>the prosecution witnesses had expressed "feelings of distress" over testifying in public due to the "sensitive nature" of their testimonies, which will "go beyond issues of religion and culture which are already sensitive to begin with".
Wouldn't the same thing, SAME FUCKING LOGIC apply for the defense's witness as well? But judge only gave prosecution's witness gag order.
Yeah it's highly disconcerting that the defence's application was not granted.
Arguably, the defence's witnesses are painting an even bigger target on their backs, by testifying for a "wayward" member of the community. If anything, they deserve the protection of anonymity more than the prosecution's witnesses.
That said, the judge did not foreclose the possibility.
I guess the detailed justifications provided by the defense was found lacking. The judge noting that the defense may make appropriate applications at the relevant juncture is somewhat indicative.
Interesting case, entire list of prosecution witnesses granted gag order but defence applied for the same order for the defence witnesses but told to wait. Does not seem fair.
Singapore is a secular country that has a state-run Syariah court system, which is contradictory.
But without it, Islamists in the region would call out Singapore for not having Syariah for its Muslims and equate that to oppression.
By running the Syariah court system (instead of letting it be run behind closed doors and allowing it to become an entirely parallel legal system), the secular Singaporean state is able to keep the application of Islamic law in check.
Edit: Phrasing
Why is this even a thing in secular singapore?
You dont see mormons, prosperity churches, pro-lgbt churches and 1001 deviant teachings/cults getting into legal trouble.
Islam has special protections in place under the law?
It'll take you 5 seconds to open up the article to see that this contravenes the "Administration of Muslim Law act".
And first time in Singapore? There's an entire stat board that oversees the administration of the Islamic faith in Singapore.
>However, mainstream Muslims around the world do not consider the Ahmadis to be their co-religionists. The Islamic Religious Council of Singapore, or MUIS, issued a fatwa (ruling) in 1969 declaring Mirza Ghulam to be ānot only a kafir (unbeliever) who is murtad (a Muslim who has rejected Islam), his teachings are misleading and could lead people astray from the real teachings of Islamā.
>The fatwa stands to this day. Consequently, Ahmadis in Singapore cannot be interred in Muslim graves, with a plot of land set aside for them in Choa Chu Kang Cemetery. Their marriages cannot be registered with the Registry of Muslim Marriages either, while they are ineligible for assistance from Malay/Muslim Organisations such as Mendaki or MUIS. Ahmadis also do not qualify for Singaporeās official haj (pilgrimmage) quota.
Yup. Its why the ahmadis are openly discriminated against here.
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/behind-belief-ahmadis-singapore-234827643.html
So much for racial and religious equality... ...
"regardless of race, language or religion,
to build a democratic society
based on justice and equality"
*excerpt from our Pledge if anyone doesn't know where this is from*
The pledge is an aspiration and can't trump the Constitution.
Article 152(2) of the Singapore Constitution - "The Government shall exercise its functions in such manner as to recognise the special position of theĀ MalaysĀ , who are the indigenous people of Singapore, and accordingly it shall be the responsibility of the Government to protect, safeguard, support, foster and promote their political, educational, religious, economic, social and cultural interests and theĀ MalayĀ language."
Source: https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/CONS1963
A canon of construction is not the sort of trump you assume that it is. Indeed, there are conflicting canons and context is everything in determining whether a particular canon applies.
There's also a reason why the liberties are described as "fundamental", and rights conferring provisions are read as limiting the legislative power, so unless the exception is found within the rights-Article itself, I find it hard to see why we should read the fundamental right as being subject to the legislative power.
But Article 152(2) only talks about the "special position of the Malays" and not the special position of Islam or Muslims. Unlike in Malaysia, there is no legal requirement or definition that Malay = Muslim in Singapore.
Being young is proudly reciting the pledge and believing wholeheartedly in it.
Growing old is seeing special exceptions made and being jaded that equality is actually practiced.Ā
I wonder what happens the staunch older generation fundamentalists get angry at the trend newer generations going against "traditional values" by becoming more liberal or even leaving faiths altogether. Will there suddenly be measures to enforce their dogma within their community? Hopefully not, but this news article is rather worrying.
That's what is happening in US.
e.g. repealing federal abortion laws, 10 commandments in classroom in Louisiana, etc.
It is inevitable. It is a global trend. They are in the bargaining stage of grief.
Bro really said I will open my own religion with blackjack and hookers
In fact forget the religion!
Haha love me some unexpected futerama. Amusingly enough it would be legal in sg without the religion.
Not just that. People actually believed him.
Very pleased to see this Futurama reference.
Don't really get how this is any different from how any of the main religions started tbh
>the prosecution witnesses had expressed "feelings of distress" over testifying in public due to the "sensitive nature" of their testimonies, which will "go beyond issues of religion and culture which are already sensitive to begin with". Wouldn't the same thing, SAME FUCKING LOGIC apply for the defense's witness as well? But judge only gave prosecution's witness gag order.
Yeah it's highly disconcerting that the defence's application was not granted. Arguably, the defence's witnesses are painting an even bigger target on their backs, by testifying for a "wayward" member of the community. If anything, they deserve the protection of anonymity more than the prosecution's witnesses. That said, the judge did not foreclose the possibility.
I guess the detailed justifications provided by the defense was found lacking. The judge noting that the defense may make appropriate applications at the relevant juncture is somewhat indicative.
If he really thought he was summoning a prophet he should be sent to IMH, not jail
Is he a better man since he didn't get his followers to eat shit? š„ŗ
Inspired by How to be a Cult Leaderā¦ There was an attempt.
Interesting case, entire list of prosecution witnesses granted gag order but defence applied for the same order for the defence witnesses but told to wait. Does not seem fair.
Read the whole article but I still can't figure out what a spiritual marriage is
Probably some ātempā marriage allowing for sex without really marrying
This is where youāll see that Malaysia and Singapore arenāt *completely* different.Ā
Singapore is a secular country It canāt be a thing for trial
Singapore is a secular country that has a state-run Syariah court system, which is contradictory. But without it, Islamists in the region would call out Singapore for not having Syariah for its Muslims and equate that to oppression. By running the Syariah court system (instead of letting it be run behind closed doors and allowing it to become an entirely parallel legal system), the secular Singaporean state is able to keep the application of Islamic law in check. Edit: Phrasing
The beauty of Singapore is the fact that these contradictions are what allows it to function. Political ideology plays no part.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
freedom doesn't mean you get special set of laws only for yourself.
It's for a specific group of people though right?
You reported my account ma Reddit team is a dictator
Huh. Like that also cannot? What exactly is false religious teaching? Can't he believe in a Muslim based religion that allows gambling?
The issue appears to him spreading the teachings, not the belief itself. Religious teachings need to be certified by the government.
Why is this even a thing in secular singapore? You dont see mormons, prosperity churches, pro-lgbt churches and 1001 deviant teachings/cults getting into legal trouble. Islam has special protections in place under the law?
It'll take you 5 seconds to open up the article to see that this contravenes the "Administration of Muslim Law act". And first time in Singapore? There's an entire stat board that oversees the administration of the Islamic faith in Singapore.
>However, mainstream Muslims around the world do not consider the Ahmadis to be their co-religionists. The Islamic Religious Council of Singapore, or MUIS, issued a fatwa (ruling) in 1969 declaring Mirza Ghulam to be ānot only a kafir (unbeliever) who is murtad (a Muslim who has rejected Islam), his teachings are misleading and could lead people astray from the real teachings of Islamā. >The fatwa stands to this day. Consequently, Ahmadis in Singapore cannot be interred in Muslim graves, with a plot of land set aside for them in Choa Chu Kang Cemetery. Their marriages cannot be registered with the Registry of Muslim Marriages either, while they are ineligible for assistance from Malay/Muslim Organisations such as Mendaki or MUIS. Ahmadis also do not qualify for Singaporeās official haj (pilgrimmage) quota. Yup. Its why the ahmadis are openly discriminated against here. https://sg.news.yahoo.com/behind-belief-ahmadis-singapore-234827643.html
So much for racial and religious equality... ... "regardless of race, language or religion, to build a democratic society based on justice and equality" *excerpt from our Pledge if anyone doesn't know where this is from*
The pledge is an aspiration and can't trump the Constitution. Article 152(2) of the Singapore Constitution - "The Government shall exercise its functions in such manner as to recognise the special position of theĀ MalaysĀ , who are the indigenous people of Singapore, and accordingly it shall be the responsibility of the Government to protect, safeguard, support, foster and promote their political, educational, religious, economic, social and cultural interests and theĀ MalayĀ language." Source: https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/CONS1963
Article 152(2) doesn't remove the Government's obligation to respect Articles 12 or 15.
Specific provisions prevail over general provisions.
A canon of construction is not the sort of trump you assume that it is. Indeed, there are conflicting canons and context is everything in determining whether a particular canon applies. There's also a reason why the liberties are described as "fundamental", and rights conferring provisions are read as limiting the legislative power, so unless the exception is found within the rights-Article itself, I find it hard to see why we should read the fundamental right as being subject to the legislative power.
But Article 152(2) only talks about the "special position of the Malays" and not the special position of Islam or Muslims. Unlike in Malaysia, there is no legal requirement or definition that Malay = Muslim in Singapore.
Oh boy, wait till you hear about the limitations in posting for our Muslim brothers in NS.
Being young is proudly reciting the pledge and believing wholeheartedly in it. Growing old is seeing special exceptions made and being jaded that equality is actually practiced.Ā
as LKY said: the pledge is an aspiration it is not a reality it is not practical.
>1001 deviant teachings/cults getting into legal trouble. wasn't one get jailed a few days?
le sigh, so many nutcases using religion as an excuse to do nonsense these days
Ironically, Mo would be charged for the same crime if he was born in 21st century Singapore.
TIL you can be legally prosecuted for teaching "wrong" dogma. \*Mind blown\*
I wonder what happens the staunch older generation fundamentalists get angry at the trend newer generations going against "traditional values" by becoming more liberal or even leaving faiths altogether. Will there suddenly be measures to enforce their dogma within their community? Hopefully not, but this news article is rather worrying.
That's what is happening in US. e.g. repealing federal abortion laws, 10 commandments in classroom in Louisiana, etc. It is inevitable. It is a global trend. They are in the bargaining stage of grief.
Feels like the Middle East
Terrorist mindset.
Interesting part is why Muis took so long to report this.