Nguyen case will damage Singapore/Aust relations, says Labor
-
We can change harsh laws if they are too harsh. Now we are giving our views. If enough people feel that our laws are too harsh, citizens should get their MPs to study them and deal with them from larger perspective.Originally posted by sbst275:Apparently it is not, you wanna blame, blame those activist
And now heard there is elections when reading 1 thread, is politics playing again?
Where sentences need not be death penalty, why terminate a citizen's life. Why not substitute death sentence with life imprisonment.
Life is precious and we should try to give a citizen one chance if he has made a mistake wherever possible except for treason or war. Technical death sentence for technicallly defined offences is suspect and should be studied agains with greater care and consideration. -
Actually it all depends on us to speak...Originally posted by robertteh:We can change harsh laws if they are too harsh. Now we are giving our views. If enough people feel that our laws are too harsh, citizens should get their MPs to study them and deal with them from larger perspective.
Where sentences need not be death penalty, why terminate a citizen's life. Why not substitute death sentence with life imprisonment.
Life is precious and we should try to give a citizen one chance if he has made a mistake wherever possible except for treason or war. Technical death sentence for technicallly defined offences is suspect and should be studied agains with greater care and consideration.
But our culture dun make us so, we grew up in a env where we only bother on bread and butter issue -
judging from the comments and actions they are questioning singapore's government's right to decide the punishment. they are not just recommending.....Originally posted by robertteh:Aussies are not infringing our sovereignty as they recognize our right to decide what kind of punishment we mete out to drug offenders.
They are just making a case that death penalty for technical trafficking may be too harsh taking into account their own drug penalty and perhaps because it is too harsh, a case can be made for flexibility or perhaps changes to such laws to be more in line with international standard.
Is our government acting normal in situation where our laws are too harsh by international standard resulting in countries adopting less harsh penalty in appealing to our government to be more equitable.
If Singapore also abolishes death sentence one day, will our government feel compelled to assist citizens to spare their lives on being sentenced to death by other death-sentencing regimes. Will our government consider the whole issue from the larger perspective of humanity and intervene to spare the lives of their citizens.
And with regards to first post if they feel that hanging is repungent let them provide the means and funds for an alternative way of execution lor i'm pretty sure it can be discussed provided there is no delay
-
Originally posted by robertteh:
86 nations have abolished the death penalty for all crimes, some 75 countries have retained it. Thus an international consensus on capital punishment is clearly lacking. That is, abolition is not a customary international norm yet. Customary international law does not forbid the death penalty, it is also not settled as a norm that hanging is cruel and inhuman punishment.
Aussies are not infringing our sovereignty as they recognize our right to decide what kind of punishment we mete out to drug offenders.
They are just making a case that death penalty for technical trafficking may be too harsh taking into account their own drug penalty and perhaps because it is too harsh, a case can be made for flexibility or perhaps changes to such laws to be more in line with international standard.
Is our government acting normal in situation where our laws are too harsh by international standard resulting in countries adopting less harsh penalty in appealing to our government to be more equitable.
If Singapore also abolishes death sentence one day, will our government feel compelled to assist citizens to spare their lives on being sentenced to death by other death-sentencing regimes. Will our government consider the whole issue from the larger perspective of humanity and intervene to spare the lives of their citizens.
-
That's one part of our culture that has to be junked.If we all bother on bread and butter, who's gonna provide and sustain the environment for bread and butter to exist.It still has to be done.Originally posted by sbst275:Actually it all depends on us to speak...
But our culture dun make us so, we grew up in a env where we only bother on bread and butter issue
Don't suppose we are going to always use the food analogy till we all grow old and die right?It's healthy to have this debate now.A good start. -
Originally posted by TooFree:
Concurrently it is also not proven by a clear majority that it is an acceptable punishment too.Therefore we are in the grey zone and the best compromise is to remove the mandatory portion and let it remain on the law books though, to be applied by the courts as fit.Not given out automatically.
[b]86 nations have abolished the death penalty for all crimes, some 75 countries have retained it. Thus an international consensus on capital punishment is clearly lacking. That is, abolition is not a customary international norm yet. Customary international law does not forbid the death penalty, it is also not settled as a norm that hanging is cruel and inhuman punishment. [/b]
Courts should sentence, not the Penal Code. -
why are they not condemning Bush's state of Texas where they actually pride themselves on executing a lot of people?Originally posted by The man who was death:The aussies are not condemning the actions of nguyen but the death penalty of cos they know drug smuggling is wrong lah.
-
Same goes for 9 convicted australians facing the shooting squad in bali.
-
I think that these will not die too.Originally posted by ditzy:Same goes for 9 convicted australians facing the shooting squad in bali.
texas has been slimed by Amnesty International many times.
But the difference in these two places and ours is that they do not have a mandatory death sentencing policy, which makes the sentences handed down harder to disprove than one given by auto-default. -
Yayaya, they won't die. Next time you need drugs smuggled and get away with it, get an Australian to do it.
-
http://au.rd.yahoo.com/po/au
To add on the above, next time you need someone to help you smuggle drugs and get away with it, claim you're an addict while you're in custody. Just ask Michelle Leslie, also an Australian. -
When the laws were passed in 1975, Parliament's intent was to ensure that Singapore did not become a drug trafficking hub.Originally posted by LazerLordz:Concurrently it is also not proven by a clear majority that it is an acceptable punishment too.Therefore we are in the grey zone and the best compromise is to remove the mandatory portion and let it remain on the law books though, to be applied by the courts as fit.Not given out automatically.
Courts should sentence, not the Penal Code. -
Originally posted by TooFree:
86 against death penalty as against 75 in favour of retention is itself quite a sufficient international majority opinion or norm. Being a member of international community Singapore should at least learn to respect such majority interntional opinion and try to review the death penalty particularly if it is found to be not producing the efficacy against drug trafficking.
[b]86 nations have abolished the death penalty for all crimes, some 75 countries have retained it. Thus an international consensus on capital punishment is clearly lacking. That is, abolition is not a customary international norm yet. Customary international law does not forbid the death penalty, it is also not settled as a norm that hanging is cruel and inhuman punishment. [/b]
If by harsh death sentence, drug trafficking cannot really be solved and all we do is to execute or terminate some runners who got into the death webs due to some unfortunate personal circumstances, what is the point of retaining such harsh sentence.
Surely, two deaths do not make one life. -
coz' the Texans are not killing any aussies... Kekeke....Originally posted by the Bear:why are they not condemning Bush's state of Texas where they actually pride themselves on executing a lot of people?
also I think PM Howard needs the Americanos to cover his back so he cannot afford to offend the americans. -
Originally posted by robertteh:
want to look at statistics? China, USA, Indonesia and India, whose population add together represents more than half the rest of the world, and they are in favour of retention. That is a clear majority.
[b]86 against death penalty as against 75 in favour of retention is itself quite a sufficient international majority opinion or norm. Being a member of international community Singapore should at least learn to respect such majority interntional opinion and try to review the death penalty particularly if it is found to be not producing the efficacy against drug trafficking.
If by harsh death sentence, drug trafficking cannot really be solved and all we do is to execute or terminate some runners who got into the death webs due to some unfortunate personal circumstances, what is the point of retaining such harsh sentence.
Surely, two deaths do not make one life.[/b]
What international majority opinion?? that is total bull s h i t!! The Americans went ahead and invaded Iraq when only two countries (USA and UK) in the world agreed, and the rest of the world either objected or abstained. it is a matter of who has the interest and who has the power.
as a sovereign country, we should never subject our interest to outside pressure.
What is respect? another bull s h i t!! In East Asia, besides singapore, china, taiwan, the koreas, vietnam, thailand, malaysia and indonesia are all in favour of retention. do the OZs recognise that? we are not asking them to understand, just respect.
Surely two b u ll s h i ts cannot make point. -
I thought the Aussies should be looking at why so many australians are looking at death or jail terms in SE asia....
Another Ex-aussie model just got jail for possession of drugs in Indonesia. -
Originally posted by Lazylordz:lalala
-
maybe they are not so smart in this area... or they think that they are above the law? hmmm.Originally posted by BillyBong:I thought the Aussies should be looking at why so many australians are looking at death or jail terms in SE asia....
Another Ex-aussie model just got jail for possession of drugs in Indonesia. -
There is no one law to apply to all countries, and therefore, I think there is more to it than just making Singapore reverse the judgement.Originally posted by LazerLordz:Concurrently it is also not proven by a clear majority that it is an acceptable punishment too.Therefore we are in the grey zone and the best compromise is to remove the mandatory portion and let it remain on the law books though, to be applied by the courts as fit.Not given out automatically.
Courts should sentence, not the Penal Code.
In a sense, they're attacking our use of the death penalty...hmm... -
Asserting of influence in their sphere of influence (and interest)Originally posted by BillyBong:I thought the Aussies should be looking at why so many australians are looking at death or jail terms in SE asia....
Another Ex-aussie model just got jail for possession of drugs in Indonesia. -
It's not exactly them.There are many of us locals who do not agree that it should be an automatic sentence.Keep the death penalty but let the courts decide, not parliamentary legislation.Originally posted by deathscythe99:There is no one law to apply to all countries, and therefore, I think there is more to it than just making Singapore reverse the judgement.
In a sense, they're attacking our use of the death penalty...hmm... -
Totally.Originally posted by sgdiehard:want to look at statistics? China, USA, Indonesia and India, whose population add together represents more than half the rest of the world, and they are in favour of retention. That is a clear majority.
What international majority opinion?? that is total bull s h i t!! The Americans went ahead and invaded Iraq when only two countries (USA and UK) in the world agreed, and the rest of the world either objected or abstained. it is a matter of who has the interest and who has the power. as a sovereign country, we should never subject our interest to outside pressure.
What is respect? another bull s h i t!! In East Asia, besides singapore, china, taiwan, the koreas, vietnam, thailand, malaysia and indonesia are all in favour of retention. do the OZs recognise that? we are not asking them to understand, just respect.
Surely two b u ll s h i ts cannot make point. -
Singapore must not be moved.
Hang the man...send his body with the whole lot of heroin along as a present to John Howard -
I remember reading somewhere on LKY who said something along this line:-Originally posted by LazerLordz:It's not exactly them.There are many of us locals who do not agree that it should be an automatic sentence.Keep the death penalty but let the courts decide, not parliamentary legislation.
From his experience as a lawyer and when death sentence has to be decided by a judge or jury, there is the high possiblity of handing out punishment below the death sentence. In other words, high possibility of inconsistency arising out such arrangement. -
I wonder what if Nguyen is not an ordinary citizen but a member of Australian diplomatic corp.
Will he be cover under diplomatic immunity?
Will he be spare the death sentence?
It will be very interesting if that is the case.