Working is a crime! The officer was in hot pursuit of an illegal worker. He fell, picked himself up immediately and continued the chase. The culprit was arrested. Such is the drive, dedication and commitment of a well trained team of MOM officers in the call of duty. They have a job to do and they did well. Efficiency in the line of duty is hallmark in all civil servants. And one should not forget the exemplary efficiency and effectiveness of our car park attendants. They never miss issuing a ticket if it is deserving. What am I grumbling about? The illegal immigrants were not selling pirated VCDs or operating a gambling den or prostituting. Many were just moonlighting as cleaners and odd job labourers. They were prepared to sweat, work hard, to exchange their labour for a few dollars. Why are they turned into criminals, chased around by govt officers, arrested, fined and maybe even caned? Yes, they are criminals. The law said so. No permit to work is a crime. Period. What about the employers who employed them and exploited them for their cheap labour? Why were they not arrested? Would it not be easier to arrest the employers and terminate this vicious cycle when hungry men and women are turned into criminals just because they want to work? Oh, these are children of lesser gods. Just a general comment. The law is neutral and has no feelings, and inhuman at times. And the law is the law. The issue is the zealousness in the execution and persecuting of the violaters. I would be more at ease if public officers, in the course of their duties, think a little about rights and wrongs, about being humans, about justice and fairness, about righteousness and moral principles. If public officers cannot think or will not think, and leave morals and principles in their lockers, govts will be better off deploying a task force of Robocops, machines that just do within thinking, with no morals, no feelings and no moral principles. I am saying this in general. This sickness is affecting govt officers all around the world, and particularly so in dictatorship or authoritarian regimes. And worst of all, the biggest violators of such inhuman acts is the US. There, children of lesser gods have no rights, and are treated as collateral damages. The hideous acts of public officers when they abused their positions of power are more criminal than the crimes committed by criminals. Sad thing is that they did not think so and think that it is their job, in the course of duty,something to be proud of. A couple of days back there was this woman in China who had her 4 front teeth knocked out by public officers just for protesting about a crime or injustice done to her. Sometimes you would not know who are the real gangsters. I always call George Bush and his team gangsters.

Aware – What a brilliant coup!

They came and took over Aware in an AGM. Veterans and established Aware members were in shock and disbelief. They were caught completely off guard when an army of new members marched into the AGM and out voted almost everyone, and grabbed 9 out of 12 executive committee seats. With the exceptionally high turnout the incumbent committee still did not see it coming. And one by one the old committee members were knocked out of office by brazen new faces, all unknown. How would they dare to do such a thing? Who were they, what do they stand for, how could they just take over an established institution, just like that? No big no small! The old committee members were jolted out of their comfort zone. It was very troubling, alarming, and they made an attempt to challenge the right to take over. Basically they were saying, hey, this is our turf, you have no right to do this. If you want to take over, join the queue and wait to be invited. Unfortunately the new and brash challengers were in no mood to explain the whys. Neither did they bother about the feeble resistance. They simply brushed them aside, irrelevant. Their main concern was to win as many seats as they could. They were well prepared for it, with military precision. It was a coup well executed! Well done girls. Your planning and execution were meticulous and brutally efficient and effective. I am keen to know what is their next target. With such organising skills and talents, they could achieve anything they want to. Don’t just stop at Aware.

Kenneth Jeyaretnam joins Reform Party

This is about the best news to break the otherwise dull and mindless churning of stale political news. Finally we are seeing a very able young man standing up to carry on the job of his father. I hope no one is going to say that there is no political talents in Singapore and that Kenneth is a no talent. He has a double first like Hsien Loong. He may not have taken the ride in the bandwagon to earn tens of millions in this small pond. But he has worked overseas, depending only on his own talent and skills to earn his keep. I believe there must be many able young people like Kenneth who are waiting to step forward to serve the country and not waiting to be invited for tea. Would our political system be magnanimous enough to welcome these people as they step forward, or will they face the same sad stories of their predecessors in an unkind environment that has no room for talents in the opposition wing? We are watching and the world is also watching as the game is being played. The same old play or a new play with enlightened players sparring but without the viciousness of a medieval society? The entry of Kenneth into the political fray should raise the standard of politicking to a more sophisticated level. I dread that this is the beginning of another round of gutter politics in the making. We shall see and judge the truth from the tooth.

What’s wrong with disagreeing over issues or policies in cyberspace?

Siew Kum Hong commented that many people gripe or take pot shots at issues beneath the cloak of anonymity and that they should come out of their comfort zones to do something. I agree and disagree with parts of his comment. There is nothing wrong with being anonymous as long as the comments are fair and reasonablel. But agree, it will be better to let people know who is behind the comment in order to give a better feel and measure of what it was all about. The reasons why many are still speaking in anonymity can be found in the soul of the article by Wong Kim Hoh and reflected by Siew Kum Hong’s own sense of fear. He reminded and also made it clear that he disagreed with ‘the lawsuits and defamation schemes used to suppress dissenting views.’ There need no further explanation why people are not willing to come out into the open to state their views when the political climate is such. People who are comfortable in their lives will not want to get into an unlevel playing field and get hurt for the slightest indiscretion. And as for the challenge to come out and do something if people feel strongly about things, I think this is a bit idealistic in the context of our political culture. Stepping forward, be counted, getting the hands dirty may not lead to anything meaningful. Who really thinks that he/she can make a difference by coming out to get his/her hands dirtied except for a fortunate few? It is quite audacious to even think so. And what is so great about making a ‘political contribution’ if it is just to make a statement, a record on what the citizens feel when, ‘After all the debate…nothing’s changed…so what is the purpose?’ Or what is so different about making a point to be put on record in Parliament and making a point in the media, new and old, to express what some of the citizens are feeling? Maybe there is a big difference to some. But I don’t see or feel it that way. What are the contributions of NMP, NCMP, opposition MPs and the unelected but undying opposition politicians? I must say that each have contributed in their own ways to the political process and development of the country. On the other hand, the contributions of cyberspace and bloggers cannot be underestimated and are in no way lesser than these know politicians. In fact there are many things that cyberspace could do and did much better, like keeping issues alive and harping on them repeatedly in case people claimed that nothing said so no more an issue. Or worst, nothing heard, the people must have accepted them. The biggest contributions of cyberspace and bloggers are griping, kpkb and constantly and repeatedly not letting any issue die. This is an area that no politicians or the old media can compete with. The issues will be posted in cyberspace 24/7 and 365 days a year, for the world to see.

Corruption of the bonus system

The first thing that Obama did right was to curb the abuses of the compensation and bonus payout system in corporate America. No longer will the corporate big wigs be allowed to pay themselves crazy by abusing the trust of the minority shareholders and corruptly paying themselves with their so called bonus schemes. They design and decide how much to pay themselves, with approval of course. Actually I can't use the term corrupt as the bonus schemes were all approved by the board of directors. The payout is thus legitimate and above board, objective and according to an approved formula. The top management could even claimed that every cent they got from the bonus system is deserving. And some companies were paying their CEOs tens of millions even when the companies were bleeding, losing hundreds of millions. Superficially the bonus system appears sound. But as they said, the devil is in the details. Were the formula transparent and made known to the shareholders, and accepted by the shareholders? What were the factors in the formula and how relevant were they to the health of the companies? Could the formula pay out exorbitant amounts, unlimited amounts at the expense of the shareholder's interest? Could the factors be juggled and doctored by the accountants to reflect whatever they want to and to maximise the payout? The other problem with the bonus system is that it can be used to pull wool over the eyes of the shareholders. The top management can, for cosmetic reasons, adopt a pay freeze, smaller increases, or even a pay cut to appease the shareholders. But on the contrary they could boost up their bonus payouts from 3 mths to 6 mths, or 6 mths to 12 mths or 24 mths. No one is wiser except the people designing the scheme and managing the scheme. Transparency is important but not often practised. Obama did the right thing to freeze or cap the bonus payout. And now the American corporate wants to side step this by paying themselves upfront. The top management will scheme and scheme to pay themselves as much as they could as they don't own the companies. They were just employees. Grab as much as they can when in office.

They trusted him

In the Shi Ming Yi case in court yesterday it was reported that they trusted him and let him determine his own salary. And they have good reasons to do so. Ren Ci is so successful today because of one man, I mean monk. Shi Ming Yi is so talented and has a lot of followers and is able to raise the profile of Ren Ci and the multi million dollar donations that it received over the years. So, shouldn't people be grateful to his great contribution and talent and let him continue to run the organisation the way he knows best?

How we pay multi million dollar politicians

Now that the world is standing up to take notice of this extraordinary feat maybe we should enlighten them on the hows and whys. The rest of the world, especially politicians, must be wondering how we could pay politicians this kind of salary and the people are happy and supportive of it. They may think that if they were to propose it in their own countries there will be immediate mass demonstrations and riotings in the streets. But we did it, and for so many years, it has become part of our system of good governance. For the likes of Obama, Brown or Sarkozy, who may want to think about how to go about convincing their electorates to pay them a few million dollars in salary, the following could be a useful guide. In the first place the country must be rich enough to be able to afford the million dollar salaries. And for America and the rich European countries, this is a given and not an issue. If the people were to quibble about it, just tell them that it would cost them each a hot dog a year. Very reasonable and affordable. The next point or the most important point is to convince the electorate that they must have the best talents to lead the country. And the only way is to pay them well. Otherwise they will want to become bankers and lawyers or be in Wall Street making hundreds of millions. Our slogan is pay peanuts and you get monkeys. Surely they would not want their parliaments and congresses to be filled with monkeys. This is a very powerful argument. The other important argument is human nature. People in position of power will by nature become corrupt. To stop them from becoming corrupt, pay them up front, and pay them well so that there will be no incentive to become corrupt. This is understanding nature and human weaknesses. Once these arguments are out of the way, work out a formula to make it objective. Peg the salary of the politicians to the 100 highest paid employee's salary in the private sector. But don't peg it to the top dog. That would be too excessive. Say pick the 49th person or 50th person's salary as the bench mark. That will look very reasonable. Now debate the formula in parliament and passed it into law. Then the salary package will become legal and legitimate. See, QED. Oh, there are some other conditions to make this formula successful. The ruling party must have an absolute majority to ensure its safe passage in parliament. As for street protest in case the ignorant electorate could not understand the brilliance of such a formula, ban them. Actually, the successful implementation of this million dollar salary package for politicians requires supertalents. Only supertalents have the ability to pull this through and be able to convince the people that it is good for them and the country. Actually no, you need exceptional supertalents. Better still if they are demigods and immortals.

Highest paid politicians - the numbers are wrong!

Yes, the numbers quoted for the world's highest top 30 politicians are wrong, way off the mark. Too conservative. What were quoted in the article were only the basic 12 months' salary of the politicians. There is another element that forms part of the package. Oh actually there were two elements, another bonus payment that can go as high as 12 months of the monthly salary. Some have quoted a figure of 16 months. And there is also pension. To quote Hsien Loong during his answer to Steve Chia, a NCMP, this was what he said. 'Mr Speaker, Sir, it is an entire package. When we calculate the salary, we look into how much a person receives now, how much he receives in the CPF, and how much he can expect to save in pensions. And when a person retires, he has a choice of having a pension stream for the rest of his life or taking a commuted lump sum at the point of retirement. In fact, as a matter of fact, nearly everybody who retires prefers the commuted lump sum. Because you take a lump sum, you invest it, you do what you want. If it runs out, it runs out. There is no free lunch. If you do not have your CPF, you have the pension. If you have the pension, you have less CPF. So it all adds up to a finite amount. The Member's implicit question is: are the Ministers enriching themselves again? And the answer is, we are going on market terms and, if anything, we are paying below what the market is.' It is an entire package, ....it all adds up to a finite amount. So, when we said that a minister or Prime Minister is getting say $3m, he could possibly get $6m, plus or minus a little depending on his bonuses. Then on top of that, if he has reached 55 years of age and has served 8 years as a minister, he is entitled to another 2/3 of his basic salary. There is a formula and definition of the basic salary in the Parliamentary Pensions Act. So if a Prime Minister is getting $3.9m, he could be getting another $3.9m in bonuses and another 2/3 of an X salary. This could easily be another $2m. That will come to around $9.8m. This $9.8m is the entire package, excluding other perks. Thus, all the figures quoted are way off their marks. They should be multiplied by 2 or 2.67 times. Would these numbers drive the political leaders of the world, especially the rich western nations, insane? They must be kicking themselves for being so underpaid.

This blog is quoted in the London Times!

Thank you Green Peas. Your article is not only quoted in the London Times online and in many other blogs and forums around the world, it also enlightens the world on how well we are governed as a country. http://www.mysingaporenews.blogspot.com/ is now famous man! I have noticed that the readership these few days have shot up furiously. Here is the link: http://timesbusiness.typepad.com/money_weblog/2009/04/the-10-highest-paid-politicians-in-the-world.html#more

Citizens versus Netizens

Joel Gn from Mediacorp wrote an article on the merits of netizen views and how representatives they were in Today. His conclusion can be summarised into the following. 1. There is no face to face discussion and many netizens hide behind the veil of anonymity, especially with regard to policy matters. Thus their views were not credible. Ha, I choose to differ. It is exactly because of the culture of fear here that anonymous views are more real and representative of the truth. Many who spoke in public actually would not disclosed their true feeling and views for obvious reasons. 2. The views expressed in cyberspace are views of a few individuals. So, the views expressed in the old media are not the views of individuals? Even many of the crap surveys and pushed out as the people's views were views of individuals. Even national policies were views of individuals and not the views of the people. Agree? Remember, it is for your own good. Or shall we concede that the views expressed by the professional reporters and journalists were the views of the people, not their individual views? Joel Gn forgot that in cyberspace it is 'the message and not the platform' or the people articulating it that is important. Anyone, no matter how big his title is, if he talks nonsense in cyberspace, he will be declared a clown immediately by netizens. On the other hand, an unassuming person with no title or status but could articulate a sensible view, the view will be respected. It is the message, not who you are. And that is exactly what Joel Gn said. That is the strength of cyberspace. You can't fool anyone by virtue of your position of title. And currently, cyberspace provides the anonymity for truthful opinions and gut reactions to be aired. You can't do it in the old media. They will either be censored, or one will get himself into trouble for airing the truth.

Which blog or forum is part of the PAP stable?

The PAP has been preparing itself to play a bigger role in cyberspace. Having recognised that this is an area it cannot neglect and cannot close down, the only other option is to engage cyberspace fully as an active participant. It mentioned that it has its blogs and forums in place and it can be expected to launch its entry into cyberspace with a big bang. Now which are the blogs and forums that are actually linked with the PAP? So far we have only heard of the famous P65 and the YPAP forum. Which other ones will stand up and declare that it is also a PAP blog/forum? It will be interesting to see the real faces when the curtains are drawn. But I bet not every blog/forum will reveal its true affiliation. So there will still be a lot of guess work to try to identify who is the real McCoy.

The Art of comparing pay

Just a few weeks back, Liew Mun Leong was in cloud nine. He was the highest paid CEO in the island. So far no one is claiming to be paid more more $21m. He is also the highest pay employee in the island, private, public, civil servants, politicians, charity organisations, religious organisations all considered. Today he is probably feeling not so high when ST compares him with the CEOs of America. There they were being paid in hundreds of millions and in US$. What Liew Mun Leong got was peanut, yes, peanuts. And based on the ST articles, Liew Mun Leong is very deserving. The American companies are paying their CEOs more than Liew Mun Leong even when their companies were losing money. It is indeed a great lesson in how to compare pay and how to make one looks good or looks not too great. Our politicians sure don't look too good when compare to Liew Mun Leong. But when apples are compared to apples, our politician's salary are beyond comparison. I hope they now believe that they should not be asking for more increases until at least Barack Obama catches up. Maybe the old media should do an investigative report on all the incomes of the world's top politicians, including all the corrupt money they are getting. I am wondering how much corrupt money is Obama and Brown or Kevin Rudd getting, or Sarkozy? Then our politicians salary will be peanuts once again. And they can then justify for another round of increases. And the people will say, ya, they are underpaid.

Finding square pegs for round holes

The second round of the election campaign came on this morning. The first round was to feature the last batch of recruits that are now in office. Today we are seeing 5 new faces being featured, all very talented and successful young people. However, all 5 denied that they were interested in politics and would want to continue to pursue in their own chosen career path. For saying this, they have passed the most crucial test to be selected as candidates for the next election. Saying yes will be an immediate rejection, for harbouring political ambition. So, the next 5 new candidates for the PAP, based on my deep knowledge and understanding of how the system works, are: Terence Foo, 38, Managing partner of financial communications agency Kreab Gavin Anderson, Nizam Idris, 41, executive director of foreign exchange strategy at UBS Investment Bank, Adrin Loi, 54, executive chairman of Ya Kun International, Sybil Rocha, 25, lawyer, and Chew SuTat, 36, executive vice president and head of market development at Singapore Exchange. These are all fine young people who are professionally trained and with excellent track records in their own fields, but zero or near zero track record in politics. The only exception is Chew SuTat, a PAP member who has worked with an MP and also in the Young PAP Executive Committee. A clean slate is an advantage for a new programme to be installed into their systems of values and beliefs. We can expect more publicity to be given to another few batches of candidates in the next couple of months. Yes, the election campaign has started.

The TOP 30 highest paid politicians in the world

The TOP 30 highest paid politicians in the world are all from Singapore: 1. Elected President SR Nathan - S$3.9 million. 2. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong - S$3.8 million. 3. Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew - S$3.5 million. 4. Senior Minister Goh Chok Thong - S$3.5 million. 5. Senior Minister Prof Jayakumar - S$3.2 million. 6. DPM & Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng - S$2.9 million. 7. DPM & Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean - $2.9 million 8. Foreign Affairs Minister George Yeo - S$2.8 million. 9. National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan - S$2.7 million. 10. PMO Miniser Lim Boon Heng - S$2.7 million. 11. Trade and Industry Minister Lim Hng Kiang - S$2.7 million. 12. PMO Minister Lim Swee Say - S$2.6 million. 13. Environment Minister & Muslim Affairs Minister Dr Yaccob Ibrahim - S$2.6 million. 14. Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan - S$2.6 million. 15. Finance Minister S Tharman - S$2.6 million. 16. Education Minister & 2nd Minister for Defence Dr Ng Eng Hen - S$2.6 million. 17. Community Development Youth and Sports Minister - Dr Vivian Balakrishnan - S$2.5 million. 18. Transport Minister & 2nd Minister for Foreign Affairs Raymond Lim Siang Kiat - S$2.5 million. 19. Law Minister & 2nd Minister for Home Affairs K Shanmugam - S$2.4 million. 20. Manpower Minister Gan Kim Yong - S$2.2 million. 21. PMO Minister Lim Hwee Hwa - S$2.2 million 22. Acting ICA Minister - Lui Tuck Yew - S$2.0 million. 23 to 30 = Senior Ministers of State and Ministers of State - each getting between S$1.8 million to S$1.5 million. Note: 1. The above pay does not include MP allowances, pensions and other sources of income such as Directorship, Chairmnship, Advisory, Consultancy, etc to Gov-linked and gov-related organisations or foreign MNCs such as Citigroup, etc. 2. Though it is based on an estimate, the data cannot be far off the official salary scales. The above was posted in redbeanforum by Green Peas.

Terrorists at home

I am very sadden by the child abuse video posted in Stomp. I feel so sorry for the poor child who was being kicked around by the woman in the house. A child expects love and tender care. She must be so shock and did not even know what was going on. My god, how could this be allowed to go on? I recommend to parade the woman in the street and let the public kick her for pleasure. Why would people pay so much to bring a terrorist home?

Sentosa up its price for attractions

Some of the more popular attractions in Sentosa will have price hikes from $1 to $6. This is to increase the value of these attractions. Oh, like GST is to help the people. Quite logical actually. Sentosa has spent quite a bit of money in an advertising blitz in February to attract visitors to the island. The money spent must come from somewhere. Further, one can expect that the attractions will be more attractive with the price hike as Sentosa is going to give more value for more money paid. Just keep the entry into the island free and they can raise all the fees they want. Then it will be a case of demand and supply. I hope this island in the sun for Singaporeans will remain forever free. I dread the day when Singaporeans will again have to pay to visit the island.

PAP Youth Wing coming online

Yes, Teo Ser Luck is leading the YPAP into cyberspace. This is reported in the old media today. The YPAP forum, P65, PAP facebooks and what not, will be given a revamp and a big boost, a big bang into cyberspace. This is good news for the new media. This new position of PAP is the best sign of approval that cyberspace is going to be here for now and tomorrow. We will have more views, more pro PAP and pro govt views to balance the current negativity in cyberspace. There will be more exchanges and debates over issues, and this will liven up the discussion. The army of young PAP activitists have been released into the cyberspace playground. No longer will they be leased or kept within their closed doors to chat among themselves. The first thing I did was to take a peep at the YPAP forum this morning. No change yet. Still the same as it was before. I am truly excited and looking forward to the change. At the very least they will delete all the pornography being posted there. Now, will the PAP activists take on the challenge of the cyberspace guerillas, warts and all, and return the same compliments?

Top 10 highest paid politicians in the World 1. Lee Hsien Loong - Singapore Salary in dollars - $2.47 million Salary in local currency - S$3.76 million 2. Donald Tsang Yum-Kuen - Hong Kong Salary in dollars - $516,000 Salary in local currency - HK$4 million 3. Barack Obama - United States Salary in dollars - $400,000 4. Brian Cowen - Ireland Salary in dollars - $341,000 Salary in local currency - €257,000 5. Nicolas Sarkozy - France Salary in dollars - $318,000 Salary in local currency - €240,000 6. Angela Merkel - Germany Salary in dollars - $303,000 Salary in local currency - €228,000 7. Gordon Brown - UK Salary in dollars - $279,000 Salary in local currency - £194,250 8. Stephen Harper - Canada Salary in dollars - $246,000 Salary in local currency - C$311,000 9. Taro Aso - Japan Salary in dollars - $243,000 Salary in local currency - Y24 million 10. Kevin Rudd - Australia Salary in dollars - $229,000 Salary in local currency - A$330,000 The above is an extract from a Times Online article posted in Singapore News Alternative. And my god, the information was so wrong. Shall I correct it? Doesn't Times know who are the top 10 highest paid politicians in the world?

When numbers are Pure Nonsense!

The saga of Liew Mun Leong is still on going. Another article by Lee Su Shyan in ST today questions the logic and ridiculous nature of the way numbers are being used to justified pay and think that it is reasonable and acceptable. Liew Mun Leong's bonus is equivalent to 0.7% of the company's profit which is very, very reasonable. Compare to Kwek Leng Beng's in percentage term, his $20.7m is smaller and thus fairer. Kwek Leng Beng's is 1.1% of his company's profit. Wow, too much! Such use of numbers as comparison and justification is an insult to the shareholders intelligence. And it make a mockery of Obama's pay compare to the US economy of US$10 trillion. Obama should be paid many times more. And closer at home, Hsien Loong's pay is ridiculously low in percentage term to the GDP or whatever national data one wishes to use. When would such cock reasoning be slammed as bullshit and a reasonable compensation formula become the norm in industries? Yes, the shareholders have a lot of questions to ask in the next AGM. They should also ask what the top twenty employees' bonuses were to be fair to Liew Mun Leong. If the top twenty employees are getting several millions each, then Liew Mun Leong should not be the one that is under the spotlight.

Myth 206 - How accessible is our justice system to the poor?

The pride of our judicial system is that it is fair and just and accessible to everyone, theoretically. Everyone must have remembered the NKF cases when a few victims quietly paid up when faced with lawsuits even when they were in the right. They had to pay up, apologised and looked like a fool all because they could not afford the legal fees in a lawsuit. And there have been other cases when the victims simply weighed the cost and find it cheaper to pay and walk away than to fight it out for justice. Motor accidents must have many of such incidents. Is our legal system really accessible to the poor victims? A few who have met the criteria of being shamefully poor may be able to get legal aids and assistance. But many will not fit in. I can safely said that legal justice is available to those who can afford to pay for it or those who are so poor to qualify for aid. In the case of tort or non criminal lawsuits, it is unlikely that legal aids or assistance will be available. Correct me if I am misinformed on this. Is there anyway to make our justice system more accessible to the masses and the victims of injustice? I was reminded of the American 'contingency fee based system' which means no legal fees unless the case is won. I am still disturbed by the fact that this practice is not allowed here? What is so criminal or unjust or unfair to have such a system? Under the present system, like it or not, when a lawsuit is knocking, you have to pay up first. Be prepared to pay and hope to win to claim damages against the other party. No money you lose by default. A 'contingency fee based system' will allow the lawyers to judge a case and take on the other party when there are merits for it. This in a way can stamp the frivolours lawsuits initiated by those with deep pockets. The govt's legal aid can also provide such a service based on the merits of a case rather than on how poor is the applicant. Justice will then be available to the innocent and not innocent and poor. And the cost can be claimed from the other party. It is not necessarily a totally free service. The availability of such a service will level the floors in the public courts and also provide more businesses for the legal profession. Of course spurious and frivolous cases will be lesser as the bully will know that justice is available to the poor and innocent as well.