AHTC lawsuit - A landmark case in the making

Multimillion-dollar civil suits against 3 Workers’ Party MPs go to trial

The suits were brought against three Workers' Party MPs Low Thia Khiang, Sylvia Lim and Pritam Singh as well as others, over alleged improper payments amounting to millions of dollars....

An 'egregious, cavalier misuse of public funds': Town council lawyers rip into Workers' Party leaders

Later in the afternoon, lawyers for the three MPs and AHTC councillors Chua Zhi Hon and Kenneth Foo stressed that at all times, the five were acting honestly and in “good faith”. The five are represented by Tan Rajah & Cheah.​​​​​​​

“Various allegations have been made ... we have our responses to all those,” said lawyer Chelva Retnam Rajah in court. “At the heart of all our actions is the fact that at all times ... They were acting in good faith, acting honestly and for the purposes of the Town Councils Act in all their actions.”

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/workers-party-trial-ahtc-prptc-lawsuits-low-pritam-sylvia-10793984


Three leaders of Singapore’s leading opposition party Workers’ Party will have to defend themselves in court today over  (Oct 5) alleged mishandling of S$33 million in town council funding. The civil suit was lodged by the ruling party PAP-controlled town councils – through a fake “independent panel” filled with government cronies – after the police cleared the opposition MPs of criminal wrongdoings.

It is unknown who is sitting in the “independent panel” appointed by the ruling party dictatorship....thestatestimes

Above are two quotations, one from Channelnewsasia and the other from thestatestimes.

Just reading them prompted me to ask a few questions. One who were the people filing the civil suits against the WP? What were the grounds that gave them the privilege or right to file a civil suit against a state organisation, a legal entity, constituted under a democratic system of govt? The AHTC may be run by the WP, an opposition party, but it is a legally constituted organisation, not a private organisation, not a social organisation or a NGO or a commercial organisation.

As this is allowed in this case, it is going to set a precedent for anyone to sue any govt organisations under the same pretext, especially town councils and more.

The second point that came out from thestatestimes is the ground for defence put up by the defence lawyers, ie 'They were acting in good faith, acting honestly and for the purposes of the Town Councils Act in all their actions.' This defence is against the charge for 'egregious, cavalier misuse of public funds'. 

If this defence cannot hold, then in future, anyone being charged for the same egregious, cavalier misuse of public funds would also not be able to get away using this defence of acting in good faith, acting honestly and acting legally, as the WP representatives were acting legally too.

If this defence holds, then in future anyone acting in good faith, honestly and legally, could get away with 'egregious and cavalier misuse of public funds'.

The decision and judgement of the court would have far reaching consequences as whatever the court decides, it would become judicial precedents to be quoted in the future. 

I repeat the three points being put before the court.

1. Anyone can sue any legally constituted state organisation, especially town councils...
2. For egregious and cavalier misuse of public funds
3. Acting in good faith, honestly and legally is or is not a ground for defence.

PS. I have not seen the names of the people filing the suit against AHTC. Have they been made public or is this not to be made public, anonymous? 

Latest Views of DPRK - video

video - Life in DPRK (North Korea)

Latest, First-personal glimpses into the different shades of life in Pyongyang, capital city of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) or "North Korea" by the First DPRK Business Mission from Singapore.

Video too big to upload. Watch HERE –

https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:ugcPost:6454735943365685248/

Watch the video as you read the related Articles. ENJOY ...!

Related:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dawn-peace-dr-michael-heng-pbm/

Also HERE @ MySingapore News:

https://mysingaporenews.blogspot.com/2018/09/north-korea-or-its-official-name.html

 .

PM succession issue and the resilience of the Civil Service

Hsien Loong has said that he is going to retire soon. 5 or 6 potential PMs have been named but no one has stood out yet as the crown prince. With time running out fast, it looks like the next PM is not going to have much time for apprenticeship compares to the time taken by Chok Tong and Hsien Loong. One had about 5 years and the other more than 10 years. For the scholars who would like to do studies on the effectiveness of a Singapore PM measured against the time of apprenticeship, there are some empirical data to prove their case. For that they may want to throw in LKY and his lack of apprenticeship into the study, maybe as a placebo effect. Is there any correlation between performance and effectiveness against the time under apprenticeship? How relevant is apprenticeship to the performance of a PM?
 
Some people may be wondering why no one has stood out so far as the crown prince, the PM elect among the appointees? Is it that they are not good enough, or all about the same, too difficult to choose who is the better candidate? There is another unspoken question that no one dares to ask. What if none of them are better than their seniors like the two DPMs or Khaw Boon Wan, Ng Eng Hen or Shanmugam or Lim Swee Say for that matter? Another question, do the senior ministers respect the newly appointed PM elects?
 
I have been posing many questions on this issue without giving any answers as no one has the right answers and everyone will have his own view of the issue in discussion. What if no one is found good enough or identified when Hsien Loong quits as PM, I mean retires as PM suddenly? Would there be a leadership crisis? Would the govt ground to a halt? Boh cheng hu?
 
Some fearmongers may want to raise an alarm. How can the country survive without a PM? It must be critical and a crisis situation and there will be a loss of confidence in the country. It would be panic station. Jiat lat.
 
If such a situation occurs when no one is filling in as PM and everyone is second guessing and there is a power struggle, what would happen to Singapore? Would the police force or the armed forces stop functioning? Would the PUB stop operating? Would the HDB stop all its services? Would the hospitals stop treating the sick? Would the judicial system stand down? Would the MRT stop running, etc, etc?
 
I think nothing of these would happen. All the ministries and stats boards and public and private organizations would function as per normal, at least for a few months, until the next PM is found. The govt, the ministries, the Civil Service will not grind to a halt. We have built a very efficient and resilient system that would go on running, auto pilot in a way, without a PM or even a political govt in charge for a while. The country would not turn into chaos overnight unless there is a coup.
 
I am presuming that our Civil Service is not a house of cards that cannot function without a political party lording over it, at least during an interim period. Many of the top civil servants are better educated and trained and experience than the boys and girls in politics.
 
What do you think?

President called prostitutes, Supreme Court judge in sexual assaults

Trump has been exposed several times for calling prostitutes and for groping the fairer sex. These could be quite normal activities of individual indiscretion and no one would pay much attention on such private matters. But the president of the USA…? And his nominee to the Supreme Court judge bench has been accused and exposed for sexual assaults and related activities, revealed in public hearings and reported in the mass media.
 
What is striking in both cases is the lack of shame in both individuals in high offices with not thinking that they are still fit for public office. And what is also striking is that the whole American society did not see anything wrong or offensive in these acts committed by their leaders, a president and another going to be a Supreme Court judge, listening to cases on injustice, crimes, immorality, sexual offences etc etc. And they have been fabricating such sordid stories about Kim Jong Un and his late father of womanising to discredit them as unfit for public office.
 
Still not getting it? Ok, just imagine that one is the president or PM of Singapore and the other is going to be appointed to our very own Supreme Court. How would the Singaporeans and the mass media here react to them? A speaker and an MP had resigned and faded away quietly.
 
In the USA, the two individuals are strutting around with no sense of guilt or shame. It is like a new normal, nothing unusual, nothing undesirable, nothing to fuzz about. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the characters of these two men in high offices. They are fighting to stay in high office despite the revelations in public hearings.
 
In the little red dot, even a legal divorce would not speak well in some people’s minds. Personal indiscretion is an absolute no no. No scandal is allowed if one is to hold public office. Maybe this is one of the reasons why our political leaders and leaders in high offices are paid so highly and so highly regarded, like immortals, no smears.
 
Are the American way of life and moral values something that we should emulate as the desirable way going forward? Would Singaporeans accept our people in high offices, in public offices, to have similar indiscretions as Trump and Kavanaugh?
 
What do you think?

Scoot Mayday, RSAF F15 scrambled

Man fined $4,500 for Scoot bomb hoax. This was the headline of thenewpaper yesterday. When I read the content I could not even cry, could not even laugh. My jaw dropped in disbelief. This is another classic story of stupidity has no cure for the record. I will just state the facts as reported in thenewpaper and let you guys wonder what it was all about.
 
A man, Hsu Chun Meng, was flying off to HatYai on a Scoot flight. His hand luggage was too big to fit into the overhead luggage compartment and the stewardess told him he had to check in his baggage. She also asked him if he had any prohibited items in the bag. He replied, ‘Nothing, only bombs.’ The stewardess stared at him and he replied, ‘No bomb lah. Joking. How can it be?’
 
When the plane was about to take off, the stewardess reported the incident to the cabin crew in charge. The latter tried to contact the captain but unable to do so as the flight was about to take off and the cockpit door was locked.
 
She only managed to talk to the captain after take off and the captain followed the established protocol, made a Mayday call and flew the aircraft back to Singapore. The plane was carrying 179 passengers. A fighter aircraft was scrambled to escort it back.
 
The man was subsequently charged and fined $4,500 for the bomb hoax.
 
These were the facts. Over to you guys. Laugh if you can, cry if you want.
 
Stupidity has no cure? What do you think?
 
Key points. If it was a real bomb and not a hoax. If it was a joke….