PAP has kept Singaporeans busy with their own daily needs. They have "calculated" with great precision that Singaporeans would have no time to think about "highfalutin ideals" like "Constituitional Rights" or Human Rights while they need to spend most of their time in working for their livelihood. It also means that Singapore is yet to achieve certain level of political maturity to care about such basic fundamental political issues. Singaporeans have not gone through hardship exerted by cruel dictatorship or monarchy. Even the British Colonial rule is considered mild in comparison with the rule of those ancient feudal lords. PAP maybe an authoritarian rule and have locked up many of its political opponents, but basically it did exert cruelty and blantant exploitation on the masses. Instead, due to its past socialist leadership, it has gained tremendous political trust and capital from the population.

Having said that, the shift from socialist perspective to ultra-capitalist mindset has steadily erode the political trust and goodwill left by PAP's past socialist rule. Take housing for example. HDB has provided PAP great political capital in the past, pre-1990 era. But HDB has become a liability to PAP politically due to the change in its socialist direction. We have not seen people chased out of their HDB flats or kampong attap houses without a roof over their head in the past. But now, it is quite a common sight.

I strongly believe that if opposition wants to make an impact in winning votes, it must explicitly demonstrate such shift in policy ideological direction which is the root of many problems we face now. Only by doing so, we could totally wipe off whatever political capital is left from PAP's past leadership. Constituitional Rights? It is important but not impactful at all.

Goh Meng Seng