11/25/2005

why can't the australians get their acts together

they cursed singapore, drummed up the media, engaged in an international campaign, threatened not to come here, threatened to boycott singapore and our goods, pm to pm talks and sent envoy to meet our govt. so much publicity which could only generate heat without results. there were two avenues available to the australians. engage a queen's council and try to fight the case in court. if they win legally, the court will have to amend its judgement or sentence on nguyen tuong van. this is the only proper thing to do. the next route is to ask for clemency. and when you pleaded for clemency, you either get it or you don't. that is the end of the story. the more pressure and the greater the publicity on this case, the less likelihood will the govt change its position. as a sovereign state, they cannot bow to foreign pressure and change a court's decision or treat a foreigner more favourably than its own citizens. if singaporeans are subject to the same law, no amount of australian pressure change this case. the approach the australians are taking is to undermine the authority and position of the govt in the eyes of singaporeans, and that is totally unacceptable. maybe this is the intention. appear to be fighting like hell for the drug trafficker but actually tightening the noose at every step they take. they are just forcing the hands of the singapore govt and making the singapore govt look bad to the australians and the world. they are now the morally virtuous people while the singapore govt are the bad guys, the inhumane people.

6 comments:

Matilah_Singapura said...

Er, redbean you are ignoring the context. Even Howard said that the views on Ngyuen's execution are "not universal".

It is unfair for you to malign the whole cuntry (but do it anyway). People act individually on every issue.

The illegal drug trade is kept alive and well through out because of the global "war on drugs".

It is a based on a complete wrong view of reality i.e. "A is A", and therefore we get all these problems.

Imagine if you were Rip Van Winkle: You are a opium smoker and trader in S'pore in the 1950's. You go to sleep for 20 years, and now if you deal in opium you can be hanged.

Such is the nature of statute law - it denies facts of reality, makes its own contexts, and then is enforced not just mercilessly - but completely arbitrarily.

redbean said...

hi matilah,

in my earlier post on this subject, i reviewed all the comments in google and i did posted that the for and against is 50:50.

in this case the media, some sections of the govt are keeping the issue alive for political and personal gain. from the google post, many australians maintained that they should respect the laws of another sovereign state. some were outright against drug traffickers.

for the moment the publicity generated by those in favour of no death penalty is gaining an upper hand. and it is putting the singapore govt in a very bad light.

death penalty or no death penalty is a personal issue. the politicising of it is, like you say, selfish interest, especially the politicians.

redbean said...

hi matilah,

i also squeeze in a question in ypap forum to ask you on the reactions in perth.

Matilah_Singapura said...

Like I said: indifferent, generally speaking.

WA is enjoying wonderful prosperity. Self-interest, yah?

Ivan said...

I'm certainly boycotting anything to do with Singapore and it's barbaric and hypocritical government. To inflict a death sentence for a crime such as this is sub-human. Based on my (incomplete) research, the following companies are all blacklisted by me and my family:

* Australand (http://www.australand.com.au/)
* AV Jennings (http://www.avjennings.com.au/)
* CLP Group (http://www.clpgroup.com/)
* Optus (http://www.optusnet.com.au/)
* Pacific Internet (http://www.pacific.net.au/)
* Singapore Airlines (http://www.singaporeair.com/)
* SingTel (http://www.singtel.com/)
* TRUenergy (http://www.truenergy.com.au/)
* ViewQWEST (http://www.viewqwest.com/)

Does anyone know of any others?

redbean said...

hi ivan,

on an individual and personal basis i am also against death penalty. it is never a good idea to take a life. and in this incident, taking drug or drug trafficking did not seem to take any life. an as an individual, we are free to take whatever action that our conscience is comfortable with.

i have this contradiction in disagreeing with death penalty and accepting that sometimes a very tough and draconian punishment may be necessary...as a deterrent, and its primary objective is not to kill and hopefully not to be applied.

it would be nice if another way can be found to replace this death penalty and prevent drug traffickers from coming here. as it is, this draconian law has been able to keep some traffickers away, though not all. hopefully after this case, it will keep more away. but some will still come and the whole cycle will be repeated.

we can only hope that none will come subsequently.

even today, those singaporeans who had suffered during the japanese rule also have a self imposed boycott of japanese products. we live by our own conscience and our values of what is right or wrong.

cheers.