FEER's bloody departing shots
-
It's high time our ministers and govt leaders accept the fact that criticism and fair comment are part of daily life. Their decisions and style of leadership are not infallible and some among the population and overseas are bound to disagree with them, even robustly.
The best form of defence is simply to rebut them. Else simply ignore their statements. Defamation suits become a lame excuse to stifle free speech. After all, there are many cases where New York Columnist William Safire was ignored despite writing repeated damning articles about Singapore, some of which were far worst and less objective than the recent comments by FEER.
Why wasn't he sued?
-
2.The things i find not right are ,unfortunately to LazerLordz,Originally posted by LazerLordz:I can certainly give him his right to speech as long as he tries not to go overboard with his bashing of anything not Singaporean.
It's not about who's pro-this or anti-that. He doesn't have a very balanced point of view, and that's what's irritating me...
or fortunately to me, not happening in Sg.
Why should i spend more time and energy to dig
out faults of sg when many done here?They have done their home
works and good jobs to make sg a beeter place to stay.
Thou i may not totally agree with them.
Even some of them want PAP lose more seats to opposition parties
and the best,they hope,the desgnated PM wont elected to be the MP!!!
3.i will say loud and clear if i am not happy some polices here.
But i will bear in mind NO POLICY is PERFECT.
Many critizes this or that.Perfect ok.There is freedon of speech
here so far.
When u critize Plan A,and u propose Plan B,have u assess
the OVERALL pros and cons of each policy?
The worst is u critize and u dunt propose anythings or at least
try to.Dunt like opposition parties in last election,they just did
the same,shooting PAP medical schemes but said they would
show their proposals only when they in Power after getting more info!!
4.Manu of u dunt know sg grant half and full exemption
of income tax to
Compaines of Pioneer Status.To many it is wrong.
But if u dunt grant ,what do sg lose,opportunity costs etc...
Now in HK ,govt just want more interventions into economy .
Buy - Renowned American economist and Nobel prize winner Milton Friedman
has branded Hong Kong's latest economic policy
a mistake, saying the city should return to the
laissez-faire stance that prompted him to once describe
it as an ideal model,.
Opposition parties throw out terms like'' pick the winner'',
''rent seeking'' to resist investment incentives.Thats is why
HK economy is still and will be in bad shape.
We wil discuss HK in separate topics.
Thats fine.Sg has better chance.
5.The key is OVERALL results of each policy and to extraxt the
goods from Capitalism and Socialism.Sg has extracted much so far
and so good,thanks to first generation leaders understood socialism. -
Billybong ah, next time can don't post long long things in blue font on this background or not har? Read until eyes want to pop out already leh.
On a different matter, the whole "sueing whoever dares to deframe me" thing is not a LKY patent, Machiavelli actually proposed it first in his "Discourses", and specifically say that the founding fathers of a city state should make use of the legal system to punish all those who defame them. -
2. if u were leaders of countries and u feel defamed by individual orOriginally posted by wisefool83:On a different matter, the whole "sueing whoever dares to deframe me" thing is not a LKY patent, Machiavelli actually proposed it first in his "Discourses", and specifically say that the founding fathers of a city state should make use of the legal system to punish all those who defame them.
medias ,what areyour options?
---detain them under ISA
---put them in cave of Sentosa to collect birds nests for leaders
---put in Woodbridges
---just shot them or hang them
---cancel their citizenship and send them to whoever
will accept them
---forgive and /or forget(remember 1000 lies become a fact)
---just sue them and the most make them bankcruptcy
..........
Leader,what is your best option if u feel defamed?
The last option is most civilised,thou not pleasant at all. -
Originally posted by wisefool83:On a different matter, the whole "sueing whoever dares to deframe me" thing is not a LKY patent, Machiavelli actually proposed it first in his "Discourses", .....
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
This may sound petty but it's defamed.
2. if u were leaders of countries and u feel [b]defeamed by individual or
medias ,what areyour options?
.....[/b] -
I suspect it's coz the FEER article dared to give Chee a voice by interviewing him. After all, the govt-controlled media *has* been diligently portraying Chee as some kind of madman...Originally posted by BillyBong:It's high time our ministers and govt leaders accept the fact that criticism and fair comment are part of daily life. Their decisions and style of leadership are not infallible and some among the population and overseas are bound to disagree with them, even robustly.
The best form of defence is simply to rebut them. Else simply ignore their statements. Defamation suits become a lame excuse to stifle free speech. After all, there are many cases where New York Columnist William Safire was ignored despite writing repeated damning articles about Singapore, some of which were far worst and less objective than the recent comments by FEER.
Why wasn't he sued? 
Old and Young Lee were notably riled at the "martyr" part in the Chee interview. Do they fear that Singaporeans will start to view Chee as such a martyr? Why are they so insecure about it? -
Why are they insecure?Originally posted by spinsugar:I suspect it's coz the FEER article dared to give Chee a voice by interviewing him. After all, the govt-controlled media *has* been diligently portraying Chee as some kind of madman...
Old and Young Lee were notably riled at the "martyr" part in the Chee interview. Do they fear that Singaporeans will start to view Chee as such a martyr? Why are they so insecure about it?
Oh I feel Chee has some truths, and he has questions the Lees would rather avoid answering
That's why...
-
double post.
-
Yes, and so they have mastered the usage of Weapons of Mass DistractionOriginally posted by ShutterBug:Why are they insecure?
Oh I feel Chee has some truths, and he has questions the Lees would rather avoid answering
That's why...
-
kewl.
ill read FEER more often. -
In the first place, if I knew myself to be so easily riled up by things said in politics, I would have quit in the first place.Originally posted by lionnoisy:2. if u were leaders of countries and u feel defamed by individual or
medias ,what areyour options?
---detain them under ISA
---put them in cave of Sentosa to collect birds nests for leaders
---put in Woodbridges
---just shot them or hang them
---cancel their citizenship and send them to whoever
will accept them
---forgive and /or forget(remember 1000 lies become a fact)
---just sue them and the most make them bankcruptcy
..........
Leader,what is your best option if u feel defamed?
The last option is most civilised,thou not pleasant at all.
Politics is not dining-in. It is a rough game, words will fly, and your voters will be convinced by your programmes, not how you fix your critics. -
There is some truth is the FEER article. How many dad's out there in the world can claim to have 2 Brigadier Generals as son's! Also everymorning on my drive thru Bukit Timah I wonder why the elite schools along the entire stetch of the Bukit Timah road hardly have any non-chinese faces visible!
-
Double on that score....Originally posted by ShutterBug:Why are they insecure?
Oh I feel Chee has some truths, and he has questions the Lees would rather avoid answering
That's why...
-
Originally posted by gill_hfc:
Correction is needed, as in larger nations with military traditions, it is not uncoomon to have father and sons becoming generals in succeeding generations.
There is some truth is the FEER article. How many dad's out there in the world can claim to have 2 Brigadier Generals as son's! Also everymorning on my drive thru Bukit Timah I wonder why the elite schools along the entire stetch of the Bukit Timah road hardly have any non-chinese faces visible!
However, each are selected based on their individual performance in actual combat or war.
Can a small population of 4.5 Million produce two generals from one family ?
With regards to the non-chinese being enrolled in elite schools along Bukit Timah Road, you should understand that Chinese High is still basically a Chinese Language School.
Look across Bukit Timah canal, along Dunearn Road, the elite schools such as Anglo-Chinese School - despite being a Methodist school - will have quite a few non-Chinese (Indians and Malays) enrolled.
Then again, the percentage may not reflect the population ratio, as enrollment criteria remains on performance base.
If the majority of the non-chinese are from less privileged homes, with financial handicap, it becomes a double challenge for any child from such homes to enter the elite schools. -
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
What are the options available to you and I, if we are defamed by anonymous persons contributing to this sgForums ?
2. if u were leaders of countries and u feel defamed by individual or
medias ,what areyour options?
---detain them under ISA
---put them in cave of Sentosa to collect birds nests for leaders
---put in Woodbridges
---just shot them or hang them
---cancel their citizenship and send them to whoever
will accept them
---forgive and /or forget(remember 1000 lies become a fact)
---just sue them and the most make them bankcruptcy
..........
Leader,what is your best option if u feel defamed?
The last option is most civilised,thou not pleasant at all.
All we can do is to challenge the falsehood and expose the stupidity of the party concerned.
The other option is to ignore the pathetic nonsense that is being generated.
Only those in autocratic positions who are familiar with their absolute correctness and will not tolerate any questions asked, will seek the list of options that you have given.
Even when JBJ was sued to being a bankrupt, and accused to be a charlatan by LKY, he was finally acknowledged as a TRUE SON OF SINGAPORE - andby no less a person then PM LHL
Was LKY correct in framing JBJ as a charlatan ?
Did LKY lie about JBJ spoken a thousand times become a fact that JBJ is a Charlatan ?
What did JBJ do about this lie spoken with such intense passion by LKY ?
What else can a civilised gentleman do towards an autocrat but simply to ignore the lie, as the truth will, can and has prevailed ? -
2.Want to change the place u live in mass scale,JoiningOriginally posted by LazerLordz:In the first place, if I knew myself to be so easily riled up by things said in politics, I would have quit in the first place.
Politics is not dining-in. It is a rough game, words will fly, and your voters will be convinced by your programmes, not how you fix your critics.
Politics is the right way.only human Politics turns it to be dirty.
Founding father of Republic of China Dr Sun said''Politics belongs to
every one''.CSJ also said similiar things ,good.If we dunt chart
our future,the bad guys will do so.
3.Joining Politics in Sg is not as dangerous in other counytries.Like Low Thia Khiang and Chiam see Tong.Both of them self employed as contractor
and lawyer.But their life is ok.Have they been sued to bankcrupt?
Not yet.They know words like swords.
4.To be a opposition party nowadays is much easier than the
old time.One click,your message is accessiable to many audiences.
Whether they will click and read is another issue.
5.To be a opposition party in a proper way will not shorten
your life. -
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
Did Dr Sun made this statement ? And did you mention that CSJ said it too ? Did you link Dr Sun and CSJ to a common grand statement ?
2.Want to change the place u live in mass scale,Joining
Politics is the right way.only human Politics turns it to be dirty.
Founding father of Republic of China Dr Sun said''Politics belongs to
every one''.CSJ also said similiar things ,good.If we dunt chart
our future,the bad guys will do so.
You better tell that to SM GCT and members of his Political Party, as they believed that politics is only reserved for Politicians only.
They believe that Singaporeans - as Citizens of Singapore - have no business to be in politics.
Are you certain that joining politics in Sg is not dangerous - even especially when you have skeletons in your closet ?
3.Joining Politics in Sg is not as dangerous in other counytries.Like Low Thia Khiang and Chiam see Tong.Both of them self employed as contractor
and lawyer.But their life is ok.Have they been sued to bankcrupt?
Not yet.They know words like swords.
It is clearly easy for those who are working for themselves, or if working for others - those work do not make you dependent on the system created by the Ruling Political Party.
The reasons for Low Thia Khiang and Chiam See Tong not being sued as bankrupt are simple - they do not pick any quarrels with the Ruling Party (meaning they are marking time, gathering the sticks for the right occassion to light up a big bon fire); they cleverly avoid being agitated and pushed into any response that they have to retract - (meaning they ignore empty words from the Ruling Party); they will stand their ground when they know they have been wronged - (meaning they have successfully brought members of the ruling political party to court, as GCT had also to apologise for errors said).
Lastly, of course, being docile opposition members - they are not seen as an immediate potent threat to the established system, as they are seen to be playing by the rules created by and for the benefit of the Ruling Political Party.
CSJ challenged those arbitrary rules set by the POWER OF ONE, and he dare to question the established operating system with an even sharper focus on the issues then JBJ.
Similarly, like JBJ, CSJ had to be methodically and punishingly extinguished to prevent any other Singaporeans with like minded bravado in mind.
Easier said than done.
4.To be a opposition party nowadays is much easier than the
old time.One click,your message is accessiable to many audiences.
Whether they will click and read is another issue.
5.To be a opposition party in a proper way will not shorten
your life.
The audience is only for those who are politically inclined, or at least familiar with the workings of the internet.
The world wide web is far bigger then you can imagine, and reaching the right audience is not as easy as 'a click'[/b].
To be in an Opposition Party, one has to be able to overcome the financial challenges - on a personal and political perspective.
In the political system that has been developed by the POWER OF ONE, the future of the entire family - including distant relations - are all included in one master folio in the main frame [i]CRAY computer system purchased at millions of dollars from the USA.
Such a super-computer is used for the calculation of nuclear scientists, and sold only to countries that are considered close allies of the USA.
Why will the POWER OF ONE need a super computer with such a powerful computing capacity ? Are we developing some nuclear equation, or is the powerful computer used to help the POWER OF ONE to manage its grasp all aspects of information needed to govern 4.5 million in a tiny island ? -
i need to reaessess ranking FEER as a serious journal.
1.However, the appearance that everything is going SingaporeÂ’s way is misleading. For one thing, the benefits of attracting fund managers are small. In this yearÂ’s budget, the government announced preferential tax treatment, meaning that the local coffers will only get a small bite of this growing pie. The local market may also get a slight boost, but the biggest pluses is the extra consumption and employment in the local economy. In fact, the bid is reminiscent of SingaporeÂ’s past efforts to attract targeted industries like the Internet or biotech. It usually ends up paying top dollar, and then repenting at leisure as it turns out that it jumped on the bandwagon too late.
2.Have this learned Mr Restall do some home works before pen this essay?
He should read more,like Biomedical Sciences and Healthcare Services
The ACGR,Average Commpund Growth Rate for this industry is 23 %.
3.In 2005,sg got some S$3 billion fixed investment on Bio-medicals.
Thats is 28.5% of $10.8 billions fixed investments on manufacturing.
Some 10,000 works in this industry.Let say only 40 % are sporean,
4,000 less families suffer from unemployments.
4.Restall then compared bonds ,IPO etc with Hong Kong.
Can anyone give comments on his findings ?
5.But he did not tell you
Sg is global 6th in FX,foreign exchange,while HK is 6 th in 2004
Sg's FX volume is about 23% higher than HK in 2004.
We dunt need Sg always be no.1.But i need fatcs,not fiction
when we are serious.
added 10.10.2006 evening
6.A Singapore bioscience firm has set up the first on-board avian flu testing laboratories on the US Seventh Fleet's flagship and an aircraft carrierm , the company confirmed Monday.
(Blue Ridge) (Kitty Hawk)
Veredus Laboratories and the United States NavyÂ’s Seventh
Fleet jointly setup WorldÂ’s First Ship-based Avian Flu \
Testing Laboratory.
Singapore, July 31, 2006 pdf
7.There are many MNC which lobbying power is bigger
than this tiny co.Why US 7 th Fleet truth their sailors lifes
on Sporean hand??
8.
A drug maker GLAXO WELLCOME MANUFACTURING PTE LTD
factory in spore alone make profits $4 billions profit
yes u read correctly,S$4,151,449,000.
9.Mr Restall has not done the home works enough.
THats why he cant see the tip of Sg'd biomedical
iceberg.
10On-board testing capabilities had become 'essential,' The Straits Times quoted fleet surgeon
Captain Charles Baxter as saying from Yokosuka, Japan.
He told the newspaper that the DNA-based test kit was one of the most advanced on the market.
It requires only a small blood sample from the test subject. Results are available in four hours, compared with 10 days for other kits. -
Said by Atobe:
they(LAU and CHIAM) will stand their ground when they know they have been wronged - (meaning they have successfully brought members of the ruling political party to court, as GCT had also to apologise for errors said).
Docile:1. easily managed or handled; tractable: a docile horse.
Lastly, of course, being docile opposition members - they are not seen as an immediate potent threat to the established system, as they are seen to be playing by the rules created by and for the benefit of the Ruling Political Party.
CSJ challenged those arbitrary rules set by the POWER OF ONE, and he dare to question the established operating system with an even sharper focus on the issues then JBJ.
Similarly, like JBJ, CSJ had to be methodically and punishingly extinguished to prevent any other Singaporeans with like minded bravado in mind.
2. readily trained or taught; teachable.
1.If GCT apologised to opposition party.Then PAP is not above the laws.
2.'' being docile opposition members "Is it a insult to these 2 gentlemen?
The first priority of opposition party is to survive.
Like playing games,dunt make mistake.
There is no point to be a good horse but locked up!
i would rather to be an average horse and still can run.
CSJ made mistakes on purposes.Thats why he is OUT of the game.
3.LAU and CHIAM also'' challenged those arbitrary rules set by the POWER OF ONE.'' BUt they do it in way to survive and continue airing the voices for
people supporting them.
4.It will be suprised to me if government do not respond to From the Editor: FEER Oct 2006,last issue in SporeIn this issue, academics Michael Barr and Garry Rodan take on two taboo subjects in Singapore: the racial composition of its educational system and the governmentÂ’s control of the local media. Mr. Barr examines whether SingaporeÂ’s claim to be a meritocracy stands up to scrutiny given the striking inequality between the races as shown by the educational advantages enjoyed by ethnic Chinese. Mr. Rodan looks at how the government controls the flow of information for the purpose of protecting and reinforcing the founding myths of the PAP regime.
5.Mr Restall is really the saviour of oppressed 1.3 billion
These articles go straight to the heart of some of the most sensitive issues the Singapore government doesn’t want discussed: race, language, religion and culture. These topics are sometimes said to be “out of bounds.” As Mr. Lee Sr. once explained, “They are not cerebral matters which we can discuss in a Western salon. In our society, these are visceral matters. People take their religion very seriously. It is extremely dangerous to treat this just as another conversational subject.”
Chinese in PRCIn comments reported by Singapore's The Straits Times newspaper Tuesday, Restall said the magazine planned to vigorously defend the lawsuit and hoped it would send a message to other countries such as China about controls over the media.
----''FEER questions S'pore courts' right to hear Lees' lawsuits''
"That's one reason why it's important to fight this case, to prevent China from believing that if it adopts the Singaporean model, the international media is going to roll over and accept that, and tone down its coverage," Restall was quoted as saying in a talk on Monday to the Foreign Correspondents' Club in Beijing.
The Associated Press,10 Oct 06. -
In comments reported by Singapore's The Straits Times newspaper Tuesday, Restall said the magazine planned to vigorously defend the lawsuit and hoped it would send a message to other countries such as China about controls over the media.
I believe that the Chinese government better watch what they do. If the two Lees have to get their egos knocked to prevent a domino effect of press repression and furthering of totalitarian media control by Asian states, so be it.
"That's one reason why it's important to fight this case, to prevent China from believing that if it adopts the Singaporean model, the international media is going to roll over and accept that, and tone down its coverage," Restall was quoted as saying in a talk on Monday to the Foreign Correspondents' Club in Beijing.
In this instance, Hugo Restall has my support, as well as the support of every ethnic Chinese who believes in an open society with a fair press regime. It would be an insult and an act of racism to any Asian to think otherwise. -
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
No, PAP was not sued, GCT was sued.
Said by Atobe:
"they(LAU and CHIAM) will stand their ground when they know they have been wronged - (meaning they have successfully brought members of the ruling political party to court, as GCT had also to apologise for errors said).
Lastly, of course, being docile opposition members - they are not seen as an immediate potent threat to the established system, as they are seen to be playing by the rules created by and for the benefit of the Ruling Political Party.
CSJ challenged those arbitrary rules set by the POWER OF ONE, and he dare to question the established operating system with an even sharper focus on the issues then JBJ.
Similarly, like JBJ, CSJ had to be methodically and punishingly extinguished to prevent any other Singaporeans with like minded bravado in mind."
........................................................................................
Docile:1. easily managed or handled; tractable: a docile horse.
2. readily trained or taught; teachable.
1.If GCT apologised to opposition party.Then PAP is not above the laws.
GCT's apology shows that he believe that HE is not above the Law.
Unfortunately, the members of SDP looking at CST's track record did not see it in the same manner, and decided to vote against CST when CST refused to support CSJ's attempt to clear the 'supposedly false trump-up charges' made against CSJ by PAP's Vasso - who was the Head of the Faculty where CSJ was working.
2.'' being docile opposition members "Is it a insult to these 2 gentlemen?
The first priority of opposition party is to survive.
Like playing games,dunt make mistake.
There is no point to be a good horse but locked up!
i would rather to be an average horse and still can run.
CSJ made mistakes on purposes.Thats why he is OUT of the game.
LTK has taken worst insult then this mild critique of calling him as 'docile'; and it speaks volume of his character.
Can you - or those whom you give blind support to - truly understand the depth of the word 'insult' ?
Can anyone understand CSJ's game plan ? I would not attempt to interpret him, as I will have to be in his shoes to truly understand him; and I do not wish to do so.
They do so in a very meek way; with Singaporeans not even knowing about their efforts on any main public issues that are spoken louder in this sgforum.
3.LAU and CHIAM also'' challenged those arbitrary rules set by the POWER OF ONE.'' BUt they do it in way to survive and continue airing the voices for
people supporting them.
You should be surprised if the government will respond to this article, as the facts of the matter is as clear for all who have gone through the Singapore experience; unless you have sleep-walked through it all.
4.It will be suprised to me if government do not respond to[b] From the Editor: FEER Oct 2006,last issue in Spore
[quote]In this issue, academics Michael Barr and Garry Rodan take on two taboo subjects in Singapore: the racial composition of its educational system and the governmentÂ’s control of the local media. Mr. Barr examines whether SingaporeÂ’s claim to be a meritocracy stands up to scrutiny given the striking inequality between the races as shown by the educational advantages enjoyed by ethnic Chinese. Mr. Rodan looks at how the government controls the flow of information for the purpose of protecting and reinforcing the founding myths of the PAP regime.
These articles go straight to the heart of some of the most sensitive issues the Singapore government doesn’t want discussed: race, language, religion and culture. These topics are sometimes said to be “out of bounds.” As Mr. Lee Sr. once explained, “They are not cerebral matters which we can discuss in a Western salon. In our society, these are visceral matters. People take their religion very seriously. It is extremely dangerous to treat this just as another conversational subject.”
If the First Family truly believes in meritocracy, then let themselves be tested on foreign grounds before returning to takeover positions in state run companies.
Someone, somewhere should test the Lee's lawsuit out of the Singapore Judiciary system under independently minded legal minds, even if we to based on Singapore legislations.
5.Mr Restall is really the saviour of oppressed 1.3 billion
Chinese in PRC
........................................................................................
In comments reported by Singapore's The Straits Times newspaper Tuesday, Restall said the magazine planned to vigorously defend the lawsuit and hoped it would send a message to other countries such as China about controls over the media.
"That's one reason why it's important to fight this case, to prevent China from believing that if it adopts the Singaporean model, the international media is going to roll over and accept that, and tone down its coverage," Restall was quoted as saying in a talk on Monday to the Foreign Correspondents' Club in Beijing.----''FEER questions S'pore courts' right to hear Lees' lawsuits''
The Associated Press,10 Oct 06.
With every judges' appointment, performance and term of office being decided by the Political Leadership, can there be any independence of the Judiciary ? -
Originally posted by Atobe:
2.Who appoint ferderal judges in G8 like,US,UK,France,Germany etc?
With every judges' [b]appointment, performance and term of office being decided by the Political Leadership, can there be any independence of the Judiciary ?
[/b]
I think also decided by the Political Leadership!! -
In your statement concerning the G8 countries, will you seriously include Russia ? Can we compare the Russian Politico-Judicial system (which remains largely a hangover from the Soviet days) to the other G8 countries ?Originally posted by lionnoisy:2.Who appoint ferderal judges in G8 like,US,UK,France,Germany etc?
I think also decided by the Political Leadership!!
You are correct up to a point with the direction of your statement in that the Political Leadership of all G8 countries decide on the appointment of judges - at least at the Supreme and High Court levels.
However, it is very certain that the political leadership of these G8 countries do not influence nor force the removal of judges on account of any personal whim from the politicians of these G8 countries.
The removal of judges are based on their judicial performance and track records of judgments, and not based on their political correctness in their judicial decision to favor the Ruling Political Party or its Politicians.
The following have been extracted from an article headed as'Separation of Powers in Maldives'[/quote] written in December 2004.[/i]
The separation of powers is an established constitutional principle. It dictates that, in order to prevent the accumulation of too much power in one person or decision-making body, there must be some separation of the three branches of the constitution: the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary. If this is not achieved, there is a danger that absolute power will be vested in one individual, which could lead to inefficiency and corruption.
The theory of separation of powers has been developed by writers as far back as Aristotle, who, writing in the 4th century BC, recognised that the “rule of a master is not a constitutional rule”(see footnote 1) and that government has three functions. He opined that government intervention is necessary because of human imperfection; however it should be limited to ensure that government vests as far as possible in the people. The classic formulation of the theory of separation comes from the writings of the 18th-century philosopher the Baron de Montesquieu. In his 1752 work L’Esprit des Lois (The Spirit of the Laws), he explained that there are three functions of government and three main organs of government.
In order to protect individual liberty, the three functions of government – the formulation, the application and the enforcement of the law – should be kept separate and performed by the three organs of government – the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary. The structure should provide a system of checks and balances between the different branches to ensure that no one body can monopolise power in order to abuse it. Political theorists have long pointed out the dangers of non-observance of the separation of powers. According to Article 16 of the French Declaration of the Rights of Man of 1789, drafted after the overthrow of the despotic King Louis XVI, ‘Any society in which the safeguarding of rights is not assured, and the separation of power is not observed, has no constitution.’
There is some debate as to whether a just constitution can accommodate an overlap of personnel between the different branches. To take two examples, the UK constitution displays a considerable overlap of personnel, not the least of whom is the Prime Minister. He is the head of the executive, but is also a Member of Parliament, hence drawn from the body of the legislature. He is therefore responsible for proposing legislation and can ensure its passage through Parliament by use of the party whip system and his Parliamentary majority.
In contrast, the Constitution of the United States clearly stipulates that there can be no overlap of personnel. Article 1 of the US Constitution vests the Legislative power in Congress, Article 2 vests the Executive power in the President and Article 3 vests the judicial power in the Supreme Court and other inferior courts. Further, the Constitution states that there can be no overlap of personnel between the different functions. That the US Constitution adheres to MontesquieuÂ’s strict model of separation is unsurprising: it was produced in 1787, just 25 years after the Esprit des Lois was published, and the draftsmen were well-versed in MontesquieuÂ’s constitutional theories.
The judiciary
In the UK, the courts play a vital role in ensuring that the government adheres to the rule of law. This is a role that has developed throughout history. As far back as 1765, a prominent English judge, pointed out that a government may not act unless it is in accordance with the law, and it is for judges to decide whether the government possesses such a legal right:
“If it is law, it will be found in our books. If it is not to be found there, it is not law… By the laws of England, every invasion of private property, be it ever so minute, is a trespass. No man can set his foot upon my ground without my license… If he admits the fact, he is bound to show by way of justification, that some positive law has empowered or excused him. The justification is submitted to the judges, who are to look into the books; and if such a justification can be maintained by the text of the statute law, or by the principles of common law. If no excuse can be found or produced, the silence of the books is an authority against the defendant, and the plaintiff must have judgment.”
Lord Chief Justice Camden in Entick v Carrington (1765) -
a full scale departing attack on sg
''Profits before People'' ''End corporate rule '' as many people
demonctrating .....in spore.
oh,what we poor singaporeans!!
can anyone help enlarge the comics.
