Let Iswaran have his day in court and let the prosecutor prove beyond reasonable doubt of Iswaran's guilt. But, for the city-state, helmed by the PAP in a single-party system, to have long boasted it is incorruptible makes one wonder just what other shenanigans lie in the dark (opaque) underbelly of the PAP state. I've never thought Singapore to be "clean" from corruption and other monkey business, given the PAP has ruled Singapore with an iron fist since 1959. And just because Singapore has elections does not mean or equate to calling the city-state a "democracy". If anything, it is a single-party dictatorship that engages in, at the least, election gerrymandering and, so far as is well-documented, uses its politically pliant judiciary to cajole its critics and opponents for fear of undermining, challenging or losing its tenuous political legitimacy. Morally, the PAP has none. It's so-called rule of law, where in this day and age allows for the hanging (to death) of small-time drug-users or pushes is downright barbaric. Or to mercilessly cane offenders, which is equally barbaric. Or in any country that perpetrates the death penalty is as inhuman as Israel's conduct of ethno-genocide (regardless of how much Israel may protest against the definition of genocide, legal or otherwise) of the Palestinian people. (Just goes to show just how lame, absolutely useless and totally incompetent the entire United Nations system has become over the decades.)
And so, with Iswaran's indictment, and that of the Chinese tycoon Ong Beng Seng who "allegedly" greased Iswaran for business favors, one has top ask what more has the PAP done that accounts for its nefarious behavior. We also saw -- and still unresolved -- just how illegal sums of money had been allowed to enter Singapore by mainly Chinese nationals who are either either part of larger Chinese criminal syndicates or on their individual volition (hard to believe the latter) to purchases Class A properties and live the lifestyle of the infamously rich. How could this have happened with the explicit knowledge of state officials in what is, after all, the Singapore surveillance state?
Singapore does not operate on the basis of the prosecution needing to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. It operates on the basis of the accused proving innocence beyond doubt. So in this case its Iswaran having the burden in court to prove innocence. That's how the deck is stacked to favour the law and legal enforcement.
Singapore's biggest asset and its political strengths lie in its enforcement and management of the rule of law. Without it, Singapore would be no different in character to Malaysia, the US or UK where the law is a malleable and negotiable instrument which can be bent and molded to suit any given situation.
Even though there have been 3 prior instances where ministers of government have been found to have been corrupt (and Ishwaran has not been found guilty of any offence under Singapore's corruption laws by any court or tribunal of any offence), any change by Singaporeans towards their government at the next general elections would be an over reaction for which they will pay dearly.
One swallow does not a summer make. Not even 3 swallows.....
You’re right. I was being facetious. So much for the rule of law and democracy in Singapore.
Let Iswaran have his day in court and let the prosecutor prove beyond reasonable doubt of Iswaran's guilt. But, for the city-state, helmed by the PAP in a single-party system, to have long boasted it is incorruptible makes one wonder just what other shenanigans lie in the dark (opaque) underbelly of the PAP state. I've never thought Singapore to be "clean" from corruption and other monkey business, given the PAP has ruled Singapore with an iron fist since 1959. And just because Singapore has elections does not mean or equate to calling the city-state a "democracy". If anything, it is a single-party dictatorship that engages in, at the least, election gerrymandering and, so far as is well-documented, uses its politically pliant judiciary to cajole its critics and opponents for fear of undermining, challenging or losing its tenuous political legitimacy. Morally, the PAP has none. It's so-called rule of law, where in this day and age allows for the hanging (to death) of small-time drug-users or pushes is downright barbaric. Or to mercilessly cane offenders, which is equally barbaric. Or in any country that perpetrates the death penalty is as inhuman as Israel's conduct of ethno-genocide (regardless of how much Israel may protest against the definition of genocide, legal or otherwise) of the Palestinian people. (Just goes to show just how lame, absolutely useless and totally incompetent the entire United Nations system has become over the decades.)
And so, with Iswaran's indictment, and that of the Chinese tycoon Ong Beng Seng who "allegedly" greased Iswaran for business favors, one has top ask what more has the PAP done that accounts for its nefarious behavior. We also saw -- and still unresolved -- just how illegal sums of money had been allowed to enter Singapore by mainly Chinese nationals who are either either part of larger Chinese criminal syndicates or on their individual volition (hard to believe the latter) to purchases Class A properties and live the lifestyle of the infamously rich. How could this have happened with the explicit knowledge of state officials in what is, after all, the Singapore surveillance state?
Singapore does not operate on the basis of the prosecution needing to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. It operates on the basis of the accused proving innocence beyond doubt. So in this case its Iswaran having the burden in court to prove innocence. That's how the deck is stacked to favour the law and legal enforcement.
Singapore's biggest asset and its political strengths lie in its enforcement and management of the rule of law. Without it, Singapore would be no different in character to Malaysia, the US or UK where the law is a malleable and negotiable instrument which can be bent and molded to suit any given situation.
Even though there have been 3 prior instances where ministers of government have been found to have been corrupt (and Ishwaran has not been found guilty of any offence under Singapore's corruption laws by any court or tribunal of any offence), any change by Singaporeans towards their government at the next general elections would be an over reaction for which they will pay dearly.
One swallow does not a summer make. Not even 3 swallows.....
LOL @ "Rule of law". The "Law" is just what PAP wants it to be, to keep it in power - no more, no less.