Singapore sacks hangman before Australian execution
-
There will be a higher spotlight on the usage on the death penalty now.Even the President of AWARE is part of the action group that advocates doing away with it.Originally posted by gorby107:Maybe that one is special????
Most of the time is low-profile
Seems that Drug cases are hoo-ha thing
You want a robust civil society, you need to work for it. -
last time , got one guy tio charge .... his verdict was read out ... Hang --
but when that guy got hang , he didnt die , so he was let off , and freed
from then on ... the new verdict is hang to death .. -
the practice of double jeopardy should be eliminated.Originally posted by gUms:last time , got one guy tio charge .... his verdict was read out ...just Hang --
but when that guy got hang , he didnt die , so he was let off , and freed
from then on ... the new verdict is hang to death .. -
I actually thought that would be the best possibel way out of this:Originally posted by yuppy4life:Just a stupid question here.
Singapore is following its own law, While Australia is asking for some humanity.
Can we just avoid the conflict by asking the presidential pardon???? The guy however can still remain in Changi Prison under Singapore's custody.
In this way, both sides can save face.
Since you cant retrospectively apply laws (or should not), it's impossible to get around the legal obstacle of the mandatory death penalty.
The Presidential Pardon would have been a way around this, followed by a debate on the subject in Parliament, specifically with a view to determining whether the mandatory penalty should be refined to mandatory for drug cartel bosses and lieutenants, and the option of life imprisonment for mules.
Sadly, no thought seems to have been given to the possibility of this by our government in the last weeks. After all, if there is a strong public view, it should be taken into account. We do live in a democracy, where the views of the people should count. Or did I not read the fine print...? -
likewise for the mervyn tan case.Originally posted by jeevna:I actually thought that would be the best possibel way out of this:
Since you cant retrospectively apply laws (or should not), it's impossible to get around the legal obstacle of the mandatory death penalty.
The Presidential Pardon would have been a way around this, followed by a debate on the subject in Parliament, specifically with a view to determining whether the mandatory penalty should be refined to mandatory for drug cartel bosses and lieutenants, and the option of life imprisonment for mules.
Sadly, no thought seems to have been given to the possibility of this by our government in the last weeks. After all, if there is a strong public view, it should be taken into account. We do live in a democracy, where the views of the people should count. Or did I not read the fine print...? -
How many times does our Parliament sit?I think now would be a good time.Originally posted by jeevna:I actually thought that would be the best possibel way out of this:
Since you cant retrospectively apply laws (or should not), it's impossible to get around the legal obstacle of the mandatory death penalty.
The Presidential Pardon would have been a way around this, followed by a debate on the subject in Parliament, specifically with a view to determining whether the mandatory penalty should be refined to mandatory for drug cartel bosses and lieutenants, and the option of life imprisonment for mules.
Sadly, no thought seems to have been given to the possibility of this by our government in the last weeks. After all, if there is a strong public view, it should be taken into account. We do live in a democracy, where the views of the people should count. Or did I not read the fine print...?