72. Civic Responsibility
Observation
Letter handed over at MPS for the problem to be brought up in Parliament:
Civic Responsibility
Extracts from two articles at aeon.co:
1. “Today, in the 21st century, free speech is deeply entangled with issues of personal and group identity. In our moment, there is real value in reflecting on the centrality of civic duty in the trial of Socrates, a foundational moment in the history of free thought and democratic action. What will we have lost when the idea of civic duty, as exemplified by the relationship between Socrates and his democratic city, no longer gains purchase on our own thought and actions?”
2. “The second way of cashing out the hypocrisy accusation is the thought that virtue signallers might actually lack the virtue that they try to display. Dishonest signalling is also widespread in evolution. For instance, some animals mimic the honest signal that others give of being poisonous or venomous – hoverflies that imitate wasps, for example. It’s likely that some human virtue signallers are engaged in dishonest mimicry too. But dishonest signalling is worth engaging in only when there are sufficiently many honest signallers for it make sense to take such signals into account. While some virtue signallers might be hypocritical, the majority probably are not. So on the whole, virtue signalling has its place in moral discourse, and we shouldn’t be so ready to denigrate it.”
3. Of the two articles above, the last three paragraphs of Item 1 define civic responsibility and the three paragraphs in Item 2 answer the question whether virtue signalling is hypocrisy.
I submitted documents at MPS Ang Mo Kio in 2018 and 2019 with a view to an investigation by parliament. MP’s Responsibilities (72) quoted the duties of MP. My letters and emails listed the issues including evidence to show that officers did not reply to the mistakes made.
The problem has to do with misconduct and transgression of rules.
It will require parliament to ask how loopholes allowed officers to operate the way they did, about the distribution of power and the role of leadership.
4. At the MPS of 10 Feb, I requested that the petition writer write to the MP whether she could bring up the problem in parliament. I amended the two sentences he wrote in the petition form and he asked me to countersign the amendment. The text served as input for an electronic record to be transmitted to the MP. The text was:
"[My name] seek your assistance in raising the problem in parliament.
He has written 10 times to you about bringing up the problem in parliament."
Real Accountability (72) handed over at the MPS had the same effect and was emailed to the PM, DPM and MP the next day.
5. Since my letter MP’s Responsibilities (72) of 7 Oct, the case has not been brought up in parliament sitting of 4 Nov to 5 Nov, 6 Jan, 3 Feb to 4 Feb, 18 Feb, 26 Feb to 28 Feb and 2 Mar to 6 Mar. I showed in Debunking (72) of 29 Nov the reason you gave for not bringing up the problem in parliament cannot be true. After attending your MPS with Infallibility (72) of 23 Dec and Real Accountability (72) of 10 Feb, I have not received your reply.
72. Real Accountability
Observation
Letter handed over at MPS for the problem to be brought up in Parliament:
Real Accountability
1. "These procedures to foster integrity in public office in Athens and other Greek cities were not perfect. But they were more meaningful than those of today, both for the officeholders and for the public holding them to account. That the procedures left open to public negotiation the purposes that officeholding was expected to pursue was a key detail. Integrity in office was neither a process of comporting with prewritten rules, nor was it a matter of private conscience; it was a dynamic act of public, and publicly negotiated, understanding and debate, with real consequences for officeholders."
2. "The systemic view can also be found in the Garden of Eden. Picture Adam and Eve, before the arrival of the Serpent, contemplating the well-ordered nature of the garden in which everything works harmoniously as parts of a single whole. They do not know God’s plan. For them, the entire universe has the order of a garden in which the parts seem naturally to support each other. Its goodness is not located in an external measure – rather, it is good because it is. Man’s role is only to name, not to make, this creation. Alexander Pope’s great work, ‘An Essay on Man’ (1733-34), returns to this idea of God’s system. The poem is a discourse on system in support of a theodicy: ‘One truth is clear, whatever is, is right.’ In a system, things cannot be other than they are."
3. Of the two articles above, the last paragraph in Item 1 is on real accountability and the fourth paragraph in Item 2 is a systemic narrative.
If the problem was not with any one or a few officers when it first began, then the problem would be systemic. Officers who replied to my queries over the years were not committed to resolving the problem. Regulation covering the situation was not called up and the problem never went to higher authority. If higher authority came to know, it would not be under their purview. There was nothing in the media except for indirect references by people who were concerned.
The problem began with officers facilitating the working of a trade in an HDB flat. It was corruption, notwithstanding to what extent, that a group of officers intended to suppress. Rules were not followed that included other mistakes made against me later. Until parliament takes up the various issues listed, it will remain unresolved.
After your request for background check with a government agency on 23 Oct 2019, you have not indicated whether you could bring up the matter in parliament.
You have yet to give due consideration to the wrongdoings summarised in my letters and emails.
72. Prime Minister 2
Observation
Email sent to the Prime Minister and copied to Acting Prime Minister:
Seeking The Assistance Of The Prime Minister
I refer to the emails I sent to your office since 19 Apr 09. The emails informed and asked for your assistance when I felt the problem would not be resolved by MPs. The problem has to do with a group of officers that started with noise from the neighbour, followed by the sale of our flat and mistakes made in my CPF Account and CPF LIFE. Extracts of the emails to you are at Part A of the attachment.
I wrote to the MP, but she has shown to be unwilling to bring up the problem in Parliament. Extracts of the last three letters and two emails showing it to be so are at Part B of the attachment.
Part A shows problem of noise from the neighbour has not been resolved for close to 12 years and Part B shows officers transgressed rules, did not reply to queries and used their power to set others against me.
72. Infallibility
Observation
Another letter handed over at MPS asking the MP to bring up the problem in Parliament:
General Infallibility
1. Extracts from an article at aeon.co:
Mistaken
General infallibility is a tempting proposition. Treating an individual’s attitudes and preferences as givens – as matters beyond debate or criticism – might seem to promote human dignity by forcing us to treat all views as equally worthy of respect. But such an outlook is likely, if anything, to have the opposite effect. This is because taking seriously a person’s capacity to make mistakes is critical to taking seriously their capacity for rationality. Only by recognising that people are capable of error can we properly value anyone’s goals or engage in rational debate.
General infallibility is a modern, democratised version of the infallibility traditionally claimed by religious and authoritarian leaders. Although, unlike those other forms of infallibility, it applies to everyone, like papal infallibility it has some bounds. Everyone agrees that errors can occur where others are very immediately affected. No one would suggest that those giving medical advice or, say, forecasting the weather, can never make mistakes. Yet, today, it is a quite prevalent view that it’s wrong to regard others as mistaken in their tastes and purchasing patterns.
Claims that the subjective beliefs of individuals must be treated as infallible also provoke much criticism. Unfortunately, a common, almost reflexive, response is to insist that some people have better credentials to be taken seriously than others, whether because of differences in educational attainment, intelligence or moral fibre. This is a poor move. It smells of chauvinism. It also betrays a lack of commitment to rational discourse, since it proposes that ad hominem considerations – the characteristics of the speaker – should pre-empt listening to and assessing the evidence and argument put before us.
General infallibility creates the illusion that people are essentially mindless. It holds that we believe what we believe, and value what we value, for no reason at all, or at least for reasons that are unintelligible to anyone else. Under those conditions, no one can engage with anyone else’s views or take them seriously. If, today, identities are becoming increasingly tribally defined, with each group living in its own ‘bubble’, this is an illusion that we urgently need to learn to see through.
2. Almost all government officers who replied to my letters have a sense of infallibility that included transgression of rules. To the article in Item 1, which distinguishes between traditional and general forms of infallibility, I should add credulity in Item 4 of MP’s Responsibility (72), which is bonding through the construction of a shared story. Infallibility and credulity, it could be expected within a group.
Starting with noise from the neighbour, selling of our flat and subsequent issues that I wrote to them and to MPs, who referred the issues to them, they avoided addressing the problem. They are able to do so from the time I wrote to HDB Branch Office in 2008.
I therefore ask that the wrongdoings be brought up in parliament. There being a separation of powers between parliament and government agencies, i.e., between legislature and executive.
If the problem cannot be brought up in parliament, it will show that parliament and government agencies are plagued by the same group of people and talks of honesty, integrity and accountability do not hold up.
3. At the Meet-the-People Session (MPS) of 25 Nov 19 you said the problem was of an individual, not of policy, and I refused to accept the replies from four Ministries.
After which I showed in Debunking (72) that the problem is a group of officers and they did not reply to my queries.
Both Rules, Character & Morals (72) of 25 Nov 19 handed to you after you spoke to me and Debunking (72) of 29 Nov 19 sent four days later showed that the solution is by way of Parliament. Both included recent pronouncements from PM and DPM to similar effect.
I am waiting for your reply.
72. Debunking
Observation
Email sent to MP on whether she could bring up the problem in Parliament:
Debunking
2. First, officers from the government did not reply to the various mistakes made. I showed that in No Full Reply (78) of 5 Aug 19 where I posed the mistakes made next to the replies I received from the officers. I showed your petition writer documents in the letter where the officers went wrong.
To bring home just one issue: The senior assistant director reference to Section 15(15)(e) for disallowing refund was incorrect because it required an application to be made on the occurrence of events as listed in 2012 CPF Act. No such application was made.
3. Second, I do not see why the mistakes cannot be brought up in Parliament when these were not corrected over the years. When I reported mistakes made by officers, the department heads did not respond to the mistakes but allowed the same group of officers to reply to my queries. Their replies were always as if no mistakes were made.
However what you said to me was the officers had replied, but I have refused to accept their replies. The officers would have to produce letters and emails written to me on each issue to prove that they had in fact replied to my queries. I have shown that they have not replied to my queries in No Full Reply (78).
For a recent example, after my email Request 3 (72) of 21 Oct 19, you requested HDB to provide background on Item 1 to 5 of the email. What was their reply? Their reply could decide whether reporting to Parliament is required.
4. ...It is the same in Item 4 of Rules, Character & Morals (72), the pronouncement by PM that the People’s Action Party (PAP) “must never, ever be afraid to do what is right for Singapore” and by DPM that the PAP does not hide from “difficult truths” and “As the party in power, it is our responsibility to ensure the integrity of the system in Singapore. We must, and have taken a clear stand on this matter of principle”.
5. MPs are afraid of officers taking offence by a report in Parliament….
6. I have only one written reply from you from the eight times that I wrote to you asking for the problem to be brought up in Parliament. This was the reply to my email Request 3 (72) in Item 3 that you did not follow through. I attended six of your MPS but were only able to speak to you three times. At this rate the problem may not be resolved.
Summaries of mistakes are Summing Up (72), Explanation (72), No Full Reply (78), Request 3 (72) and Rules, Character & Morals (72).
Item
9 in Summing Up (72), with reference to emails of 3 Mar 19, 14 Mar 19, 24 Mar 19 and 31 Mar 19, is long and detailed but Item 1d) in Rules, Character & Morals (72) is short.
Summaries of situations are Q & A(75), Resolution (72), No Fair Play (12) and MP’s Responsibilities (72). These are about governance.
A concept known as
credulity defined in an extract in MP’s Responsibilities (72) describes the type of situation I am in.
7. The problem is a group of officers in Item 3. The solution is by way of Parliament in Item 4. The complaint is Item 6.
8. Please let me know, after this email and the letter handed to you, whether you could bring up the problem in Parliament.
72. Rules, Character & Morals
Observation
Letter handed over at MPS requesting that the MP bring up the problem in Parliament:
Rules, Character & Morals
3. MORALS
Facts and reason are not enough. If you want to understand politics, look to morals
If there’s one political idea most of us can agree on, it’s that we’re currently living through an age of immense ideological polarisation. Inspired by the hyperpartisan political climate in the US, the experimental social psychologist Peter Ditto at the University of California, Irvine set out to investigate how differing views of morality shape political judgments. Working from what’s known as ‘moral foundations theory’, which uses five categories – harm, fairness, loyalty, tradition and purity – as a framework for moral reasoning, Ditto created a survey website to learn to what extent different moral frameworks shape outlooks on political questions, and indeed the greater world. His findings were compelling, but likely unsurprising if you’ve ever had an irreconcilable political squabble at the dinner table: it’s our moral filters, not facts or rational thinking, that mould our ideological outlooks. You can read more about Ditto’s work at the University of California website.
https://aeon.co/videos/facts-and-reason-are-not-enough-if-you-want-to-understand-politics-look-to-morals
It will be of interest if officers apply the five categories of harm, fairness, loyalty, tradition and purity to themselves. Based on my case, I think loyalty would come up high and harm, fairness, tradition and purity low. If so, it will be an indictment.
4. Quotes from cna:
a) The People’s Action Party (PAP) “must never, ever be afraid to do what is right for Singapore”, said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on Sunday (Nov 10) at the PAP convention, a gathering of the party's members and activists.
b) The People's Action Party (PAP) does not hide from “difficult truths”, Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat said on Sunday (Nov 10) at the PAP Convention, a gathering of party members and activists.
“As the party in power, it is our responsibility to ensure the integrity of the system in Singapore. We must, and have taken a clear stand on this matter of principle,” he added.
5. Two days after my previous email Request 3 (72) of 21 Oct 19, you requested HDB to provide background on Item 1 to 5 of the email. On the same day of your reply, I heard noise from my next door neighbour at 10.00am for 45 min. It was a signal.
I have made a note of my next door neighbour in Item 1a) above.
6. After the parliament sitting of 4 Nov 19 and 5 Nov 19, I checked the parliament reports but found nothing related to my complaint.
7. Noise caused by the neighbour working a trade in HDB flat is an offence and officers in collaboration with the neighbour is corruption. The evidence in No Full Reply (78) of 5 Aug 19 , Request 3 (72) of 21 Oct 19 and Item 1 above are each summary that covered all the issues.
8. I spoke to you and your petition writers and this is the eight times I wrote to you. Each time I requested for an investigation through Parliament because writing to the government agencies has not worked through the years.
Please let me know when you could bring up the problem in Parliament so I could follow its resolution.
72. Request 3
Observation
Email to MP requesting that she bring up the problem in Parliament:
Repeated Request 2
7. In each of the processes mentioned above government officers had deviated from the rules:
a) Officers set up a situation where I committed my name to the studio apartment instead of our names to deprive us of SHB.
b) Officers took away $5000 from the sale of our flat for no apparent reason. There was no proof that we had received the $5000.
c) The 2012 CPF Act stated that refund to CPF Account was required unless members made an application stating the reason as listed in the Act. We did not made such an application.
d)The two additional CPF LIFE I was asked to purchase gave low rate of returns compared to the rate of return from the Retirement Account. The purchases did not conform to what was stated in the Important Notes on CPF LIFE.
e) The property agent and his company were negligent in their duties with respect to the $5000 deposit and refund to CPF Account. They colluded with the Resale Section of HDB to conceal and misrepresent the issues.
f) All issues started from the neighbour in 2007 although the noise from the working of a trade could be traced back to 1998. Then, I wrote to HDB Branch Office and sent a letter of appreciation to HDB Feedback Unit when the occupier was evicted. Not long after, officer facilitated the transfer of the flat to the neighbour who was to be the second owner to continue with their work. In 2010, I wrote to the Police that I suspected the-people-in-flat-across-the-neighbour were installed to protect the neighbour.
72. MP's Responsibilities
Observation
Letter handed in at Meet-the-People Session and emailed to PM, DPM. SM and MP:
Responsibilities of Member of Parliament
1. Quotes:
a) United Kingdom
The first duty of a member of Parliament is to do what he thinks in his faithful and disinterested judgement is right and necessary for the honour and safety of Great Britain. His second duty is to his constituents, of whom he is the representative but not the delegate. Burke's famous declaration on this subject is well known. It is only in the third place that his duty to party organization or programme takes rank. All these three loyalties should be observed, but there is no doubt of the order in which they stand under any healthy manifestation of democracy.
— Winston Churchill, Duties of a Member of Parliament (c.1954-1955)
4. To explain, there is a concept known as credulity defined in the article below:
Debunking debunked
Animal magnetism was a way of formalising a common human capacity for suspending judgment and playing along in the name of social bonds. I use the term credulity for that capacity because I want to draw attention to the fact that our commitment to secular agency, and to the activities of debunking that secular agency implies, can often misrecognise this capacity as belief. It isn’t belief, not really; it’s neither believing or disbelieving, but bonding through the construction of a shared story. Debunkers often dismiss such bonding as credulity in the bad sense – as excessive belief. Animal magnetism is an opportunity to ask what baby is getting thrown out with this bathwater.
What then is debunking? It can be a necessary way of setting the record straight. I’m by no means opposed to truth-telling. We need fact-checkers. The more highly placed the con artist, the more his or her deceptions matter. In such cases, it makes sense to insist on hewing to the truth, and it might not be very important that, in so doing, we are setting aside a significant dimension of what it means to be human: the dimension of credulity as I am defining it here.
https://aeon.co/essays/is-debunking-more-about-the-truth-teller-than-the-truth
72. Request 2
Observation
An email to MP:
Repeated Request
2. An example of the problem is CPF LIFE.
The Important Notes on CPF LIFE stated that only two deductions from Retirement Account (RA) were required. One upon purchased of CPF LIFE and the other two months before age 65. Payout started at 65. The two additional CPF LIFE that I was asked to purchase were not required.
The spreadsheets that I submitted showed the rate of return of the first purchase, the second additional purchase and the third additional purchase to be 4.082%, 3.216%, 2.944% respectively. On similar terms as the first purchase the rate of return of the two additional purchases were found to be lower and below the estimated lower range of 3.75%. Without the two additional purchases, the money left in the RA would have earned 4%.
Two other mistakes were found. One with the addition of interest earned for the year right after the second additional purchase. The spreadsheets showed the rate of return of the addition of interest earned to be below 0.001%.
The other with the transfer of available balance from RA to CPF LIFE two months before age 65. The whole of available balance was supposed to be transferred, but only part of the available balance was transferred. The record of the previous year showed the amount of the available balance and the Important Notes on CPF LIFE showed that the transfer of available balance was required. The officer I met agreed, but the officer who replied to my letter did not reply to the question.
72. Parliament 2
Observation
An email to the Prime Minister:
Submission of Second Set of Documents to Parliament
“I think that submission at MPS Ang Mo Kio is appropriate because petition writers at MPS have control over what to write and who to address the complaint. They would say “Speak to the MP”, but would not write the letter to inform the MP directly. The first set of documents I wanted to hand over to the MP was not accepted. Please refer to Parliament (51) in my blog, which is the email of 9 Jul 18.”
“Without an investigation from Parliament, officers will continue to go against me with monetary losses, troubles and inconveniences. As can be seen, the problem cannot be resolved in any other way.”
72. Resolution
Observation
Letter handed in to MP at Meet-the-People Session:
Being Accountable To Parliament
1. Since the letter Government Departments dated 28 Dec 18 handed to Mr Teo at Meet-the-People Session (MPS), there were three letters Bringing Up To The Prime Minister, Monthly Payout From CPF LIFE and Documents Provide The Explanation handed in at MPS. Mr Teo wrote to HDB or CPF or both together on the issue of the refund to CPF Account, the $5000 deposit in the Resale Document from HDB and the CPF LIFE, but only on one issue at a time.
HDB and CPF did not give full reply but, as usual, avoided my questions. There were no reply to the last three letters. In fact, when I handed in the letter Monthly Payout From CPF LIFE, Mr Teo showed me a letter sent to him from CPF. I did not read the letter but Mr Teo said CPF wrote that they had replied to me numerous times before. The letter Documents Provide The Explanation to Mr Teo was handed to Ms Sun who presided at the next MPS. This time I requested of the petition writer that the assistance of the Prime Minister was required on all the five issues listed in the letter.
Mr Teo and Ms Sun together wrote four times to CPF on the issue of CPF LIFE, but no reply was sent to me the last three times. Just as Mr Teo had informed me at the second last MPS that CPF had sent a letter to him instead, CPF could have sent a letter to Ms Sun of the last MPS. It happened so after CPF wrote the letter dated 27 Jun 19 that I would start receiving my monthly payout in August. There were mistakes in the letter and I went to CPF Tampines Service Centre on 9 Jul 19 with my letter Annuity Premium Deduction And Retirement Account Balance Toward CPF LIFE. After going through my letter and the letter and attachments from CPF, the attending officer checked with her senior and asked me whether I had received a reply on 19 Jun 19 after the last MPS with Ms Sun. Since I did not receive the reply, the reply would be to Ms Sun.
7. The letters Bringing Up To The Prime Minister and Documents Provide The Explanation addressed to Mr Teo are each summary of all the five issues that required investigation. The letter Annuity Premium Deduction And Retirement Account Balance Toward CPF LIFE addressed to CPF Tampines Service Centre is a new issue that required investigation. The last letter was in reply to the letter from CPF of 27 Jun 19 to inform the start of monthly payout at age 65 in two months time. All the letters are at Summing Up (72) Item 23, Explanation (72), Annuity (78) respectively. The letter from CPF dated 27 Jun 19 will be submitted at MPS, Ang Mo Kio. However, my comments are at Salient Points 2 (40) under SP2-Annuity Premium Deduction.
Why investigation? My complaints through MPS, the last numbered twenty, have no effect. Their replies avoided the questions in the ways noted in the letter Monthly Payout From CPF LIFE and no reply was given recently noted in Item 1. The email dated 14 Mar 19 in SP2-Summing Up Item 16 is proof that officers did not reply to the refund to CPF Account and the low rate of return from additional CPF LIFE. The questions were first posed in 19 Apr 14 to CPFB and 30 Apr 15 to a director of CPFB respectively. What started it all was noise from the neighbour eleven years ago from the first MPS on 16 Feb 08.
The reason it was not addressed by executive officer up to the level of director is because of influence from powerful persons. They are not visible, but they affect the future prospects of officers. They cause officers to misbehave because of advantage gained. Although we have a centralised government that is efficient, we are not immune to such influence. Item 4 a) to g) above refer to such a situation.
Their influence cut across government departments, statutory boards and commercial enterprises. In my case I was stonewalled and there was not much in the way of a media report except for indirect references. Item 5 above are pronouncements from ministers, which I feel have some bearing.
That brings me to the final point, which is also the title of this letter. Without an investigation from Parliament, my complaint will never be resolved. I will always be at the end of officers who will continue to go against me.
I had asked that the matter be brought up to the prime minister and the Parliament before. The petition writers had reservation when I asked that they addressed my complaint directly to MP. I had therefore submitted the first set of documents in Salient Point (40) and will submit the second set of documents in Salient Points 2 to MPS, Ang Mo Kio.
Please bring up my complaint in Parliament.
72. Prime Minister
Observation
An email to PM:
A Request To Meet The Prime Minister At Meet-The-People Session
2. David Marshall dedicated one day per week to receive the people of Singapore after he won the election in 1955. He established the important principle still followed today that the role of government was to listen and help its people.
Quote from wikipedia.org: “The 1966 Wee Chong Jin Constitutional Commission had recommended an Ombudsman to deal with complaints against the bureaucracy, but Parliament rejected the recommendation and instead preferred that such cases were handled by the Members of Parliament themselves or the national Feedback Unit. This need to perform an ombudsman function is probably another rationale for having the Meet-the-People Sessions.”
Quote from Anthony Victoria Michelle: “The late Mr J. B. Jeyaretnam, an opposition member in Parliament, motioned for “directing all ministries that where they reject any application from a citizen or make any decision which impinges on the rights of the citizens, they should give detailed reasons for their rejection” (Singapore Monitor, 4 December 1982).The late Mr Lee’s response was that more often than not, [not because] residents did not come forward because they did not understand the policy, but either because they did not want a particular policy to be applied to them or because they wanted a more favourable standing for a particular service. The late Mr Lee went further to stress that “The Government’s duty is to patiently but firmly convince such people that because the rules are not bent for anyone, therefore all are better off...there is no failure in communication. The failure is in human refusal to accept that they cannot be exceptions to the rule” (Singapore Monitor, 4 December 1982).”
In 1995 David Marshall said “Nowadays it seems quite normal for high officials to be answerable to citizens, but in the context of the 50s the choice I made to Meet The People Sessions caused surprise and alarm to many" (Roots, December 1995).
72. Explanation
Observation
Letter handed over at Meet-The-People Session:
Documents Provide The Explanation
1. There are a number of mistakes made in the five issues of my case. They are not complicated issues. The process of checking the documents of government departments is required to arrive at a conclusion.
There were mentions that it is for the court to decide. It can be, but it gets complicated with the many layers of government and a host of other matters with little connection to the issues. A weak rival is likely to give up with the delays, expenses and lack of resources.
If the mistakes are to be decided by the court, will it not affect the integrity of the department concerned? In my case internal investigations are only required to reach a conclusion. But there are resistance to carry out investigations that will implicate officers. There seem to be not enough good people who will make the difference.
It is not the fine points of the law that needs to be clarified. Most, if not all, of the issues are in the document provided by departments or to be found in departments.
It will be in the public interest to correct the mistakes made or to explain the positions taken according to the documents. The issues could also be brought up to the prime minister for a determination since it has not been addressed.
The case has been for years as more issues cropped out.
2. The refund to CPF Account is an example. It is common knowledge that refund is required after sale of flat for fund used to purchase the flat. Yet officers continue to mislead. When asked to show proof, a senior assistant director quoted Section 15(15)(e) of 2012 CPF Act, which is another misleading statement because we did not make an application through Section 15(15)(e). No application was made, therefore the refund should have proceeded as usual.
6. Is there any official document to indicate the neighbour was carrying on a trade in the flat? The government should have details of occupation, residence and place of work of the first and second owner of the flat. There was evidence of a working relationship that caused them to transfer the flat from the first owner to the second owner that was facilitated by officer after an eviction. There was also evidence that the people in the flat across the neighbour were there to protect the neighbour. This from the fact that after I had informed the police, no action was taken and their reply did not refer to the people in the flat across the neighbour.
Is there any record of quarrels with other households in other places over noise considering that they are a group of people operating a business over a long period?
After two years of complaint to the authorities, I blogged. All troubles encountered and the monetary losses listed that were caused by officers started from here.
72. Summing Up
Observation
12.
10 May 19
Letter handed in at Meet-the-People Session
Monthly Payout From CPF LIFE
Monthly Payout From CPF LIFE
The questions on CPF LIFE:
Was it in my interest to have brought the additional CPF LIFE on 27 Sep 10? The officer who asked me to buy did not give any explanation. No important notes or grace period was given. In fact, there was no need for the additional CPF LIFE because it was stated that the final transfer from Retirement Account to CPF LIFE would be made one or two months before monthly payout began at age 65. Retirement Account paid an interest rate of 4% whereas calculation in my spreadsheet showed the additional CPF LIFE paid an average of 3.2% (upper range rate of return plus lower range rate of return divided by two).
If rate of return from CPF LIFE were lower than Retirement Account, could this have been one of the reason to make the purchase of CPF LIFE compulsory as stipulated in the Silver Housing Bonus Scheme? The second additional CPF LIFE was purchased on 12 Jan 15 under the Silver Housing Bonus Scheme. The spreadsheet showed the second additional CPF LIFE paid an average of 2.9%. A much lower rate of return.
Was there a mistake in the monthly payout from CPF LIFE with the interest amount of $1757.88 transferred from Retirement Account under the Silver Housing Bonus Scheme? Without even considering interest rate and inflation over time the additional $4.21 monthly payout from age 65 added up to less than the $1757.88 over a lifetime. The spreadsheet could only show a rate of return less than 0.001%.
9.
5 Apr 19
Letter handed in at Meet-the-People Session
Bringing Up To The Prime Minister
Bringing Up To The Prime Minister
“In the email of 14 Mar 19 I showed Section 15(15)(e) of 2012 CPF Act that the senior assistant director quoted to stop the refund to CPF Account was the fault. Section 15(15)(e) required an application to be made before the charge would be cancelled if the Board was satisfied. We did not made an application therefore Section 15(15)(e) did not apply. The senior assistant director and other officers had been giving misleading replies.”
In the email of 3 Mar 19 I submitted spreadsheet calculation that could be used to compare the four calculations on similar terms across the board. The rate of returns of two additional CPF LIFE were shown to be low compared to the CPF LIFE purchased when it was first introduced. The fourth calculation was an obvious mistake. I already had my doubt with the first additional CPF LIFE purchased on 27 Sep 10. Although I substantiated, a director and officers had dismissed my concerns without any explanation.
The email of 24 Mar 19 referred to the sale of the flat in general and the third salesperson in particular. He and his company failed to inform me about the refund to CPF Account and the details of an Option To Purchase (OTP). I wrote to them about the refund to CPF Account but they did not assist and the option was never explained. When I requested to reduce their fee to 1%, the company replied that they reserved all rights to proceed against me through other avenues if I chose not to mediate or pay the full fee.
The email of 31 Mar 19 referred to the officers at the resale section of HDB. The handling officer set me up for monetary losses. It was the issues of no refund to CPF Account, OTP and SHB. I was aware there was a need for refund to CPF Account, unaware there was a OTP and unaware SHB was involved. The principal estate manager who processed the SHB after we were found to be eligible did not refer us to the Important Notes in the form but instead caused a 10 weeks delay and a $219.60 fee to register our name to the studio apartment.
“The email of 31 Mar 19 is also on all the issues relating to officers that started with noise from the neighbour in 2007. I think the prime minister could help.”
8.
31 Mar 19
Email to MP
10. If the Option To Purchase for the flat had indeed came from HDB, it would be a mistake. The Exclusive Estate Agency Agreement For The Sale of Residential Property had this statement:
Schedule 1, Explanatory Notes: (10) An agreement for sale and purchase may take the form of an executed sale and purchase agreement or an option to purchase which has been exercised by the Buyer.
We had an agreement with the Estate Agent, there was no need for the option. If the option was together with the agreement, I would have known about the cost and exercise price of the option and the prescribed documents. (The principal estate manager of the letter dated 4 Mar 19 wrote that the cost and exercise fee of the option were considered part of the agreed resale transacted price of the flat. He had not produced the documents I requested.) Thus without knowing the detail of the option, I had unintentionally lowered the price of the flat by the cost and exercise fee of the option that were deducted from the price of the flat shown in the resale document.
20. The above issues at HDB, CPF and CEA that affected me affect the people of Singapore. The issues persisted over the many years because there were evidence of wrongdoing. Although the issues were revisited many times, these were not addressed due to the same group of officers preventing resolution.
21. I could only hope the-whole-of-government takes action. Will the prime minister, cabinet or parliament consider the problem?
3.
3 Mar 19
Email to MP
Refund to CPF Account and Return of Deposit After Sale of Flat
“I made four calculations where lump sums were committed to compare rate of return that included the two instances just mentioned. Each of the calculation was in two stages. The first stage used the single payment formula from the date the lump sum was committed to the date at age 65 and the second stage used the annuity formula from age 65 for 20 years (life expectancy of Singaporean male at 65 is about 85). With the help of the spreadsheet the rate of return could be adjusted to give the same monthly payout as estimated by CPF Life.”
Spreadsheet-CPF Life
Shareable Link
72. Mistake
Observation The owner hoped that his letter to the Prime Minister, just after he made a report at Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB), could see some action being taken. It would be action taken directly to the case for the first time.
CPIB (78) is the report. Cool (71) is a new perspective. Singapore (67) is of relevant.
72. Trust
Observation No action is taken against officers who acted against rules. In the first case proceeds from sale of flat was not returned to CPF Account as required. In the second case the application form for Silver Housing Bonus was concealed from the owner. In the third case CPF LIFE Plans were issued under doubtful circumstances. In all three cases there were delays and monetary losses. Could Parliament bring it up?
The details are in CPF LIFE (78), CPF/HDB (78), CPF 2 (78) and CPF 1 (78).
72. Order
Observation
1. Our Singapore Conversation (OSC) began life around National Day, 9 Aug 12, after News (31) and Citizen (32). Although OSC looked to the next 20 years, it could have discussed the owner's case.
2. Another example is given in Moral Hazard (65) where no effective action could be taken.
3. A need for public dialogue could be seen from Punggol East (35) and Anonymity (59).
4. On 1 Sep 12 the Law and Foreign Affair Minister considered what could be an ethics law on unneighbourly act. His remarks is at Morality (39).
5. On 18 Sep 12 the Prime Minister said it was far better to suffer embarrassment and keep the system clean than to pretend that nothing had gone wrong and let the rot spread. He said the government was reviewing and tightening the system to maintain its high standard of honesty. His remarks in a speech given at CPIB (Corrupt Practice Investigation Bureau) is at Switch (38).
6. On 12 Aug 13 DPM Teo Chee Hean said in Parliament:
"The Public Service does not tolerate wrongdoing and misconduct, and will take firm action in all cases, decisively and transparently. Every case is thoroughly investigated. If need be, a separate agency will conduct the investigation to ensure independence and impartiality."
Errant officers who have not broken the law but where actions are serious enough to constitute misconduct are subject to disciplinary action either by the Permanent Secretary or the Public Service Commission.
More of his remarks is at Item 14r, Comment (14).
7. On 7 Mar 14 The Business Times reported "MHA plans review panel to boost public trust. To underscore its intolerance of grave wrongdoings and misconduct by its officers, the Ministry of Home Affairs will set up an independent review panel to look into the findings of its internal probes of such cases.
Mr Teo, who is also Coordinating Ministry for National Security, said that when directed by the minister, the panel will review the findings of internal investigations into cases of serious alleged misconduct by an officer in his official capacity; those include cases which have led to death or serious injury, perverted the course of justice or which are in the public interest."
8. On 8 Mar 14 Acting Minister for Culture, Communication and Youth announced a new tribunal would be set up to adjudicate difficult cases of dispute between neighbours.
9. In Item 4, a good underlying explanation may be found for the law on unneighbourly act to be implemented as most Singaporeans live in flats. If it is not an ethics law, it would not have helped the owner because of evasion by the officers and neighbour. In Item 5, to maintain high standard of honesty the government needs to explain how it is going to be effected. In Item 6, if the owner's case was investigated, what was the outcome. In Item 7, if an internal investigation was conducted of its officers concerning the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour, would the minister direct the review panel to look into the case. In Item 8, would the judge be able to stop the officers from stationing the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour to protect the neighbour from insiders and using noise to force the owner into selling his flat because he knew too much.
10. Evidence (21), Behaviour (23), Integrity (25), Committee (27) and Ombudsman (29) are on actions that could have been taken.
11. Continuous knocking from 7.00 pm to 8.45 pm during National Day Rally speech by PM on 18 Aug 13. Were the officers and neighbour telling the owner something?
12. Deliberation (37), Public Service (48), Openness (50), Governance (51), Anonymity (59) and Empathy (63) take a look at the problem and its resolution.
13. Morality (39), Liberty (52), Iron Cage (53), Ruler (55), Popular Culture (58), Diplomat (62) and Singapore (67) are on "doing the right things, and doing these things right".
14. Argument (44) and Perspective (45) are on reasonable approach to ethical conflict without personal opinion and cultural bias getting in the way.
15. Parkinson (40), Open Access (49) and Iron Cage (53) are on bureaucracy.
16. Principle (47) is on openness, accountability and tolerance as apply to the case. Anonymity (59), Open Source (60), Moral Hazard (65) and Corruption (66) are on openness. Search for word openness, accountability and tolerance in the postings.
17. Neighbour (4) is a problem yet to be resolved given what goes on between the officers and neighbour.
18. Case (19) is a community project. Do so by informing others and leaving your comment in the blog.
19. The owner wrote to the Council of Estate Agencies (CEA) and MPs on a related problem. House Selling 1 (70), House Selling 2 (70), House Selling 3 (70), House Selling 4 (70) and Request (72) show officers tried to block the owner from selling his flat at a good price.
20. On 11 Mar 14 The Business Times reported "HDB overhauls system for resale transactions. It is requiring buyers to first obtain the option to purchase (OTP) before asking for a valuation through HDB - and it will not accept valuation request from sellers.
This pushes buyers and sellers into negotiating resale prices based on the latest transacted prices, instead of haggling over the COV as is done now.
On the likelihood that there may be sellers who may fish for valuation reports through the HDB, the board said that it will monitor the new resale procedures.
The HDB spokeswoman said, 'If there are salespersons who try to game the system to obtain valuations, we will carry out relevant investigations together with the Council for Estate Agencies (CEA)."
21. In Item 20, the owner thinks the problem is buyer and seller should be in direct contact during price negotiation. They could defer to their salesperson, if they engage one, for price information and assistance.
22. An extensive network of contacts in the administration has been the problem. In a cover-up the officers prevented the stopping of the neighbour who works a trade in the flat. They collaborated to force the owner into selling his flat and, when he did, to sell at below market price. As shown in the blog, the Government was unable to deal with the officers on the ground.
23. Endgame (74) and Committee (27) are on abusers and remedies respectively.
24. Lee Kuan Yew Hard Truths To Keep Singapore Going Straits Times Press
Q: What do you mean by a "strong system"? Is it another phrase for PAP continuing to be in power?
A: Whether it's the PAP or any other government does not interest me. I'm beyond that phase. I'm not out here to justify the PAP or the present government. I want to get across just how profound is this question of leadership and people and the ethical and philosophical beliefs of the leadership and the people.
Q: Not many people can understand that we're not a normal country.
A: Denmark, Sweden can get by with mediocre governments, Singapore cannot. The civil service will go down. If at the core centre quality goes down, then in all the subsidiary organisations quality will also go down. You will no longer inspire. Because no man can judge a person accurately if that person is superior than he is. So we never ask somebody who's inferior to judge. Very seldom does an inferior person says, "He's better than me." Once you have weak people on top, the whole system slowly goes down. It's inevitable.
25. Sunday, 8 Dec 13. PAP adopts 8-point resolution to build better nation for all.
With the theme, "Our New Way Forward, A Call to Action", the resolution emphasises that it will govern the country with integrity and never tolerate corruption.
The last time a resolution was adopted was in 1988 at the party's first Convention when an eight-point Agenda for Action was revealed.
26. The following was reported in the Straits Times on 29 Mar 14 and 30 Mar 14:
Singapore has a strong anti-corruption system and values but it is not the system that will continue keeping it clean. It is the people who run it who will do so, said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.
He made this point on Friday during a dialogue at independent think-tank Chatham House, while responding to questions from Mr Malcolm Rifkind, the chair, and an audience of academics, diplomats and London's intellectual elite.
Mr Rifkind noted that the abhorrence of corruption went back to the days of former prime minister Lee Kuan Yew. Were there strains in the system now?
Whether or not the People's Action Party (PAP) can continue to run the Government depends in how well it acquits itself and continues to build on the successes of the past, and on Singaporeans themselves, said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.
Similarly, there can be no straight-line predictions that because the opposition has 40 per cent of the vote, it will not be long before it takes over government, he said, during a dialogue at Chatham House, a think-tank, yesterday.
The exchange began when Mr Rifkind noted that the PAP had been in power for more than half a century and if this was healthy.
27. Postings in the blog anaudienceofthree and complainproper have been amended for unclear passage and bad grammar. Passages are added on hindsight. Postings at complainproper3 remain unchanged as it was first posted.
72. Request
Observation After the owner sold his flat, he sent "A Request In The Public Interest" to the PM. He hopes an investigation would apportion blame among the officers and repossess the flat from the neighbour.
Text messages (not included in the blog) in House Selling 1 (70), House Selling 2 (70), House Selling 3 (70), House Selling 4 (70) and Request (72) clearly showed the influence of officers over estate agents. The intent was for the owner to sell at below market price or sell back to HDB at even lower price.
The text messages, which were emailed to MPs, enabled a message to be spread within the real estate community. It helped the owner sell his flat.
Officers (3), Neighbour (4) and Civics (10) are on the officers, neighbour and insiders respectively. In Proving (24), the owner shows a case against the officers and neighbour.
71. Environment
Observation
Passages from Triggers:
One of the greatest instances of denial involves our relationship with our environment. We willfully ignore how profoundly the environment influences our behavior. In fact, the environment is a relentless triggering mechanism that, in an instant, can change us from saint to sinner, optimist to pessimist, model citizen to thug--and make us lose sight of who we’re trying to be.
The good news is that the environment is not conducting a cloak-and-dagger operation. It’s out in the open, providing constant feedback to us. We’re often too distracted to hear what the environment is telling us. But in those moments when we’re dialed in and paying attention, the seemingly covert triggers that shape our behavior become apparent.
71. Government
Observation
1. Extract from The World Until Yesterday,
“Maintenance of peace within a society is one of the most important services that a state can provide. That service goes a long way towards explaining the apparent paradox that, since the rise of the first state governments in the Fertile Crescent about 5,400 years ago, people have more or less willingly (not just under duress) surrendered some of their individual freedoms, accepted the authority of state governments, paid taxes, and supported a comfortable individual lifestyle for the state’s leaders and officials.”
2. Right from the start there were evidence against the neighbour and officers, but as the authority did not give a reply, he blogged. He continued to blog as officers caused troubles during and after he sold his flat. The situation is better left to the Government to resolve since the problem lies with the officers. Officers had pushed for mediation through the Community Mediation Centre with the neighbour, but he thinks it is a civil and criminal case involving both the officers and neighbour.
Please refer to Report (1), Justice (18), Evidence (21), Standpoint (34), Deliberation (37) and Wealthy Families (71) for details of the case.
71. Bully
Observation
Article in Chinese on the subject of bully「霸凌」.
71. Wealthy Families
Observation
Similar dynamics are at play where wealth and high office allow unfair treatment of citizens. A form of entitlement where officers with connections are more likely to get promoted and act above their rank.
Constitutionally there is separation of powers, but when such relationships are practised extensively the whole system could be stalemated.
Examples could be found in Mistakes (72), GE2015 (50) and Authority (16). There is no reply from the Prime Minister’s Office, no reply from the President’s Office and no reply from the Public Service Commission respectively.
In Singpass (23), Assurity (23), Defect (23), CPIB (78), CPF Life (78), CPF/HDB (78), CPF 2 (78), CPF 1 (78), there were no attempt to address the issues except for one instance when officers were by-passed and the Silver Housing Bonus approved. And so with Real Estate (77) and House Selling 1 (70), where a real estate company and Council of Estate Agencies respectively did not address issues in their replies.
It all started from a complaint to Pasir Ris HDB Branch Office about a neighbour working a trade in their flat in 2007. Early postings refer to letters from the owner to Head of Pasir Ris Branch Office (HBO), Members of Parliament and various government departments including the media, but all without effect because HBO has all the connections to block the complaint.
He hopes the Second Reading of the constitutional amendments to the elected presidency could resolve the problem. In Constitution (61), passages from The Constitution of Singapore A Contextual Analysis 2015 are quoted to better understand how his case could come to be. The unresolved case having to do with dishonesty and corruption of public officers.
71. Cool
Observation
Cool How the brain’s hidden quest for cool drives our economy and shapes our world
Steven Quartz and Anette Asp
“Both a sweeping history and a scientific exploration, Cool charts the evolution of an ineffable concept that, whether or not we realize it, influences our decision making every day. Reading this book can’t make you cool, but it can give you the tools to figure out why cool matters.”
2. Mistake (72) was posted at the same time. It was a letter to the Prime Minister showing inequality and unethical conduct. The owner will update when correction is made.
3. Electoral boundaries are being redrawn and a general election could be a few months away. Will his case be brought up this time round?
71. Endgame
Observation
A blurb to Endgame Derrick Jensen,
"Author, teacher, activist, small farmer, and leading voice of uncompromising dissent, he regularly stirs auditoriums across the country with revolutionary spirit."
2. Posts that seemed to the owner to have made an impact--Discovery (9), Case (19), Behaviour (23), Integrity (25), President (26), Committee (27), Citizen (32), Standpoint (34) and House Selling 4 (70).
70. House Selling
Observation House Selling 1 is the reporting of the first salesperson to Council of Estate Agencies (CEA), House Selling 2 is the termination of service of the first salesperson, House Selling 3 is the termination of service of the second salesperson, House Selling 4 gives reasons why the owner cannot sell his flat and House Selling 5 is a query to Central Provident Fund Board (CPFB) whether it is equitable for CPF money used to purchase a flat to be returned directly to the owner upon sale of the flat and on eligibility for Silver Housing Bonus (SHB).
The owner later found an item in CPF's website "Sale of HDB Flat & Refund of CPF under Public Housing Scheme".
As to its rationale for the return of CPF money to the owner and eligibility for SHB, still waiting for a reply.
All five posts were emails sent to the MPs to ask for their assistance.
69. Help
Observation The post at civicadvocator.net on 11 May 09 was followed two weeks later by DPM Teo Chee Hean saying that the government was on the lookout for bold and visionary leaders and people who could adapt to changing environments. On 30 Mar 10 he said public officers would be encouraged to keep to the logical rather than ideological path and stayed pragmatic in making policies. And on 13 May 11 after the General Election he said politicians were forced to admit they need to connect to the people, and Public Service was forced to re-look at the way in which it formulated policies with respect to citizens.
The posting of Committee (27) on 15 Oct 11 may have generated a debate in Parliament that led the Worker's Party's General-Secretary to say his party would act as a voice for the people in Parliament on 21 Oct 11. His remark is at Overview (28).
The CUTS at the Worker's Party's website dated 7 Mar 12 was posted after Dissent (30) on 11 Feb 12.
The owner started his blog on Aug 09 and noise subsided some time after Standpoint (34) in Aug 12. It was the only way to resolve his problem.
68. Cities
Observation Ethos: predominant characteristics of a cultural community; ethics of a community.
Short Version (2), Quote (20), National Day (36), Parkinson (40), Meritocracy (41) and Elites (42) are relevant. What does Singaporeans want their leaders to do?
67. Singapore
Observation Short Version (2) indicates the officers' extensive influence through a network of contacts.
The officers influence through unofficial channels from bottom up whereas centralised control is from top to bottom. The officers build a network of contacts to advance their interest whereas authorities use centralised control to allow policies to be implemented without much obstacles.
In the case because the authorities did not take up the complaint when informed, the system disconnects. It would be of interest to examine the problem for essence. Conflict (43) has a list of 57 essences from The Five Percent.
Item 4x in Discovery (9) asks why enforcement agencies have not taken the lead, Item 1 and 2 in Evidence (21) are on types of evidence and proofs, and Item 9 and Item 10 in Behaviour (23) are on three-part virtue and political culture respectively.
In Category (80), the owner's postings are listed in eight categories: Bureaucracy, Complaint, Ethics, Explanation, Governance, Observation, Openness and Pronouncement. Later postings are mainly extracts from books but included his observation.
66. Corruption
Observation The owner uncovers a long-standing affair between officers and neighbour that allows the neighbour to work in their flat.
A team was installed in the-flat-across-the-neighbour shortly after the owner's first Meet-the-People Session. They kept an eye on the owner and monitored the activities of the neighbour. The intent was to cover up past dealing by forcing the owner to sell his flat.
It was the support of insiders that enabled the owner to point out wrongdoing. Corruption, Global Security, and World Order would refer to the insiders as bottom-up approach.
Pervasive Case (5), Question (15) and Reason (22) are the details.
65. Moral Hazard
Observation Officers did not deny the going-on. Having set the owner up, they kept referring him to Community Mediation Centre. Under normal circumstances, HDB would have came to a quick conclusion because the owner pointed to events that showed officers colluded with the neighbour and insiders assisted the owner. But high officials would not take up the case.
For more than five years the neighbour continued to work in their flat even as the owner complained. Before, it was the first owner who allowed an occupier to work in the flat and he was evicted. Following the transfer of the flat from the first owner to the neighbour, they continued with their work. The officers intended cover-up because they facilitated the transfer after the eviction. High officials kept their silent because they wanted to avoid the consequences.
An extensive network of contacts in the administration enables the neighbour to carry on a trade in their flat. Even as the Ministers instituted policy changes because of publicity in the case, the administration did not correct the problem. This is the moral hazard.
Noise may be down and less frequent after Standpoint (34), but the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour are still around to protect the neighbour.
Civics (10) and Public (11) show the extent of the problem.
64. Wisdom
Observation Finding of wrongdoings should lead to punishment and prevent the wrongdoing from being repeated. Why should the owner's case be an exception? It is only human nature that if one is allowed to get away with it, one would continue with it. When such behaviour is rewarding, it will affect the whole system.
Switch (38) and Morality (39) explain the problem.
Posts under Explanation in Category (80) are on cause and effect of the problem.
63. Empathy
Observation A society, or rather its top people, is out of touch when it would not correct wrongdoing. The owner's case is an example.
Case (19), National Day (36) and Elites (42) are on the happening.
Integrity (25), Perspective (45) and other posts under Ethics in Category (80) are on the reasoning.
62. Diplomat
Observation The problem started in Jun 07 and, as a last resort, the owner began blogging in Aug 09. Some viewers encouraged, others put-down. But it was the viewership that led to the lessening of noise with President (26) on Sep 11. The noise came down after Standpoint (34) on Aug 12.
Statements made by Ministers: Item 13 in Civics (10), Item 13 in Public (11), Item 14 and 15 in Ethics (12), Item 14r) in Comment (14), Item 7 in Authority (16), Item 9 in Reason (22), Item 13 and 14 in Proving (24), Item 12 in Ombudsman (29), Item 1 in News (31), Item 2 in Switch (38).
Pervasive Case (5) shows that the authorities did not intervene. If not for the media and insiders, the owner would still be coping with the noise.
61. Rule of Law 2
Observation
Why bureaucrats matter in the fight to preserve the rule of law
Melissa Lane is the Class of 1943 professor of politics and director of the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University. She is the author of a number of books, including Eco-Republic (2011/2012) and The Birth of Politics (2015), and has appeared often on the ‘In Our Time’ radio broadcast on BBC Radio 4.
Socrates, while serving on the Athenian Council, sought to prevent it from making an illegal decision. Martin Luther, when a council convened by the Emperor Charles V in 1521 told him to recant, is said to have declared: ‘Here I stand; I can do no other.’ The United States’ attorney general Elliot Richardson and the deputy attorney general William D Ruckelshaus both chose to resign in 1973 rather than obey President Richard Nixon’s order to fire the special prosecutor investigating Watergate. More recently, the acting attorney general Sally Yates was fired after she announced that the US Department of Justice would not cooperate in enforcing President Donald Trump’s executive order against Muslim immigrants. They all said no. Each of them, for reasons of principle, opposed an order from a higher authority (or sought to prevent its issuance). They are exceptional figures, in extraordinary circumstances. Yet most of the time, the rule of law is more mundane: it depends on officials carrying out their ordinary duties within the purposes of the offices they hold, and on citizens obeying them. That is to say, the rule of law relies upon obedience by bureaucrats, and obedience of bureaucrats – but crucially, within the established norms of the state.
The statebuilding efforts of medieval and early modern Europe are great and complex endeavours, with their own rich histories. In relation to the rule of law and role of the bureaucrats, we can think of their papal chanceries, state treasuries and imperial ministries as a kind of foundation on which modern reformers and rulers and revolutionaries alike would build liberalism and the rule of law. These bureaucracies constituted the tools of power for rulers. In providing the impartial officials, rule of law procedures and institutional forms of equality, bureaucracy constituted the mechanisms to vouchsafe people’s rights. Liberal reformers used these very mechanisms to try to extend wider rights and liberties to more and more groups.
To be sure, we must not be blind to the ways in which the machinery of state will remain a major resource for parties and politicians who seek to control and to advance their own ends. My point is that, while aspects of this machinery might remain intact, challenges to evidence-based reasoning, fair procedure and impartial officialdom – to the whole apparatus of bureaucratic office and the rule of law – threaten to corrode it. Whether in the long run the machinery itself can withstand this corrosion is an open question.
There is an irony here. Weber’s fear was that the iron cage of rationalising modernity, including bureaucracy, would stifle liberty, meaning and ultimate value, squeezing out responsible, charismatic politicians. Yet today, faced with the menace of charismatic, reckless politicians, what Weber feared as an iron cage appears to us to be the building block of some of history’s most hard-won rights. Plato looks more prescient: long ago he warned of both the charismatic but irresponsible politicians, and the insouciant, irresponsible officials who serve them, who risk eroding the norms of office on which the values of the rule of law and liberty rest.
61. Rule of Law
Observation
1. Quotes from Singapore Chronicles Law:
The adoption of the crime control model by Singapore’s criminal justice system has undoubtedly contributed to the low crime rate. Even as the values inherent in the criminal justice system are beginning to be re-examined, the system must continue to balance the public interest in ensuring that the factually innocent are not convicted and the factually guilty are not acquitted. If the criminal justice system loses sight of this goal, Singapore in future faces the real danger of forgoing the safety and security that the present system has given.
Thus, for Prime Minister Lee, the rule of law must serve the needs of society instead of being an abstract ideal that has no practical application. This conception of the rule of law was recently reiterated by Attorney-General V K Rajah, when he said that Singapore should be more concerned with having a “practical and working model” of the rule of law, that leads to four key features, namely, that key institutions are effective, incorruptible and impartial; that rights are respected and effectively enforced; that justice is accessible; and that the entire legal system is predicated upon fairness. The core idea behind the rule of law, as understood in the Singapore context, is the supremacy of the law, which must be applied to all and be above all.
2. Is there rule of law in his case? There is a trail of evidence that the authorities had not taken up but left to officers who never addressed the issue. From his observation there was collusion with the neighbour, if not why would they go to such extent to evade and cause him trouble.
In his blog, he maintains that a crime was committed and it is of public interest.
Please refer to Evidence (21), Reason (22), Behaviour (23), Deliberation (37), Principle (47), Wisdom (64) and Government (71).
61. Democracy
Observation
Wisdom from classical Greece: democracy and liberalism are both better off if we understand the difference between them
Josiah Ober
The long search for the best possible political order had come to a close. Liberal democracy – defined as popular sovereignty plus individual autonomy and human rights – was the answer.
The cognitive scientist Steven Pinker contrasts liberal democracies with regimes based on demonising, utopian ideologies, concluding that: ‘democracies are vastly less murderous than alternative forms of government’. Like other modern writers, Pinker uses ‘democracy’ as shorthand for ‘liberal democracy’, meaning a grab-bag of favoured conditions: popular sovereignty, rule of law, voting rights, human rights, free speech, equal opportunity, separation of church and state, distributive justice, and a market-based economy. To its ancient Greek inventors, democracy meant simply collective self-government by citizens.
The history of citizen self-government in the Greek city-states clarifies what democracy is – and what it does (and does not) deliver. Ancient Athens, like some other Greek city-states, was a democracy, not a liberal democracy. Ancient Athenians neither embraced human rights nor separated religion from coercive state authority. Liberalism is a moral ideal born of the 18th-century Enlightenment and centred on the value of individual autonomy. Liberalism offers reasons why rights should be regarded as universal, as inhering in each individual human being, and why a coercive state must be neutral in regard to religion. A political regime might be liberal but not democratic – the 19th century Austro-Hungarian empire, for example.
The rule governing the practice of ostracism provides a telling example of a limit on the Assembly’s legislative authority – a limit that was democratic but not liberal. Each year, at a meeting of the Assembly, the Athenians voted on whether to hold an ostracism. Usually they voted ‘no’. On 15 known occasions, they voted ‘yes’. Then they held a second meeting, in the public square, to which each citizen brought a fragment of pottery (ostrakon) on which he (or a literate friend) scratched the name of the man he thought most deserved to be exiled from Athens for 10 years. The plurality winner of this ‘unpopularity contest’ was thus expelled. There was no trial, and no appeal.
This is an important point because many people today suppose that limiting the power of government is a modern, explicitly liberal innovation. It is not. A democracy that is not liberal can impose limits upon itself. Democratic citizens can choose the rule of law as a constitutional principle, and they can do so without invoking the mystical notion that it is the laws that do the ruling. Democracy need not be a majoritarian train wreck.
The people of Demopolis are self-interested in the usual ways that people are, and no more naturally cooperative than other people. But they do agree on three things: they want to create a state that is 1) stable and secure, 2) prosperous enough to compete with rival states, and 3) non-tyrannical – it is not ruled by a powerful individual or coalition. The people of Demopolis can create new constitutional rules for their state, but, if the new order is to succeed, they must limit those rules to those that its diverse population will actively support.
The three basic rules – requiring participation in making and enforcing the rules, establishing procedures for shared and effective decision-making, and forbidding legislation that would threaten the conditions necessary for making and carrying out decisions – yield a basic government for the imaginary Demopolis. That government has core features identical to those of actual ancient Greek democracy: collective and limited self-government by a large and diverse body of politically free and equal citizens. That government is not liberal, in the contemporary sense of guaranteeing universal human rights, but neither is it majoritarian tyranny. It is, in fact, democracy.
Both democracy and liberalism offer laudable features for a modern society. But we must not underestimate how hard it is to sustain collective self-governance by citizens while protecting and advancing liberal rights. That difficulty is manifest in the 21st-century US, as the country struggles with global and domestic terrorism, political polarisation, new and old forms of discrimination and group identity, and growing economic inequality. The prospects of both democracy and liberalism, at home and abroad, will be much improved if people understand the difference between them.
61. Human Rights
Observation
Are human rights anything more than legal conventions?
John Tasioulas is the inaugural Chair of Politics, Philosophy and Law, and director of the Yeoh Tiong Lay Centre for Politics, Philosophy and Law at King's College London. He is working on his latest book, Human Rights: From Morality to Law (forthcoming, OUP).
Now, it is true that since the middle of the previous century an elaborate architecture of human rights law has emerged at the international, regional and domestic levels, one that is effective to wildly varying degrees. And for most practical purposes, it might be that we can simply appeal to these laws when we talk about human rights. But, ultimately, this legalistic approach is unsatisfactory.
My own view is that human rights are rooted in the universal interests of human beings, each and every one of whom possesses an equal moral status arising from their common humanity. In other words, in defending human rights, we will need to appeal to the inherent value of being a member of the human species and, in addition, the interests shared by all human beings in things like friendship, knowledge, achievement, play, and so on. And we will need to ask whether these considerations generate duties that are owed to each and every human being. This proposal is hardly uncontroversial. The appeal to the inherent value of humanity will be contested by some as a brute prejudice – a ‘speciesism’ on a par with racism. Similarly, the appeal to universal interests will be contested by those who think that human rights are ultimately about respecting individual freedom regardless of whether it advances the right-holder’s well-being.
Whether I’m right or not, I am convinced that we cannot sustain our commitment to human rights on the cheap, by invoking only the law or the assumptions of our liberal democratic culture. Only a deeper justification can explain why we are right to embody them in the law, or maintain a liberal democratic culture, in the first place. This has precisely been the aim of philosophical defences of human rights from the 12th century up until very recent times. To keep our human rights culture in good order, we cannot avoid engaging with the question of justification. And we should think of this not as the exclusive domain of professional philosophers, but as a process of public reasoning to which all citizens are called to contribute.
61. Head of State
Observation
1. In Right Men (25), the quotes in Chinese with translation in English are relevant to his case.
2. In Madame Bovary (61), political indifference to human rights is examined in Feng Xiaogang’s tale of a village woman’s search for justice in mainland China. The award-winning film is titled《我不是潘金蓮》(I am not Pan Jin Lian) while for its Western audience it is “I am not Madame Bovary”. The people in China are familiar with the first female character while Westerners are with the second. Though of different story, both female characters are considered “bad women”.
3. In Bully (71), an article on the subject of bully「霸凌」. (Use https://www.mdbg.net/chindict/chindict.php for character by character translation if required.)
4. In Amos Yee (61), the teenage was granted asylum by an immigration judge in US. The conclusion of the judge was “well-founded fear of future persecution in Singapore”. All paragraphs in the article are extracts from economist.com, asianbreakingnews.net and thestate.com.
5. In Feud (25), “Singapore and the Fighting Lees Will squabbling in the ruling family lead to more political debate?”: an opinion piece by The Wall Street Journal that Singapore “could benefit from more robust democratic debate”
Extract from Speech by Workers’ Party Chief Low Thia Khiang on 38 Oxley Road Dispute:
First, I am of the view that the correct platform to settle the private dispute is the Court. Individuals who made less serious allegations that undermine the reputation and authority of the Prime Minister and Cabinet Ministers have been brought to task for libel. There is no reason why this time it should be different because it is from the Lee family; and the allegations are much more serious.
Given the past track record, not doing so would risk the Government giving the impression that it is afraid of what the Lee siblings might say or reveal. This will taint the trust Singaporeans has placed on the Government and compromise the high standards that the Government prides itself on achieving and aspires to maintain.
----------
If the Prime Minister had sued his siblings, he could have been cross-examined on other issues such as why the complaint in this blog could not be resolved. Would such a complaint have been irrelevant and out of context?
6. In Government (71), there were evidence against the neighbour and officers. He blogged because the authority did not give a reply. He continues to blog as officers caused troubles during and after he sold his flat.
The situation is for the Government to resolve since the problem lies with the officers. The officers had pushed for mediation between he and the neighbour through the Community Mediation Centre, but he thinks it is a civil and criminal case involving both the officers and neighbour.
Please refer to Report (1), Justice (18), Evidence (21), Standpoint (34), Deliberation (37) and Wealthy Families (71) for details of the case.
7. In Environment (71), passages from Triggers:
People have compliance issues for two reasons: either they think they have a better way of doing something (classic need-to-win syndrome) or they’re unwilling to commit fully when it means obeying someone else’s rules of behavior (classic not-invented-here syndrome). Such orneriness often degrades the situation instead of making it better.
The takeaway: When we engage in noncompliance, we’re not just being sloppy and lazy. It’s more aggressive and rude than that. We’re thumbing our noses at the world, announcing, “The rules don’t apply to us. Don’t rely on us. We don’t care.” We’re drawing a line at good enough and refusing to budge beyond it.
8. In Gene (25), a person’s abilities may be in his genes but his character is acquired over a lifetime.
Quote from The Gene:
History repeats itself, in part because the genome repeats itself. And the genome repeats itself, in part because history does. The impulses, ambitions, fantasies, and desires that drive human history are, at least in part, encoded in the human genome. And human history has, in turn, selected genomes that carry these impulses, ambitions, fantasies, and desires. This self-fulfilling circle of logic is responsible for some of the most magnificent and evocative qualities in our species, but also some of the most reprehensible. It is far too much to ask ourselves to escape the orbit of this logic, but recognizing its inherent circularity, and being skeptical of its overreach, might protect the weak from the will of the strong, and the “mutant” from being annihilated by the “normal.”
Perhaps even that skepticism exists somewhere in our twenty-one thousand genes. Perhaps the compassion that such skepticism enables is also encoded indelibly in the human genome.
Perhaps it is part of what makes us human.
9. In Humans 3.0 (51), a passage from Humans 3.0:
When I started working on this book, my hypothesis was that Humans 3.0 were the embodiment of the Anthropocene era, where mankind had evolved from being subjugated by nature to mastering it. Over the past few years of delving into this evolution, however, my views have evolved. Throughout history, we’ve bounced between competition and cooperation, often not aware that we were doing so. Humans 3.0, the updated software to the hardware supplied by nature, isn’t just the synthesis of that dialectic; it also represents the emergence of our consciousness of it. We’re not just becoming a different kind of people; we’re becoming aware of the fact that we’re becoming a different kind of people. Humans 3.0 therefore aren’t just group harmony or competitive individualism. We’re both, a combination of the two, an unprecedented step in history. It’s been a slow process so far to get here, but, just like technology behind it, it’s speeding up.
61. Amos Yee
Observation
Amos Yee, the teenage, was granted asylum by an immigration judge in US. The conclusion of the judge was “well-founded fear of future persecution in Singapore”. All paragraphs in the article are extracts from economist.com, asianbreakingnews.net and thestate.com.
61. Madame Bovary
Story Outline
Film review: I Am Not Madame Bovary – Fan Bingbing defies petty bureaucracy in dark satire.
A Kafkaesque tale about the Chinese bureaucracy’s indifference to the people’s legal rights, it finds Fan Bingbing in top form as Li Xuelian, a provincial woman who is swindled by her ex-husband and shunned by the courts. Li’s case is complicated in that the couple have faked their divorce to secure a new home, but the man ends up marrying another woman and even sullies Li’s name with claims of infidelity.
Adapted by Liu Zhenyun from his own 2012 novel, I Did Not Kill My Husband, the dark social satire follows Li as she spends the next 10 years petitioning various levels of government, often concluding with a trip to crash the annual national congress in Beijing. Dry humour permeates the story, which sees embarrassed officials go from turning Li away to clumsily muffling her to save their jobs.
Edmund Lee
61. Wrongdoings
Observation
1. The owner hopes his letter to the president, after amendments to elected presidency, will draw his case to a close.
2. More correspondence were added to Defect (23) showing officers did not reply to evidence and would not refer to their superior. The case is about a flourescent fitting dropping from the ceiling of studio apartments.
3. In Assurity (23), officers repeatedly caused delays by not sending him the pin mailer to activate Singpass 2FA (two factors authentication).
4. In Singpass (23), officers blocked the updating of account details required for the change of password. The website automatically prompted updating of account and requested mobile phone and/or email upon his mother’s first log-in, but he was unable to help his mother complete the process. Official document dated 5 Jul 2015 indicated those features have been in place for about a year.
5. In Enlightenment (25), the writer quotes sayings and proverbs applicable to past and current events. And Tradition (27) is on the importance of rules. Articles are in Chinese.
Under the category Complaint, it could be seen that officers did not reply to evidence and did not refer to their superiors when requested over many issues since 2007.
6. In Abuse (61), a Taiwanese writer is against the death penalty because of danger of abuse by people in government. Written in Chinese. (For those whose Chinese is not up to the mark, use https://www.mdbg.net/chindict/chindict.php for listening and translation.)
7. In Constitution (61), passages from The Constitution of Singapore A Contextual Analysis 2015 are quoted to better understand how his case could come to be. The unresolved case having to do with dishonesty and corruption of public officers.
8. The lessons in Wealthy Families (71) may apply to officers with strong backing:
‘The proverb “shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations” is not used to mock the third generation; it is not stupidity or incompetence that leads to the demise of family wealth. The key message of the proverb is that there are invisible forces at work that have a debilitating effect on character building. These invisible forces, which we refer to as the “wealth trap,” make it very difficult to pass on the first-generation mentality and values to the second and third generation--precisely the mentality and values that brought financial success to the family.’
9. Dialogue from Better Living Through Criticism (of Criticism [50]):
Q: What about the public’s interest, though? We have so much to choose from, and so much of it is cheap or free. And a lot of it is better than what came before. Greater abundance, higher quality, seamless distribution--why complain about any of that?
A: I’m not! But there are hidden costs, and lingering questions. How are you supposed to choose, in the face of this abundance? What will guide your choices? There are really only two options: marketers, whose job is to sell--that is, to spin, to hype, to lie--and critics, whose job is to tell the truth.
Q: How can it be the truth, though? It’s only your opinion. I thought we’d established that: your voice.
A: You haven’t been listening. The voice of the critic is, above all, an honest voice, a voice that can be trusted. Not obeyed or blindly agreed with, but trusted in the way you’d trust a friend.
61. Constitution
Observation
The Constitution of Singapore A Contextual Analysis Kevin YL Tan
2. Constitutionalism in Singapore
II. The Constitution as Supreme Law
A. The Amendment Regime
Although Great Britain remains one of the few countries in the world with no written constitution, almost every one of its former colonies--including Singapore--has a written constitution. Written constitutions differ significantly from unwritten ones in that their validity and supremacy emanate from the people directly, rather than through Parliament. As pointed out by the American constitutional law scholar Edward Corwin many years ago, in the:
written Constitution, higher law at last attained a form which made possible the attribution to it of an entirely new sort of validity, the validity of a statute emanating from the sovereign people. Once the binding force of higher law was transferred to this new basis, the notion of the sovereignty of the ordinary legislative organ disappeared automatically, since that cannot be a sovereign law-making body which is subordinate to another law making body.
The Constitution is thus a higher law that cannot be easily supplanted by an ordinary act of the legislature.
Presidency Thio Li-ann
2. The Rationale, Inception and Evolution of the Scheme
Are the President’s Powers Exhaustive
Legal texts are rarely exhaustive, as human mind cannot exhaust all the possible contingencies attending how an institution may operate in practice.
Article 21(2)(i) of the Constitution provides that the President may exceptionally act in his discretion with respect to “any other function the performance of which the President is authorised by this Constitution to act in his discretion”. The issue then arises as to whether the President may act in a certain manner that is not specifically prohibited in the constitutional text, or whether specific authorisation is needed before he may act in his personal discretion.
Insofar as the constitutional text is not exhaustive and insofar as the Constitution is a “living institution”, presidential powers may evolve through practice and be found in two further sources. First and more conventionally, norms may be found in constitutional conventions - maxims of political morality derived from long practice, which engender expectations of certain forms of conduct. While not binding as a matter of law, a flouting of convention would entail political repercussions.
If the President oversteps his powers, short of the Article 22L removal procedure, the matter will be addressed not by judicial review, but by political negotiation whose resolution depends on the sense and sensibility of the relevant actors. For example, when President Ong Teng Cheong called a farewell press conference in 1999 and criticised the Government in various aspects, Cabinet ministers responded and showed their disquiet by issuing a statement in Parliament and debating the matter, to diffuse the weight of the President’s critique. This will be discussed in greater detail below. To give another example, when President S R Nathan called a press conference to explain his thinking behind approving the first ever draw-down on national reserves in 2009, this elicited no public government disapproval. Perhaps whether or not the President may call a press conference without eliciting government disapproval in discussing presidential functions depends whether this is critical or explanatory in content and tone. There is nothing to prevent the President from calling a press conference, but if the purpose is to criticise the Government, one would expect a strong government rebuttal before Parliament and other forums.
61. Abuse
Observation The writer is against the death penalty for only one reason. Governments should not be allowed the rights to take the life of citizens because of the constant danger of abuse by people in government.
61. Rights
Observation Why was the owner's case ignored? The government could clarify what went on within the system.
The owner makes his complaint in Plea (7), Record (8) and Behaviour (23).
Posts asking the government to step in are under Governance in Category (80).
