At least this Ah Neh MP is not as bad as Chris de Souza. That bugger even quoted the wrong section of a law and he did so in Parliament. Worse, the incompetent and lazy bumps who put together the Parliamentary Reports (Hansard) did not detect the error and it is now permanently in the records of the legislative arm of this Little Red Dot.
The link is here:
http://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/report.jsp?currentPubID=00004764-WA
Let me elaborate:
1) On 25th August 2008, Parliament debated "Acquittals of Accused and Presumption of Innocence". At column 2988 of the report (see link), it is recorded that Chris de Souza said: "First, if we take the argument on the issue of cost to its logical conclusion, would the Minister then think it is acceptable for a defence counsel, whose client has been found guilty by the Court of Final Appeal to say publicly that his client could be factually innocent and, therefore, need not have to pay cost? This is possibly a real issue because under
section 401 of the CPC, prosecution can request cost."
2) Section 401 of the CPC has nothing to do with costs. Instead, it deals with the High Court's powers on revision.
3) The correct section should be Section 355(1) which states:
"The court before which a person is convicted of an offence may, in its discretion and if satisfied that the defence of the person was conducted in an extravagant and unnecessary manner, order that person to pay a sum to be fixed by the court by way of costs of his prosecution."
:oIo:
Chris de Souza's particulars can be found here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_de_Souza