Sammyboy RSS Feed
19-09-2013, 10:50 PM
An honorable member of the Coffee Shop Has Just Posted the Following:
Retired Chief Justice (2006 – 2012) Chan Sek Keong’s over-simplified answer is not wrong in itself, but it is only one part of the concept of rule of law. It is curious how he omits other key elements that make up real rule of law. These missing key elements also happen to be inconvenient to a government that hates to have its freedom of action circumscribed.
Was Chan just trying not to embarrass our political masters? Or has he come to believe himself that these other elements of rule of law aren’t important any more and need no reiteration?
Neither makes him look good.
Many Singaporeans, having heard our government proclaim their devotion to the rule of law, and boasting about how Singapore is highly ranked internationally for it, would have long come to the conclusion that there is something terribly fishy about the claim; they would long have suspected all those perfumed praises must surely mask a rotting carcass. Frankly, they aren’t wrong, once again proving the adage that one cannot fool all the people all the time. Yet, few would be able to go beyond amorphous suspicion and articulate what ‘rule of law’ should be and why we fall short.
Before dealing with the concept of ‘rule of law’, we first need to better understand what ‘law’ is.
- http://yawningbread.wordpress.com/20...-more-meaning/ (http://yawningbread.wordpress.com/2013/09/19/rule-of-law-in-singapore-is-so-thin-it-holds-no-more-meaning/)
Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com (http://www.sammyboy.com/showthread.php?163709-“Rule-of-law”-in-Singapore-is-so-thin-it-holds-no-more-meaning&goto=newpost).
Retired Chief Justice (2006 – 2012) Chan Sek Keong’s over-simplified answer is not wrong in itself, but it is only one part of the concept of rule of law. It is curious how he omits other key elements that make up real rule of law. These missing key elements also happen to be inconvenient to a government that hates to have its freedom of action circumscribed.
Was Chan just trying not to embarrass our political masters? Or has he come to believe himself that these other elements of rule of law aren’t important any more and need no reiteration?
Neither makes him look good.
Many Singaporeans, having heard our government proclaim their devotion to the rule of law, and boasting about how Singapore is highly ranked internationally for it, would have long come to the conclusion that there is something terribly fishy about the claim; they would long have suspected all those perfumed praises must surely mask a rotting carcass. Frankly, they aren’t wrong, once again proving the adage that one cannot fool all the people all the time. Yet, few would be able to go beyond amorphous suspicion and articulate what ‘rule of law’ should be and why we fall short.
Before dealing with the concept of ‘rule of law’, we first need to better understand what ‘law’ is.
- http://yawningbread.wordpress.com/20...-more-meaning/ (http://yawningbread.wordpress.com/2013/09/19/rule-of-law-in-singapore-is-so-thin-it-holds-no-more-meaning/)
Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com (http://www.sammyboy.com/showthread.php?163709-“Rule-of-law”-in-Singapore-is-so-thin-it-holds-no-more-meaning&goto=newpost).