• 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.

By Election Case to be heard in Open court. What does that imply?

alantan27

Alfrescian
Loyal
Joined
Aug 13, 2008
Messages
462
Points
0
By Election Case to be heard in Open court. What does that imply?
 
More powder kegs to increase the hatred of Singaporeans
 
So who'll be the Kangaroo Judge hearing this case in a Kangaroo Court..????
 
AGC appeals against ruling to hear Hougang by-election application


SINGAPORE: The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) has lodged an appeal against a High Court judge's ruling that there are sufficient grounds to hear, in open court, an application by an Hougang resident to order the Prime Minister to hold a by-election in the constituency within three months or within a "reasonable time" deemed by the court.

A closed-door hearing will be held on Thursday before the Court of Appeal to consider the AGC's application for an urgent date for its appeal.

The AGC, represented by Chief Counsel David Chong, had argued before Justice Philip Pillai that Madam Vellama's application was "wholly misconceived" and "is legally unsustainable and is unarguable in law and fact".

Madam Vellama had filed an application on March 2 for the Prime Minister to be held accountable for calling a by-election in Hougang, following the sacking of former Member of Parliament Yaw Shin Leong from the Workers' Party.


display_image.php
 
This is really getting hilarious. A-G is PM and Cabinet legal counsel. How could PM send the case to Court and A-G appeals against it?
 
This case is going to take the Mickey out of us. It's a big wayang. The Judiciary brought the executive to court and proved to the People how independent they are. The people got the chance to feel good. The judiciary got vindicated. But in the final analysis, the executive branch still has the last word. And everybody goes on living happily ever after.
 
Last edited:
“I make no apologies that the PAP is the Government and the Government is the PAP.”
- Lee Kuan Yew, Petir, 1982

What can we say?
Let's wait.
 
It is a giant wayang with possibility of surprise outcome.

Of course, if you think the latter has a snowball chance in hell of happening, I got a bridge in Alaska to sell you.
 
Last edited:
That the Judiciary is independent of the Executive. :eek::D

The last time a Judge tried to be independent, he was sent back to AGC to be a DPP. He is Senior Counsel Michael Khoo and the accused was JBJ.
 
Back
Top