Singapore Expats Forum

Horrors awaiting parents of NS defaulters

A moderated forum for serious discussions only.
User avatar
Mad Scientist
Director
Director
Posts: 3459
Joined: Thu, 03 Dec 2009
Location: TIMBUKTU

Postby Mad Scientist » Sun, 10 Nov 2013 6:08 pm

smoko wrote:@MS I have no bad intention but am trying to help my rellies. Do you know a good lawyer that they can consult ?


OK SMOKO. You are going to smoke the peace pipe with me on this one
I am walking on thin ice to calm you down
1. As you have read thru my posting and from Mindef , CMPB even foreign mission basically you are into grips with the age issue
2. The child is the one the will face the music period.
3. The parents if they still live in SG will be harass or prosecute if the prosecutors can proof beyond reasonable doubt that they help their child to jump ship hence the $5K fine.
4. If the child is overseas and still holding SG PP that it will not get renewal once expired as all renewal is done at ICA SG although you submit in overseas
5, If the child holds a foreign PP he is fine as long as he does not enter SG or in transit as his name will be in that flight manifest. To detain or not is anybody guess. There are several cases prior to the internet era that defaulters got haul back or detained. Again it all depends on if the child is going to be an example for all would be
6. If the parents lives overseas, the SG Gahmen cannot do any harm unless they return to SG . If the parents hold foreign PP chances will be slimmer even if they were to return to SG but that depends if the parents knowingly which is a crime hold dual PP. If the parents renounces theirs prior to the child NS issues then it is fine but if it is otherwise I do not want to gamble with it
7. Interpol has too many things to do other then hauling NS defaulters. There are categories on when Interpol steps in. NS defaulters is NOT one of them.
8. The implication if the child mess up his life is by not gaining employment in SG nor a social visit.
9. Lawyers just sucks your money away with little help.
10. We did hauled one chap back from Brisbane but he was already a "deserter" for 7 years.
11. Unless your family is a white horse category then frets no more

NS guidelines and its revisions came about mainly targeting the Chinese ethnic population as this groups has the wealth and means to jump ship.
LKY , GKS knew this hence this guidelines was put up
This group is the most passive, obedient but least loyalty towards SG.
Take example of the piano man, Teh Chean Wan, and many ex MP that are Chinese which try to defy the odds and failed

Does this satisfy your doubts ?
The positive thinker sees the invisible, feels the intangible, and achieves the impossible.Yahoo !!!

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Sun, 10 Nov 2013 7:40 pm

JR8 wrote:But do you know, was their nationwide conscription during the entire 'Cold War' period?


sundaymorningstaple wrote:It rather immaterial, frankly speaking. Not everybody was called up during the VN war either. Nor the Korean war. The fact that it was still used is all that matters, not the quantity. Only enough are drafted to fill out the requirements at any given time.


I did not know that! So the draft must have felt like something of a lottery? How strange that must have been to go through - you get drafted but your next-door schoolfriend doesn't.

My father got drafted in WW2. Called up, well I think he must have been 17 or 17.5. I don't think there was a lottery though, everyone bar the invalided had to serve (hence my presumption it worked the same way in the US).

User avatar
sundaymorningstaple
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 35115
Joined: Thu, 11 Nov 2004
Location: Still Fishing!
Contact:

Postby sundaymorningstaple » Sun, 10 Nov 2013 7:57 pm

It WAS a lottery. You buys your ticket (Your date of birth) and you takes your chances stay and hope or run to Canada (as quite a few did).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_lottery_(1969)

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Sun, 10 Nov 2013 8:26 pm

Thanks for that.

Just *wow*! I had no idea.

I wonder if such a system could work today; or whether people would rise up against it. 'Picking lottery balls from a jar, to send you off to war'.... :???: I suspect the response from many these days would be 'Cuff that man, jail me!'


p.s. Is there any popular symbolism to the first and last picked dates, Sep 14, and Sep 24th? I can see how they could figure within popular culture/art/music from the time. You know like say a blues song from the time, about being born on Sep 14th, vs ones patriotism, or what ever...

How did it work. Did they do these lotteries weekly/monthly? When they were drawn, did you subsequently discuss with your friends/neighbours 'Hey they picked July 3rd last night, Jeez, damned close shave there man!'...?

What a terrible thing. I never knew this draft method existed.

User avatar
sundaymorningstaple
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 35115
Joined: Thu, 11 Nov 2004
Location: Still Fishing!
Contact:

Postby sundaymorningstaple » Sun, 10 Nov 2013 10:21 pm

I forget the frequency. As I enlisted when I was 17 it really wasn't of any consequence to me. By enlisting in the Warrant Officer Flight Training program, I was given a two year (instead of the normal 3 year enlistment - Draft meant two years as well) but if I made it through flight training and got my warrant, my enlistment was automatically extended upon receiving a warrant, to 4 years active duty. However, after they had trained so many pilots and had no place for them on their return after their first tour (they had to keep you stateside for at least 12 months before sending you back again. Sadly (!!) there was not enough time to send you back for a second tour for 12 month (again, they couldn't send you for less than 12 months) so they started giving us a way out which I took. I extended for 6 months while in country (1st tour of 18 months) and then took an early out from active duty after 3 years. Worked for me. I returned home one week before the '68 Tet Offensive and 6 months later in July '68 I got my discharge. I've flown maybe a dozen times since then but never bother to convert my military rating to a civilian one..

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Mon, 11 Nov 2013 9:48 am

Most interesting. Thanks!

smoko
Member
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed, 06 Nov 2013

Postby smoko » Wed, 13 Nov 2013 10:27 am

Mad Scientist wrote:
smoko wrote:@MS I have no bad intention but am trying to help my rellies. Do you know a good lawyer that they can consult ?


OK SMOKO. You are going to smoke the peace pipe with me on this one
I am walking on thin ice to calm you down
1. As you have read thru my posting and from Mindef , CMPB even foreign mission basically you are into grips with the age issue
2. The child is the one the will face the music period.
3. The parents if they still live in SG will be harass or prosecute if the prosecutors can proof beyond reasonable doubt that they help their child to jump ship hence the $5K fine.
4. If the child is overseas and still holding SG PP that it will not get renewal once expired as all renewal is done at ICA SG although you submit in overseas
5, If the child holds a foreign PP he is fine as long as he does not enter SG or in transit as his name will be in that flight manifest. To detain or not is anybody guess. There are several cases prior to the internet era that defaulters got haul back or detained. Again it all depends on if the child is going to be an example for all would be
6. If the parents lives overseas, the SG Gahmen cannot do any harm unless they return to SG . If the parents hold foreign PP chances will be slimmer even if they were to return to SG but that depends if the parents knowingly which is a crime hold dual PP. If the parents renounces theirs prior to the child NS issues then it is fine but if it is otherwise I do not want to gamble with it
7. Interpol has too many things to do other then hauling NS defaulters. There are categories on when Interpol steps in. NS defaulters is NOT one of them.
8. The implication if the child mess up his life is by not gaining employment in SG nor a social visit.
9. Lawyers just sucks your money away with little help.
10. We did hauled one chap back from Brisbane but he was already a "deserter" for 7 years.
11. Unless your family is a white horse category then frets no more

NS guidelines and its revisions came about mainly targeting the Chinese ethnic population as this groups has the wealth and means to jump ship.
LKY , GKS knew this hence this guidelines was put up
This group is the most passive, obedient but least loyalty towards SG.
Take example of the piano man, Teh Chean Wan, and many ex MP that are Chinese which try to defy the odds and failed

Does this satisfy your doubts ?


@M.S
Thank you very much. Sorry for the late reply.
The parents are still SGers and hold SG PP and go back to SG to visit rellies occasionally.

The parents are looking to get family court to order the 17 yr old son to go back to SG. But NZ lawyer say not easy because the son can challenge the parents. Will be long process.

The son never applied for E.P. Will mindef,cmpb demand bond because of this?


10. We did hauled one chap back from Brisbane but he was already a "deserter" for 7 years.

They requested his extradition from Brisbane?? You used the term "deserter". Is it different from "defaulter"?

User avatar
PNGMK
Governor
Governor
Posts: 5673
Joined: Thu, 21 Mar 2013
Location: Sinkapore

Postby PNGMK » Wed, 13 Nov 2013 11:08 am

Smoko- please dissuade the parents from the family court option. It's not going to work for a number of reasons - the most obvious being that the kid only has to wait til he's 18 and the FC won't intervene. What will happen is the family will fracture.

Although we've painted a bad picture the reality is that it is the kid who will suffer most the consequence and in fact, if he never goes near Singapore, it doesn't even matter.

The parents won't lose that much - they won't lose their CPF, HDB etc... There will be a little bit of aggravation but it's manageable, particularly if the parents decide to remain in NZ.

smoko
Member
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed, 06 Nov 2013

Postby smoko » Wed, 13 Nov 2013 4:44 pm

PNGMK wrote:Smoko- please dissuade the parents from the family court option. It's not going to work for a number of reasons - the most obvious being that the kid only has to wait til he's 18 and the FC won't intervene. What will happen is the family will fracture.

Although we've painted a bad picture the reality is that it is the kid who will suffer most the consequence and in fact, if he never goes near Singapore, it doesn't even matter.

The parents won't lose that much - they won't lose their CPF, HDB etc... There will be a little bit of aggravation but it's manageable, particularly if the parents decide to remain in NZ.


@PNGMK
Thanks. You're right. Some of us felt the same way about the FC too and have been trying to convince them to drop that route.

User avatar
Mad Scientist
Director
Director
Posts: 3459
Joined: Thu, 03 Dec 2009
Location: TIMBUKTU

Postby Mad Scientist » Thu, 14 Nov 2013 1:05 am

smoko wrote:@M.S
Thank you very much. Sorry for the late reply.
The parents are still SGers and hold SG PP and go back to SG to visit rellies occasionally.

[color=blue]It all depends on the severity of the person involves and the level of comms you had between Mindef/CMPB with the family. You roll the dice , you take your chances


The parents are looking to get family court to order the 17 yr old son to go back to SG. But NZ lawyer say not easy because the son can challenge the parents. Will be long process.

Family Court in NZ will do you diddly squat. This is foreign law which is totally different with SG Law Enactment. What power can the Family Court do? If the child refuses then he is taking things into his hand hence let him suffer the implications.


The son never applied for E.P. Will mindef,cmpb demand bond because of this?
Bond of course since he is way pass 13 but the fact of the matter is he still has to serve NS. Which part of this equation you do not understand?
Bond or otherwise, jump ship or family court is does nothing. He has to serve NS or else be a defaulter


[/color]

10. We did hauled one chap back from Brisbane but he was already a "deserter" for 7 years.

He AWOL for 3 years while serving NS back in the 80s. Winston Choo wanted to make an example for these groups. We hauled a total of 30 deserter(mostly Chinese and three Indians) all around the world back to face the music. Jailed time then serve the balance NS, SG PP application banned for three years after that. We classified them deserter after 5 years they cannot be found.

They requested his extradition from Brisbane?? You used the term "deserter". Is it different from "defaulter"?
The positive thinker sees the invisible, feels the intangible, and achieves the impossible.Yahoo !!!

smoko
Member
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed, 06 Nov 2013

Postby smoko » Thu, 14 Nov 2013 5:48 am

M.S wrote:The son never applied for E.P. Will mindef,cmpb demand bond because of this?
Bond of course since he is way pass 13 but the fact of the matter is he still has to serve NS. Which part of this equation you do not understand?
Bond or otherwise, jump ship or family court is does nothing. He has to serve NS or else be a defaulter


@M.S Thanks.
I think the parents are now resigned to the fact that their son will not agree to go back and legally there is nothing they can do to make their son go back.

There is not much information about the T&C of the bond except that to get the E.P, one must sign bond. In other words no bond, no E.P will be issued, so cannot exit Singapore. In this particular instance, at this stage, it seems pointless for the parents to retroactively apply for E.P because the son is adamant to default.

Putting aside the son, since he wants to make his own bed, what is the best option for the parents in their current plight? Would it still make sense for them to apply retroactively for E.P and furnish bond? Should they wait for mindef/cmpb to contact them?

AngMoG
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 609
Joined: Wed, 17 Apr 2013

Postby AngMoG » Thu, 14 Nov 2013 10:25 am

smoko wrote:
M.S wrote:The son never applied for E.P. Will mindef,cmpb demand bond because of this?
Bond of course since he is way pass 13 but the fact of the matter is he still has to serve NS. Which part of this equation you do not understand?
Bond or otherwise, jump ship or family court is does nothing. He has to serve NS or else be a defaulter


@M.S Thanks.
I think the parents are now resigned to the fact that their son will not agree to go back and legally there is nothing they can do to make their son go back.

There is not much information about the T&C of the bond except that to get the E.P, one must sign bond. In other words no bond, no E.P will be issued, so cannot exit Singapore. In this particular instance, at this stage, it seems pointless for the parents to retroactively apply for E.P because the son is adamant to default.

Putting aside the son, since he wants to make his own bed, what is the best option for the parents in their current plight? Would it still make sense for them to apply retroactively for E.P and furnish bond? Should they wait for mindef/cmpb to contact them?


Just throwing this out there, maybe MS or someone can comment on this... would it perhaps help if the parents made a declaration to MinDef (and possibly ICA) that they have exhausted their means in getting their son to do NS, have tried the best they can to convince him and cannot legally force him to go once he is 18.

Otherwise, they may as well face some harassment every time they go to SG or want to renew their PP.

User avatar
sundaymorningstaple
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 35115
Joined: Thu, 11 Nov 2004
Location: Still Fishing!
Contact:

Postby sundaymorningstaple » Thu, 14 Nov 2013 10:50 am

AngMoG wrote:
smoko wrote:
M.S wrote:The son never applied for E.P. Will mindef,cmpb demand bond because of this?
Bond of course since he is way pass 13 but the fact of the matter is he still has to serve NS. Which part of this equation you do not understand?
Bond or otherwise, jump ship or family court is does nothing. He has to serve NS or else be a defaulter


@M.S Thanks.
I think the parents are now resigned to the fact that their son will not agree to go back and legally there is nothing they can do to make their son go back.

There is not much information about the T&C of the bond except that to get the E.P, one must sign bond. In other words no bond, no E.P will be issued, so cannot exit Singapore. In this particular instance, at this stage, it seems pointless for the parents to retroactively apply for E.P because the son is adamant to default.

Putting aside the son, since he wants to make his own bed, what is the best option for the parents in their current plight? Would it still make sense for them to apply retroactively for E.P and furnish bond? Should they wait for mindef/cmpb to contact them?


Just throwing this out there, maybe MS or someone can comment on this... would it perhaps help if the parents made a declaration to MinDef (and possibly ICA) that they have exhausted their means in getting their son to do NS, have tried the best they can to convince him and cannot legally force him to go once he is 18.

Otherwise, they may as well face some harassment every time they go to SG or want to renew their PP.


I'm curious. Why would MINDEF care? The parents are the ones who got the son into the mess by not following protocol when they tried to get the son out of NS by immigrating in the first place.

smoko
Member
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed, 06 Nov 2013

Postby smoko » Thu, 14 Nov 2013 12:49 pm

Majority of Singaporeans migrate because of children's education and prospects. Even primary school is already so exam oriented. Some passports can provide easier access to live and work in certain countries.

User avatar
sundaymorningstaple
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 35115
Joined: Thu, 11 Nov 2004
Location: Still Fishing!
Contact:

Postby sundaymorningstaple » Thu, 14 Nov 2013 1:26 pm

Did the father do NS? If so, he would have already known about Exit Permits being required.


  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “Strictly Speaking”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests