Nguyen Tuong Van case heats up.

edo83:

i agree it affects people. i simply believe we should return the criminals to the country of citizenship given

1. the country can adequately deal with the criminal (returning a criminal to Kenya or Iraq is dumb)
2. the country has legal right to do so.


the issue here is not about the tantrum that Canberra is kicking up. Its about whether or not sg has the legal right and capacity to impose its harsh laws on citizens of other countries.
 
Silencer - do you agree then, that what constitutes "adequately deal" for different countries is hard to pintpoint, or even talk about? I am sure Kenya or Iraq would be offended if that were to be done.
 
thor666 said:
Actually, I believe the crux of the problem for SG,
Click to expand...

thor i agree with you. i however, realized singaporeans so rally whenever nationalist sentiment is threatened. the irony is sweet.

about the 'deal adequately with' statement, i agree they'll be pissed off. but one has to weigh the severity of the case in such situations. if a terrorist were to let back and its almost a given he'll get off lightly, in the interest of national security and for the 'greater good', i think he shouldn't be allowed back to Kenya/iraq.
 
Ixora05, Silencer and Thor666 gave an intelligent and thought-provoking response. Got me thinking... hmm... Time to think outside of the box.


Edit: I am a local-based foreigner...
 
jumbo:
its a pleasure. i don't aim to change anything, simply to present an alternate POV to the conversation.

i'm a foreign based local :D
 
Silencer said:
about the 'deal adequately with' statement, i agree they'll be pissed off. but one has to weigh the severity of the case in such situations. if a terrorist were to let back and its almost a given he'll get off lightly, in the interest of national security and for the 'greater good', i think he shouldn't be allowed back to Kenya/iraq.
Click to expand...

agreed.

however, this would probably mean the wording would be "at the discretion of the government/constition/law (i'm not sure which.) of Singapore". And given the government's firm stand on the issue, I'm not sure changing that wording would even make a difference. sad but true.

thor i agree with you. i however, realized singaporeans so rally whenever nationalist sentiment is threatened. the irony is sweet.
Click to expand...

i must be one of the exceptions. :p

i would have been for capital punishment, but after reading up the facts of the case, I'm now rather unsure whether capital punishment for drug trafficking is a good policy or not.
 
perhaps worded as "ensure that country of origin has satisfactory judiciary and security facilities to allow the due processes of law to take place" would suffice.
to use discretion would be to give powers untold to them :) perhaps at the discretion of a 'non-partisan' committee elected by the Speaker of the Parliament. (like in US Senate committees) can't guarantee a 100% on how transparent things would be, but i dare say it'll be a good deal more than what's happening now.

i'm glad you thought about it.
 
Foreign-based local! :D

Damn complex... But the alternate POV is really helping me out.

I think Australia and her ppl shouldn't have criticised S'pore's law, they should have pointed out and insisted that S'pore doesn't have the right to punish him and demand for his return. And punish him accordingly... Cause people here only see and hear what they want.

Poor guy. I really hope the government shows mercy and leniency, it's gonna affect the global view on S'pore.

Well, it's good we have intellects and thinkers here at SOFT! Otherwise it will be so boring... :)
 
A case-by-case approach is always good--however, do you think the Singapore government would risk taking such an approach? nope. the risk in a case-by-case approach is that it is too subjective, no nice safe guidelines for the government to follow and so they will not take that risk, even if it makes more sense to do so.

thor666: exactly! capital punishment for drug trafficking might not be the best way to go. possibly forcing the person to live with losing their freedom and everyday comforts might be a far worse punishment. you never know. and it's true. We can talk talk talk all we want but in the end we cannot rally the support needed to change the cause and anything short of the entire island rising up would not succeed in changing a single govt official's mind. -I can just see ISD tracking me down now man-
 
jumbo read some of the replies to my previous long articles. :) some of them are quite funny. make for excellent read!

that's the practicality argument: whether or not the sg government will buy it. for them to do so, there must be some kind of impetus. e.g. governmental image (and bloody impt enough to warrant that!), economic incentive etc.
 
one big point to note would be that the Singapore government does need to change its statute in order to spare Nguyen, given that it is concluded Nguyen can be judged by Singapore Law. That would "threaten the soverignity" of Singapore.... whatever that means. :p

Ixora05: haha... I hope you don't get the air-con/ice cube treatment...
 
air-con/ice cube treatment? What on earth is that??

and in this case, Singapore's sovereignty being threatened simply means that it'll get its toes stepped on jurisdiction-wise. its right to rule, I think. basically Singapore government gets its ego more than a little bruised and authority challenged.
 
i think i'll PM u what that is. dont really want to make the thread too socio-political/controversial..
 
ixora05 said:
. basically Singapore government gets its ego more than a little bruised and authority challenged.
Click to expand...

and we can't have that, can we? Especially so early on in Mr LHL's tenure.

nice, healthy discussion going on in here....If it was something philosophical I'd take part; just not interested in this case.
 
James is right. the judicial system is separate from the parliementary side of the government. the decision to continue with the hanging is a judicial decision, the government has no say in the judge's decision. the only person with the power to stop it is the President, and he's not obliged to grant reprieve.

...perhaps if australia is unhappy about singapore executing an australian, they should do some housekeeping of their own. break out the capital punishment, hang a couple of their drug dealers and traffickers. that way we wouldn't have to do it for them.
 
do u think the president will stop it? i think he might if aus didn't say those things they did...

now that they did, doing so would only show 1 thing: sg's weak efectively becoming a bully-magnet...
 
serialninja said:
James is right. the judicial system is separate from the parliementary side of the government. the decision to continue with the hanging is a judicial decision, the government has no say in the judge's decision. .
Click to expand...

I disagree. But I shan't elaborate on that lest I get into trouble...heheh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Back
Top