-
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.
Serious "World Best Debator" Li Shengwu Not So Glib Anymore! Kowtowed And Apologized!
- Thread starter JohnTan
- Start date
He made a private post and he is a private citizen. Why must the pap go after him or monitor him or whatever? The gahmen to free to monitor the postings of private citizens? Is he a crime suspect that needs to be monitored? Alot of people has said worse things about the gahmen..and if the gahmen wants to arrest everyone..all the hdb flats need to be converted to jail's.
In mudland, you cannot complain about islam and bumiputera policy. In zikapore, you cannot anyhow comment on our judiciary.
Have you chopped of your dick yet?
He is stating a fact and Singkieland not mudland.
Last edited:
Why would I chop it off? My wife and I make love every night. I could snip yours off if you want.
You wife is a bitch who fucked a statue.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-singapore-politics-letter-idUSKBN1AK1M3
"He said he would seek to defend himself through legal representation in Singapore but would not be returning to the country.
"I have no intention of going back to Singapore. I have a happy life and a fulfilling job in the U.S.," he told Reuters in an interview."
***
Full Article
Singapore PM's nephew says will not return home to face charges
SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Li Shengwu, the nephew of Singapore's prime minister, who will face contempt of court proceedings for comments he made suggesting the city-state's courts were not independent, said on Saturday he would not be returning to Singapore.
The office of Singapore's attorney general said on Friday it will seek to begin contempt of court proceedings against Li, a U.S.-based academic, over Facebook posts he made on July 15. The legal move is the latest twist in a family feud over the fate of late Singapore founding father Lee Kwan Yew's house that gripped the nation last month.
In his post, Li, nephew of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and a son of Lee's brother, Lee Hsien Yang, described the Singapore government as "litigious" and the courts as "pliant".
Li, 32, is currently a junior fellow at Harvard University and told Reuters he expected to commence an assistant professor position with the university in the fall of 2018.
He said he would seek to defend himself through legal representation in Singapore but would not be returning to the country.
"I have no intention of going back to Singapore. I have a happy life and a fulfilling job in the U.S.," he told Reuters in an interview.
In a statement on Friday, the attorney general's chambers said it had previously instructed Li to remove the post and issue a letter of apology acknowledging that his comments about the judiciary were baseless.
It said Li had failed to meet those requirements by the stipulated deadline of 0900 GMT, Friday, which had been pushed back from July 28 at Li's request.
"As Mr Li has failed to purge the contempt and to apologize by the extended deadline, an application for leave to commence committal proceedings for contempt against him will today be filed in the High Court," the statement said.
Earlier on Friday, Li said on Facebook he had amended his original July 15 post to clarify any misunderstandings. However, he said he did not believe the post was in contempt of court.
Li's July 15 post was shared on a privacy setting that allows content to only be viewed by his Facebook friends. He said on Friday the intent of that post was to convey the "international media were restricted in their ability to report" on a recent feud between Prime Minister Lee and his siblings "due to the litigious nature" of the government.
"It is not my intent to attack the Singapore judiciary or to undermine public confidence in the administration of justice," he said.
The public spat between the Lee siblings, children of Lee Kuan Yew, flared in June over the future of the family home and raised questions about governance in the city-state.
Lee Hsien Yang and sister Lee Wei Ling accused their elder brother of abusing his powers, prompting the prime minister to call an extraordinary special sitting of parliament in July to "clear the air" over an issue that some people say has tarnished Singapore's image.
(The story corrects upcoming appointment to assistant professor from associate professor, paragraph 4)
Reporting by Sam Holmes; Editing by Alex Richardson and Andrew Hay
"He said he would seek to defend himself through legal representation in Singapore but would not be returning to the country.
"I have no intention of going back to Singapore. I have a happy life and a fulfilling job in the U.S.," he told Reuters in an interview."
***
Full Article
Singapore PM's nephew says will not return home to face charges
SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Li Shengwu, the nephew of Singapore's prime minister, who will face contempt of court proceedings for comments he made suggesting the city-state's courts were not independent, said on Saturday he would not be returning to Singapore.
The office of Singapore's attorney general said on Friday it will seek to begin contempt of court proceedings against Li, a U.S.-based academic, over Facebook posts he made on July 15. The legal move is the latest twist in a family feud over the fate of late Singapore founding father Lee Kwan Yew's house that gripped the nation last month.
In his post, Li, nephew of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and a son of Lee's brother, Lee Hsien Yang, described the Singapore government as "litigious" and the courts as "pliant".
Li, 32, is currently a junior fellow at Harvard University and told Reuters he expected to commence an assistant professor position with the university in the fall of 2018.
He said he would seek to defend himself through legal representation in Singapore but would not be returning to the country.
"I have no intention of going back to Singapore. I have a happy life and a fulfilling job in the U.S.," he told Reuters in an interview.
In a statement on Friday, the attorney general's chambers said it had previously instructed Li to remove the post and issue a letter of apology acknowledging that his comments about the judiciary were baseless.
It said Li had failed to meet those requirements by the stipulated deadline of 0900 GMT, Friday, which had been pushed back from July 28 at Li's request.
"As Mr Li has failed to purge the contempt and to apologize by the extended deadline, an application for leave to commence committal proceedings for contempt against him will today be filed in the High Court," the statement said.
Earlier on Friday, Li said on Facebook he had amended his original July 15 post to clarify any misunderstandings. However, he said he did not believe the post was in contempt of court.
Li's July 15 post was shared on a privacy setting that allows content to only be viewed by his Facebook friends. He said on Friday the intent of that post was to convey the "international media were restricted in their ability to report" on a recent feud between Prime Minister Lee and his siblings "due to the litigious nature" of the government.
"It is not my intent to attack the Singapore judiciary or to undermine public confidence in the administration of justice," he said.
The public spat between the Lee siblings, children of Lee Kuan Yew, flared in June over the future of the family home and raised questions about governance in the city-state.
Lee Hsien Yang and sister Lee Wei Ling accused their elder brother of abusing his powers, prompting the prime minister to call an extraordinary special sitting of parliament in July to "clear the air" over an issue that some people say has tarnished Singapore's image.
(The story corrects upcoming appointment to assistant professor from associate professor, paragraph 4)
Reporting by Sam Holmes; Editing by Alex Richardson and Andrew Hay
Li Shengwu, the eldest son of Lee Hsien Yang, said that a social media posting that he made in July was intended as a criticism of the “litigious nature” of the Singapore government and its subsequent effect on media freedoms, and not on the judiciary.
“It is not my intent to attack the Singapore judiciary or to undermine public confidence in the administration of justice. Any criticism I made is of the Singapore government’s litigious nature, and its use of legal rules and actions to stifle the free press,” said Li in a Facebook post on Friday (4 August).
Li was referring to a private Facebook post he had made in July. Linking to a Wall Street Journal article about the Lee family feud, Li said then, “The Singapore government is very litigious and has a pliant court system. This constrains what the international media can usually report.”
The 32-year-old, who is also the nephew of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, said he had been sent a “threatening letter” by the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) that called the post an attack on the Singapore judiciary and in contempt of court. In response, he had decided to amend the original post to avoid any “misunderstanding”.
He explained that his intention was to convey the restrictions on international media in their reporting on the Lee saga, and the different legal rules with respect to press freedom in Singapore as compared with countries such as the United States.
“There is also flexibility in Singapore’s defamation laws – they just have different boundaries from the defamation laws in other jurisdictions. The government makes use of these legal rules to restrict unfavourable reporting,” he added.
Li noted that an “unauthorised screenshot” of the post had been taken and then published by several media outlets, including Singapore mainstream media.
“No one who published or republished my private post had approached me to clarify what I meant. Curiously, the Singapore media had time to seek statements from a Senior Minister of State and the AGC, but did not even do basic fact-checking – they inaccurately reported that the post was taken down, because they did not bother to contact me.”
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/not-attack-singapore-judiciary-li-shengwu-061734539.html
ShengWu showed AGC and PAP his middle finger. That's good!
no studying you twit and fucker. He's a researcher
LHL, AGC and PAP have their hands full. They have opened up too many cans of worms. Will we see more revelations of skeletons within LeeFamily?
http://www.theindependent.sg/lexicon-what-is-a-compliant-judiciary/
Lexicon: What is a compliant judiciary?
August 5, 20172676
By Kumaran Pillai
It is probably the most problematic words in Singapore and any attempt to decipher its meaning will be just as problematic. If I can hazard to explain it in lay terms, a compliant judiciary is one that adheres to common law and the laws enacted by parliament as opposed to being “progressive” or “independent,” or worse a “rogue” judiciary.
There have been calls in South Africa (SA) pleading the courts to be more “compliant” because judges are using the legal system for their own political ends. In SA, they want the judges to adhere to laws enacted by parliament. So, a compliant judiciary is a good thing, is it not?
It is baffling, so why wouldn’t we want a legal system which is largely compliant? Why is our AGC taking issue with the use of word (com)pliant?
In Singapore, a “compliant judiciary” is a bad word. Lawyers talk about it all the time in coffeeshops and over dinners and they often end up making an oblique reference to politics. I’m not even sure if the usage is correct to mean whatever they are trying to convey. Perhaps they should use a better word to describe our judicial system.
From what little I can make of it; the usage of “compliant judiciary” is problematic and it often depends on the context in which it is used. If it is used to say that the judiciary is colluding with the political elites for their own political ends, then it is most likely to be construed to be in contempt of court.
What’s interesting about this is the way the word compliance is used and interpreted in different parts of the world, or even in Singapore, it can mean different things to different people.
So, is our judiciary independent? Yes and no. Again, it is contextual. Our judiciary is not “independent” like the justice system in America but our judiciary is “independent” to mean it is free from political interference.
When our lawyers say that we are “not independent” they can mean that we are not “progressive,” as in using the court system to change social norms, or they can mean we are pliant. It is important to note that there is a vast difference between pliant and compliant – they mean and connote different things.
Some political scientists believe that the American system of changing social norms through an independent judiciary is peculiar to them and it is undemocratic because the judiciary is not accountable to the electorate. It is important to bear in mind that our political institutions, democratic or otherwise, have taken a different path. We have rule of law and state apparatus but our electoral accountability is less than desirable. In fact, a lot of information is not available to us.
To confuse you even more, our courts are both compliant and independent but may not be pliant.
Confused? Ask the Law minister to explain.
Lexicon: What is a compliant judiciary?
August 5, 20172676
By Kumaran Pillai
It is probably the most problematic words in Singapore and any attempt to decipher its meaning will be just as problematic. If I can hazard to explain it in lay terms, a compliant judiciary is one that adheres to common law and the laws enacted by parliament as opposed to being “progressive” or “independent,” or worse a “rogue” judiciary.
There have been calls in South Africa (SA) pleading the courts to be more “compliant” because judges are using the legal system for their own political ends. In SA, they want the judges to adhere to laws enacted by parliament. So, a compliant judiciary is a good thing, is it not?
It is baffling, so why wouldn’t we want a legal system which is largely compliant? Why is our AGC taking issue with the use of word (com)pliant?
In Singapore, a “compliant judiciary” is a bad word. Lawyers talk about it all the time in coffeeshops and over dinners and they often end up making an oblique reference to politics. I’m not even sure if the usage is correct to mean whatever they are trying to convey. Perhaps they should use a better word to describe our judicial system.
From what little I can make of it; the usage of “compliant judiciary” is problematic and it often depends on the context in which it is used. If it is used to say that the judiciary is colluding with the political elites for their own political ends, then it is most likely to be construed to be in contempt of court.
What’s interesting about this is the way the word compliance is used and interpreted in different parts of the world, or even in Singapore, it can mean different things to different people.
So, is our judiciary independent? Yes and no. Again, it is contextual. Our judiciary is not “independent” like the justice system in America but our judiciary is “independent” to mean it is free from political interference.
When our lawyers say that we are “not independent” they can mean that we are not “progressive,” as in using the court system to change social norms, or they can mean we are pliant. It is important to note that there is a vast difference between pliant and compliant – they mean and connote different things.
Some political scientists believe that the American system of changing social norms through an independent judiciary is peculiar to them and it is undemocratic because the judiciary is not accountable to the electorate. It is important to bear in mind that our political institutions, democratic or otherwise, have taken a different path. We have rule of law and state apparatus but our electoral accountability is less than desirable. In fact, a lot of information is not available to us.
To confuse you even more, our courts are both compliant and independent but may not be pliant.
Confused? Ask the Law minister to explain.
In coffee shops ppl are saying even his own Brother has to run road, dont fuck with Ah Loong and PAP if you want a peaceful life here.
This Chinese NY coming no more need to visit lanjiao uncles and cheebye aunties and pretend goowills.
Cb you no update.
Already no talk since 2015.
At least 2 years no reunion dinner liao
