Tuesday, August 26, 2008

Can a Person or a Government 'not corrupted' in law be 'corrupted' in fact?

When I read ST's Govt defends A-G's stand on acquittals, I was perplexed that "Law Minister reiterates that 'not guilty in law' does not mean 'innocent'. So 'not guilty' is 'guilty'?

83 year old great-grandma said, "Lung see ee, kui ah see ee!" Hokien roughly translated to English is, "He's human, he's also the devil!"

I was puzzled further when I read, "Attorney-General Walter Woon stated that an acquitted person may be 'not guilty' in law, but 'guilty' if fact." So what are judges for? Who's law is it anyway?

In this 'golden period' of 'golden rule' in Singapore, I guess he who has the gold makes the rules. So 'guilty'; 'not guilty';'corrupted'; 'not corrupted' depends on whether you are judge under law or fact or whatever. Now I'm really confused!

If that's the case, Can a Person or a Government 'not corrupted' in law be 'corrupted' in fact?

Go figure :)



At August 26, 2008 at 9:38 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is there any difference between Lee Hsien Loong paying himself a couple of million S$ in annual salaries and Chen Shui Bian pocketting himself millions of Taiwanese Dollar from the Taiwan Govt Special Funds ?

Who benefits in both cases ?

At August 26, 2008 at 10:54 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Taiwan has a far superior system in place than Singapore.
The Taiwan govt do not overpay themselves and the justice system is independent, not afraid to prosecute and investigate their ex president. IBAHRI is right about the Singapore judiciary and its relationship with this govt.
Facts are more important than laws!

At August 27, 2008 at 11:54 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Facts says a lot more than laws.

For example: ex president Chen Shui Bian and our PM are both extremely greedy for money or corrupted with such desire....this is a fact.
Chen paid himself millions...but it is against the law.
PM Lee paid himself millions...but it is within the law.
Another example: PAP puts Chia Thye Poh in detention for 32 years...corruptly abusing the ISA to extract a confession...this is a fact.
interpretation of the ISA to the letter....PAP acted within the law.

At August 31, 2008 at 11:15 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

An excellent rhetoric! Used their own justifications against them, nice...

At November 11, 2008 at 9:48 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting to know.


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home