• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

David Schlesinger: Sinkapore's courts of law are state-controlled

dr.wailing

Alfrescian
Loyal
In a live interview with the newsdesk of Al Jazeera two days ago, David Schlesinger, Chairman of Thomson Reuters says Sinkapore's courts of law operate the same way as those in Shanghai and Beijing. HK courts are different.
 

makapaaa

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
M_Id_449241_Lee_Hsien_Loong.jpg


You think like this can entrap me to sue? Only a fool will fight in a court not under his control! I smart leh? *hee*hee*
 

cass888

Alfrescian
Loyal
This is the reason why. Reporters are not tua pai Singapore. Who they think they are to have the right of confidentiality?


Singapore Appeals Court Orders Reuters To Disclose Source
Saturday, May 26 2007


Foreign Media in SGP and SGP Judiciary Pseudonymity 12:26 am
by Jonathan Lynn
SINGAPORE, May 25 (Reuters) – Reuters identified an anonymous source on Friday after Singapore’s Court of Appeal ordered a reporter for the international news agency to disclose the name and the source gave permission to do so.
The source released the reporter from her duty of confidentiality when it became clear that the reporter would face jail unless she complied with the court order, confirmed by the appeal court on Thursday.
Singapore law does not recognise the right of journalists to protect the identity of their sources, which is enshrined in the laws of many countries protecting freedom of expression, as well as recognised by the European Court of Human Rights.
“It is Reuters policy to protect the confidentiality of our sources,” Reuters Editor-in-Chief David Schlesinger said. “To defend this principle we challenged the order in court and fought it all the way to Singapore’s Court of Appeal, the highest court in Singapore.”
The reporter had been called to give evidence in a commercial case between two brokers in the city-state, Tullett Prebon and BGC Partners. Tullett Prebon had asked the reporter to identify a source quoted in a story about how the two brokers settled a dispute over the hiring of a team of traders.
The court order obtained by Prebon, and upheld by the appeal court, warned the reporter she faced imprisonment to compel her to comply with the order. Under these circumstances, the source did not want the reporter to break the law and defy the court. The source therefore consented to the disclosure.
“We believe confidentiality of anonymous sources must be protected as it is this trust between source and reporter that brings to light vital information and helps provide the transparency so necessary for the efficient working of markets in a free and vibrant society,” Schlesinger said.
“I regret that the courts ruled against this principle that I believe is so important not only for a free press but also for a clean, orderly and transparent market.”
Reuters uses anonymous sources only when it believes they can provide necessary information that cannot be obtained in another way.
##########
Updated at 0920hrs with the following news report
Who is the source?
• Court orders media to reveal name • ST, BT give in after initial fight • Reuters refuses; case goes to highest court


In a live interview with the newsdesk of Al Jazeera two days ago, David Schlesinger, Chairman of Thomson Reuters says Sinkapore's courts of law operate the same way as those in Shanghai and Beijing. HK courts are different.
 

frenchbriefs

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
of course have to fight this case lah kum lan kia,if not next time everytime Singapore government suka suka ask for confidential information and reveal sources then must reveal to them?who the fuck PAP think they are?

This is the reason why. Reporters are not tua pai Singapore. Who they think they are to have the right of confidentiality?


Singapore Appeals Court Orders Reuters To Disclose Source
Saturday, May 26 2007


Foreign Media in SGP and SGP Judiciary Pseudonymity 12:26 am
by Jonathan Lynn
SINGAPORE, May 25 (Reuters) – Reuters identified an anonymous source on Friday after Singapore’s Court of Appeal ordered a reporter for the international news agency to disclose the name and the source gave permission to do so.
The source released the reporter from her duty of confidentiality when it became clear that the reporter would face jail unless she complied with the court order, confirmed by the appeal court on Thursday.
Singapore law does not recognise the right of journalists to protect the identity of their sources, which is enshrined in the laws of many countries protecting freedom of expression, as well as recognised by the European Court of Human Rights.
“It is Reuters policy to protect the confidentiality of our sources,” Reuters Editor-in-Chief David Schlesinger said. “To defend this principle we challenged the order in court and fought it all the way to Singapore’s Court of Appeal, the highest court in Singapore.”
The reporter had been called to give evidence in a commercial case between two brokers in the city-state, Tullett Prebon and BGC Partners. Tullett Prebon had asked the reporter to identify a source quoted in a story about how the two brokers settled a dispute over the hiring of a team of traders.
The court order obtained by Prebon, and upheld by the appeal court, warned the reporter she faced imprisonment to compel her to comply with the order. Under these circumstances, the source did not want the reporter to break the law and defy the court. The source therefore consented to the disclosure.
“We believe confidentiality of anonymous sources must be protected as it is this trust between source and reporter that brings to light vital information and helps provide the transparency so necessary for the efficient working of markets in a free and vibrant society,” Schlesinger said.
“I regret that the courts ruled against this principle that I believe is so important not only for a free press but also for a clean, orderly and transparent market.”
Reuters uses anonymous sources only when it believes they can provide necessary information that cannot be obtained in another way.
##########
Updated at 0920hrs with the following news report
Who is the source?
• Court orders media to reveal name • ST, BT give in after initial fight • Reuters refuses; case goes to highest court
 

Tuayapeh

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
of course have to fight this case lah kum lan kia,if not next time everytime Singapore government suka suka ask for confidential information and reveal sources then must reveal to them?who the fuck PAP think they are?





anybody wanna bet Tan Siong Thye will be hearing Pinky's case?????
 

cass888

Alfrescian
Loyal
Siow! This is not asked by the government. It is asked by a litigant who subpoenaed Reuters.

of course have to fight this case lah kum lan kia,if not next time everytime Singapore government suka suka ask for confidential information and reveal sources then must reveal to them?who the fuck PAP think they are?
 

Papsmearer

Alfrescian (InfP) - Comp
Generous Asset
Don't talk so much lah. Just sue Al jazeera if Gay Loong and the PAP got the balls. This is a very serious accusation broadcast to the world and very damaging to the govt.'s reputation. Sue small guy very garang. Try and sue the number one news source in the muslim world and see what will happen to them. Some iman will order a jihad on gay loong.
 
Top