Singaporean opposition leader gets warning over dispute with
-
copied from Asia one.com
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_POL_SINGAPORE_POLITICIAN_WARNED_ASOL-?SITE=ASIAONE&SECTION=ASIA&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2006-05-12-07-55-54
Singaporean opposition leader gets warning over dispute with elections department
SINGAPORE (AP) -- Singapore on Friday reprimanded an opposition leader accused of threatening an elections official ahead of a landslide victory for the ruling party in a vote on May 6.
Police said James Gomez, an assistant secretary-general of the opposition Workers' Party, had committed an offense but would not be prosecuted because he cooperated with authorities and did not have a criminal record. He could have faced one year in jail if convicted.
Gomez was under investigation for alleged criminal intimidation and providing false information. Pending the outcome of the investigation, Gomez was barred from traveling to Sweden to work at a Stockholm-based research institute.
Before the parliamentary election, Gomez accused officials of misplacing his election papers. He later apologized after security camera footage showed he put the form in his bag, and claimed he forgot to file the document because he was distracted.
A police statement cited "several serious inconsistencies and discrepancies" in Gomez's accounts of the incident, and said the state prosecutor gave him a "stern warning."
The government speculated that Gomez had staged the incident in order to discredit the elections department. Opposition leaders, in turn, have accused the government, which exercises strict political controls, of trying to silence them with defamation suits and other heavy-handed tactics.
The ruling People's Action Party won 82 out of 84 elected seats, a result that left its near-total domination unchanged from the previous Parliament. But the percentage of votes won by the ruling party dropped to 66.6 percent from 75.3 percent in the 2001 election.
Gomez lost his race for office as a candidate in a multimember constituency. -
Remember boys and girls....
Finger wagging is a criminal act in Singapore.
Ka na sai............
And they say until like they found him guilty already but decided to let him go like that........PUI!
It's a lost cause in the 1st place! They should charge him man! I wanna see what crap evidence/witness they going to bring up in court.
.......
Prosecuting Lawyer: "And what happens after that?"
ED officer: "He...he....he then wagged his index finger at me.....sob sob" *breaks down and cry*
Prosecuting Lawyer: "Are you ok to continue? How did his finger wagging make you feel?"
ED officer: "*sob sob* It was a terrifying experience....i was traumatised....i kept thinking about my wife and kids....my life flashed before my eyes....i was very sure that he is going to keep wagging his finger till it fly off his hand and poke me in the eye.......*sob sob*"
Prosecuting Lawyer: "Your Honour, this is proof that the office is indeed extremely intiminated and traumatised by the finger wagging commited. I have no further questions" -
Since when can the Public Prosecutor find a person guilty?He is not the judge.
-
dunno why hor.. the cctv of our world class mrt always fail to record the detail of ah beng on mrt, thiefs and even ppl that jump onto the rail.... but the cctv at this dept can have so good image... hmm which brand har? smrt should go buy hor
-
Extract from CNA :
Police said on Friday that after reviewing the evidence, the Public Prosecutor was satisfied that Mr Gomez had committed the offence of using threatening words towards a public servant.
What are the "threatening words" that Mr James Gomez have alleged to have made towards the Election Department Officials ?
Why are these alleged "threatening words" never published ?
If the Public Prosecutor 'WAS SATISFIED' that an OFFENCE HAD BEEN COMMITTED, why let James Gomez off the hook ?
This is typical hogwash from the Public Prosecutor Office, working under the directives of the POWER OF ONE. -
It's so PETTY, and CHILDISH.
PAP is coming across to be very SENSITIVE & INSECURE. -
So u want tur kwa?
-
that's why he's working in errection depart-ment. peepur cock and balls long departed already.
-
The Straits Times – 13 May 06
Gomez let off with a “stern warning”
Workers’ Party member James Gomez has been given a “stern warning” for what police said yesterday was his use of threatening words towards a public servant.
A police statement said that after reviewing the evidence, the Public Prosecutor was satisfied that he committed the offence against a public servant who was carrying out his duties.
“However, having considered all the circumstances of the case, Mr Gomez’s willingness to cooperate with the police and the absence of any previous criminal record, the PP has decided that a stern warning be administered to Mr James Gomez for the offence,” the statement said. -
The Straits times - 13 May 06
Gomez a liar, reiterates MM
MM Lee commented on news that WP member JG was let off with a stern warning in his run-in with the Elections Department.
“It is in the Attorney-General’s authority to exercise his discretion, but his decision not to prosecute does not in any way make JG less of a liar or less dishonest,” Mr Lee said in a statement issued in Beijing late last night.
“I reiterate what I have called him, a liar and dishonest, and that Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Low Thia Khiang did not act honorably by shielding him. If JG claims he is not a liar nor dishonest he can go to court to clear his name.”
At an election rally on May 2, Mr lee called Mr Gomez a “liar” for claiming he had filed for a minority certificate at the Elections Department when it was later proved he had not.
Both he and Deputy PM Wong Kan Seng said Mr Gomez was out to set up the department and smear the GovernmentÂ’s reputation. Mr Lee challenged Mr Gomez and the WP leadership to sue him if what he was saying about Mr Gomez was unture. -
I would rather think that this is one manÂ’s opinion toward this issue and not PAP's.Originally posted by ShutterBug:It's so PETTY, and CHILDISH.
PAP is coming across to be very SENSITIVE & INSECURE. -
The next time an opposition get called a liar, Singaporeans are less likely to believe it. There are too many cries for wolf, and Singaporeans are tired of hearing cries for wolf.
-
Originally posted by I-like-flings(m):dunno why hor.. the cctv of our world class mrt always fail to record the detail of ah beng on mrt, thiefs and even ppl that jump onto the rail.... but the cctv at this dept can have so good image... hmm which brand har? smrt should go buy hor
-
Originally posted by PatrickLTH:
Surely it is obvious that MM LKY feels supremely confident and confortable in having his legal matters battled out in the Singapore Judiciary.
The Straits times - 13 May 06
[b]Gomez a liar, reiterates MM
MM Lee commented on news that WP member JG was let off with a stern warning in his run-in with the Elections Department.
“It is in the Attorney-General’s authority to exercise his discretion, but his decision not to prosecute does not in any way make JG less of a liar or less dishonest,” Mr Lee said in a statement issued in Beijing late last night.
“I reiterate what I have called him, a liar and dishonest, and that Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Low Thia Khiang did not act honorably by shielding him. If JG claims he is not a liar nor dishonest he can go to court to clear his name.”
At an election rally on May 2, Mr lee called Mr Gomez a “liar” for claiming he had filed for a minority certificate at the Elections Department when it was later proved he had not.
Both he and Deputy PM Wong Kan Seng said Mr Gomez was out to set up the department and smear the GovernmentÂ’s reputation. Mr Lee challenged Mr Gomez and the WP leadership to sue him if what he was saying about Mr Gomez was unture.
[/b]
With so much 'local murmuring' - and also 'on-going internation scrutiny' - about the independence of the Singapore Judiciary when dealing with 'Political Issues', it will only be a hollow victory even if MM LKY should score another legal win over the Opposition in the Singapore Courts.
One will only wonder if he will remain confident in having his dispute - with the Workers' Party leadership - being heard in a neutral court located in the First World - Canada, or United Kingdom, or USA, or perhaps the International Court of Justice.
Over the years, there has been continuous negative opinions by the International Commission of Jurists towards the Singapore Judiciary - which has passed consistently negative conclusions on political issues.
This reason alone, will makes it even more important for MM LKY to accept political lawsuits to be settled in a neutral venue located in a First World Country, with a panel of Judges from the First World, and comparing Singapore Legislations with that of several First World Countries as references. -
never understood why Gomez would want to set up the elction department. it doesnt make sense to me. PAP are bunch of paranoids.
its also time for Granpa Lee to keep his mouth shut over the Gomez affair. he is like a broke violin harping away. There are many things Singapore could also say about Grandpa Lee and family. -
Originally posted by Atobe:
This led me to think of the NKF saga, whereby Durian sued two people in the past and won in both cases, for saying that he was extravagant in traveling first class under NKF accounts.
Surely it is obvious that MM LKY feels supremely confident and confortable in having his legal matters battled out in the Singapore Judiciary.
With so much [b]'local murmuring' - and also 'on-going internation scrutiny' - about the independence of the Singapore Judiciary when dealing with 'Political Issues', it will only be a hollow victory even if MM LKY should score another legal win over the Opposition in the Singapore Courts.
One will only wonder if he will remain confident in having his dispute - with the Workers' Party leadership - being heard in a neutral court located in the First World - Canada, or United Kingdom, or USA, or perhaps the International Court of Justice.
[/b]
Is it true that the main reason that the two people lost the case (did not fight actively for the case) was because they do not have deep pocket to take on Durian / NKF then?
If the two are as rich as SPH, then they can afford the best lawyers, and they will win the case right? -
true! if you have deep pockets you can battle it out in the judiciary. Gomez is more worried about loosing his job and paying rent instead of focusing on the rantings of the old lunatic Lee. Anyway if i was Gomez i wouldnt be worried about him, Granpa Lee may not be around during the next election. Heaven or hell might have a 1 way ticket waiting for him already by thenOriginally posted by PatrickLTH:This led me to think of the NKF saga, whereby Durian sued two people in the past and won in both cases, for saying that he was extravagant in traveling first class under NKF accounts.
Is it true that the main reason that the two people lost the case (did not fight actively for the case) was because they do not have deep pocket to take on Durian / NKF then?
If the two are as rich as SPH, then they can afford the best lawyers, and they will win the case right? -
Originally posted by Atobe:
I still believe the independent of Singapore Judiciary.
......
Over the years, there has been continuous negative opinions by the [b]International Commission of Jurists towards the Singapore Judiciary - which has passed consistently negative conclusions on political issues.
This reason alone, will makes it even more important for MM LKY to accept political lawsuits to be settled in a neutral venue located in a First World Country, with a panel of Judges from the First World, and comparing Singapore Legislations with that of several First World Countries as references. [/color]
[/b]
Remember that the judges are only allowed to look at what is presented in black and white on the case in hand and be guided by the Blank and White of the Law.
If you loss the case, it is not because you are right or wrong, but how your case has been presented, by your lawyer, both in writing and deliberated in the court.
What is not presented, “the truth”, whether it is in your head or other places (for example the fact that Durian do travel in first class using NKF fund), the judge cannot take into consideration, if they are not presented in writing or deliberated in the court.
The failure if any, is because we are not rich enough, to engage the top lawyer, who understand the Laws, to look at all angle, and to get all the relevant supporting facts, and to argue the case properly, to the judge. -
they really made a mountain out of a molehill.
it was such a trivial. now the whole world knows.
first world country!!!
-
First wolrd country meh?Originally posted by dragg:they really made a mountain out of a molehill.
it was such a trivial. now the whole world knows.
first world country!!! -
can the thinking crowd here explain this:
worker party did not say a word support
their thinking Ph D candidate(PhD one,not election candidate)
commarade while our
clever PhD CSJ
supported Gomez at 11.05.2006 essay.
Why WP have not supported Gomez in web site?
2.Gomez said Sylvia Lim saw him submitted.Lim never denied this.
After Gomez confirmed he had not submitted,Lim also
said not a single word.What was her stand ,have seen submission or not. -
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
WP does not comment on ongoing investigations.Are you too thick to understand that?
can the thinking crowd here explain this:
[b]worker party did not say a word support
their thinking Ph D candidate(PhD one,not election candidate)
commarade while our
clever PhD CSJ
supported Gomez at 11.05.2006 essay.
Why WP have not supported Gomez in web site?
2.Gomez said Sylvia Lim saw him submitted.Lim never denied this.
After Gomez confirmed he had not submitted,Lim also
said not a single word.What was her stand ,have seen submission or not.
[/b] -
Originally posted by PatrickLTH:
If you had read the statement of someone - who was with the POWER OF ONE, and also if you have read the reports by the independentInternational Commission of Jurists, and you still believe that the Singapore Judiciary is independent on 'Political Lawsuits' then nothing more need to be said.
I still believe the independent of Singapore Judiciary.
Yes, the Judiciary are allowed to look at what is presented, but are they allowed to decide according to the facts as presented by both sides in lawsuits that are heavily 'Politicized' ?
Remember that the judges are only allowed to look at what is presented in black and white on the case in hand and be guided by the Blank and White of the Law.
Even the late ex-President Devan Nair had written about the independent observation made in the Tang Liang Hong Trial, in which Judge Paul Bentley - from Canada invited by Amnesty International - had said : "The logic escapes me," Judge Bentley wrote in a report, when analyzing the facts of the case and the conduct of the trial.
If you loss the case, it is not because you are right or wrong, but how your case has been presented, by your lawyer, both in writing and deliberated in the court.
What if the Judiciary makes 'Fundamental Errors in Law' that is seen so clearly to be purposefully pursued in a Political Vendetta Lawsuit ?
Obviously, if the facts are not revealed the judge cannot be expected to make any valued judgment.
What is not presented, “the truth”, whether it is in your head or other places (for example the fact that Durian do travel in first class using NKF fund), the judge cannot take into consideration, if they are not presented in writing or deliberated in the court.
The failure if any, is because we are not rich enough, to engage the top lawyer, who understand the Laws, to look at all angle, and to get all the relevant supporting facts, and to argue the case properly, to the judge.
However, what IF the judge decide to ignore or suppress the submission of statements made by those who have claimed to have been falsely accused, and proceed to hand down sentence - which lead to the making of a Singapore Political Fugitive ?
Yes, under the present Legal System, where the Court charges its time by the hour for the sitting to hear cases - (the costings will include Judge's seniority, Court Clerks and Officers in attendance, rental of the room and equipment plus utilities ) - it is only those with deep pockets that will be able to get justice to be served - and only in NON-POLITICAL ISSUES that do not involve the Government. -
Last time GE01 kena disqualified because of admin matters, so wanna scratch them back this time
-
"If I find any eggs rotten in this carton, there will be consequences."