Friday, January 7, 2011

Law Society of Singapore vs Gopalan Nair, falsifying the record

Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is not only that Lee Kuan Yew's one party state's judges use the law as a political tool to silence dissent, they even falsify the record as well. Take the following law report from Singapore about me, Singapore Law Watch (2011)07Jan, they carefully distort the facts into the record, and put it out as a law report, which lawyers in the island would rely as precedent. This precedent is patently false in many respects, and completely distorts the facts, which unless checked with other sources, becomes the truth.

This way history is re-written and Lee's political opponents are carefully shown to future generations as evil. At least that is what they hope.

It reminds one of the horrors of George Orwell's Department of Information in "1984", where history is carefully written and re-written to show Big Brother as God and Goldstein the the enemy, the epitome of evil.

But thankfully, Lee Kuan Yew in his determination to destroy democracy, has in fact managed to show the island in very bad light, for those who wish to know, and such distortions and lies, which managed to go down very well in the past, are having a very hard time now.

What has happened, as per my version of things, are appended below the report of Singapore Law Watch, another state controlled law report.

Singapore Law Watch
Disciplinary tribunal finds lawyer guilty
[2011] 07 Jan_ST

Title: Disciplinary tribunal finds lawyer guilty
Source: Straits Times

Legal News Archive

A DISCIPLINARY tribunal appointed by the Chief Justice has found former Singaporean lawyer Gopalan Nair guilty of contempt of court and misconduct.

As a result, the 60-year-old, who is a US citizen and lives in California, faces possible disbarment in Singapore.

The tribunal, in its report dated Dec 28, found Mr Nair guilty of the five charges brought against him by the Law Society of Singapore. Its case was presented by lawyer Peter Low.

Two charges relate to a July 2008 incident here when he was allegedly abusive to police officers. He was later fined $3,000 for disorderly behaviour and hurling expletives at police officers. Three other charges relate to posts in his blog in 2008, which the tribunal found amounted to contempt of court.

Mr Nair wrote posts in 2008 impugning the integrity of two High Court judges. In another post, he announced that he was defying an undertaking given to a district judge to remove two posts which related to his being in contempt of court. He said that he was standing by what he had written.

The tribunal's report said, in parts, that Mr Nair's authorship and posting of blogs amounted to scandalising the courts, or demonstrated 'his utter contempt towards the court'. It also said his conduct was not befitting a lawyer.

In September 2008, Mr Nair was sentenced to three months' jail for remarks in one of the blog posts, which were found to have scandalised the judiciary and insulted a High Court judge.

Mr Nair was not present for the hearings of the tribunal, which was initiated in September 2009.

The tribunal report noted that he had been notified and had the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority's permission to re-enter Singapore if he applied to do so.

The tribunal, made up of Senior Counsel Toh Kian Sing and lawyer Tan Jee Ming, recommended disciplinary action against Mr Nair.

He will be referred to a Court of Three Judges, and could face disbarment, be barred from applying for a practising certificate here, or face censure or other punishments.

He moved to the United States in the early 1990s and became a US citizen in 2004. He stopped practising here but has remained on the rolls.

Mr Nair responded to the tribunal's report in a blog post on Tuesday saying, among other things, that it ignored his various requests - such as for paid air travel and accommodation - and he could conclude only 'that they simply did not want me to appear at their hearing'.

This is not the first time Mr Nair has been found guilty of misconduct by a disciplinary committee. In 1992, he was suspended from practice for two years for remarks about former attorney-general Tan Boon Teik.


1. In 2008 Mr. Nair wrote posts impugning the integrity of 2 High Court Judges.

I have written numerous blog posts criticizing Singapore judges both during, before and after 2008. I find it an honor to do it, because Singapore judges are corrupt dishonest and permit themselves to be used as political tools to silence dissent against Lee Kuan Yew.

It is completely lawful to "impugn" the integrity of a judge such as Belinda Ang Saw Ean who so shamelessly abused her judicial office during the 3 day defamation trial of Lee Kuan Yew vs Dr. Chee Soon Juan. It is not just lawful to "impugn" her integrity in a case such as this, it is completely necessary to do it. And I will do it again because injustice has to be exposed very loudly. Who is it that said, it is a religious thing to condemn injustice. Please refer to my blog post of Thursday May 29, 2008 "Singapore. Judge Belinda Ang's Kangaroo Court".

2. The Tribunal's report said in parts that Mr. Nair's authorship and posting of blogs amounted to scandalizing the courts, or demonstrated his "utter contempt towards the court". It also said his conduct was not befitting a lawyer.

About my having scandalized the Singapore court and demonstrating utter contempt for it, I totally agree. Yes I intended to scandalize the Singapore court because it needed scandalizing, because as the word suggests, it is a scandal for a system such as this that claims to have the rule of law but in fact breaks every single one of it's rules. And yes, I only have contempt for such a legal system which is a mere extension of the government rubber stamping it's decisions, exactly as what the Communist Chinese one is.

As for conduct not befitting a lawyer, I totally disagree. A lawyer should have the courage to stand up to judges who subvert the law for political ends and such action by a lawyer is in keeping with the highest traditions of the Bar. It is those Singapore lawyers who meekly remain silent and do nothing in the face of this shameful disgrace who are acting with such conduct.

3. Mr. Nair was not present for the hearings of the tribunal which was initiated in September of 2009. The Tribunal report noted that he had been notified and had the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority's permission to re-enter Singapore if he applied to do so.

This part is a clever distortion of the facts to completely falsify what happened. I have an American passport and ordinarily I would not need a visa to enter Singapore. However in my case, after I had the pleasure of Lee Kuan Yew's jail in Singapore for 2 months, at Changi Airport at the time of my departure, Singapore authorities stamped a deportation order in my passport, meaning unlike any other American I needed a visa to enter Singapore and if I did without permission, jailed for up to 2 years. You see, about this part, this Singaporean Law Report is nakedly silent. So I, unlike any other American can never enter Singapore without a visa, which I needed if I wanted to attend my trial in Singapore.

So several months before the hearings, I had written to Audrey Lim Yoon Cheng, who was alleged to be the Secretary of this disciplinary Tribunal to arrange for a visa. Her position however was all along that this had to be done by me and she will do nothing to facilitate my travel to Singapore. Accordingly I wrote to the Immigration Department several times and they never responded. I then wrote to the Attorney General of Singapore, the Minister of Law Singapore, the Minister of Home Affairs Singapore, not once but several occasions for permission to travel. None of them responded.

Then all of a sudden, keeping in mind that I live in California, and half way around the world from Singapore, about 10 days before the hearing, some woman from the Immigration Department writes to me with a form asking that I fill it up and get a Singapore sponsor for a visa. Since I did not have a Singapore sponsor, I told her so, whereupon she dropped the requirement of the sponsor, but by this time there was only 2 days or so left for the hearing.

But this related only to my applying to enter Singapore and even at this time, contrary to this Singaporean report no permission was given because I never applied. I don't have to tell you that it is impossible to travel to Singapore and be in a state of readiness for the hearing in 2 days!

Cleverly this report distorts the facts and tells bald shameless lies. It was not a case that I did not want to come; it was a case of their not wanting me to be there, because they only began discussing the visa 10 days or so before the hearings! .

Furthermore they never gave me immunity from arrest among other things, which I would come to below. Please see my blog post of Jan 04, 2011, Law Society of Singapore vs Gopalan Nair, Guilty! In absentia hearings.

4. "He moved to the United States in the early 1990s and became a US Citizen in 2004. He stopped practicing here but remained on the Rolls".

"He stopped practicing here but remained on the Rolls" is cleverly distorted to appear as if I remained on the Singapore Rolls by choice. This is how it is. To practice law there, you have to be on the Rolls and take out a practicing certificate. For lawyers who emigrate, even though you do not take out a practicing certificate, you still remain on the Rolls. So in my case, I was on the Rolls not because I did anything to facilitate it; you are on it automatically.

5. Mr. Nair responded to the Tribunal's report in a blog post on Tuesday saying, among other things, that it ignored his various requests, such as for paid air travel and accommodation, and he could conclude only "that they simply did not want me to appear at their hearing".

This is a cleverly tailored partial half truth and partial concealment of the facts. What was the most important thing I asked for was immunity from arrest and prosecution if I entered Singapore, even if I received permission.

Since my return to USA I had written numerous blogs attacking the integrity of their judges and their legal system. In particular, I broke the undertaking I gave to a Singapore judge not to criticize and to remove critical blog posts, while I was held in Singapore against my will.

All these acts on my part renders me liable to arrest and imprisonment again if I entered Singapore and it would be suicidal for me to do it without some sort of immunity. For this guarantee, I wrote repeatedly to everyone including of course the Tribunal, the Attorney General and every other side kick that Lee Kuan Yew uses but I got no response. This fact appears totally concealed in this report.

If Singapore was serious in giving me a chance to defend myself, it would have been easy for them to give me this assurance so that this case can be fairly litigated.

In addition in a case such as this where Singapore is commencing proceedings, any other respectable legal body would have facilitated his travel, provide his reasonable living expenses to enter and remain in Singapore. To take a hypothetical case, what happens if the Defendant was impecunious, would they proceed in his absence and disbar him because he had no money to come? Their failure to provide a reasonable opportunity for me to attend clearly nullified the value of any judgement they come up in this case.

Please see my blog post of Jan 04, 2011, Law Society of Singapore vs Gopalan Nair, Guilty! In absentia hearings. .

6. This is not the first time Mr. Nair has been found guilty of misconduct by a disciplinary committee. In 1992 he was suspended from practice for 2 years for remarks about former Attorney General Tan Boon Teik.

The 1992 incident could not have been a greater misuse of the law. In brief, the case arose as a result of Tan Boon Teik claiming that JB Jeyaretnam was not entitled to a pardon resulting from his exoneration of all blame by the Privy Council London arising from his disbarment by the Singapore Court; his reason being that he was not given an opportunity to appear at the London hearing and that Jeyaretnam "had not shown repentance remorse and contrition for his crimes", an incredible statement, given the facts.

The real facts were that Tan Boon Teik did not want to attend the London hearing and therefore he lied about this. Secondly how can a man who was found innocent show remorse repentance and contrition. Surely it is an oxymoron. When I wrote to him asking him to explain he failed to do it. I then distributed the correspondence between him and me throughout the law firms in Singapore.

Surely there is nothing wrong in asking questions of Tan Boon Teik and neither is there anything wrong in telling him that what he was saying is contrary to the facts. For this I was suspended for 2 years. Please see my blog post of December 23, 2010, "Law Society of Singapore vs Gopalan Nair, two plus two is fifty eight!"

This report iin Singapore Law Watch is written by Tessa Wong. She is one of the remaining Singaporeans who profit any way they can because they do not have the courage or the ability to earn a living in an honest manner. In any case, she carefully remains Tessa Wong, not Tessa Wong Chin Seng, or Wong Keng Keng or whatever. I guess her plan like the many others there, is that when and if she is ever found out and asked to account, she would then cleverly claim that she never was Tessa Wong and she is Wong Ching Ching.

She belongs to a group of human beings who are not brought up in the belief that it is good to be honorable.

And a word of advice to this Singapore government of Lee Kuan Yew. In this day and age, you cannot win in a battle such as this. The truth always trumps the lie, and in this case, when you have an opponent such as me outside your island, there is nothing much you can do to silence him. You cannot arrest him, you cannot take away his job, you cannot harm his family, in short there is nothing you can do.

As for the man on the street in Singapore, your reputation is already rock bottom. And as for those who have an interest in matters such as this, thanks to you for making me famous, my blog would be visited for my side of the story. In the past the lies in this law report would have gone unnoticed because one could not refute it, but today, because of the Internet, I am able to give my side of the story and there is nothing you can do.

So by all means continue, but rest assured, I am going to have my say too.

Gopalan Nair
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 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.


Anonymous said...

The Tribunal has misdirected itself on the law of "fitness". Fitness is related to character and not to political views. Fitness is a continuing requirement. If by reason of your political views which in this instance is quite obviously the case you are rendered unfit the decision is wrong.

The essential enquiry ought to be directed to your character namely whether your character is
such that you can be trusted to perform your duty as a lawyer. You are no longer holding a practising certificate and you are not dealing with the Singapore public. Reputation is also irrelevant in your case because the confidence of the public in the due administration of justice has not been shaken by your deemed scandalous remarks of the judiciary. The Minister for Law have just said that the more the legal system is mocked, the more efficient it will become. Your conduct have in fact made the legal system more excellent and achieved world best rating. They should be giving you an award instead of punishment.

Anonymous said...

See this article, and let us know if you agree with this women.

Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior
Can a regimen of no playdates, no TV, no computer games and hours of music practice create happy kids? And what happens when they fight back?

Apply this totalitarian/authoritarian model to the Chinese nation as a whole and you can see that the Chinese Communist Party is a perfect embodiment of the "Chinese Mother." The Chinese people are the children that need to be whipped into shape so that they perform in the manner needed to raise up the Chinese nation.

In the Singapore context, it may explain mother LKY thinks his ways are superior.

mycroft said...

They did call the six-shooter 'The Leveller' because with it even the weakest person could stand up to the bullying of the biggest, strongest thug, didn't they? Thank goodness for the Internet I say, an even mightier leveller that allows the hitherto helpless, downtrodden and voiceless to stand up to even the most vicious of governments.

Few knew the facts about your encounter with AG Tan Boon Teck because in 1992 the Internet was in its infancy and barely accessible to anyone but scientists and geeks. All we knew was what the propaganda machine churned out. What a difference 20 years makes. Now, one articulate lawyer with a well-read blog gets to take on a fascist government to put on the record their dishonesty, lies and half-truths for the whole world to read. And there's not a damned thing they can do about it but clench their fists and grind their teeth in rage. Great stuff!

The Straits Times has got away with distorting the truth and papering over the cracks in favour of Lee and his communist party for 50 years. They have let no opportunity slip by to tar and feather his opponents and make him out to be a global statesman, an intellectual giant, the pious father of the nation. Then along came the Net and whaddya know, our God is in reality a thoroughly nasty character, who would've thunk it!

Your publicly taking apart, line by line, this legless kangaroo case shows both the Singapore Law Society and the ST for what they have today become: the disgraceful, willing tools of a police regime little different to that of the PRC's. Ironic really, considering Lee's endless vain and empty boasting about how he rode the communist tiger in the 60s and won.

Two legs good, four legs better said...

George Orwell’s Animal Farm:

Presently the tumult died down. The four pigs waited, trembling, with guilt written on every line of their countenances. Napoleon now called upon them to confess their crimes. They were the same four pigs as had protested when Napoleon abolished the Sunday Meetings. Without any further prompting they confessed that they had been secretly in touch with Snowball ever since his expulsion, that they had collaborated with him in destroying the windmill, and that they had entered into an agreement with him to hand over Animal Farm to Mr. Frederick. They added that Snowball had privately admitted to them that he had been Jones’s secret agent for years past. When they had finished their confession, the dogs promptly tore their throats out, and in a terrible voice Napoleon demanded whether any other animal had anything to confess.

Anonymous said...

Do you know that that slime dog balls sucker ex AG.Tan Boon Tiek.
Who betray J.B.Jeyaratnam was his bestman. He has no moral value bought by LKY for 30 pieces of silver to fix his friend.

Anonymous said...

Read this case and you will understand the peremptory norm in a Kangaroo court is presumed guilty until proven innocent. There is nothing to defend even in a capital punishment case of drug trafficking. So simplistic yet it is a life at stake. Note the underlined "intended for sale" in the accused statements were extracted on different occasions to ensure a conviction of trafficking.

Anonymous said...

Singapore has a lot to learn from Hong Kong.

Highlights - CJ's speech at Ceremonial Opening of the Legal Year 2011

"This is the true role of the courts. The courts do not serve the people by solving political, social or economic issues. They are neither qualified nor constitutionally able to do so. However, where legal issues are concerned, this is the business of the courts and whatever the context or the controversy, the courts and judges will deal with these legal issues."

Shame on Singapore.
Shame on Lee Kuan Yew.

Anonymous said...

"The Minister for Law have just said that the more the legal system is mocked, the more efficient it will become."

Singapore legal system doesn't need to be mocked by others, it's very state of existence is itself a mockery to universal law. Any sound mind can sense the kangaroo-ness of the world famous kangaroo court and system that manipulated by you-know-who, only unsound mind will deny that.

Anonymous said...

"Singapore has a lot to learn from Hong Kong."

How can kangaroo system compare to humane system ? Don't disgrace Hong Kong please !

Anonymous said...

strait times report 12th jan 2011. online citizen blog to be considered political association. the persons behind it have to go public. pap so smart great timing. if the persons behind go public they will be sued for libel and made bankrupt.

Anonymous said...

People should write truth and facts about LEEs and put them onto every bookshelves. I hate how fake our history books about singapore are.He seriously NEED to know that he do not deserve any respect before going back into the cold earth!

Anonymous said...

I'm just an ordinary Singaporean, aged 21. Working a temporary full time job, before entering NS. Am probably like any of you, taking the full effort to wake up every morning to go to work that obviously, without a doubt underpays me. And i am well aware of that, and also of the fact that there are people who are aware of this, but doing nothing about it.

Everyone complains, but no one is doing anything about it. And i can't stand this. The ones who want to do something eventually get out of here, because the sad truth is, when you try to change the system, the system ends up changing you. To which, i am not going to agree to at all.

My primary concern is the fact that the rich are getting richer, am refering to the "digits" here. And the average Singaporean, poorer. Recently, i saw a teen probably who just got his license, with his friend, in a Ferrari, zooming past the heartland, with a sticker on the bumper that say, Thank you Mum and Dad. Now, COE prices? It's obviously, about the ability to pay and not according to someone's needs.

An average singaporean who gets into the early morning train, carrying his toddler's pram. While his is carrying the toddler, with another 2 kids trailing behind her, trying to squeeze into the sardine packed train. While that son of a rich business tycoon, is wasting his petrol in his car.

This may not be relevant. But i just wanted to pour these out. This has to change.

Anonymous said...


For the sake of advancing your case that Justice Belinda Ang Saw Ean abused the court's process in favour of Lee Kuan Yew in the defamation case against Chee Soon Juan you should file a complaint that Justice Belinda Ang Saw Ean be removed from the Bench. This is what it should happen in a country like Canada where the rule of law is upheld not only paying lip service like in the case of Singapore. See the proceedings commenced in Canada against Supreme Court of Ontario Judge the Honourable Paul Cosgrove in the link below:

This is the true meaning of the rule of law in a democracy.