'Despite its impressive economic development, Singapore fails to meet international standards for political and human rights and there are concerns about the independence of its judiciary, an association of lawyers said.' - a conclusion by the report.
this is the conclusion of the report by International Bar Association (IBA). i don't know anything about iba. one thing i guess is this organisation is not made in singapore. iba is not a product of singapore. then what the hell he knows about singapore than singaporean?
if i'm wrong, it's such a shame if iba knows better than all singaporeans the true fact of singapore judiciary. the problem is if the ministry of law is above all else, then who is going to check the ministry? is there an independent to check the ministry?
by independent i mean the selection of the members are not by politicians. so if the report imply that the judiciary is not independant, there are 2 inferences:-
Case1: A selected B for promotion so A has relationship with B. A vs C. C no relationship with A. now A vs C. A said he's right, C said he's right, stalemate. third party is called, and he's B. now A,B,C each has a vote with total of 3 vote. if 2 votes on A, A wins and vice versa. who is going to win?
Case2: A selected B for promotion so A has relationship with B. D vs C. C, D no relationship with B. now D vs C. D said he's right, C said he's right, stalemate. third party is called, and he's B. so B,C,D each has a vote with total of 3 vote. if 2 votes on D, D wins and vice versa. who is going to win?
the article i read from yahoo 2 days ago from reuters is the illustration of case 1. eg, chee and the past opposition party members who challenged politicians.
the funny thing is our govt and the law minister cited the instances of case2. eg, that business here is protected by our law, singapore is an orderly society etc etc.
if me, a person with no tertiary education, could understand the report and cited case 1 and 2, why the ministry could not comprehend the report? with their qualification of phds in law and top brains, earning salary that they deserved to earn, i never understand how they could not comprehend what the report is saying.
why the ministry keep saying about case 2? is it an avoidance, like an ostrich burying its head in the sand or really couldn't comprehend what the report is inferring?
if the ministry is still talking about case 2 then i think the chances of singapore bringing an international arbitration here will be reduced. hope the ministry respond it soon and acurrately.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment