The Court of Appeal has allowed the Attorney-General Chambers to withdraw its appeal against the application by …

The Court of Appeal (CA) has allowed the Attorney General's Chambers (AGC) to withdraw its appeal against the application by Hougang resident Vellama Marie Muthu seeking the Court to declare that the Prime Minister does not have "unfettered discretion" in deciding whether and when to call by-elections.

The High Court will now hear the case on a date to be decided.

In a hearing that lasted half an hour on Wednesday morning, senior counsel David Chong, acting for the AGC, said the withdrawal was because the AGC felt there is no substratum in the case brought by Vellama now since the Prime Minister has called a by-election in the Hougang constituency.

In short, he argued that there is no case to be heard and thus the AGC is withdrawing its appeal against Justice Pillai's decision in March for the case to be heard in open court.

The AGC's appeal was also objected to by M Ravi, lawyer for Vellama, who had filed an application to strike out the AGC's appeal. M Ravi said the AGC's

Hougang resident Vellama Marie Muthu rescinds her offer to withdraw her application from the Court. (Yahoo! photo/Andrew …

Vallama Marie Muthu's application to the High Court to order the Prime Minister to call a by-election in Hougang, and to declare that the PM does not have "unfettered discretion" in deciding whether or when to call by-elections, has taken another turn.

In the latest development on Sunday, Vellama's lawyer, M Ravi, informed the Attorney General's Chambers (AGC) that Vellama is rescinding her offer to withdraw her application from the Court.

This follows comments made by the AGC to Vellama's offer, made on Friday, 11 May. In that offer to the AGC, M Ravi said his client is prepared to withdraw her application because "the factual objective of her litigation has now been achieved" with the Prime Minister having called a by-election in Hougang.

Her offer to the AGC, however, was made on the conditions that the AGC withdraw its appeal against High Court judge Philip Pillai's decision on 3 April to allow the case to be heard. Also, the AGC should not seek costs against Vellama in the case.

(Getty Images)

My mother passed away 10 and a half years ago, shortly after I turned 13.

It was a death I did not expect at all, and it was for that reason that I was more shocked and angry at my elder siblings and father for not telling me—because they all seemed more prepared for her eventuality than I was.

I don't quite understand my behaviour in the days following her passing. The wake passed in a blur, for me, and consisted mainly of my siblings and I sitting at the playground with a friend and senior from school who played card games with us. I do remember the day of the funeral, though. I remember walking behind the hearse, listening to a really bad recording of "Amazing Grace" and deciding then and there that I hated the song.

In the immediate few months that followed, though, I eventually led myself to believe that my mum had simply gone on a very long holiday, and would not be coming back anytime soon. That seemed pretty acceptable to me at first, but as I made visits to my mother's niche

Not many Singaporeans can distinguish between the mandatory death penalty and the death penalty. (Getty Images …

Singapore's mandatory death penalty for capital crimes is well known. Increasingly, however, critics of the law have been more vocal in recent years. Awareness of the death penalty has grown, albeit rather slowly, among Singaporeans as campaigners against this particular law continue to seek its abolition.

Many Singaporeans, however, still do not or cannot make the distinction between the idea of the death penalty (DP) and that of the mandatory death penalty (MDP) in capital cases. The MDP provides that anyone who is found guilty of a capital crime must be sentenced to death.

Judges have no discretionary powers to mete out any other sentence.

For example, if one is found guilty of trafficking above the statutory threshold of a certain prohibited drug, the sentence is automatic death. That is the only and compulsory sentence the trial judge can and must mete out.

While some have called for the total abolition of the death penalty itself, others want the process by which the mandatory

Policy makers have not yet taken a hard look at the government's ideological roots, says our blogger. (Yahoo! file …

The quick backstory of what Singaporeans have seen since the results of the 7 May 2011 general elections shows a People's Action Party government correcting policy mistakes that got voters so worked up that they brought the ruling party's share of vote to a historic low of  60.1 per cent and threw out two ministers and a senior minister of state from a group representation constituency (GRC).

Some unpopular ministers left the Cabinet, and hot-button issues like transport, immigration and housing are now being tackled with some urgency and eagerness.The phrase  "inclusive growth" keeps cropping up in politicians' speeches and interviews.

Roots vs Reality

But what we have yet to see is the policy makers taking a close and hard look at this government's ideological roots and whether the policies that grew out of these firm beliefs are still relevant. And more important, whether they are realistic to a population that find their lives squeezed by demands at home and at work.

For

If you've been following the stampede of objections after one professor suggested "shock therapy" to up the wages of the lower income, you would have read that higher wages alone is considered a potentially "dangerous" thing.

It can cause all sorts of ill effects, which the prime minister himself laid out in no uncertain terms. "Business costs would go up, affecting Singapore's competitiveness, and inflation could rise," the Straits Times reported him as having said in his May Day message.

I pity the low-income earners. It seems that asking for a pay rise engenders much hand-wringing from the powers-that-be. The bottom strata of our society, who do not work less hard than anyone else, is required to raise productivity before talk of any wage increase is entertained. Preferably, they should raise it by 3 per cent every year for the next 10 years, as Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam had pledged to achieve.

Otherwise, the low income earners might cause businesses to go bust,

By Alex Au of Yawning Bread

The debate that Lim Chong Yah kicked off is a welcome one. He has argued that if Singapore is ever to make progress on narrowing the income gap, it is going to require strong affirmative action by the state. He has proposed double-digit increases for the bottom wage earners over a few years coupled with a moratorium on salary increases for top earners.

Predictably, the government has megaphoned its opposition. It will be economic suicide, it says, touting its own plan for improving productivity through financial incentives while gently tightening up on the import of foreign labour instead.

Look away from the specifics and you'll see a fundamental issue being debated. Look harder and you will see another fundamental issue NOT debated.

Let me begin by dealing with the first.

Ultimately, Lim Chong Yah's proposal rests on a belief that unless there is sufficient pain, productivity improvements will not be made. The government however is saying let's make

Broadcasts by Rediffusion were a part of life for many older Singaporeans, says our blogger. (Getty Images)

"Mrs Grace Fu, Senior Minister of State for Information, Communications and the Arts, said the closure of Redifussion will be a loss to many but 'demands are changing and it is a commercial decision'." — Straits Times, 10 April, 2012.

Rediffusion is a radio service which began life in Singapore in 1949, just after the war. It gained popularity among Singapore's ethnic Chinese community with its programmes in Hokkien, Teochew and Cantonese. The government's focus on promoting bilingualism, basically English and a mother tongue, saw dialect programmes banned from the air waves in 1982. That decision was changed in the late 1990s to allow several hours of dialect programmes.

Now, after 63 years in operation, Rediffusion has announced it is shutting down on 30 April. Pleas for help from the station have so far fallen on deaf ears. The government, as Fu's comments seem to indicate, is willing to let "commercial decision" or market forces decide the fate of this icon of