walter woon vs ngejay

[leetahbar]

the words of walter according to media

AG Woon says there's only one law for both the rich and poor
By Asha Popatlal, Channel NewsAsia | Posted: 11 December 2008 2133 hrs

SINGAPORE: There is no such thing as one law for the rich and one for the poor, nor one for the well-connected in Singapore.

Attorney-General Walter Woon made this clear as he delivered the inaugural Association of Criminal Lawyers of Singapore (ACLS) lecture on Thursday.

Interest in the topic had been stoked after the Association's president Subhas Anandan raised the issue in its newsletter of certain well-off or white-collar accused persons being allowed to pay compound fines for their offences.

Professor Woon argued that a common scenario is for the courts to refuse to let the accused settle privately with the victim in simple cases. In such cases, the fine goes to court and the victim is no better off financially.

On the other hand, Mr Subhas cited cases where the offender is allowed to compound his offence with no objection from the prosecution.

One such recent case cited was a doctor who paid S$51,000 to a lady patient who claimed she was molested by him.

Outlining the scenarios under which his office prosecutes, Prof Woon stressed that while compensation naturally favours richer people, the judge acts as a final check as to whether this can be allowed, as long as public interest is not adversely affected.

"What factors do we not consider? We don't consider whether someone is rich, certainly not – or politically well-connected. We cannot conduct prosecutions on the basis that some people are above the law. Certainly we don't conduct prosecutions on the basis that the rich and well-connected get away with it.

"This is dangerous; this undermines the whole rule of law – that some people think because of their political convictions, they cannot be touched. That is a very, very slippery slope. Not the game that we will play here," he said.

 

[leetahbar]

ejay's turn in his own words:

AG Walter Woon: People opposed to the Government expect special indulgence, but they too have no licence to break the law
Written by Ng E-Jay
12 December 2008
Attorney-General Walter Woon, in addressing criticisms raised recently over legal cases involving wealthy individuals, has taken the opportunity to lash out at people who are critical of the Government as well as Opposition parties and their supporters.

Addressing about 270 members at the inaugural Association of Criminal Lawyers of Singapore (ACLS) lecture on Thursday, Professor Woon said the prosecution does not consider whether a suspect is “rich or politically well-connected” before pressing charges. (ST Online, “One system of justice for all”, 12 Dec)

Interest in the topic had been stoked after the Association’s president Subhas Anandan raised the issue in its newsletter of certain well-off or white-collar accused persons being allowed to pay compound fines for their offences. (Channel News Asia, “AG Woon says there’s only one law for both the rich and poor”, 12 Dec)

But AG Walter Woon did not stop there. He went on to assert that the same standards apply to offenders who are aligned with opposition parties.

“People opposed to the Government expect special indulgence, but they too have no licence to break the law,” he said.


In mentioning that prosecutions cannot be conducted on the basis that some people are above the law, nor on the basis that the rich and well-connected can get away with it, Walter Woon also said, “This is dangerous; this undermines the whole rule of law –- that some people think because of their political convictions, they cannot be touched. That is a very, very slippery slope. Not the game that we will play here.”

In a discussion about whether our current legal system affords the rich and well-connected special privileges such as the chance to compound offences where others might not be allowed to, it is shocking, but not really surprising, that AG Walter Woon has chosen to drag Opposition parties and their supporters into the m&d as well.

AG Walter Woon has been known to make unprovoked and unfair statements about human rights activists and Opposition supporters, even going so far as to call the former “fanatics”. His latest accusation that people who oppose the Government think they should be above the law, or that they expect special indulgence, is but the latest icing on the cake.

Without having to read too much into Walter Woon’s statements, one can readily tell that he must be referring to civil disobedience activists as well as supporters and members of the Singapore Democratic Party who are currently paying the price for exercising their Constitutional Rights to freedom of assembly.

These activists believe that in a political climate where the ruling party has complete domination of Parliament and claims a monopoly on our political space through the mainstream media, the best way of demonstrating that a law is unjust is to break it and provoke an over-reaction from the authorities.

However, these activists have never felt they are above the law, or that they should be given preferential treatment in Court. Instead, they do what they do precisely because they have the greatest respect for the law, which must be subordinate to our Constitution since the Constitution is the highest law of the land.

Whether or not one agrees with the methods these activists are employing is a separate issue. The issue now is that AG Walter Woon’s accusation that these activists think that they are above the law or should not be prosecuted due to their political convictions is a flagrant misrepresentation of the facts. None of these activists have ever made any statement or conducted themselves in a way that even remotely suggests that they are of this persuasion.

Civil disobedience activists believe that the law should be applied fairly to all, and that selective application of the law should not be used to intimidate critics of the Government or suppress political dissent. But nowhere have they ever come close to asserting that Opposition should be above the law. Such a belief is wholly inconsistent with what they are trying to achieve for Singapore, which is a fairer and more just set of laws for all Singaporeans that gives full accord to their Constitutional Rights of freedom of speech, association and assembly.

 

[leetahbar]

so ejay must be right in his own words and walter was wrong. but the latter deals in law while the former is maths nerd.

so sdp's action in "civil disobedience" is the right of law? but does a group of about 18 represent the majority of the peasants' opinions? or are they simply being self-righteous and consider themselves "above the law"?

 

[cheongsimon]

the words of walter according to media

AG Woon says there's only one law for both the rich and poor
By Asha Popatlal, Channel NewsAsia | Posted: 11 December 2008 2133 hrs

SINGAPORE: There is no such thing as one law for the rich and one for the poor, nor one for the well-connected in Singapore.




"Certainly we don't conduct prosecutions on the basis that the rich and well-connected get away with it.

Thats right. Singapore's legal system was endorsed by the International Bar association as the BEST in the world.

 

[zack123]

Thats right. Singapore's legal system was endorsed by the International Bar association as the BEST in the world.

So many rich and famous got off with lighter sentences in Singapore. The best does not mean the fairest.

 

[cleareyes]

Its true that there is one law in the land and that applies to both rich and poor.

But the difference is not the law but the execution of the law and how far the execution of the implication behind the law.

Lawyers should understand this, I dont expect the layman to.

 

[leetahbar]

So many rich and famous got off with lighter sentences in Singapore. The best does not mean the fairest.

that would bring us back to ancient china where corrupt magistrate wore coin-shaped hat

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Very apt and nicely said

But the difference is not the law but the execution of the law and how far the execution of the implication behind the law.

.

 

[mscitw]

Swine Woon is either fool or liar, indeed he could be both.

It is clear that Peasantpore has 'One Three 3 systems'.

One set of laws to protect the Imperial Clan and their lackeys.

Another set of laws to protect e rich and big shot foreign talents.

And one set harsh legalist laws to oppress local peasants.

Swine Woon is indeed a top lackey of the regime, his ancestors will roast in their coffins.

 

[guavatree]

that would bring us back to ancient china where corrupt magistrate wore coin-shaped hat

quote .... Swine Woon is indeed a top lackey of the regime, his ancestors will roast in their coffins. .... unquote

 

[Darkcloud]

Why stinko Ng E Jay don't send his article to walter woon?

WHY?

 

[leetahbar]

his article is only good to be read by prejudiced minds cos he himself is one of them.

 

[guavatree]

his article is only good to be read by prejudiced minds cos he himself is one of them.

chao ah kwa fake monk PAP dog

you're one heck of a fucking jealous retard!

 

[myfoot123]

Can Walter Goon explain why law disallowed opposition to cycle in the park and yet happily grant permission for PAP to cycle in the park?

Has he got the gut to analyse the above situation publicly and put it on main media for all to see?

 

[mscitw]

Lackey Woon ( a fat one) is simply doing his job as a lackey, to secure court wins for his political masters and their favored chums while dishing world class judgements on peasants to suppress them.

 

[leetahbar]

would u rather our law be disrespected like what csj is forever trying to instigate many into do ing the same?

 

[guavatree]

would u rather our law be disrespected like what csj is forever trying to instigate many into do ing the same?

bapok PAP dog

what disrespected are you toking about?

you suck PAP lanjiaos so you respect the PAP kangaroo courts lor .... LOL