Ladies and Gentlemen,
As there is no need to take any bets whether I will be disbarred from the Rolls of Lawyers in Singapore which is a forgone conclusion; for persistently criticizing Singapore’s bully boy Lee Kuan Yew, his corrupt judiciary and his "unique" legal system; and since my date for disbarment is fast approaching, with my trial set for May this year in Singapore, which by the way I cannot attend since I have been denied entry into Singapore; it is time to re-visit it's cause and effect so as not to forget what this is all about.
There are 5 charges against me as follows.
Charge 1 and 2, are for the allegations that on July 4, 2008 I had had used abusive language against Lee Kuan Yew’s policemen in a Singapore street, and had behaved in a disorderly manner.
I denied these charges and went though an 18 day trial in Lee’s court totally refuting the incredulous claims of 5 policemen who dutifully repeated the same accusation that I behaved in this way.
As to what motive I would have to do this while my passport was held by them prohibiting my leaving the island was never explained.
Neither was it proven that I was mentally of unsound mind as only someone unsound would want to be doing this for no motive at all!
The evidence of the chief witness, a policeman was so incredible; it was more apt for the pages of Alice in Wonderland.
If alcohol was an issue, which too was demolished since the amount, was less than a tenth of the limit even for driving a motor vehicle!
And finally what crowns it all is the Singapore state controlled newspaper the Straits Times reported earlier that as many as 25 bystanders had witnessed my unacceptable behavior but strangely not a single one of them, an independant witness, was called at trial.
All we have is policemen repeating the same thing after sufficient coaching. In any case, even in the assumption that I did it, which is not the case, these charges are not something which requires a lawyer to be struck off the rolls in any law abiding country.
Charge 3 relates to this blog Singapore Dissident. It states that in this blog, on May 28, 2008, while in Singapore, I had written the following words about Lee Kuan Yew's judge Belinda Ang Saw Ean following her corrupted biased and totally unjust court decision granting her master Lee the sum of over $400,000.00 against Dr. Chee Soon Juan for criticism which was completely acceptable and normal in any democratic society in the world.
I had said: "The Judge Belinda Ang (Belinda Ang Saw Ean) was throughout prostituting herself during the entire proceedings by being nothing more than an employee of Mr. Lee Kuan Yew and his son and carrying out their orders".
I had said these words of the Singapore strongman's judge and I would gladly repeat it again. It was a correct usage of the English language to indicate a total abdication and corruption of her role as a judge in her thoroughly denying Dr. Chee Soon Juan a fair hearing between May 26 and May 28 2008 in Singapore at which time I was present.
The reader is invited to read my blog post again as well as perusing the correct dictionary meanings of "prostituting" in the circumstances in this case.
This is not a case where any lawyer in any respectable democracy would be disbarred.
Charge 4 refers to my retracting the assurances I gave in Lee Kuan Yew's courts just before I was released from Lee's jail and permitted to leave the country.
The circumstances are as follows.
On or about August of 2008 I had already been convicted and sentenced as relating to Charges 1 and 2 above, “the disorderly case”.
In September of 2008 I was sentenced to 3 months jail for "insulting" Judge Belinda Ang Saw Ean as in Charge 3 above.
While in jail, when I had only about a week to go before my date of release from prison of November 20, 2008, around the 12 of November 2008, I was visited by Lee’s police in the prison and charged this time for contempt of court for statements I made earlier in court during my "disorderly" case as in Charge 1 and 2 above.
The statements included such as “I have no trust in the impartiality of this court” and “this is a politically motivated case”.
If I denied the charges, I would certainly have lost in Lee Kuan Yew's courts; this would also mean my having to stay even longer in Lee Kuan Yew’s prison.
For the sake of getting out of Singapore, I would have even said that Lee Kuan Yew is the same as Mahatma Gandhi if they wanted it; I apologized to the judge several times in order to conform to the terms set down by Lee's prosecutor and promised never to criticize the Singapore judiciary again, ever. Had I been asked to say that the Singapore legal system was the best in the world, I would have said that too.
Of course when saying any of this, I had no intention whatsoever of keeping any of these promises.
Lee's judge, satisfied with my remonstrances of remorse repentance and contrition, for which had there been a Hollywood producer present, I would have received an Oscar for acting, my incarceration was not extended.
After having been relieved from Lee Kuan Yew's prison on November 20, 2008 and leaving Singapore for good on May 26, 2008, after arriving in California, I retracted all apologies given to this kangaroo court of Lee Kuan Yew in this blog and swore to continue criticizing Lee and his judges where criticism is due.
This charge relates to my blog post of November 28, 2008 in California in which I withdrew all apologies given to Lee Kuan Yew's judge in Singapore.
No lawyer in any real democracy in the world would be disbarred for this.
Charge No 5, relates to my blog post of November 30, 2008 in which I repeated the same words that I had used in relation to Judge Belinda Ang Saw Ean in Charge 3, that is, Lee Kuan Yew's judge Judith Prakash had "prostituted herself" in her decision to send 3 Singapore democracy activists to jail merely because they had worn T Shirts emblazoned with the picture of kangaroos outside Belinda Ang Saw Ean's court during the Dr. Chee Soon Juan hearing referred to in Charge 3.
This judge did in fact "prostitute herself" for sending these 3 men to jail because this is not contempt of court and she was acting merely to please her master Lee Kuan Yew.
Again this is not a case where any lawyer would be disbarred from the practice of law.
Every move of Lee Kuan Yew's disciplinary tribunal in this case as well as the arguments of his selected lawyer to carry out his pleasure, will be posted on this blog.
I will of course be disbarred in Lee Kuan Yew's island for this, which will cause the rest of the world to observe another instance of Lee's routine usage of the law to punish his critics.
This will turn out to be an advantage to me for giving me another opportunity to expose the misuse of the law and another confirmation to the International Bar Association’s 72 page finding that Singapore does not have the rule of law.
With Lee’s above charges, it would be impossible to convince anyone in any place other than North Korea, Burma or Cuba that discipline is warranted let alone disbarment.
Of course, one thing Lee Kuan Yew could do is to now create new offences, by accusing me of imaginary crimes.
Why not claim that I had killed 25 people while in Singapore and the only reason they did not charge me earlier was that only now were the bodies recovered!
Why not say that I had burgled 25 houses in Singapore but since the victims only reported the crimes now, they could not have charged me earlier!
Surely with these made up crimes, which you know Lee Kuan Yew is an expert in doing, disbarment will be at least arguable.
But on these present charges as they stand, Lee is going to look silly again.
From now until May 2010, there is still time for him to do this. Can we expect murder charges?
39737 Paseo Padre Parkway, Suite A1
Fremont, CA 94538, USA
Tel: 510 657 6107
Fax: 510 657 6914
Your letters are welcome. We reserve the right to publish your letters. Please Email your letters to firstname.lastname@example.org And if you like what I write, please tell your friends. You will be helping democracy by distributing this widely. This blog not only gives information, it dispels government propaganda put out by this dictatorial regime.