S'pore Government to be grilled on Myanmar
-
Based on the Order Paper of the Parliament sitting this Monday (2 days' time), Myanmar-related issues will dominate the session, with nearly 1/3 of the questions on it alone (12 out of 38 ).
More than half (7 out of 12) are from non-PAP MPs. WP NCMP Sylvia Lim filed 3 questions and NMPs Siew Kum Hong and Eunice Olsen filed 2 each. The other 5 questions are from PAP MPs Irene Ng (2), Lee Bee Wah, Lily Neo and Charles Chong.
All MPs, ruling party MPs or otherwise, have covered basically all areas that were discussed in online forums, from Asean's stand on action against to trade with Myanmar to Myanmar-related protests in Singapore.
For those following the Myanmar issue, it could be a sitting to watch. I recommend to read the questions and ministers' replies in the Hansard for the most accurate contents, rather than rely on the printing press.
Regards -
-
I would support sg to not show support for a DESPOT. Ermmmmmmm...what did I just said????
-
During the Suharto's era, one of the government-linked companies's Managing Director was charged for bribery to the Indonesian government officer for bribery in UK.
There was no commission of inquiry to look into the possibility of this bribery case being linked to the GLC or higher up.
Should the evidences provided by US now be looked into by a commission of inquiry to avoid cover-up of crucial information which may point to wrong doings by anyone in government.
" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.cnn.com
-
S'pore Government to be grilled on Myanmar ?
and what would I expect?
-
Do not be surprised if the response is nothing more then another Raymond Lim's performance at the Thomson-Bishan meet the people session - which seems to be the standard format for Ministers caught in a difficult situation.
The approach is to belabor the subject, befuddle the audience with a round about historical accounting, and attempt a response with an indirect answer that address the issue at a tangent - leaving everyone wondering if there were any satisfaction from the answer given.
The Singapore Government has a deeper relationship with the Myanmar Junta then what is seen on the surface and known publicly.
It is amazing that Jane's Defense magazine was able to uncover the regular electronic surveillance flights conducted by some purpose built RSAF plane, flying in international airspace up the Malacca Straits to land in Myanmar, before making a return journey down the same flight path.
If relation is not thick, can Singapore have any such access to the military facilities for the RSAF plane to land in Myanmar before the return trip ?
If relation is not thick, how could the Myanmar non-government personalities move so freely in and out of Singapore without any interference from the Singapore Government, when these people are known by Interpol and US Federal Narcotics Bureau to be involved in the drug trade ?
Ironically, a Singapore Lawyer was permanently detained under the Criminal Detention Legislation, and his recent attempts to have the Singapore High Court to strike down the Detention Order was denied.
This Legislation allow the Home Affairs Minister to issue an order for the detention of any one deemed as a criminal threat, and will be locked up without evidence being produced, nor charges for conviction by the Judiciary.
The detained Singapore Lawyer was charged for being the Master Mind of an International Drug Operation, but no evidence was produced nor was he formally charged for a trial by the Singapore Judiciary.
He was simply locked up and only to be released sometime in the future and at the discretion of the Home Affairs Minister.
If those known Myanmese drug dealers can move so freely in and out of Singapore, while a Singaporeans is locked up for the same circumstance - the relationship surely must be as deep as the ocean floor.
Can we expect any truth to be heard from the Parliamentary ''grilling'' ? -
If it becomes a Senate Committee matter and beyond,then it's something..Originally posted by robertteh:During the Suharto's era, one of the government-linked companies's Managing Director was charged for bribery to the Indonesian government officer for bribery in UK.
There was no commission of inquiry to look into the possibility of this bribery case being linked to the GLC or higher up.
Should the evidences provided by US now be looked into by a commission of inquiry to avoid cover-up of crucial information which may point to wrong doings by anyone in government.
" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.cnn.com -
Then we will still see more traffic jams after the ERP fees go up and more jams where previously there was none like in Sin Min or Thomson. This kind of murky traffic solution packages are being marketed to the world despite more jams being caused with higher ERP fees.Originally posted by Atobe:Do not be surprised if the response is nothing more then another Raymond Lim's performance at the Thomson-Bishan meet the people session - which seems to be the standard format for Ministers caught in a difficult situation.
The approach is to belabor the subject, befuddle the audience with a round about historical accounting, and attempt a response with an indirect answer that address the issue at a tangent - leaving everyone wondering if there were any satisfaction from the answer given.
Now the minister will say he needs more time as not all the solutions are yet finalized holistic is what he said) or even thought about by the million-dollar ministers.The Singapore Government has a deeper relationship with the Myanmar Junta then what is seen on the surface and known publicly.
With its own citizens the ministers will be denying every surveillance reports or keeping quiet like the NKF malpractices going on for years, fire risks in wet markets or Hougang but let's see this time what ministers will say to deny US government's satellite surveillance reports of Singapore government's deep involvement with Junta.
It is amazing that Jane's Defense magazine was able to uncover the regular electronic surveillance flights conducted by some purpose built RSAF plane, flying in international airspace up the Malacca Straits to land in Myanmar, before making a return journey down the same flight path.If relation is not thick, how could the Myanmar non-government personalities move so freely in and out of Singapore without any interference from the Singapore Government, when these people are known by Interpol and US Federal Narcotics Bureau to be involved in the drug trade ?
This is called Singapore's version of Rule of Law (My laws) when citizens have to obey drug laws but government does not have to obey the same laws just by quoting selectively some other sections of the law that their interpretations are out of the law like RAF needs training ground and air-space and there is no choice but to exchange some space for drug monies being deposited or invested in our Singapore banks.
Ironically, a Singapore Lawyer was permanently detained under the Criminal Detention Legislation, and his recent attempts to have the Singapore High Court to strike down the Detention Order was denied.
This Legislation allow the Home Affairs Minister to issue an order for the detention of any one deemed as a criminal threat, and will be locked up without evidence being produced, nor charges for conviction by the Judiciary.
So the Interpol's reports are either non-factual or are not applicable to sovereignty issues or RSAF. What kind of Rule of Law is this?The detained Singapore Lawyer was charged for being the Master Mind of an International Drug Operation, but no evidence was produced nor was he formally charged for a trial by the Singapore Judiciary.
This difference in treatments between the above-stated case of a lawyer being locked up for involvement in drugs without trial whereas and the drug kings' repeated exchanges of benefits and depositing drug monies in some banks without queries should have been put up as a more relevant topic for recent discussions at the International Conference of Lawyers on Rule of Law as practised in Singapore where MM Lee insisted that Singapore is among the top countries with biggest accountability and rule of law and professor Jayakumar was quick to say Singapore achieved higher social cohesion through practice of rule of law.
He was simply locked up and only to be released sometime in the future and at the discretion of the Home Affairs Minister.
If those known Myanmese drug dealers can move so freely in and out of Singapore, while a Singaporeans is locked up for the same circumstance - the relationship surely must be as deep as the ocean floor.
Can we expect any truth to be heard from the Parliamentary ''grilling'' ?
[/b]
It looks like a person has two mouths to talk and everything said about rule of law in Singapore depends on selective comparison or some other different interpretation of law.
Where are all the lawyers now ? Do they agree we have a true interpretations of law or interpretational Rule of Law in Singapore in our drug laws (RSAF), fire-risk laws (Hougang Fire) or company laws (NKF) -
clicky here for list of companies 'implicated' by links to Burma => List
(note that all the companies did was to trade with Burma)
and i wonder just how many of the companies can be considered 'holding up the junta' ?
sometimes, it's laughable what some people with their knee-jerk action and reactionism in them show of their true selves
and if any company is really holding up the junta, it's Chevron working as Total there...
the rest are the other oil companies like Petronas, Daewoo and China Petroleum.. i don't think our SPC has a cut in it at all even though they are there..
maybe these people should see how Unocal and Total worked to lay the oil pipeline.. where they actively helped the military with human rights violation...
where is Singapore in this sordid mess? i don't know.. in the first clicky, you can see the 'anyhow hantum' method of gathering 'information' where even companies like International SOS which is a medical and emergency assistance company in the 'list'
well, there may be links to the butchers in Burma.. but when were they done and what was the intent then? as you have seen, it was a policy of engagement and trying to open them up without major uprising which would have caused a lot of bloodshed...
that didn't work..
neither did an attempt at revolution..
the question is 'now what?' and not a bloody witch hunt which you people in SC, with your blind hatred of the MIW seem intent on...
think.. try not to let your hatred blind you...
p.s. Chevron is fighting tooth and nail NOT to withdraw from Burma