• 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.

Anti-Mandatory Death Penalty

Goh Meng Seng

Alfrescian (InfP) [Comp]
Generous Asset
I have written about this topic a couple of years ago in some internet forums. I have just realized that I didn't record it down in my blog here.

The issue of Death Penalty arises every now and then whenever there are cases concern drug traffickers being tried and the convicted are due for hanging. I am no expert in law but somehow I find it quite funny that even murder could be lessen to a crime of manslaughter which doesn't necessary warrant a mandatory death penalty but drug traffickers are dealt with a direct mandatory death penalty regardless of age and other circumstances.

The present case involving Yong Vui Kong is worth noting because the judge preceding the case has specifically asked the prosecutor and defendant lawyer into his chamber to ask the prosecutor whether the charge could be lessen in any ways. But the prosecutor refused to lessen the charge and the judge, although apparently he felt that the accused deserve a second chance in life, has no choice but to read out the verdict of death penalty just because it is the MANDATORY sentence.

This is the case whereby a law that stipulated a MANDATORY GRAVE SENTENCE of DEATH PENALTY has robbed the preceding judges of the necessary discretion that he needs. Our legal system should not be diminished into just a de-humanized system of strict and rigid rules because justice is based on two main faculties, one is the cold logic of right and wrong, the other, the consideration of human emotions and circumstances whereby crimes are committed.

Furthermore, there may be circumstances that wrong findings may result in injustice being done. In our system, when you are charged and accused of a serious crime like drug trafficking, the onus of proof lies with you, the accused, rather than the prosecutor. For example, if someone made use of your friendship to carry illegal drugs into Singapore to pass it to someone as a "Christmas Gift" and you were caught at the custom, even if you are unaware that the "gift" is actually a decoy containing illegal drugs, you will be charged as drug trafficker.

There isn't a need for any further proof of any sorts, other than the drug appears in the bag that belongs to you. Even if someone mischievously sabotage you by stuffing it into your bag without you knowing.

There is almost zero chance for you to prove your innocence. The prosecutor does not need to prove that you are a "willing" partner in the trafficking and simply by the fact that these drugs are found in your bags, you will be charged, found guilty and hung. The police and prosecutor are least interested in finding out who gave you the drugs and if you are paid to do so, who are the masterminds behind it.

This is the absurdity of the law. There are also criticisms that while our government is over zealous in hanging every small drug mules but yet they have legitimate business dealings with the biggest drug lord in Burma. If that is true, then that is really the biggest irony.

I always wonder whether there are any FRUITFUL follow up on the capture of these small drug mules, beside sending them to the gallows. I mean, shouldn't the police follow the leads from these drug mules to crack down on the drug ring leaders? Or even cooperate with foreign agencies to crack down on these international drug trafficking organizations? If what these drug mules have provided help to crack down on the bigger ring leaders, shouldn't we show some mercy and clemency over them?

Maybe in Singapore, the mindset of the authorities is that showing mercy or clemency is a sign of "weakness". It is not. It is a sign of social maturity, progress and humility if appropriate clemency is shown to those who deserve it.

Drug Trafficking is a serious offense but so is Death Penalty as a grave sentence. A serious offense like Drug Trafficking would need serious findings of guilt other than physical evidence. Just like the case of killing a person. It could well be a MURDER which is planned intent, or manslaughter in a "freak" incident. Or just basically an accident. The intent of the accused is of paramount importance. Thus I could not understand why the proof for such a serious offense like Drug Trafficking is just so simple.

Death Penalty is a serious grave sentence that could not be rectified later if the judgment is found to wrong. It is an irreversible sentence. Strange enough, such a serious sentence could be belittled by the law in making it "Mandatory" in cases like drug trafficking. Law is not at all black and white but has a big patch of gray. There are many instances where the judge could not be conclusive in the findings but just based on what he chose to believe to make his judgment. If this is the case, discretion should be given to the judge to make the necessary moderation in his sentencing.

I admire the persistency of some of the human rights activists and lawyers in continuing their fight against death penalty. I may not agree with them totally in the abolishment of death penalty because there are indeed many people who did evil things in this world who need no lesser punishment than the death penalty. But I would find that have a law that assert Death Penalty as the Mandatory sentence for Drug Trafficking or other crimes is not that appropriate at all. In fact, I do not prefer to have mandatory sentencing embedded in any law of crimes because we are a human society. Discretion should be given to the wise judges to decide on the sentence based on the severity of the case and the various circumstances surrounding it.

While many activists may feel hopeful that Yong Vui Kong may have a chance in his appeal because he has won unprecedented battle to get his execution extended twice, but I feel that as long as the law is not changed to get rid of the Mandatory nature of the Death Penalty, chances are that he will not get his second chance in life. There will be many more Yong Vui Kong in future.

For the mean time, it would be good for his family to treasure whatever time he has left in this world while we shall continue to press for a CHANGE in our law and justice to be done by getting the authorities to get the main culprits, the drug ring leaders, to proper justice.

Goh Meng Seng
 

Debonerman

Alfrescian
Loyal
Ask the question why the discharging of a firearm in the process of committing a crime, irregardless if it was meant as a warning shot attracts the same mandatory penalty. If Yong's case results in a new precedent, then God help us if firearms are used regularly to threaten victims by "young and naive Malaysian boys with sob stories".
 

TeeKee

Alfrescian
Loyal
drug traffickers are just couriers....why give them death penalty?

nobody forces you to take drugs....if they did those are the ones who should get death penalty....

if you take drugs on your own accord, you should get the death penalty, which you do, if you ODed...on yourself...

if you visit sinful places like nightclubs, do prepared to be drugged and get into alot of trouble...

dun blame others for your own sins...be responsible, be a man.

Romans 6:23 (New International Version)

23For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in[a] Christ Jesus our Lord.
 

TeeKee

Alfrescian
Loyal
Ask the question why the discharging of a firearm in the process of committing a crime, irregardless if it was meant as a warning shot attracts the same mandatory penalty. If Yong's case results in a new precedent, then God help us if firearms are used regularly to threaten victims by "young and naive Malaysian boys with sob stories".

Guns are good to liberate people from totalitarian regime. That is why USA still allowed people to carry arms...unfortunately, those carrying are not using it to liberate their country instead for criminal activities...
 

Jabba

Alfrescian
Loyal
More might be "encouraged" to traffic drugs or kidnap or posess firearms or murder if the death sentence is abolished...then again...if it is meant as a deterent...sooner or later...jaywalking will carry a death sentence too...
 

TeeKee

Alfrescian
Loyal
More might be "encouraged" to traffic drugs or kidnap or posess firearms or murder if the death sentence is abolished...then again...if it is meant as a deterent...sooner or later...jaywalking will carry a death sentence too...

if there's no demand, how could the supplier survive?
 

Goh Meng Seng

Alfrescian (InfP) [Comp]
Generous Asset
Ask the question why the discharging of a firearm in the process of committing a crime, irregardless if it was meant as a warning shot attracts the same mandatory penalty. If Yong's case results in a new precedent, then God help us if firearms are used regularly to threaten victims by "young and naive Malaysian boys with sob stories".

I am against MANDATORY sentences in whatever criminal law as it robs the very much needed discretion from the judge in carrying out his duty.

Justice must be made from the balance between cold logic and human circumstantial considerations. It would be very de-humanizing if everything just goes by the book and rule without any inputs of human feelings. There will be no contradictions here if the change is made at the way we create our law.

Goh Meng Seng
 

Goh Meng Seng

Alfrescian (InfP) [Comp]
Generous Asset
More might be "encouraged" to traffic drugs or kidnap or posess firearms or murder if the death sentence is abolished...then again...if it is meant as a deterent...sooner or later...jaywalking will carry a death sentence too...

To me, it is not about abolishment of death penalty but rather, getting rid the mandatory nature of it.

Goh Meng Seng
 

Communist

Alfrescian
Loyal
I am against MANDATORY sentences in whatever criminal law as it robs the very much needed discretion from the judge in carrying out his duty.

Justice must be made from the balance between cold logic and human circumstantial considerations. It would be very de-humanizing if everything just goes by the book and rule without any inputs of human feelings. There will be no contradictions here if the change is made at the way we create our law.

Goh Meng Seng

Aiyah Mr Goh, if that's the case, it will be even better if we return to the jury system, preferably with 13 jurors. You want to leave the life and death decision with two judges?
 

Goh Meng Seng

Alfrescian (InfP) [Comp]
Generous Asset
Aiyah Mr Goh, if that's the case, it will be even better if we return to the jury system, preferably with 13 jurors. You want to leave the life and death decision with two judges?

I am open to the jury system because I truly believe that Law and Justice must reflect the core values of the society at any time. Since core values of a society may just change throughout time, so does Law and Justice must adjust to that change. Having a jury may be good in that sense, to bring in that part of the social values.

Goh Meng Seng
 

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
Do not touch this topic with a 10 ft barge pole if you want to engage in politics in Singapore at this time.

The older folks can well remember the scourge of heroin in the 60s and 70s and its impact on schools and HDB estates. There were instances where large numbers of residents in one or two blocks were lost to heroin with addicts robbing the elderly in lifts for fixes, addicts overdosed and lying on stairwells etc.

The older folks can tell the difference before and after the introduction of the death sentence. There was a time when son of a well regared Raffles Institutiuon Principal, the sons and daughters of Sr Police Officers, Civil servants and business people were lost to heroin. Swee Kee of Chicken Rice fame had the son lost to heorin. The same for Jln Kayu roti prata. All before the death sentence was introduced.

School Kids of the 70s in ACS, SJI, RI, and the top tier schools would have seen a straw of heroin or know at least of addicts. Its not the case anymore. Whole cohorts of school kids since the introduction of the death sentence have never seen a straw or know of anyone addicted to it. Only the lower tier schools have some contact in this space.

Becareful - politics is not covering everything that you believe in but covering where common ground with the electorate can be reached. You might get consensus with the avante garde young but its not the worth it.

We are in the midst of No. 4 heroin territory where the stuff is highly lethal and addictive. The West gets the watered down version and the toll is not as high. Their studies does not relate to our instance.

There are far more important issues from MPs stuck with unnecessary council work like an anvil around their neck to PA and NTUC offering jobs to spouses/ families of grassroots leaders.

The faulty mechanics of mandatory laws cannot be expressed via this subject in electioneering. The Aunties and Uncles of HDB land cannot extrapolate to that extent.






I have written about this topic a couple of years ago in some internet forums. I have just realized that I didn't record it down in my blog here.

The issue of Death Penalty arises every now and then whenever there are cases concern drug traffickers being tried and the convicted are due for hanging. I am no expert in law but somehow I find it quite funny that even murder could be lessen to a crime of manslaughter which doesn't necessary warrant a mandatory death penalty but drug traffickers are dealt with a direct mandatory death penalty regardless of age and other circumstances.
 

Communist

Alfrescian
Loyal
Do not touch this topic with a 10 ft barge pole if you want to engage in politics in Singapore at this time.

And I will add the eldest son of the famous Dawood Restaurant owner. I was shocked when I found out he was hanged for trafficking. He was the heir to the business! He broke his mother's heart, a one hell of a nice lady. She invited me to her house for Hari Raya once.:(
 

Goh Meng Seng

Alfrescian (InfP) [Comp]
Generous Asset
Dear Scroobal,

Thank you for your advice.

I do understand the implications of this issue to many people, especially those old timers. It is not going to be the main topic of election campaigning for sure.

But it is a policy stand I want to take because I truly feel that mandatory sentencing is de-humanizing even though I feel that total abolition of death penalty is not a wise move. Yes, you are right, it is not an easy topic to explain in an elections.

Goh Meng Seng


Do not touch this topic with a 10 ft barge pole if you want to engage in politics in Singapore at this time.

The older folks can well remember the scourge of heroin in the 60s and 70s and its impact on schools and HDB estates. There were instances where large numbers of residents in one or two blocks were lost to heroin with addicts robbing the elderly in lifts for fixes, addicts overdosed and lying on stairwells etc.

The older folks can tell the difference before and after the introduction of the death sentence. There was a time when son of a well regared Raffles Institutiuon Principal, the sons and daughters of Sr Police Officers, Civil servants and business people were lost to heroin. Swee Kee of Chicken Rice fame had the son lost to heorin. The same for Jln Kayu roti prata. All before the death sentence was introduced.

School Kids of the 70s in ACS, SJI, RI, and the top tier schools would have seen a straw of heroin or know at least of addicts. Its not the case anymore. Whole cohorts of school kids since the introduction of the death sentence have never seen a straw or know of anyone addicted to it. Only the lower tier schools have some contact in this space.

Becareful - politics is not covering everything that you believe in but covering where common ground with the electorate can be reached. You might get consensus with the avante garde young but its not the worth it.

We are in the midst of No. 4 heroin territory where the stuff is highly lethal and addictive. The West gets the watered down version and the toll is not as high. Their studies does not relate to our instance.

There are far more important issues from MPs stuck with unnecessary council work like an anvil around their neck to PA and NTUC offering jobs to spouses/ families of grassroots leaders.

The faulty mechanics of mandatory laws cannot be expressed via this subject in electioneering. The Aunties and Uncles of HDB land cannot extrapolate to that extent.
 

drifter

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
Though many countries in the world has abolished capital punishment due to reasons pertaining to humanity, some countries are still sticking to the traditional practice of capital punishment. Is it rational to keep capital punishment, or should it be abolished altogether?

Often, it is sentenced for serious crimes. Such crimes include murder and drug trafficking, just to name a few. So, should this kind of punishment be abolished? As the old saying goes, two wrongs will never make a right.

Although one can argue that a person who commits a crime as serious as murder should be getting an eye for an eye, such punishment would never right the wrong which has been done. The murder victim will never come back to life regardless of the judgment passed on the murderer.

When a person is sentenced to death for a serious crime, he is only getting the easy way out for all he has done. Instead, he should have to carry the burden of having committed such a crime, and be allowed to repent for the rest of his life. Thus, a life sentence should be a more fitting punishment in this case.

Regardless of the power and authority the law has over us, no one should be given the power to take away another person's life. For the right or wrong reasons, it is just simply wrong to take a life.

With all the backing of humanity, capital punishment should be abolished. A more humane alternative punishment should be used instead of this harsh punishment.

I believe minors should never be eligible for the death penalty because I believe no one should ever be eligible for the death penalty. If we as a society want to tell the world that killing another human being is wrong, what better way than to say "We think killing is so wrong that we'd never do it ourselves." If we tell our children that murder is wrong, then go out and kill members of our society, no matter how bad they are, we are all hypocrites. Rehabilitation should be the goal of all penal systems, especially when it comes to minors. They have their whole lives ahead of them. Rehabilitate them. Show them that killing is wrong by showing them how good life can be. Killing is wrong, whether by the state or anyone else, and justifying murder by saying that he killed therefore he deserves to be killed is not teaching at all. The killing of another human being is wrong. Plain and simple.
 

Communist

Alfrescian
Loyal
Mr Goh Sir

In my opinion the reason for the unprecedented move on the part of the courts, not Ravi's brilliance if you can call it that!

Kong Chan Tarng
 

ThePlen

Alfrescian
Loyal
i agree. history has cast a dark shadow on this

a mandatory death sentence doesnt care if the convicted person is repentant or not. in a way, it leaves no room for discussion, do not pass GO and head straight for the gallows. definitely, some persons get a rude awakening upon receiving the death sentence. somehow, even the mandatory death sentence doesnt deter people from murder and drug trafficking.

interestingly, advocates against the death penalty tend to portray the person as a "good person" at birth and had trafficked drugs due to poverty or bad company. it seems like even family members couldnt have stop them, leaving only the law to prosecute them and in sinkie's case, death


Do not touch this topic with a 10 ft barge pole if you want to engage in politics in Singapore at this time.

The older folks can well remember the scourge of heroin in the 60s and 70s and its impact on schools and HDB estates. There were instances where large numbers of residents in one or two blocks were lost to heroin with addicts robbing the elderly in lifts for fixes, addicts overdosed and lying on stairwells etc.

The older folks can tell the difference before and after the introduction of the death sentence. There was a time when son of a well regared Raffles Institutiuon Principal, the sons and daughters of Sr Police Officers, Civil servants and business people were lost to heroin. Swee Kee of Chicken Rice fame had the son lost to heorin. The same for Jln Kayu roti prata. All before the death sentence was introduced.

School Kids of the 70s in ACS, SJI, RI, and the top tier schools would have seen a straw of heroin or know at least of addicts. Its not the case anymore. Whole cohorts of school kids since the introduction of the death sentence have never seen a straw or know of anyone addicted to it. Only the lower tier schools have some contact in this space.

Becareful - politics is not covering everything that you believe in but covering where common ground with the electorate can be reached. You might get consensus with the avante garde young but its not the worth it.

We are in the midst of No. 4 heroin territory where the stuff is highly lethal and addictive. The West gets the watered down version and the toll is not as high. Their studies does not relate to our instance.

There are far more important issues from MPs stuck with unnecessary council work like an anvil around their neck to PA and NTUC offering jobs to spouses/ families of grassroots leaders.

The faulty mechanics of mandatory laws cannot be expressed via this subject in electioneering. The Aunties and Uncles of HDB land cannot extrapolate to that extent.
 

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
Bro, I can tell you that it so bad that the Govt had to shut down well known F&B outlets in 5 star hotels repeatedly because the wealthy families were losing their scions and their loved ones and were pressurising the Govt to do something. Barberella at Holiday Inn was closed 3 times and the Govt got so fed up that it has banned the name forever.



And I will add the eldest son of the famous Dawood Restaurant owner. I was shocked when I found out he was hanged for trafficking. He was the heir to the business! He broke his mother's heart, a one hell of a nice lady. She invited me to her house for Hari Raya once.:(
 
Last edited:
Top