I am proud of GMS who attended the anti death penalty gathering yesterday

[Tan Kim Kim]

But here, it is the cabinet which decides, the ELECTED President is just a rubber stamp. That is the difference.

Goh Meng Seng

So your stand is you prefer to let 1 person decide rather then the cabinet decide?? What will happen if the president happen to be like ex Taiwanese law minister Wang qinfen who was a devoted Buddhist and to put her own believe and religion above the law & constitution rights ?

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

The funny thing is people who never attended the court trial proceeding, never read the transcript of the case, decide that death penalty is wrong and the president is wrong not to grant clemency or not being advised by government to grant clemency. Ancient emperors had absolute powers of not only clemency but general amnesty. Could even declare general amnesty 特赦天下 all criminals pardoned just because he's happy on his birthday or something like that. You all want that? Millions of your ancestors fought to death to abolish that.

With due respect, we are not asking the President or anyone else to do such things. I believe in the process of granting clemency, even in ancient China or monarchies, they have people to review each individual cases based on the merits.

The Presidents or monarchs will have to depend on a group of people to go through all the cases and give prudent reviews. I think you are totally mistaken on how it works here. Even for occasions like birthday of emperors or monarchs, those cases of whom are pardoned are scrutinized by a group of advisers.

Goh Meng Seng

 

[Velma]

You're welcome and you're right in principle. Malaysia and Thailand also hang drug traffickers. China executes them by firing squad. US electrocutes murderers and terrorists. I don't see what's so especially controversial and contentious about death penalty except being statutorily imposed mandatory, i.e. the judge can't decide to lower the sentence even when there're mitigating circumstances.

I guess, if there is no mandatory death penalty, and the judge decides to grant death penalty, the defendant can appeal. If the defendant is rich and can hire a good lawyer who can find the loopholes, he probably can have his sentence reduced to 7-15 years in jail instead of being hanged. That will be no justice for the victims.

 

[Sideswipe]

Even for the Yang Agong in Malaysia, he has such powers but must go through a tribunal for advice. He has his own discretionary power to decide. Same goes to the King/Queen of England, although at the moment, such powers has been delegated to another person.
But here, it is the cabinet which decides, the ELECTED President is just a rubber stamp. That is the difference.
The Thai King has the discretionary powers to grant clemency as well. So is the President of Taiwan. There are ample examples in the world.

a elected or appointed president is a more ceremonial position with few reserve powers under parliamentary system. that why I asked how many parliamentary system countries ( not monarchy ) give president power to grant clemency at personal discretion. I don't know too.
Today the British monarch only grants pardons on the advice of a government minister.

don't understand why anti-dp activists keep on talking about a potential constitutional crisis. think our constitution clearly indicates that president can't give pardons.

 

[Ramseth]

I guess, if there is no mandatory death penalty, and the judge decides to grant death penalty, the defendant can appeal. If the defendant is rich and can hire a good lawyer who can find the loopholes, he probably can have his sentence reduced to 7-15 years in jail instead of being hanged. That will be no justice for the victims.

If you're charged for crimes punishable by death penalty, legal aid is free all the way to appeal, unless you choose to pay yourself.

If your lawyer managed to find loopholes to save you, that's fine. Due process of the law. While we may generally think that murderers and drug traffickers deserve the death penalty, we must also think, allow them to explain and defend themselves, with proper legal counsel, and allow the judges to judge and come to a legal conclusion and verdict.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

a elected or appointed president is a more ceremonial position with few reserve powers under parliamentary system. that why I asked how many parliamentary system countries ( not monarchy ) give president power to grant clemency at personal discretion. I don't know too.
Today the British monarch only grants pardons on the advice of a government minister.

don't understand why anti-dp activists keep on talking about a potential constitutional crisis. think our constitution clearly indicates that president can't give pardons.

I think you are mistaken. Many ELECTED Presidents have EXECUTIVE powers and more than ceremonial roles; eg. US, Taiwan, Philippines... As for those under parliamentary system, Agong of Malaysia has clemency discretion aided by a tribunal.

Some Commonwealth countries like Australia still regard the Queen of England as their monarch. If you are asking for Elected Presidents in parliamentary systems, I will have to checked. Singapore has a unique system of Elected Presidency basically due to political considerations.

Nevertheless, the spirit of Democracy is based on separation of powers; at least 3 powers: Judiciary, Legislation and Executive. Most parliamentary systems in the world, including England, has moved towards to a more distinctive separation of powers. In this case, it is odd for the Executive and Legislation representative to decide on Judiciary matters. That is why I advocate the clemency process to be handed by the President via an empowered Tribunal to advise the President. But ultimately, the President will have his own discretion made.

Goh Meng Seng

 

[Ramseth]

Many ELECTED Presidents have EXECUTIVE powers and more than ceremonial roles; eg. US, Taiwan, Philippines... As for those under parliamentary system, Agong of Malaysia has clemency discretion aided by a tribunal.

You're mistaken. Singapore is still under Parliamentary system, not Presidential system as in USA, ROC or Philippines. In Singapore, the Head of Government is still the Prime Minister, not the President, whether elected, walked-over or appointed.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

You're mistaken. Singapore is still under Parliamentary system, not Presidential system as in USA, ROC or Philippines. In Singapore, the Head of Government is still the Prime Minister, not the President, whether elected, walked-over or appointed.

I have not mistaken Singapore as Presidential system. But the point is, even under Parliamentary system, be it Constitutional Monarchy or otherwise, we should be moving towards a more distinct separation of powers as well. This is a World Trend, starting from England and Nordic countries.

Goh Meng Seng

 

[Queen Seok Duk]

Sure they can, on a noose instead of a clothesline.

In ancient China, only the head was hung on display as deterrent.

Typical Ramseth form of reply. Deliberately move the discussion away from the original context when caught with his pants down. It's so difficult to admit: "I made a mistake."


http://www.trackerpress.com/reference/hanged-or-hung.php

Which is correct: "hanged" or "hung" ?

hanged is used only when referring to the hanging of a person by the neck with the intention of killing him or her.

In all other cases, hung is the past tense of hang.
Examples:

Correct: The murderer is going to be hanged at dawn.

Incorrect: The murderer is going to be hung at dawn.

Correct: We hung your picture on the wall.

Incorrect: We hanged your picture on the wall.

What about "Hung, drawn and quartered", then? Shouldn't it be "Hanged, drawn, and quartered"?

No, and this is why: "Hanged" is used when a person is hung by the neck with the intention of causing death. Being hung, drawn, and quartered is a rather different, very grisly, way to die: the person is not intended to die from the the hanging but instead – slowly, painfully, and with a great deal of mess – by being slit open so that his guts spill out, and then chopped up into quarters.

 

[scoopdreams]

I have not mistaken Singapore as Presidential system. But the point is, even under Parliamentary system, be it Constitutional Monarchy or otherwise, we should be moving towards a more distinct separation of powers as well. This is a World Trend, starting from England and Nordic countries.

Goh Meng Seng

Mr. Goh, don't get baited into a pointless argument regarding government structures and balance of powers - focus on your aim at attending the gathering.

It was to send a message that there is a group of people who would like a clearer examination and consideration into the role of the mandatory death sentence in a modern society.

It has nothing to do with the type of government, but everything to do with the times. Focus on it, don't get drawn in by Ramseth and Sideswipe.

 

[Ramseth]

I have not mistaken Singapore as Presidential system. But the point is, even under Parliamentary system, be it Constitutional Monarchy or otherwise, we should be moving towards a more distinct separation of powers as well. This is a World Trend, starting from England and Nordic countries.

Under a Parliamentary system, having an elected President is either a mistake or a joke. WP is against that in manifesto. You should know that. Elected to no power, where got meaning? Waste peoples' time. In Singapore's context, power of guarding reserves is only just in case non-PAP wins power. Otherwise, what do you expect with a PAP sponsored Presidential do with a PAP PM or Finance Minister? Anyway, I believe that even Lee Kuan Yew himself sees the farce now.

 

[myfoot123]

Death penalty is still the best solution.

I am sure those activists will stop preaching anti-death penalty stance once they find out they have to pay more taxes to support the scum in prison.

It pales in comparison to supporting the scum in white.

 

[Ramseth]

Which is correct: "hanged" or "hung" ?

hanged is used only when referring to the hanging of a person by the neck with the intention of killing him or her.

In all other cases, hung is the past tense of hang.
Examples:

Correct: The murderer is going to be hanged at dawn.

Incorrect: The murderer is going to be hung at dawn.

Correct: We hung your picture on the wall.

Incorrect: We hanged your picture on the wall.

What about "Hung, drawn and quartered", then? Shouldn't it be "Hanged, drawn, and quartered"?

No, and this is why: "Hanged" is used when a person is hung by the neck with the intention of causing death. Being hung, drawn, and quartered is a rather different, very grisly, way to die: the person is not intended to die from the the hanging but instead – slowly, painfully, and with a great deal of mess – by being slit open so that his guts spill out, and then chopped up into quarters.

A person is hanged till dead. After death before removal from noose, the corpse is still hung there.

Anyway, semantics is neither of our points, is it?

 

[Tan Kim Kim]

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/1i4qDlnuoqo?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/1i4qDlnuoqo?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>