Friday, October 31, 2008
<!-- Begin .post --> famiLEE LEEgime court violated law & constitution and then slapped itself
Today's Yahoo Taiwan News for comparison！
URL1
URL2
In almost every single one of the trials which the famiLEE LEEgime abused to Fix The Opposition, it persistently violated and neglected the constitution.
In such trials just involving myself, it already happened for about 5 times.
That included the 8 cases of General Election 2006 speeches, consisting of 2 part-heard cases and 4 un-heard cases.
This aspect became the most obvious on Thursday, 30 October 2008 at court 5, where I face Tak Boleh Tahan protest charges together with the TBT18.
It had been a constant style that famiLEE LEEgime's court make such kind of rulings in our cases:
To make it the most ironical, there are lots of exhibits in the main hall of that famiLEE LEEgime Subordinate Court including one "TOOLS OF LAW" showing statutes and constitution. On a huge picture of taken at the interior of the old parliament house, it printed in huge fonts this introduction of the constitution:
Strangely, I just came across a piece of news from Yahoo Taiwan, that reported how their judge had struck down an unconstitutional legislation regarding massage services that allowed only visually disabled persons (usually blinds) to work in massage services, that this is found to be in violation of constitutional equality.
Saturday, November 01, 2008
<!-- Begin .post --> 李家王朝初级法庭刻意抹杀宪法
今日新闻－台湾法庭宣布违宪的法条无效！
URL1
URL2
李家王朝初级法庭在针对反对派的每个官司里都坚决漠视宪法。
单在本人所面对的官司里面这就已经发生5次。
其中，2006年大选的演讲案8宗还有2宗未结，4宗未开审。其他案子还多得是，也是绝对会坚决抹杀宪法的。
以本星期4，2008年10月30日为例，控告本人和另外18人在国会大厦示威，是最明显的。
李家王朝的法官一贯都在我们提出宪法抗辩的时候这样裁决：
极其大笑话的是，其实就在这李家王朝初级法庭当中的大堂上，显著的摆放着一系列的展览品。但是是不准拍照的！在展览品其中“TOOLS OF LAW" 有一张旧国会議厅的巨大照片，旁边标写着：
今天正好天意，我在台湾雅虎新闻看到这则彻底反映李家王朝的新闻，就转贴在这里让大家比较：:-)
視障才能做按摩 大法官說違憲
聯合 更新日期:2008/11/01 07:20 記者王文玲／台北報導
司法院大法官昨天作成解釋，宣告身心障礙者權益保障法明定按摩業專由視障者從事的法條，因違反憲法平等權及工作權而違憲。
依大法官第六四九號解釋，盲人近卅年來獨占按摩業的情形將被打破，明眼人最遲三年後即可合法從事按摩業。
大法官宣告身心障礙者權益保障法第四十六條第一項前段規定違憲，自解釋公布起最遲三年後失效，這也是歷來解釋所定的最長時間；以讓主管機關為視障者做好縝密的規畫執行，促進視障者的多元就業，並將按摩業的管理導入正軌。
解釋指出，禁止非視障者從事按摩業始於民國六十九年的殘障福利法，但隨著社會發展，按摩就業和消費市場擴大，盲人專事按摩業的規定對其他人造成過度限制，違反憲法平等權及工作權。
因為按摩的範圍不明確，執行標準不一，坊間的腳底按摩、推拿塑身、護膚美容、健康會館或理髮店等行業，只要營業中有明眼人按摩，都可能被處罰；使得有意投身按摩業的明眼人須轉行或失業，對消費者也不公平。
大法官雖宣告有關規定違憲，但強調應保障視障者的工作權，主管機關應致力提升其社經地位，加強工作能力，促成視障者和非視障者的雙贏。
【記者李順德／台北報導】大法官釋憲宣告「不讓明眼人按摩」違憲，內政部長廖了以第一時間對這項釋憲有點錯愕，隨後說，既然大法官釋憲已有定論，內政部為減緩衝擊，將協調勞委會開辦職訓及就業服務，增加視障者就業媒合機會，並於三年期限內完成相關配套措施及修法工作。
被媒體詢及此一釋憲結果，廖了以說，社會福利概念原本就是要保障弱勢，幫助視障者，不能說成要與明眼人搶工作。內政部說，多年來幫助視障者增加就業管道，讓按摩成為視障者重要謀生技能，粗估目前從事按摩業的視障者，占所有視障就業人口三分之一強。
【記者曾懿晴／台北報導】「請政府對視障者的生存權負起責任！」殘障聯盟秘書長王幼玲表示，視障朋友因在就業市場上處於劣勢，當初才立法保障他們的按摩工作機會。「面對大法官的釋文，我們深感遺憾。」
posted by uncleyap at 1:31 PM
<!-- Begin .post --> famiLEE LEEgime court violated law & constitution and then slapped itself
Today's Yahoo Taiwan News for comparison！
URL1
URL2
In almost every single one of the trials which the famiLEE LEEgime abused to Fix The Opposition, it persistently violated and neglected the constitution.
In such trials just involving myself, it already happened for about 5 times.
That included the 8 cases of General Election 2006 speeches, consisting of 2 part-heard cases and 4 un-heard cases.
This aspect became the most obvious on Thursday, 30 October 2008 at court 5, where I face Tak Boleh Tahan protest charges together with the TBT18.
It had been a constant style that famiLEE LEEgime's court make such kind of rulings in our cases:
- Subordinate Court have no power to handle constitutional issues.
- This is not a Judiciary Review, take your grievances to one.
- Defense on Constitutional Ground can not be accepted in this trial.
- Educing any evidence to prove Constitutional Violation is Irrelevant and Not Permitted.
<dl style="color: rgb(51, 102, 255);">Reference of constitutional question to High Court
56A. —(1) Where in any proceedings in a subordinate court a question arises as to the interpretation or effect of any provision of the Constitution, the court hearing the proceedings may stay the proceedings on such terms as may be just to await the decision of the question on the reference to the High Court.
[15/93]
(2) An order staying proceedings under this section may be m
ade by the court of its own motion or on the application of any party and shall be made at such stage of the proceedings as the court may see fit having regard to the decision of such questions of fact as may be necessary to be settled to assist the High Court in deciding the question which has arisen and to the speedy and economical final determination of the proceedings.
[15/93]
(3) Where an order for stay of proceedings has been made under this section, the court shall state the question which in its opinion has arisen as to the interpretation or effect of the Constitution in the form of a special case which so far as may be possible shall state the question in a form which shall permit of an answer being given in the affirmative or the negative.
[15/93]
(4) The court shall cause the special case to be transmitted to the High Court and the High Court shall hear and determine the constitutional question arising out of the case in the exercise of its original jurisdiction.
[15/93]
(5) Notice of the hearing of the special case by the High Court under this section shall be given to the Attorney-General who shall have a right to be heard.
[15/93]</dl>
Still the District Judge Chia Wei Kiat ruled against that application, saying that he is still not inclined to transmit these cases to High Court for constitutional arguments from ALL the accused persons and their councils to be heard!56A. —(1) Where in any proceedings in a subordinate court a question arises as to the interpretation or effect of any provision of the Constitution, the court hearing the proceedings may stay the proceedings on such terms as may be just to await the decision of the question on the reference to the High Court.
[15/93]
(2) An order staying proceedings under this section may be m
ade by the court of its own motion or on the application of any party and shall be made at such stage of the proceedings as the court may see fit having regard to the decision of such questions of fact as may be necessary to be settled to assist the High Court in deciding the question which has arisen and to the speedy and economical final determination of the proceedings.
[15/93]
(3) Where an order for stay of proceedings has been made under this section, the court shall state the question which in its opinion has arisen as to the interpretation or effect of the Constitution in the form of a special case which so far as may be possible shall state the question in a form which shall permit of an answer being given in the affirmative or the negative.
[15/93]
(4) The court shall cause the special case to be transmitted to the High Court and the High Court shall hear and determine the constitutional question arising out of the case in the exercise of its original jurisdiction.
[15/93]
(5) Notice of the hearing of the special case by the High Court under this section shall be given to the Attorney-General who shall have a right to be heard.
[15/93]</dl>
To make it the most ironical, there are lots of exhibits in the main hall of that famiLEE LEEgime Subordinate Court including one "TOOLS OF LAW" showing statutes and constitution. On a huge picture of taken at the interior of the old parliament house, it printed in huge fonts this introduction of the constitution:
THE CONSTITUTION
The Constitution came into force on 9 August 1965, the day of Singapore's independence from Malaysia. The Constitution is the supreme law of Singapore. Any law that conflicts with the Constituion is void and Singapore courts can strike down any legislative or executive Acts that go against the Constitution....
So this is how the corrupted and incompetent famiLEE LEEgime made audacious violation of constitution and rules of law, and then slapped itself in the face.The Constitution came into force on 9 August 1965, the day of Singapore's independence from Malaysia. The Constitution is the supreme law of Singapore. Any law that conflicts with the Constituion is void and Singapore courts can strike down any legislative or executive Acts that go against the Constitution....
Strangely, I just came across a piece of news from Yahoo Taiwan, that reported how their judge had struck down an unconstitutional legislation regarding massage services that allowed only visually disabled persons (usually blinds) to work in massage services, that this is found to be in violation of constitutional equality.
Saturday, November 01, 2008
<!-- Begin .post --> 李家王朝初级法庭刻意抹杀宪法
今日新闻－台湾法庭宣布违宪的法条无效！
URL1
URL2
李家王朝初级法庭在针对反对派的每个官司里都坚决漠视宪法。
单在本人所面对的官司里面这就已经发生5次。
其中，2006年大选的演讲案8宗还有2宗未结，4宗未开审。其他案子还多得是，也是绝对会坚决抹杀宪法的。
以本星期4，2008年10月30日为例，控告本人和另外18人在国会大厦示威，是最明显的。
李家王朝的法官一贯都在我们提出宪法抗辩的时候这样裁决：
- 初级法庭无权处理宪法相关的问题。
- 现在法庭不是处理司法审计（Judiciary Review）你的冤屈该到那里去申述。
- 以宪法的平等；或聚会；或言论自由为抗辩的理由，法庭不接受。
- 相关的采証程序不准进行。
<dl style="color: rgb(51, 102, 255);">Reference of constitutional question to High Court
56A. —(1) Where in any proceedings in a subordinate court a question arises as to the interpretation or effect of any provision of the Constitution, the court hearing the proceedings may stay the proceedings on such terms as may be just to await the decision of the question on the reference to the High Court.
过后地方法庭法官（Chia Wei Kiat) 仍然裁定，他不愿意按照上述法律把他所无权处理的宪法争议转到有权力处理宪法问题的高等法院！显然是法庭在违反抗宪！56A. —(1) Where in any proceedings in a subordinate court a question arises as to the interpretation or effect of any provision of the Constitution, the court hearing the proceedings may stay the proceedings on such terms as may be just to await the decision of the question on the reference to the High Court.
[15/93]
(2) An order staying proceedings under this section may be made by the court of its own motion or on the application of any party and shall be made at such stage of the proceedings as the court may see fit having regard to the decision of such questions of fact as may be necessary to be settled to assist the High Court in deciding the question which has arisen and to the speedy and economical final determination of the proceedings. [15/93]
(3) Where an order for stay of proceedings has been made under this section, the court shall state the question which in its opinion has arisen as to the interpretation or effect of the Constitution in the form of a special case which so far as may be possible shall state the question in a form which shall permit of an answer being given in the affirmative or the negative. [15/93]
(4) The court shall cause the special case to be transmitted to the High Court and the High Court shall hear and determine the constitutional question arising out of the case in the exercise of its original jurisdiction. [15/93]
(5) Notice of the hearing of the special case by the High Court under this section shall be given to the Attorney-General who shall have a right to be heard. [15/93]
</dl>
极其大笑话的是，其实就在这李家王朝初级法庭当中的大堂上，显著的摆放着一系列的展览品。但是是不准拍照的！在展览品其中“TOOLS OF LAW" 有一张旧国会議厅的巨大照片，旁边标写着：
THE CONSTITUTION
The Constitution came into force on 9 August 1965, the day of Singapore's independence from Malaysia. The Constitution is the supreme law of Singapore. Any law that conflicts with the Constituion is void and Singapore courts can strike down any legislative or executive Acts that go against the Constitution....
腐败无能的李家王朝就是这样明目张胆的违反违宪然后这般的自打嘴巴！The Constitution came into force on 9 August 1965, the day of Singapore's independence from Malaysia. The Constitution is the supreme law of Singapore. Any law that conflicts with the Constituion is void and Singapore courts can strike down any legislative or executive Acts that go against the Constitution....
今天正好天意，我在台湾雅虎新闻看到这则彻底反映李家王朝的新闻，就转贴在这里让大家比较：:-)
視障才能做按摩 大法官說違憲
聯合 更新日期:2008/11/01 07:20 記者王文玲／台北報導
司法院大法官昨天作成解釋，宣告身心障礙者權益保障法明定按摩業專由視障者從事的法條，因違反憲法平等權及工作權而違憲。
依大法官第六四九號解釋，盲人近卅年來獨占按摩業的情形將被打破，明眼人最遲三年後即可合法從事按摩業。
大法官宣告身心障礙者權益保障法第四十六條第一項前段規定違憲，自解釋公布起最遲三年後失效，這也是歷來解釋所定的最長時間；以讓主管機關為視障者做好縝密的規畫執行，促進視障者的多元就業，並將按摩業的管理導入正軌。
解釋指出，禁止非視障者從事按摩業始於民國六十九年的殘障福利法，但隨著社會發展，按摩就業和消費市場擴大，盲人專事按摩業的規定對其他人造成過度限制，違反憲法平等權及工作權。
因為按摩的範圍不明確，執行標準不一，坊間的腳底按摩、推拿塑身、護膚美容、健康會館或理髮店等行業，只要營業中有明眼人按摩，都可能被處罰；使得有意投身按摩業的明眼人須轉行或失業，對消費者也不公平。
大法官雖宣告有關規定違憲，但強調應保障視障者的工作權，主管機關應致力提升其社經地位，加強工作能力，促成視障者和非視障者的雙贏。
【記者李順德／台北報導】大法官釋憲宣告「不讓明眼人按摩」違憲，內政部長廖了以第一時間對這項釋憲有點錯愕，隨後說，既然大法官釋憲已有定論，內政部為減緩衝擊，將協調勞委會開辦職訓及就業服務，增加視障者就業媒合機會，並於三年期限內完成相關配套措施及修法工作。
被媒體詢及此一釋憲結果，廖了以說，社會福利概念原本就是要保障弱勢，幫助視障者，不能說成要與明眼人搶工作。內政部說，多年來幫助視障者增加就業管道，讓按摩成為視障者重要謀生技能，粗估目前從事按摩業的視障者，占所有視障就業人口三分之一強。
【記者曾懿晴／台北報導】「請政府對視障者的生存權負起責任！」殘障聯盟秘書長王幼玲表示，視障朋友因在就業市場上處於劣勢，當初才立法保障他們的按摩工作機會。「面對大法官的釋文，我們深感遺憾。」
posted by uncleyap at 1:31 PM
