What a week and the clown has to be none other than Shanmugam supposedly an Indian who is in charge of Ministry of Law which is in mini turmoil over this episode. Read the reply to Kojak below.
This has taken a life of its own and there is an uproar among many Singaporeans. Heard people have been called up and asked for explanation. This one is now making waves in the corridors of powers because there has not been such a case of breaching civil rights in this manner before. Which by the way is entrenched in the constitution. Even the Malays are upset and have made an official complaint
This has taken a life of its own and there is an uproar among many Singaporeans. Heard people have been called up and asked for explanation. This one is now making waves in the corridors of powers because there has not been such a case of breaching civil rights in this manner before. Which by the way is entrenched in the constitution. Even the Malays are upset and have made an official complaint
from MLAW HQ CMC (MLAW) [email protected]
to BT Kojak
date Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:16 AM
subject RE: PRC asking a Singaporean Indian not to cook and eat curry
.
Dear Mr Kojakbt,
RE: PRC asking a Singaporean Indian not to cook and eat curry
We refer to your email dated 9 August 2011.
2 We thank you for your feedback and concerns raised regarding the article in TODAY, “Number of neighbour disputes hit high” (8 August 2011) and write to clarify the case facts. The article stated that community mediator, Mdm Marcellina Giam, “got the Indian family to agree to cook curry only when the Chinese family was not home”. We have checked with Mdm Giam and this is inaccurate. The solution to the dispute was proposed by one of the parties and accepted by the other party. Mdm Giam did not propose the solution for the parties, neither did she impose it on them.
3 This is in fact the crux of mediation. The community mediators, who are trained volunteers, act as a neutral third party to facilitate discussions between the disputing parties. Their role is not to decide on the outcome of a case; they have no authority to do so. The final outcome, which is unique to each case, must be a mutually acceptable solution arrived at by both disputing parties after discussion. Mediation seeks to provide an informal and amicable way of settling inter-personal, social and community disputes to cultivate a more harmonious, civil and gracious society.
4 In cases where parties are of different ethnicities, cultural background or nationalities, the community mediators take great care in trying to get parties to understand the varying perspectives, and foster greater understanding and communication. In this particular case, despite clearly different cultural backgrounds, both parties were able to come to a mutually agreed solution by themselves in the interest of neighbourliness.
5 We have also issued a clarification on the matter in TODAY (11 August 2011). You may refer to the ‘Voices’ section for the clarification at: http://www.todayonline.com/Voices/EDC110811-0000303/Mediators-are-a-neutral-third-party
.
Yours sincerely
Joanna Hor
Deputy Manager, Community Mediation Unit
Ministry of Law
to BT Kojak
date Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:16 AM
subject RE: PRC asking a Singaporean Indian not to cook and eat curry
.
Dear Mr Kojakbt,
RE: PRC asking a Singaporean Indian not to cook and eat curry
We refer to your email dated 9 August 2011.
2 We thank you for your feedback and concerns raised regarding the article in TODAY, “Number of neighbour disputes hit high” (8 August 2011) and write to clarify the case facts. The article stated that community mediator, Mdm Marcellina Giam, “got the Indian family to agree to cook curry only when the Chinese family was not home”. We have checked with Mdm Giam and this is inaccurate. The solution to the dispute was proposed by one of the parties and accepted by the other party. Mdm Giam did not propose the solution for the parties, neither did she impose it on them.
3 This is in fact the crux of mediation. The community mediators, who are trained volunteers, act as a neutral third party to facilitate discussions between the disputing parties. Their role is not to decide on the outcome of a case; they have no authority to do so. The final outcome, which is unique to each case, must be a mutually acceptable solution arrived at by both disputing parties after discussion. Mediation seeks to provide an informal and amicable way of settling inter-personal, social and community disputes to cultivate a more harmonious, civil and gracious society.
4 In cases where parties are of different ethnicities, cultural background or nationalities, the community mediators take great care in trying to get parties to understand the varying perspectives, and foster greater understanding and communication. In this particular case, despite clearly different cultural backgrounds, both parties were able to come to a mutually agreed solution by themselves in the interest of neighbourliness.
5 We have also issued a clarification on the matter in TODAY (11 August 2011). You may refer to the ‘Voices’ section for the clarification at: http://www.todayonline.com/Voices/EDC110811-0000303/Mediators-are-a-neutral-third-party
.
Yours sincerely
Joanna Hor
Deputy Manager, Community Mediation Unit
Ministry of Law
