The state controlled
The article reads
"Four more foreign law firms will be allowed to practice in
Under the Qualifying Foreign Law Practice Licenses scheme foreign law firms are allowed to practice in all areas of law except domestic areas of litigation and general practice, like family or criminal law. They are given an initial five years license period.
The four firms are: Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, Jones Day, Linklaters and Sidley Austin. They join six other law firms awarded licenses in 2008.
Chosen from 23 applications, the four firms have "extensive global networks" and "deep expertise in key practice areas". This will support the growth of the economy here and the development of legal services, the ministry said in a statement. The ministry added that the scheme also aims to reinforce
Their working in
And its judges are all poodles for Lee Kuan Yew government. They routinely deliver judgments tailored to please the Lees.
As for police powers, they are unlimited. They can search you anytime, anywhere and even lock you indefinitely.
In 2008, I was jailed, deported and disbarred in that island, for writing a blog critical of Lee's judges. (Not that the Singapore disbarment has affected me one bit, since the California Bar where I practice have decided to totally ignore it, and so has the English Bar of which I am also a member). Chee Soon Juan, the Secretary General of an opposition party has been repeatedly jailed and bankrupted just for exercising his human rights of free speech. So have a series of political opponents who have been destroyed for doing just that.
It is puzzling now to see top law firms from respectable proud and well respected democracies such as the UK, Australia and elsewhere, who must be fully aware of what Singapore is in this Internet age, willingly coming to Singapore for the work. Being motivated for profit is understandable, but should they not also consider the way they make that money. Is not having an office in
Moreover this raises a very important question. Regardless of any area of the law, it sometimes has to do with constitutional law. For instance in a libel case, a defense would be the right to express oneself. The same would apply in an intellectual property case and for that matter in a wide variety of situations. The question here is how are these foreign lawyers who are accustomed to appear before independent judges in their countries, going to come to terms with the decision of a Kangaroo legal system which denies such rights?
Have they considered how they would deal with a situation when they have to appear before a disgraced Lee Kuan Yew judge such as Belinda Ang Saw Ean who willingly bends the law for her master's pleasure?
Granted, most of the cases dealt with by these foreign lawyers will be commercial in nature, are we to assume that a judge who willingly abuses the law to please Lee Kuan Yew in a defamation lawsuit will somehow become impartial in a case non political in nature?
Have these foreign law firms been told that Singapore, a crowded island of no less that 5 million only has about 2,000 local lawyers and a shrinking number at that. And do they know that the reason for this de minimus totally inadequate number is because all the local lawyers who know first hand what Lee's Kangaroo courts are, have decided not to have anything more to do with it and have all left for Australia and the West. And do they know that they, the foreign lawyers, are in fact taking the places of
And are they aware that just like Gopalan Nair, myself, a former
I am not sure if they know this or don't but sooner or later they will have to come to terms either with their conscience or their clients when things go wrong, when they will realize that it is not so good working in dictatorships like Singapore or North Korea. It is not good for their soul and neither is it for their client; unless of course he is a money launderer millionaire of which there are many running around in Lee Kuan Yew’s paradise island.
Attorney at Law
A Singaporean in Exile