..
CPIB website clearly stated
"Gratitude is a serious offence."
(15-01-2023, 10:52 AM)Scythian Wrote: [ -> ]..
CPIB website clearly stated
"Gratitude is a serious offence."
depends on who it applies to lah
We had to pay $88 million of fines but no charges laid?
.
Can traffic and LTA parking offences be given stern warnings too?
(15-01-2023, 10:47 AM)theold Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.malaymail.com/news/singapore...case/49957
WTF! Nation’s reputation at stake, what mean cannot reveal? .... other companies should have the right to know so that they can avoid them. In WP’s
Raeesah Khan,case, they can go into such great details.
This is why I " Don't respect SG laws ever since a lot " saga " happen during currently LHL terms as PM all along. "
Even Lawyers now a days also can " corrupt , eat client money "
The Chief Judge , oh well " appointed by PAP themselves "
since PAP does not want to charge them in court, it is up to opposition MPs to pursue this matter in parliament.
voters need to know the reasons why they are not charged for corruption in court.
let see if WP or Leong Mum Wai will raise this corruption issue .
(15-01-2023, 11:05 AM)[[ForeverAlone]] Wrote: [ -> ]This is why I " Don't respect SG laws ever since a lot " saga " happen during currently LHL terms as PM all along. "
Even Lawyers now a days also can " corrupt , eat client money "
The Chief Judge , oh well " appointed by PAP themselves "
Not only don’t respect SG laws, but don’t respect the PM who controls CPIB.
Imagine if LKY is still PM, who dare to do such a thing.
Pinky truly lost it.
(15-01-2023, 11:08 AM)forum456 Wrote: [ -> ]since PAP does not want to charge them in court, it is up to opposition MPs to pursue this matter in parliament.
voters need to know the reasons why they are not charged for corruption in court.
let see if WP or Leong Mum Wai will raise this corruption issue .
This country is definitely going to the dogs!
(15-01-2023, 11:08 AM)forum456 Wrote: [ -> ]since PAP does not want to charge them in court, it is up to opposition MPs to pursue this matter in parliament.
voters need to know the reasons why they are not charged for corruption in court.
let see if WP or Leong Mum Wai will raise this corruption issue .
If PSP or WP is smart they'll make this into a big matter in parliament.
Move on....
CPIB already did their job.
Now is how to grow the company.
Merger on the way.
Sembmarine shareholders, keep fingers crossed
Hope for good news soon.
(15-01-2023, 11:08 AM)forum456 Wrote: [ -> ]since PAP does not want to charge them in court, it is up to opposition MPs to pursue this matter in parliament.
voters need to know the reasons why they are not charged for corruption in court.
let see if WP or Leong Mum Wai will raise this corruption issue .
Excellent point
I hope TCB is preparing Leong how to goreng PAPigs on this
(15-01-2023, 01:22 PM)Migrant Wrote: [ -> ]Move on....
CPIB already did their job.
Now is how to grow the company.
Merger on the way.
Sembmarine shareholders, keep fingers crossed
Hope for good news soon.
A COI was conducted on Raeesah Khan with definite conclusions that she lied in Parliament but PAP decided not to move on because the Workers Party was involved. These six assholes may bring out a bunch of grapes if they go to court hence a move on is necessary?
(15-01-2023, 11:03 AM)YummyKing Wrote: [ -> ]WTF! Nation’s reputation at stake, what mean cannot reveal? .... other companies should have the right to know so that they can avoid them. In WP’s Raeesah Khan,case, they can go into such great details.
They are covering- up their own mistakes
Shouldn't the Minister- in- charge be COP, too?
CPIB's explanation on why the six are only given warnings is vague and without any substance. It reveals nothing about what are the considerations.
The is their explanation (taken from CNA):
"The decision whether to prosecute the six individuals for criminal offences has to take into consideration all relevant factors, such as the culpability of each individual, the available evidence and what is appropriate in the circumstances," it said.
"Having taken these into consideration, stern warnings were issued to the six individuals."
This kind of explanation might as well don't say anything. Let's assume that the PM of Singapore takes a bribe. CPIB could very easily use the same excuse as the above to absolve him of any guilt, without giving clear reasons why this should be so. In other words, the authorities now are too lazy to explain anything to us. They just need to say that they have considered all aspects and the judgement is as such.
How could CPIB be the judge in this case? It must be debated in a court of law.
(15-01-2023, 05:05 PM)Ola Wrote: [ -> ]They are covering- up their own mistakes
Shouldn't the Minister- in- charge be COP, too?
They don't cover up they turned their mistakes into yours
(15-01-2023, 05:14 PM)Blasterlord2 Wrote: [ -> ]CPIB's explanation on why the six are only given warnings is vague and without any substance. It reveals nothing about what are the considerations.
The is their explanation (taken from CNA):
"The decision whether to prosecute the six individuals for criminal offences has to take into consideration all relevant factors, such as the culpability of each individual, the available evidence and what is appropriate in the circumstances," it said.
"Having taken these into consideration, stern warnings were issued to the six individuals."
This kind of explanation might as well don't say anything. Let's assume that the PM of Singapore takes a bribe. CPIB could very easily use the same excuse as the above to absolve him of any guilt, without giving clear reasons why this should be so. In other words, the authorities now are too lazy to explain anything to us. They just need to say that they have considered all aspects and the judgement is as such.
How could CPIB be the judge in this case? It must be debated in a court of law.
Well said, you had given good pointers here....
(15-01-2023, 05:14 PM)Blasterlord2 Wrote: [ -> ]CPIB's explanation on why the six are only given warnings is vague and without any substance. It reveals nothing about what are the considerations.
The is their explanation (taken from CNA):
"The decision whether to prosecute the six individuals for criminal offences has to take into consideration all relevant factors, such as the culpability of each individual, the available evidence and what is appropriate in the circumstances," it said.
"Having taken these into consideration, stern warnings were issued to the six individuals."
This kind of explanation might as well don't say anything. Let's assume that the PM of Singapore takes a bribe. CPIB could very easily use the same excuse as the above to absolve him of any guilt, without giving clear reasons why this should be so. In other words, the authorities now are too lazy to explain anything to us. They just need to say that they have considered all aspects and the judgement is as such.
How could CPIB be the judge in this case? It must be debated in a court of law.
Which court in Singapore?
We have seen the law minister commenting on the poly lecturer being racist (the one who voiced unhappiness over the Indian-Chinese couple) yet he wasn't charged then.
Why so, Mr Shanmugam?
NO names, anything u say also u suka loh
(15-01-2023, 01:25 PM)Bluebull Wrote: [ -> ]Excellent point
I hope TCB is preparing Leong how to goreng PAPigs on this
they need a law expert adv on how to goreng in parliament
(15-01-2023, 09:33 PM)talky Wrote: [ -> ]they need a law expert adv on how to goreng in parliament
Pitam Singh and Sylvia Lim are both trained lawyers, can they take PAP to task..................?
(15-01-2023, 09:22 PM)limpeh394 Wrote: [ -> ]NO names, anything u say also u suka loh
. surprise surprise surprise
Today's CPIB stern warning for guilty corruption case is unprecedented
(15-01-2023, 05:14 PM)Blasterlord2 Wrote: [ -> ]CPIB's explanation on why the six are only given warnings is vague and without any substance. It reveals nothing about what are the considerations.
The is their explanation (taken from CNA):
"The decision whether to prosecute the six individuals for criminal offences has to take into consideration all relevant factors, such as the culpability of each individual, the available evidence and what is appropriate in the circumstances," it said.
"Having taken these into consideration, stern warnings were issued to the six individuals."
This kind of explanation might as well don't say anything. Let's assume that the PM of Singapore takes a bribe. CPIB could very easily use the same excuse as the above to absolve him of any guilt, without giving clear reasons why this should be so. In other words, the authorities now are too lazy to explain anything to us. They just need to say that they have considered all aspects and the judgement is as such.
How could CPIB be the judge in this case? It must be debated in a court of law.
Possibly, the presiding judge be given stern warnings too.
Hahahaha
Hahahaha
Hahahaha
Hahahaha
I just want to laugh
in other words future traders who intend to cheat should take similar route at least.
no charges no naming nothing!
only stern warning..
(16-01-2023, 07:15 AM)menghuii Wrote: [ -> ]in other words future traders who intend to cheat should take similar route at least.
no charges no naming nothing!
only stern warning..
pls make sure you are an elite to get special treatment.