“Cabinet clemency” doesn’t sound as nice.

From TheOnlineCitizen:

The High Court today ruled that the President has no discretion in deciding clemency appeals. The court’s judgement says Cabinet is the only authority in such matters. Law Minister K Shanmugum’s statements about Yong Vui Kong is not prejudicial, the court ruled.

The court was handing down its decision in lawyer M Ravi’s application for a judicial review on the president’s powers on clemency appeals.

This is the part of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore that relates to the granting of pardons. It comes under Part V: The Government, Chapter 1: The President. (Emphasis added are my own.)

Grant of pardon, etc.
22P. —(1) The President, as occasion shall arise, may, on the advice of the Cabinet —

(a) grant a pardon to any accomplice in any offence who gives information which leads to the conviction of the principal offender or any one of the principal offenders, if more than one;

(b) grant to any offender convicted of any offence in any court in Singapore, a pardon, free or subject to lawful conditions, or any reprieve or respite, either indefinite or for such period as the President may think fit, of the execution of any sentence pronounced on such offender; or

(c) remit the whole or any part of such sentence or of any penalty or forfeiture imposed by law.

(2) Where any offender has been condemned to death by the sentence of any court and in the event of an appeal such sentence has been confirmed by the appellate court, the President shall cause the reports which are made to him by the Judge who tried the case and the Chief Justice or other presiding Judge of the appellate court to be forwarded to the Attorney-General with instructions that, after the Attorney-General has given his opinion thereon, the reports shall be sent, together with the Attorney-General’s opinion, to the Cabinet so that the Cabinet may advise the President on the exercise of the power conferred on him by clause (1).

I’m no constitutional lawyer, so perhaps I am simply too ignorant to understand, but I am having a lot of trouble bridging the great divide between “the Cabinet may advise the President” and “the President has no discretion, Cabinet is the only authority“.

Image sourced from SoShiok.com: President Nathan helps cook his favourite briyani.

Such a ruling raises many questions, not least of which is: what is our President for, then? And if he doesn’t have the discretion when it comes to clemency appeals, then why is it known as the “presidential clemency“?

After the initial shock, disbelief and rage, the only emotion that seems left to me now with regards to this High Court decision is disappointment. Disappointment in the judiciary, that they have decided to interpret the Constitution in such a way that gives the Cabinet so much power. Disappointment in the government, that they have once again got away with doing and saying whatever they want with no regards for the views or opinions of the people. And disappointment in myself and my fellow citizens, that we seem to be letting them get away with it. Again.

Still, with every defeat in the courts, Yong Vui Kong’s life falls further into the hands of the people. Into our hands. You and me. And it is our right as citizens of a country that still claims to be democratic to stand up and say, “This is wrong. I do not stand for this. I do not give you the mandate to kill a boy.”

The onus is now on us to keep fighting for his life. And as long as there is still breath in Vui Kong’s body, I don’t intend to back down.