6/10/2014
Hsien Loong versus Roy Ngerng, a case he cannot lose
After Roy Ngerng’s apology to Hsien Loong and his withdrawal of some posts in his blog, the defamation suit is now in court pending a hearing in July. This is becoming a case where Hsien Loong cannot lose and it would be a matter of how much would the damages be for tarnishing his reputation.
The big question in everyone’s mind, and in Hsien Loong’s as well, is whether he wants to pursue and win this case. It is a no brainer to ask when a victory in court is a near certainty for the plaintiff to want to back out and withdraw the charge. Exactly, and it is exactly why everyone is asking. A legal victory in this case could end up as a hollow victory. It is the consequence of a political repercussion that would be troubling Hsien Loong as a politician. He has to seriously consider how this victory would play on his chances and the votes for the PAP in the next GE.
The spontaneous,unconditional and unquestioned support of the people in rushing to Roy Ngerng’s aid, to hand money to him to fight this defamation suit must mean something to Hsien Loong and the PAP. The protest rally at Hong Lim and the high turnout out in Singapore’s context must also be telling Hsien Loong something.
There is a message. The people are not happy with the defamation suit. The people are not happy with the govt’s handling of the CPF savings. The people are behind Roy Ngerng even if it is only 40%. How many votes will be converted as a result of this defamation suit is still everyone’s guess. It would definitely cost Hsien Loong and the PAP some votes, and the fear is that it would be enough to tip the scale. Many seats were decided by a 10% winning margin or less.
Would it make any difference if Hsien Loong shows some magnanimity and generosity to Roy Ngerng and call off the suit? What is the difference if suit is allowed to proceed or to stop it now? It is no longer a legal issue. It is politics, it is constructive versus destructive politics. It is not Hsien Loong versus Roy Ngerng, It is more than that. It is Hsien Loong versus the people. It is PAP versus the people. It is about the nature of politics and whether this will change as the country moves forward, or it is more of the same, the same politics of Sue.
Kopi Level - Green
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
48 comments:
The people are not happy with the defamation suit. The people are not happy with the govt’s handling of the CPF savings.
RB
U think this Lee Hsien Loong don't know meh?
The fact that he proceeds with the suit shows he knows better, and his supreme confidence in the 60%, and his correct judgement of Sinkie opposition and even Roy.
And I share his confidence and judgment and PAP will still win at least 2/3 majority seats, although I dislike his actions and the outcome.
I must agree with your judgement. And I should agree that the defamation suit should go on.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/23/weekinreview/23worth.html?_r=0
No lah. There is no way LHL will back away. Lose face lah. Anyone who damages your name, you must take them down -- this is mantra of the PAP lah.
It depends on how the court applies the law.
Anyway, the fight -- CPF etc -- is now being played with increased ante -- it is now a fight to the bitter end.
Yah loh, must appear to be a strooong leeder. Stupid nevermind, die die must look strong. Wait own follower revolt how tio bo?
When a person create for himself a situation of damn if you do and damn if you dont, who is to be blame.
So as at now, what is the exact amount of money the Ministry of Finance is owing to the CPF board or rather to the people???
I am really confused over RB's stand! The essence of his post is that PM should be magnanimoua and drop the law suit.
But when he is challenged @Anonymous 10.57 am, he hastily backtracked and agreed that the law suit should go on @RB 10.57.
Ma Na Boleh Ini Macham!
How come after the June 7 rally, Roy stop updating the daily "Fund Raising For Roy Ngerng’s Court Case Against Lee Hsien Loong" on his blogsite http://thehearttruths.com/ hah?
from wiki information on Conflict of Interest we can use to for reference.
Types of conflicts of interests
The following are the most common forms of conflicts of interests:
Self-dealing, in which an official who controls an organization causes it to enter into a transaction with the official, or with another organization that benefits the official. The official is on both sides of the "deal."
Outside employment, in which the interests of one job contradict another.
Family interests, in which a spouse, child, or other close relative is employed (or applies for employment) or where goods or services are purchased from such a relative or a firm controlled by a relative. For this reason, many employment applications ask if one is related to a current employee. If this is the case, the relative could then recuse from any hiring decisions. Abuse of this type of conflict of interest is called nepotism.
Gifts from friends who also do business with the person receiving the gifts. (Such gifts may include non-tangible things of value such as transportation and lodging.)
Pump and dump, in which a stock broker who owns a security artificially inflates the price by "upgrading" it or spreading rumors, sells the security and adds short position, then "downgrades" the security or spreads negative rumors to push the price down.
Other improper acts that are sometimes classified as conflicts of interests are probably better classified elsewhere. Accepting bribes can be classified as corruption; almost everyone in a position of authority, particularly public authority, has the potential for such wrongdoing. Similarly, use of government or corporate property or assets for personal use is fraud, and classifying this as a conflict of interest does not improve the analysis of this problem. Nor should unauthorized distribution of confidential information, in itself, be considered a conflict of interest. For these improper acts, there is no inherent conflict of roles (see above), unless being a (fallible) human being rather than (say) a robot in a position of power or authority is considered to be a conflict.
COI is sometimes termed competition of interest rather than "conflict", emphasizing a connotation of natural competition between valid interests rather than violent conflict with its connotation of victimhood and unfair aggression. Nevertheless, denotatively, there is too much overlap between the terms to make any objective differentiation.
The PAP creates the problems, then they solve them. Ah Loong sues Roy is also creating problem. But for himself. Win or lose, he will lose more votes. He opened the pandora box.
wiki --- Ways to mitigate conflicts of interests[edit]
Removal[edit]
The best way to handle conflicts of interests is to avoid them entirely. For example, someone elected to political office might sell all corporate stocks that they own before taking office, and resign from all corporate boards. Or that person could move their corporate stocks to a special trust, which would be authorized to buy and sell without disclosure to the owner. (This is referred to as a "blind trust".) With such a trust, since the politician does not know in which companies they have investments, there should be no temptation to act to their advantage.
Disclosure[edit]
Commonly, politicians and high-ranking government officials are required to disclose financial information - assets such as stock, debts such as loans, and/or corporate positions held, typically annually. To protect privacy (to some extent), financial figures are often disclosed in ranges such as "$100,000 to $500,000" and "over $2,000,000". Certain professionals are required either by rules related to their professional organization, or by statute, to disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest. In some instances, the failure to provide full disclosure is a crime.
However, there is limited evidence regarding the effect of conflict of interest disclosure despite its widespread acceptance.[33] A 2012 study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association showed that routine disclosure of conflicts of interest by American medical school educators to pre-clinical medical students were associated with an increased desire among students for limitations in some industry relationships. However, there were no changes in the perceptions of students about the value of disclosure, the influence of industry relationships on educational content, or the instruction by faculty with relevant conflicts of interest.[34]
And, an increasing line of research suggests that disclosure can have "perverse effects" or, at least, is not the panacea regulators often take it to be.[35]
Recusal[edit]
Those with a conflict of interest are expected to recuse themselves from (i.e., abstain from) decisions where such a conflict exists. The imperative for recusal varies depending upon the circumstance and profession, either as common sense ethics, codified ethics, or by statute. For example, if the governing board of a government agency is considering hiring a consulting firm for some task, and one firm being considered has, as a partner, a close relative of one of the board's members, then that board member should not vote on which firm is to be selected. In fact, to minimize any conflict, the board member should not participate in any way in the decision, including discussions.
Judges are supposed to recuse themselves from cases when personal conflicts of interest may arise. For example, if a judge has participated in a case previously in some other judicial role he/she is not allowed to try that case. Recusal is also expected when one of the lawyers in a case might be a close personal friend, or when the outcome of the case might affect the judge directly, such as whether a car maker is obliged to recall a model that a judge drives. This is required by law under Continental civil law systems and by the Rome Statute, organic law of the International Criminal Court.
Third-party evaluations[edit]
Consider a situation where the owner of a majority of a publicly held corporation decides to buy out the minority shareholders and take the corporation private. What is a fair price? Obviously it is improper (and, typically, illegal) for the majority owner to simply state a price and then have the (majority-controlled) board of directors approve that price. What is typically done is to hire an independent firm (a third party), well-qualified to evaluate such matters, to calculate a "fair price", which is then voted on by the minority shareholders.
wiki -- con't
Third-party evaluations may also be used as proof that transactions were, in fact, fair ("arm's-length"). For example, a corporation that leases an office building that is owned by the CEO might get an independent evaluation showing what the market rate is for such leases in the locale, to address the conflict of interest that exists between the fiduciary duty of the CEO (to the stockholders, by getting the lowest rent possible) and the personal interest of that CEO (to maximize the income that the CEO gets from owning that office building by getting the highest rent possible).
Hi oldhorse, my comment serves two purposes. One was to appease anon 10:57, so he got nothing else to say. Two was to take a stand knowing that Matilah would take the opposite.
See, clever or not : )
37 percents of CPF saving per month work until 70, keep delaying and giving excuses, then just give you back a few hundred per month, what do you thinK?
Would you rather get back you CPF at 55 as promised, after slogging so hard for 30 over years, as reserve in case you are out of job has a family to take care?
MS would say no, he likes it in drips. He does not like it to cum all at one go.
Those tiny percents who spent all their hard earn money are usually less educated ones, the more educated one are less likely to spend all their money? Should not locked all people money, should gave them at 55 and 60, if 55 the spent all then 60 got to delay at bit if they got reserve 60 can give all?
I am 100% behind increasing the interest rate on the CPF bcos 2.5% is clearly too low.
But is having a minimum sum really that bad? Without the minimum sum, how do we ensure that retirees continue to have a regular income long after they are able to work.
It will be a Pyrrhic victory.
The case will be followed by many very closely. Why do so many people donate to this cause? Why? Many possible reasons right!Sympathy for him? seeing him as a champion of the CPF cause? or maybe some felt like saying no to the PAP for bullying a man in the street ?
anyway as the analogy goes, a single chopstick snap easily BUT one big tied bundle is very STRONG as illustrated this episode.
The problem is many die before 65 can't enjoy the fruit of their labour and savings, if they take out their CPF at 55 they can enjoy the fruits of their labour, even some use up most of their money they got to go back to work until the 75 if they are alive?
Many of those unlucky who died will not able to enjoy their fruits of their labour if they can't withdrawal their money after slogging hard over 35 years and still got to slog again the whole life, how many like these type of prospect?
Which could due to the wrong policies?
The most critical point is locking up people lifetime saving forever?
Now many were well educated different from previous era of less educated?
So the more likely they can handle better and prepare more financial course when they withdraw their money at 55?
Howe Yung CHong lost to Chaim See Tong due to the CPF case?
By donating to Roy, they sure they are betting correctly on the right horse?
60% will rather bet for the white horse that comes with thunder and lightning, and at the right time.
What the use of minimum sum where most cant meet the minimum sum?
Howe Yung CHong lost to Chaim See Tong due to the CPF case?
2:10 pm
Not Howe Yung chong lah, it was Mabok Tan (not his real name lah).
Don't anyhow comment if u cannot get your basic facts right. Or else can get sue one u know, if u kena the wrong person.
LHL will never lose this in the court of law, but he is already losing in the court of opinions
LHL must learn to live in the 21st century not 20th century. Using laws to bully the people only reveals how narrow minded, childish, despicable a person is. Whoever who advised him to commence the lawsuit is an enemy of the state as well as his greatest foe. This person is trying to ruin him completely.
"But is having a minimum sum really that bad? Without the minimum sum, how do we ensure that retirees continue to have a regular income long after they are able to work."
So few Singaporeans have heard of a state pension, where the money comes from the government.
You mean he got sabo by his trusted advisers? Then like that no need enemies anymore.
Matilar, I am away from sg and upon checking into hotel and surf RB website, u die die just sprout your nonsense. Got nothing better to do is it. Knn go write your books lar. Go write book 1
1) how to boast about sexual power when both tiny are missing
2) the art of incest
3) the guide on how to bull shits
4) how to irritate people and waste their time daily
5) learning to be thick skin and flameproof
6) how to tahan when your ass kena fucked
7) how to act as patriot when you are a traitor
8) how to act and look normal when you are actually insane
9) learning to speak when a cock is stuck in your mouth
10) how to con your sisters and daughters to continue having sex with you without reporting to the police.
11) How to develop multi tasking skill. Sharing of secret on Learning how to type on keyboard posting commentary on blog when there is a hard cock pushing in and out in matilar mouth.
12) How to cook two tiny to be delicious enough that the pigs would eat them.
13) How to brag about your intelligence when you have none and how to tahan when both mouth and ass kena screwed at the same time.
When one is young and working, there is still this comfort that when you reach 55 years old, one is able to relax a bit and enjoy life as best as one possibly could by using the CPF funds available then to fulfil one's aspirations whether to overcome one's financial difficulties, start a small business or even pursue one's further interests not made possible during one's earlier working years.
Then suddenly all these later aspirations in life of Singaporeans are suddenly destroyed by a groupthink of men headed by none other than that useless son of LKY who didn't even think it absolutely necessary to consult CPF members for their consent & in that process broke the very one and only promise governing CPF savings withdrawal.
If any Govt leader can just break the promise like that, what sort of integrity do they have left ? What more when we are referring to LKY's son here ? The one that says he is worth paying many times more than the US President ?
See lar now Roy is jobless
Many strike lotteries spent all their money too got to go back to work?
Should there be an option to give back people cpf at 55 as promised?
Many might have genuine need for the hard earn savings?
Does the Prime Minister needs to be advised over the Matter?
If he cannot handle the Issue himself, can he be a Prime Minister? He may have sought opinions and that is not been advised.
In any case, it is a very poor decision and though he will surely win the Case, his integrity will certainly be affected. As the Head of State, he has the Duty to educate his subjects(citizens) and correct them if they are not criminally wayward.
Suing subjects instead of correcting and enlightening them shows that narrow mindedness and small heartedness of a person. This is certainly not the kind of quality one expects from a head of state.
What the Prime Minister wants is to save his own integrity. Unfortunately, his reputation will be greatly damaged.
What a mother of paradox!
patriot
Got CPF take back work until died better, cpf locked up forever can't got to work until died?
Govt do have their need of money in locking up people money for good, because worried a few person would used up all their money?
But many others do have their need in getting back returns then only 3 percent after slogging hard for whole life and expecting to get back their CPF to get better passive income then just put in the CPF can't be used?
Most hard earned money take years to save, more difficult to use up then windfall like strike lotteries?
>>541
The last I checked, he does not have a law degree. Someone around him must have advised him to take such a stupid action to destroy his and his own family reputation completely. In the old days, we have eununch; nowadays, we probably have ministers.
I have read all the bitching in this forum about how badly treated you all are. I just do not understand the Singaporean mentality. In most other countries when one is unhappy with the system, he/she just pack up and leave for pasture new. In Singapore however, people just bitch and complain. Why don't Singaporeans who are not happy pack up and leave? Why live in a place when you are not satisfied with your government? I understand you are allowed to take all your savings out of the country. I know what I will do if I do not like the system I live under. I would just pack up and find my fortune elsewhere. I suppose when people say that Singaporeans are a pampered lot, it must be true. Singaporeans have lived under a nanny system for so long and to venture out of their comfort zone must be quite daunting. Well, you lot can bitch as much as you like, the way I see it, this PAP government would stay in power for another 100 years and if you do not like this for your children, you better pack up and leave. Many who are more appreciative would be glad to take your place.
"See lar now Roy is jobless"
Anon 5:33 pm
But how will this affect the 60%?
Will it be reduced, remain the same or even bigger come next GE?
Or will it make the Sinkie opposition more determined and more ready to be govt?
What do u think?
RB, why do you always give good advice and feedback to Ah Loong? Let him dig his own grave. Or maybe he treats what you write as only noise and he knows better?
Anon 10:25, the difference between true blue Singaporeans and foreigners is that this is our country and we kpkb or bitched to make things better. We don't run away so that parasitic mercenaries would come in to take over our country. It is traitorious for Singaporeans to let foreigners take over their homes.
Many foreigners are wishing thet Sinkies will just do that and quit this island.
Anon 1:14, I wish everyone well,
Roy or Hsien Loong. Hope an amicable solution will come to passe. Unfortunately with yesterday's development, both sides are going to lock horns and dug in their heels. It is turning ugly.
Roy dug his own grave.
Roy deleted defamatory comments as demanded from his website, but continue to circulate via email defamatory comments widely even to news media. Is this a sincere regret and apology ?
/// patriot said...
Does the Prime Minister needs to be advised over the Matter? ///
He needs to be mentored.
>>1025pm
Many here already pack up and leave but still like to kpkb here because something cannot be replaced and this is called HOME country.
"Roy deleted defamatory comments as demanded from his website, but continue to circulate via email defamatory comments widely even to news media. Is this a sincere regret and apology ?"
When Pinky Lee and his PAP minions delete critical comments on their facebook asking for clarification and kena scolded for incompetence and ineptness, may I ask you too "Is this a sincere regret and apology ?"
This article has been reposted in TRE with an edited title, Hsien Loong versus the people. I have put a comment in the TRE addressed to the editor not to change the title or content of my articles without my consent.
I am waiting for TRE to change the title to its original form. If they refuse to amend the title I will not allow them to repost my articles there.
Changing the title or adding offensive pictures to my articles can alter the meaning and intent and become very sensitive if not offensive.
OK sure win. Happy now?
Post a Comment