Friday, October 31, 2008

famiLEE LEEgime court violated law & constitution and then slapped itself

Today's Yahoo Taiwan News for comparison!

In almost every single one of the trials which the famiLEE LEEgime abused to Fix The Opposition, it persistently violated and neglected the constitution.

In such trials just involving myself, it already happened for about 5 times.

That included the 8 cases of General Election 2006 speeches, consisting of 2 part-heard cases and 4 un-heard cases.

This aspect became the most obvious on Thursday, 30 October 2008 at court 5, where I face Tak Boleh Tahan protest charges together with the TBT18.

It had been a constant style that famiLEE LEEgime's court make such kind of rulings in our cases:

  1. Subordinate Court have no power to handle constitutional issues.
  2. This is not a Judiciary Review, take your grievances to one.
  3. Defense on Constitutional Ground can not be accepted in this trial.
  4. Educing any evidence to prove Constitutional Violation is Irrelevant and Not Permitted.
On October 30 2008 Thursday, they went so far in court 5 for the TBT trial that after Dr CSJ read out this Subordinate Courts Act Section 56A and made application under that particular section for the cases to be transmitted to High Court according to this law:

Reference of constitutional question to High Court
56A. —(1) Where in any proceedings in a subordinate court a question arises as to the interpretation or effect of any provision of the Constitution, the court hearing the proceedings may stay the proceedings on such terms as may be just to await the decision of the question on the reference to the High Court.
(2) An order staying proceedings under this section may be m
ade by the court of its own motion or on the application of any party and shall be made at such stage of the proceedings as the court may see fit having regard to the decision of such questions of fact as may be necessary to be settled to assist the High Court in deciding the question which has arisen and to the speedy and economical final determination of the proceedings.
(3) Where an order for stay of proceedings has been made under this section, the court shall state the question which in its opinion has arisen as to the interpretation or effect of the Constitution in the form of a special case which so far as may be possible shall state the question in a form which shall permit of an answer being given in the affirmative or the negative.
(4) The court shall cause the special case to be transmitted to the High Court and the High Court shall hear and determine the constitutional question arising out of the case in the exercise of its original jurisdiction.
(5) Notice of the hearing of the special case by the High Court under this section shall be given to the Attorney-General who shall have a right to be heard.

Still the District Judge Chia Wei Kiat ruled against that application, saying that he is still not inclined to transmit these cases to High Court for constitutional arguments from ALL the accused persons and their councils to be heard!

To make it the most ironical, there are lots of exhibits in the main hall of that famiLEE LEEgime Subordinate Court including one "TOOLS OF LAW" showing statutes and constitution. On a huge picture of taken at the interior of the old parliament house, it printed in huge fonts this introduction of the constitution:

The Constitution came into force on 9 August 1965, the day of Singapore's independence from Malaysia. The Constitution is the supreme law of Singapore. Any law that conflicts with the Constituion is void and Singapore courts can strike down any legislative or executive Acts that go against the Constitution....

So this is how the corrupted and incompetent famiLEE LEEgime made audacious violation of constitution and rules of law, and then slapped itself in the face.

Strangely, I just came across a piece of news from Yahoo Taiwan, that reported how their judge had struck down an unconstitutional legislation regarding massage services that allowed only visually disabled persons (usually blinds) to work in massage services, that this is found to be in violation of constitutional equality:

視障才能做按摩 大法官說違憲
聯合 更新日期:2008/11/01 07:20 記者王文玲/台北報導










Sammyboy.Com 论坛发布


Post a Comment

<< Home