Ladies and Gentlemen,
Singapore's state controlled newspaper The Straits Times of Feb 16, 2012 has the story "Judges do justice, not politics: Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong". The article states "Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong on Wednesday responded to critics who charge that judges here make decisions that tend to favor the Government". "He said the Singapore courts have never shirked from the judiciary role of checking on legislative and executive acts when issues of illegality are raised."
As if saying this much was not enough, he goes on to say that "Singapore courts have never shirked from the judiciary role of checking on legislative and executive acts when issues of illegality are raised" and 'the judiciary is aware of it's responsibilities as the third arm of the state. Whatever their personal persuasions, judges do not let political considerations influence their decisions"
To put it bluntly, the Singapore Chief justice is simply a callous unscrupulous liar.
When a Chief Justice of any country has to go out and say this, it raises suspicion immediately. You don't hear the Chief Justice of California having to go out and make a speech and claim this, since that is what judges are supposed to do anyway. I believe that the Chief Justice of Singapore has come under so much criticism internationally (by the way he does not care one bit what locals think since they are after all mere "digits" as his boss Lee Kuan Yew has called them) that he has begun to feel the pain. In fact when some judge of any country has to make a statement like this, people tend to believe the very opposite, which happens to be true by the way, that his judges do exactly what he claims they do not. They are politicians, not judges.
They have always followed the Communist Chinese principle of "justice" (please see my earlier post). They administer it according to the "3 supremes". In any case before them, the first consideration is the supremacy of Lee Kuan Yew's Peoples Action Party, just as in China, it is the Communist Party. The second "supremacy" is the interests of the state, which means China or Singapore as the case may be. The last supremacy is, not surprisingly since it is Singapore we are talking about, is the lowest in the hierarchy of priorities, which is the interests of the litigants.
JB Jeyaretnam, an arch political rival and a threat to Lee Kuan Yew's rule was repeatedly sued, bankrupted and jailed and eventually met his death all because he challenged Lee Kuan Yew's rule. Even though everything he did was entirely lawful, Singapore’s corrupt judges, to please the Lee Kuan Yew government destroyed him. This was not law, it was politics. These were not judges administering the law impartially. They were politicians sitting as judges to destroy political opponents.
Chee Soon Juan today is another victim of these disgraceful men and women sitting as judges to further the ends of Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore government. Just as JB Jeyaretnam he was repeatedly sued suffering millions of dollars in damages, bankrupted, sent to jail and disqualified from politics all because he had the gall to go against Lee Kuan Yew and his government. When Lee's judges did this dirty work, they were not acting in a judicial role, they were acting as Lee's hit men to finish him off.
When Tan Liang Hong, another victim at the hands of Lee's judges contested the 1997 elections and accused Lee of corruption in the purchase of Jade Mansion condominiums when he and his entire family received preferential treatment at the expense of the taxpayers, which happed to be true, these same judges slapped damage awards in Lee's defamation suit against him amounting to millions of dollars, hounded Tang with arrest and imprisonment, resulting in his having to flee for Australia. This wasn't law, it was a disgrace.
When I demanded of the Attorney General of Singapore an explanation of his actions in respect of JB Jeyaretnam in 1991, Singapore’s judges had me suspended from practice for 2 years claiming that I had "threatened" the Attorney General. One of the judges in that case was the Tamil Indian, GP Selvam, a disgraceful man who has since retired from the bench and makes a living now as a lawyer working on Singapore government contracts. That was not law. That was punishing me because I had displeased his master.
Also at the 1991 elections when I stood as the opposition Workers Party candidate for the Singapore constituency of Bukit Merah, I had made a rally speech pointing out that the manner in which lower court judges were appointed by the Legal Service Commission, a branch of the executive, gave the impression of bias and that it should be changed. Nothing at all wrong with that. Yet Lee's disgraceful judge TS Sinnathuray doing his dirty work to please Lee Kuan Yew found my speech in contempt of court because according to him, these words were "contemptuous of the Singapore judiciary". That action was not law, it was a disgraceful act of misusing the law to please their political masters.
In fact the biggest disgrace to the rule of law in Singapore is this man himself, Chan Sek Kiong. Please read my blog January 12, 2010 "Singapore's Chief Justice, Chan Sek Keong disgracefully and shamefully abused the law" (http://singaporedissident.blogspot.com/2010/01/singapores-chief-justice-chan-sek-keong.html).
Briefly the disgraceful facts are these. In 1997 Chan was Lee's Attorney General. That was the year of elections in Singapore. At Cheng San Constituency, it was discovered that Lee Kuan Yew's son, and 2 other senior government ministers were found inside the elections polling station there.
This was a violation of Singapore’s Parliamentary Elections Act, which prohibited politicians from approaching within 200 meters of election polling stations, designed to prevent political interference upon citizens casting their votes.
When JB Jeyaretnam complained about this to the Attorney General (Chan) he came up with his "brilliant" argument. His argument was that Lee Kuan Yew's son together with his colleagues had committed no wrong since the law prohibited any politician from coming within 200 meters of a polling station. But since in this case, they were found actually within it, there was no violation! Tell me, if this is not twisting the law and turning it into a comedy, what is it?
This man’s speech reminds me of Bashar Al Assad of Syria telling the international media yesterday that his troops are not killing anyone in Homs while we can all see with our very eyes in the news, in videos and reports that he is massacring them. I guess there is a reason for Assad to deny massacring anyone just as the Chief Justice of Singapore has to deny abusing the legal system to please his political masters.
Attorney at Law
Disbarred from practicing law in Lee's Singapore, imprisoned and refused entry to the island for criticizing Singapore's judiciary in this blog (see blogpost May 29, 2008 Singapore. Judge Belinda Ang's Kangaroo Court)
Actively practicing law in California and in good standing at the California Bar.
Member in good standing as a lawyer in England and Wales (Barrister).
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.