A final embrace for condemned man? http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/11/30/australia.singapore.ap/ Singapore envoy unsure on decision of hug between Australian, mother Thursday, December 1, 2005 Posted: 0255 GMT (1055 HKT) CANBERRA, Australia (AP) -- Australia's foreign minister made an urgent plea Thursday to Singapore to allow an Australian mother to hug her condemned son at their final meeting before he is hanged early Friday. Foreign Minister Alexander Downer spoke to Singapore's High Commissioner to Australia Joseph Koh and asked him to urgently tell his government to let Kim Nguyen embrace her 25-year-old drug trafficker son Nguyen Tuong Van when they meet for the last time at Changi Prison on Thursday. "I said to him: 'Look, I just want to reiterate that some physical contact between Van Nguyen and his mum means a lot to us and I hope that the Singapore government will accede to that," Downer told reporters. "It's just my view that they should have some contact before he dies," Downer added. The government has been lobbying Singapore to allow the mother and son to embrace since last week. Singapore previously has rejected requests from family and loved ones to have any physical contact with condemned prisoners. Death row inmates at Changi Prison are separated from their visitors by a pane of glass. Downer said he had not been given a reason why Nguyen could not embrace her son one last time. Singapore has rejected its free trade partner's appeals for clemency for Nguyen, who received a mandatory death sentence after he was caught in 2002 at Singapore's Changi Airport on his way home to the southern city of Melbourne carrying nearly 400 grams (14 ounces) of heroin. Koh gave a rare media interview on the case Thursday, saying he did not know what his government had decided on the issue of the mother and son being allowed physical contact before Nguyen is executed. "We have noted Mr. Downer's request," Koh told Australian Broadcasting Corp. radio. "I do not know of any decision." Koh did not directly answer when asked whether he thought that refusing clemency would damage relations between the two countries. "I think the bigger picture is that Singapore highly values good relations with Australia and with Australian leaders," Koh said. "We share a common belief in the sanctity of the law." "It is for this reason that the Singapore Cabinet actually deliberated at length on the clemency petition," he added. Singapore respected Australia's choice to abolish capital punishment in the 1970s, he said. "But we hope that Australia and Australians would also likewise respect Singapore's sovereign choice in imposing the death penalty for the most serious crimes, including drug trafficking," Koh said. But Attorney-General Philip Ruddock branded Nguyen's impending execution as abhorrent, especially because the sentence was mandatory and mitigating circumstances were ignored. "It's a most unfortunate, barbaric act that is occurring," Ruddock told Sky television Thursday. Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Was gonna start a thread on this myself. In short, the punishment doesn't fit the crime. The Singaporean version of democracy and criminal justice system are still in the Dark Age.
Their economy and public safety are well above Dark Age and some of their neighbors' standards. Ends justify means?
Nope. I am pretty sure Indonesia and Malaysia also have death penalty for drug traffickers, but that doesn't deter the drug trafficking in and out of that area. Why does enforcing public safety have to be barbaric and inhumane?
Their country their rules, people have to know there is a risk when they attempt to smuggle the drugs. DD
So is Singapore singled out because it's a successful and prosperous city? I'd be for the death penalty if it was egalitarian, cheap, and if it didn't shoehorn various crimes into arbitrary standards. Would that make my morality barbaric and inhumane?
Singapore and malaysia are absolutely hardass when it comes to drug trafficking. When I crossed the border, there were security guards with some heavy weaponry ready to arrest anyone suspected of having drugs. They had a whole corps of troops specifically for arresting drug smugglers. Although, if you can speak Malay and have a few bucks on you, its pretty easy to get by without any problems.
The same dope kings at the top whom Nguyen was essentially carrying the goods for as a mule, are going to go scott-free. In the larger picture, hanging this kid serves no benefit. There will be plenty just as desperate as Nguyen and more than willing to carry for said dope kings next week. The Australian govt already requested to let Nguyen speak up and expose his employers in exchange for life in prison. But Singapore officials are like robots.
I am against the death penalty. I am not concerned that I will be put to death, even living in a state that still executes people, because it is not difficult to avoid commiting capital crimes. I would hope that Singapore would get rid of the death penalty. Until they do, I have no plans to move drugs through their county (probably not afterward either ) Just like I say in every drug thread: Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. He should expose his employers anyway. What good comes from keeping silent. I am sure his family would want those who got him into this to be punished, and the Australian government could probably offer them protection.
I am pretty sure it must be much cheaper for other countries, compared to the USA. Insane how much $$$ it is in AMerica.
That's very sad, and I would hate to have those conditions in the US. That said, Singapore can choose how it dictates its laws and how to enforce them. The country is very different from the US, but people are for the most part satisfied and tolerant of the laws. Penalties are very harsh, but it does work because it does make people think twice and about the consequences. A lot of my Singaporean friends got harassed by Americans while they were studying here, but really if you look beyond that stuff and the common sense that you should not break the law while in another country, it's a very beautiful country. It gets a lot of smack, but I'm certain a lot of Americans would not mind that type of government at all given some people's stance on torture, death penalty, and drug laws.
There was a time in China when the family was charged for the $.10 bullet that killed their relative. Are you suggesting we outsource our death row process? (awful, I know)
Your earlier post seemed to imply that economic well beings and low crime rates in Singapore are directly linked to harsh penalties for non-violent crimes. This is a rather weak argument since its neighbouring states have similar stiff law against drug trafficking but they don't have nearly the same advancement in their economy and public safety. On the other hand, there are countries that are much more civilized in dealing with non-violent offenders while at the same time enjoying high degree of successes in both peace and prosperity. The kid confessed the crime and was cooperative with the Singaporean authority, yet none of these were taken into consideration in the mitigating process. In addition, most of the drug was originally produced from Burma, where Singapore is the biggest investor. Thus, besides being barbaric and paranoid, the Singapore goverment is also exploitive and hypocritical. We are not talking about public canning, which I think probably fits the crime. Taking the life of a human being in a cruel manner and for a desperate cause is not justice. If we should feel outraged at Saddam's killing of those Kurds and Shiites who tried to overthrow his government, we cannot be much indifferent and obtuse towards the barbaric acts commited by the government of Singapore, in the name of *law and order*.
Trying not to derail from the subject, but the main reason why Singapore is doing so well economically is because they essentially have a benevolent dictator. He runs the country/city with an iron fist and doesn't let anything slide. He appears to be hard but fair, meaning nobody gets away with anything even if you are wll connected or rich. He also subsidizes industries and makes Singapore a very nice place to meet to do business because it is safe, clean and is in a central location between Asia, Australia, and India. I've been there twice for business and Singapore reminds of a Starbuck; Nice, clean, pleasant, predictable and kinda boring. Its by far the cleanest and safest feeling city I've been too. It feels like going to a upscale suburban shopping mall the size of Austin.
My earlier post was in the lines of: if it works for them and has continued to work, does their prosperity stick out like a sore thumb for those who have moral objections and want systems like police states to fail? That's fair. Our arguments touch on different forms of hypocrisy. Ideally, I disagree with government sanctioned murder. Pragmatically, some individuals in society should be eliminated for the public good (such as repeat violent offenders, health care managers who continuously embezzle and cripple the system, or agents guilty of high treason). Drug dealing may seem harmless because drug abuse can be a self-inflicted crime, but that's also based on personal perspective. The Burma connection is disturbing, but exploitation and hypocrisy is a common theme in world affairs. It doesn't allow the government a free pass, but...what they're doing fits in the theme of ends (public prosperity and safety) justifying the means. Some would say loosening punishment for foreign offenders from rich and wealthy criminals is a sign of weakness. You might think the entire system is ridiculous from the core up, but many of their citizens have bought and accepted it. Their per capita suggests many are successful from it.
Drugs are a drain on society I don't know about Singapore . . but Crack heads commit crimes here all the time eliminate the crack . . you eliminate the crackheads that is their philosophy a Society has the right to protect itself what do you suggest they do? Jail them? That is Obviously working so well here in America I'm sure where I stand but I can understand why they have such harsh laws nothing here says this is a 1st offense either Rocket River
i agree totally. its their country, their laws. reminds me of that punk that got his ass caned for vandalising cars. i remember when every one was saying that the kid didnt deserve such punishment,why? cause he is an american? the mother wanted Clinton to step in. thank god Clinton was smart enough to stay out of it. i hate people from other countries, especially industrialized western countries, who go somewhere and think the local laws dont apply to them.
