Singapore, simply a sore loser, in disputing "The White Paper".

Updated Nov 15, 2009
Re-updated Nov 15, 2009

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Singapore has indeed reached it's nadir in self respect.

There comes a time, among totalitarian regimes when they have such a bad name, they no longer care what people think.

Just as North Korea a repressive dictatorial regime claiming daily to be the best and most humane democracy in the world!

Just as Burma does; countries that don't care anymore what you know.

Singapore similarly has hit rock bottom in its reputation, and knowing it, they say silly things, regardless even if they are simply nonsense.

After all, with a reputation like that, what is there to lose!

A few days ago, Robert Amsterdam, the renowned Canadian human rights advocate and lawyer stationed in London wrote a scathing detailed account of human rights abuses in Singapore especially about Dr. Chee Soon Juan, Singapore's foremost political dissident.

For the past 18 years Lee Kuan Yew unable to silence Dr. Chee, has continued to persecute him, repeatedly jailing and bankrupting him, yet he refuses to give up.

Instead, of condemnation, he receives international acclaim and praise while this government is detested as authoritarian and intolerant of dissent.

Having run out of ideas on how to deal with him, they have now descended to telling outright lies about him and like small children in a quarrel have started calling him names!

This is surely not the hall mark of any nation worth its salt. It is that of banana republics.

To Robert Amsterdam’s article, they responded now with a 10 page document, headed "Singapore Government responds to the "White Paper on the Repression of Political Freedoms in Singapore" by a Canadian law firm", SG Press Center dated November 11, 2009, rebutting whatever Robert Amsterdam had said.

Singapore’s response did not contain a single truth in its entirety.

Surely, with a government owned and controlled media, they can go on telling any lie they want, any time they want, since there is no one to challenge them in Singapore.

But what is disgusting about Singapore’s action was this.

It is one thing to tell a lie and hope to get away with it.

It is quite another to tell a lie knowing your listener knows it is one.

It says "Singaporeans have repeatedly rejected Dr. Chee and his party" pointing out that in Singaporean elections, Dr. Chee's party the SDP polled the lowest votes among the 2 other parties.

Firstly we do not know whether in fact this is true.

For all you know, the elections themselves which are run, not by any independent body but by the Prime Minister's office itself, may have all been rigged to produce the desired result.

Lee Kuan Yew has of course consistently claimed that his elections are fair, but till today, no independent monitors have been allowed to ensure its fairness.

Moreover if anyone even questioned the impartiality of elections, they will be sued impoverished imprisoned and bankrupted with lightning speed, just as the lightning sign in Lee Kuan Yew's political party emblem!

Moreover, Dr. Chee Soon Juan being a highly qualified and capable individual poses the greatest threat to Lee Kuan Yew and his people, if he ever enters Parliament.

Therefore as he has to be stopped at any cost, the media and every organ of state is used at election time to the maximum to vilify and defame him.

Moreover, because of serial numbers on election ballots, the general fear was that if you voted for Dr. Chee Soon Juan's party, you will be discovered and punished.

Under these impossible odds, it was a miracle that Dr. Chee Soon Juan's party got even the number of votes they did.

So Lee Kuan Yew's argument that "Singaporeans have repeatedly rejected Dr. Chee and his party" sounds rather hollow does it not?

It is as if you tie the hands of your opponent in a boxing match and then say you won hands down!

It says "Singapore is a democratic state with a government that is elected through universal franchise".

But in Singapore, there is no independent press; all of it is state owned and controlled.

There is no independent judiciary; they are all beholden to Lee Kuan Yew.

There is no human rights, no freedom of speech expression or assembly, even though these rights are in the Constitution.

The slightest criticism of Lee Kuan Yew, his government or his courts would either land you in jail or bankrupted.

The average man is terrified of his government and his own mouth.

He goes about like a zombie. In these circumstances, how do you say "Singapore is a democratic state with a government that is elected through universal franchise"?

It says Singapore has a "well established legal framework and has an independent judiciary that has been ranked among the top in the world by World Economic Forum, IMD and PERC.

I am not sure how these organizations said what they are alleged to have said, or whether they even said so in the first place.

But I can tell you this. They are simply wrong.

They are somewhere else and simply have no idea of what goes on in Singapore.

They should come and ask people in Singapore how they rank their judiciary.

They should ask Dr. Chee Soon Juan who has been jailed 7 times simply for making speeches or peaceful protests in Singapore whether there is an independent judiciary.

They should ask me, having spent 3 months in jail for merely criticizing Singapore’s judge Belinda Ang Saw Ean; and only then should they come up with these accolades.

Singapore has a corrupt judiciary; corrupt because they have forgotten what being a judge is, that is to be independent and fair.

They have instead become Lee Kuan Yew's servants to do his bidding.

Singapore it says "has a written constitution that is supreme and which guarantees liberties such as the right to life or personal liberty, right to equal protection, freedom of speech, assembly, association and religion".

Big words. Only if this were true.

How do you say you have a right to freedom of speech, when every single newspaper is owned and controlled by the government and to print and publish any literature, you need a permit?

When you are sued whenever you criticize the government?

When you have to apply for a permit even to hold a one man peaceful protest?
When, even if you apply for it, you will be denied?

How do you say equal protection when a Tamil cannot live in any part of Singapore he wants, since the government housing agency (HDB) will not allow it?

When the Tamil (although a citizen) is required to live only in government designated areas?

When it is a police state where the police can stop search frisk and arrest anyone anytime without any probable cause, even on trumped up charges?

In these pathetic circumstances, what written constitution is Singapore talking about?

Then this shameless government goes on not only to defame Dr. Chee Soon Juan again, it belittles him. Is this really necessary for a so called government of a sovereign nation?

And what is worse, none of what they say is true. It starts with the words "he was sacked by the University for misusing research funds".

This is what you say, but Dr. Chee has denied ever misusing any funds.

And since you control all the newspapers and Dr. Chee Soon Juan was never given any real opportunity to challenge your allegations, what do you expect any Singaporean to believe?

In these circumstances, I tell you what I believe. I believe you are shamelessly lying through your teeth; other wise you would not be using your state controlled press to disallow anyone else to have a word edgewise.

But you fail to realize that people are not as stupid as you think. We all can see that only a government that is trying to hide the truth will muzzle the press and prevent a contrary argument.

Dr. Chee Soon Juan never did any of those things you say.

He was simply framed, playing by your book of dirty tricks for which you are world famous, with these accusations, merely because in 1991, he had the audacity to join the opposition political party SDP, and challenge you at the polls.

Since he was not prepared to be silenced and neutered, like your poodle Chiam See Tong, he had to be removed; which you did in the only dirty way you know; by trumped false charges. It was as simple as that.

And in your desperation to discredit him which is not very successful, you start by calling him names and mock him, hoping this would somehow lower his standing.

No self respecting nation would have stooped so low like you do here by your reference to his hunger strike, accusing him of "eating a hearty breakfast" every morning and "taking glucose" etc.

Your reference to these things is not only disgraceful; it is also embarrassing for a government of a country.

You then argue that Dr. Chee soon Juan was guilty after all because “he could have sued the University but did not".

Isn't Lee Kuan Yew here unashamedly insulting our intelligence? Don't we all know that the Singapore courts are all controlled by Lee Kuan Yew?

And don’t we all know that there was no chance whatsoever of Dr. Chee Soon Juan winning any law suit in Lee Kuan Yew's courts in his entire lifetime?

So does it not seem completely logical that Dr. Chee Soon Juan would do no such thing? This is the sort of argument here that boils the blood of all of us, which is to argue a point which we all know to be completely and entirely untrue.

It then refers to Chiam See Tong, a sort of pseudo opposition politician, as "a respected and honorable man". Surely we are not surprised it says this.

As opposed to Dr. Chee Soon Juan, Chiam See Tong, although not in name, is almost a member of the PAP, Lee Kuan Yew's political party.

Chiam See Tong, as we all know, has been a great asset to Lee Kuan Yew and his PAP.

Lee Kuan Yew knows that for Singapore, it would not look very good in the eyes of the world if every single MP in Singapore were a PAP member, in which case, it would be another Cuba.

So to give it the appearance of a multi party democracy, an opposition member or two in Parliament helps.

So who better to have as an "opposition member" than Chiam See Tong. Chiam never attacks the PAP where it really matters.

He does not question the denial of human rights, of free speech, free press and expression.

He does not engage in peaceful protests.

He would perhaps say a few words on the lack of sufficient parking lots in Geylang, Singapore or some other totally insignificant matter, take his monthly stipend and go home.

He is a tame docile and obedient Lee Kuan Yew lackey, politically impotent and castrated. Surely a man like that for Lee Kuan Yew has to be, in his words, a "respected and honorable man"!

And the lies goes on, such as "Chiam was very unhappy with Dr. Chee's antics", "Dr. Chee maneuvered to oust Chiam" etc etc. In other words, it wants us to believe that Chiam was a good guy and Dr. Chee was a bad one.

What is the point of all this I wonder. Can we not as humans with normal intelligence decide ourselves who is Chiam See Tong and who is Dr. Chee Soon Juan?

And then it says that Dr. Chee Soon Juan fabricated evidence before the Select Committee on health expenditure and was fined.

Frankly we don’t know if this is true and in any case, it has no relevance to Robert Amsterdam's White Paper which claims that Singapore abuses the law to punish political dissidents.

It now talks about the 2001 elections and Goh Chock Tong.

It says Dr. Chee Falsely accused the government of loaning $10 million to Indonesia for which he was sued and found liable.

What Singapore does not tell you here is this. There was ample evidence in Singapore’s own state controlled newspapers that in fact Indonesian President Suharto had asked Singapore for a huge loan during Indonesia's economic crises and there was rampant speculation that in fact the loan was given.

In these circumstances, tell me why it was wrong to question a Prime Minister whether this was the case, since under the rule of law (which Singapore is supposed to have) politicians, especially those in government are required to submit to a wide latitude of public scrutiny, it being in the public interest.

Dr. Chee should never have been sued in the first place and even if he was, the lawsuit should have been dismissed.

In fact not only was Dr. Chee sued and found liable, he was ordered to pay several hundred thousands dollars in damages, an amount which was calculated not to compensate Goh Chock Tong but to permanently destroy Dr. Chee Soon Juan from ever running for political office.

Now the case of Lee Kuan Yew and Dr. Chee Soon Juan in the 2006 lawsuit.

Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore lies when it says "Dr. Chee's articles alleged that Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and (his son) PM Lee Hsien Loong was corrupt and covered up serious financial wrong doing in National Kidney Foundation (NKF) a major charity".

We know what happened of course.

NKF, a government charity was caught in fraudulent activity.

What Dr. Chee Soon Juan said was something to this effect, namely, that if a government owned charity could be so corrupt, what guarantee do we have that the government itself is not corrupt.

Now a statement like this is normal and acceptable in any democracy, merely raising concern over the need for honesty and integrity in government. It was not defamatory at all.

But we know why Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew commenced the legal actions that he did.

2006 was an election year.

This fraud in a government charity looked very bad for him.

So, in accordance with his time honored dirty tricks, he sued using his corrupt judiciary.

What we are not told is that Judge Belinda Ang Saw Ean, this shameless woman whose career is primarily running around doing Lee Kuan Yew's errands, denies Dr. Chee Soon Juan even a trial.

She decides the case merely on affidavits privately in her chambers!

Dr. Chee Soon Juan is not allowed to produce any witnesses!

Lee Kuan Yew or none of his witnesses is subject to cross examination.

The case is found in favor of Lee Kuan Yew, to use the pun on his political party emblem, with "lightning speed".

Some time later, this same shameless woman of a judge, Belinda Ang Saw Ean, hears the case to decide the quantum of damages.

If there was ever a more shameless spectacle of a travesty of justice, I am not aware of it.

I went to Singapore specifically to attend this hearing and was present throughout the 3 shameful days in court.

I wrote about it in this blog Singapore Dissident on May 29, 2008 "Singapore Judge Belinda Ang's Kangaroo court" the following words " The judge Belinda Ang was throughout prostituting herself during the entire proceedings by being nothing more than an employee of Mr. Lee Kuan Yew and son and carrying out their orders".

In my blog, I said many other things about this judge of course, but for these words, I was charged and convicted in Singapore and jailed for 3 months.

How shamelessly this judge behaved is written in my blog.

The case was not a case at all.

It was a public lynching of Dr. Chee Soon Juan and Miss Chee Siok Chin.

And why I say that this government has no shame at all to lie is this.

In court, disregarding the Singapore journalists who will shamelessly lie for their state owned newspapers, there were several journalists from free and democratic countries present.

They saw the shameful spectacle.

Yet this shameless government says “they (Dr. Chee and Siok Chin) behaved outrageously throughout the proceedings"!

We know who was outrageous and it was not Dr. Chee Soon Juan or Chee Siok Chin.

What Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore does not say is the amount of damages awarded against Dr. Chee Soon Juan and Chee Siok Chin.

Not surprisingly in Singapore’s unique legal system, and as expected, it was more than $400,000.00 (approximately US$ 300,000.00).

And what is more, at the end of the 3 day hearing, the judge, to please Lee Kuan Yew even more or perhaps directly under his orders, sends Dr. Chee Soon Juan and Chee Siok Chin to jail for 2 weeks for contempt of court!

Then Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore come up with various instances of Dr. Chee Soon Juan breaking the “law” by his civil disobedience.

What law are they talking about?

In all these cases Dr. Chee Soon Juan either spoke or held a peaceful protest on matters of public interest.

There was nothing illegal about his actions.

The Constitution specifically gives these rights to citizens.

Lee Kuan Yew's government had made laws to make these constitutional rights illegal by requiring permits to speak or assemble in public. And what is worse, there is no point in applying for any permit because in Singapore’s entire history, no permits were ever granted the opposition.

Constitutional law under common law specifically disallows the making of laws in violation to the Constitution, which is supreme.

Lee Kuan Yew's laws taking away these constitutional rights are illegal. Period.

Dr. Chee committed no crimes at all in his conducting peaceful protests or public speaking. Lee Kuan Yew' Singapore is simply telling a shameless lie by saying this.

Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore then claims that Dr. Chee Soon Juan committed contempt of court because Singapore has great judges and an "independent judiciary".

I suppose North Korea will say that too. Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore can say all they want of course, it is quite another thing if anyone believes them.

Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore then talks of freedom of assembly, yet restricts that right, by requiring permits, which they say are necessary to, believe it or not, “prevent terrorism”.

Very conveniently said, is it not? Terrorism!

Where in Heavens did the Singapore government get the idea of Dr. Chee Soon Juan being a terrorist! Dr. Chee Soon Juan is no terrorist.

Why then all this talk of terrorism?

Very simply put, Singapore has no excuse to deny the right of citizens the right to peaceful assembly. Lacking any argument whatsoever, you can expect a morally bankrupt country to talk about such irrelevance, would you not?

This government talks of their illegal detention of their citizens without trial under the Internal Security Act.

Their argument of course is totally wide off the mark, since they have no justifiable argument whatsoever.

They defend this illegal practice claiming it was introduced by the British.

What has a law that was introduced by the British more than half a century ago got anything to do with reality of Singapore now, you may to ask.

If the British had introduced the punishment of pulling out fingernails, would Lee Kuan Yew have still retained it?

Does the simple fact of it being introduced by the British somehow give it legitimacy?

And then they claim that the prisoner is allowed visits etc etc. We should tell Lee Kuan Yew and his government that detention without trial of Singapore citizens in their own country is simply wrong.

If you have evidence, then try them. If not, simply shut up.

Don't give us a history lesson of the communist threats. Those things were in the past, many moons ago.

Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew then goes on to defend his regular use of defamation lawsuits to silence dissent by his subservient judges routinely ordering damages of hundreds of thousands of dollars against Lee’s political opponents merely for commonplace criticism.

Dr. Chee Soon Juan, JB Jeyaretnam, Tang Liang Hong, western newspapers such as the Economist and Wall Street Journal have all been sued through Lee Kuan Yew's favorite weapon, the defamation law suit.

And in all these cases, if you were to examine what they had said, I am sure you would not find a single instance of actionable conduct.

Not a single instance.

But yet in all of them, they were all found guilty, the judgments were all in hundreds of thousands of dollars and they were all bankrupted.

Perhaps the single fact which gives the cat away is that every one of them were politicians and the criticism was against Lee Kuan Yew and his government.

I suppose that very well explains the abuse of Lee Kuan Yew's law and his corrupt judges without more.

Singapore then goes on to defend Chiam See Tong and Low Thia Khiang, 2 miserable opposition members in Singapore's Parliament of 84 members of which 82, mind you 82, are PAP members.

This by itself should tell the inquiring mind a great deal about Lee Kuan Yew's style of democracy.

As I said, these 2 opposition members serve the purpose of Lee Kuan Yew and his government and do nothing for the cause of the opposition.

They are, as I said, lauded and extolled as model opposition politicians. Why, because they do nothing for the opposition.

They may make some quiet noises about something completely irrelevant in Parliament such as the parking lots in Hougang or Potong Pasir, and quietly go home.

And of course they collect their monthly stipends.

And because they are such good opposition politicians, for Lee Kuan Yew that is, they get some government contracts which benefit their private businesses.

Beyond that they don't do much.

Coming to JB Jeyaretnam, not satisfied that Singapore has persecuted and hounded him throughout his political career, they now want; it seems; to defame his name even after he is dead.

I need not defend JB Jeyaretnam.

Singapore knows JB Jeyaretnam, the champion of his people who fought so hard for their dignity and was throughout his career repeatedly sued bankrupted hounded and jailed for no crime whatsoever, except that he was a threat to the continued power of Lee Kuan Yew and family.

I know him personally as a member of the Workers Party from 1984 to 1991.

All I need to say about JB Jeyaretnam is this.

From as early as the 1970s, Lee Kuan Yew was terrified of JB Jeyaretnam as a threat to his position which meant that from that time till he died, Lee Kuan Yew brought a series unrelenting trumped up lawsuits without any basis whatsoever against him which finally ruined and killed him.

JB Jeyaretnam was a great man. And his name will live in eternity.

Now Singapore refers to the case against me, Gopalan Nair.

It starts off with a lie as follows "Mr. Gopalan Nair had sent an email to various people in Singapore (including the Attorney General) making various scandalous allegations against justice Belinda Ang (Belinda Ang Saw Ean)a judge of the Supreme Court."

This statement is a lie, and Singapore knows it.

This is what happened.

I was in Singapore High Court attending the hearing for the assessment of damages of Lee Kuan Yew's defamation case against Dr. Chee Soon Juan and Chee Siok Chin from May 26 2008 to May 28, 2008.

I was seated in court in the visitor’s gallery and observed the proceedings.

I found the conduct of the judge Belinda Ang Saw Ean disgraceful and shameful.

She did not appear to act as a judge at all, but was there only to please Lee Kuan Yew and his son and do whatever they desired.

It was not only a shameful sight, it was almost embarrassing, not just for a judge but for any human being to crawl so low.

On May 29, 2008, I wrote a blog post in this blog entitled Singapore’s Judge Belinda Ang's Kangaroo Court."

In it I detailed to the best of my memory what I remembered to be some of the most shameful instances of bias on the part of this judge.

One of my statements in the blog post was "The judge Belinda Ang, 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 never sent anyone any Emails as this Singapore report claims.

On May 31, 2009, at about 8.30 pm, I was arrested by about 5 plain clothes policemen as I was descending the elevator in my hotel at the lobby.

I was immediately handcuffed in the elevator, manhandled, taken back to my hotel room on the 7th floor and there my room was ransacked in my presence.

Among the items seized were my passport and a handwritten note book which contained various personal particulars among which was my Yahoo Email address user name and password.

The Arresting Officer and Investigating Officer was Assistant Superintendant Abdul Razak Zakaria of Central Police Station, Singapore.

The Address is

Central Police Station
391 New Bridge Road
#03-112 Police Cantonment Complex, Block A
Singapore 088762

Fax: (65) 62200877
The telephone numbers and Emails are:

ASP Abdul Razak Zakaria, Telephone Office (65) 6557 3361, Telephone Mobile (65) 9756 7953

Commander/ DAC Lau Peet Meng, Telephone (65) 6557 5001 Email: lau_peet_meng@spf.gov.sg

Dy Commander/ Supt Lee Ping Yue, Telephone (65) 6557 5002 Email: lee_ping_yue@spf.gov.sg

Head Investigation/ Supt Abdul Khalik Abdul Latiff Telephone: (65) 6557 3323 Email: abdul_khalik_latiff_@spf.gov.sg

I was taken to Central Police Station.

I was locked up in solitary confinement for about 10 days or so.

I was interrogated day and night several times. Several times in the middle of the night and early morning hours.

They were trying to break my spirit.

This was torture no less.

The interrogations were as many as several times a day. They were unrelenting.

Each time I was taken from the cell, placed in handcuffs and taken to an interrogation room. There my one hand was handcuffed to the bench I sat.

Inspector Abdul Razak Zakaria was a Malay Muslim man in his 40s with a boyish face.

He told me he was very recently promoted Assistant Superintendant.

Almost every day, he showed me several emails which had my Email address. However the sender was Pallichadath Gopalan Nair, a name I have not used since 2004. I have used the name Gopalan Nair only.

These emails had attachments of my blog posts from this blog Singapore Dissident including the blog post about Judge Belinda Ang Saw Ean's about which I wrote.

They were addressed to various important people including Judge Belinda Ang Saw Ean herself, the Attorney General and Solicitor General among others.

I had never sent any of these Emails.

ASP Abdul Razak Zakaria kept insisting that I sent these Emails and I kept repeating that I never sent any of them.

He kept saying that it had my email address on them, therefore I must have sent them.

I kept telling him that I wrote the blog post about Judge Belinda Ang Saw Ean, but I never sent these Emails.

I told him that I did write these blog posts. That Singapore Dissident is my blog and all the blog posts were written by me.

But I never sent any of these Emails. I told him there was no need for me to send anyone any Emails, since I had my blog.

This Malay policeman's interrogation was unrelenting.

He asked me to admit that the Emails were mine.

More than once he said he said he was going to charge me under the Sedition Act threatening me with 3 years in jail, an inducement of sorts, that perhaps if I admitted sending these Emails, he would instead be lenient?

The fact is I never sent any of these Emails that he produced. And I simply told him that I was not prepared to admit to sending any emails, no matter what he did.

Frankly I do not know whether these Emails were in fact sent or by whom, although the suspicion is this man, ASP Abdul Razak Zakaria who got possession of my Email address and password, himself sent it, or got others to send it, I have no idea.

During my trial, the prosecution brought in the secretary of Judge Belinda Ang Saw Ean who said in court that she received Emails to which my blog posts were attached from a sender named Pallichadath Gopalan Nair. So did the private secretaries of other judges.

I cross examined Abdul Razak Zakaria on the witness box for several days.

I asked him if he checked the contents of my notebook to which his answer was "that he glanced through it".

I suggested to him that he must have gone through the book with a fine tooth comb, to which he answered (hilarious) that he did not know what a fine tooth comb had to do with this case! His English was poor.

I had told him and the judge throughout the trial that I admit writing the blog post and I am very proud of it and stand by every word in it.

But I never sent any Emails. In any case, I had no reason to send Emails to this judge or anyone else, since I had my blog and the world will read it.

The judge admitted that there was no evidence that I sent any Emails and I was not being charged for any Emails.

Despite this; despite the fact that it was never proven that I sent any Emails to anyone, this Singapore report shamelessly states categorically that I sent Emails to various people!

Yes, I did write my blog then as I am doing now, but accusing me of sending Emails when this was not proved at all, shows how low this government would go in their desperate attempt to salvage their reputation, which unfortunately has irretrievably sunk rock bottom.

One interesting occurrence during the 8 day trial was this.

I was cross examining Abdul Razak Zakaria on the stand during the Muslim month of Ramadan, the Muslim holy fasting month.

During this time it was particularly important for Muslims not to offend by religious indiscretion, one of which is of course lying under oath.

Zakaria being a Malay Muslim is conditioned by his religious and superstitious beliefs.

The Malay Muslim, by their superstition and beliefs, believe that to take the oath to God and to lie is a mortal sin, which they cannot reconcile during their prayers to Allah, which by the way, I assume Abdul Razak Zakaria does.

So I took very careful care to ensure that he took the oath to tell the truth, which meant in this case to Allah.

I then asked him whether he was a Muslim to which he answered yes.

I then asked him whether it is a sacrilegious and blasphemy to tell a lie under oath and he said "Yes".

I asked this a number of times to drive home the message at which point both the prosecutor and judge objected that I should refrain from reference to his religion.

But the damage was already done. Abdul Razak Zakaria was put on the spot. There he was in front of a court and audience, having taken the oath before God and now he would have to lie. He was uncomfortable. .

Zakaria seemed particularly irritable and discomfit when I asked him if he lied when he said, he did not send any Emails using my Email address; that he did not know anyone who sent these Emails; and that he did not collaborate with the Attorney General or others in stage managing this Email accusation.

I pointed out to him that among the Malay Muslims, when they have committed some offense against Allah as serious as lying under oath, they and their offspring and their descendants would suffer the wrath of Allah.

He was particularly nervous when he acknowledged this before an audience in court.

It might be interesting for the reader to contact the Central Police Station, contact particulars above, and speak to Abdul Razak Zakaria and ask him again whether he lied under oath and as to who it was that sent those Emails.

It might be interesting to ask him whether he or his family members have recently suffered any calamity resultant on the wrath of Allah for lying under oath during Ramadan?

In fact the criminal charge that I was charged with had nothing to do with me. I was charged under Section 228 of the Singapore Penal Code (Lee Kuan Yew’s law) which read "Whoever intentionally offers any insult or causes any interruption to any public servant, while such public servant is sitting in any stage of judicial proceeding shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to $5,000.00 or with both"

This charge clearly refers to someone who was physically present in court and while there, in the presence of the judge, either insulted her in person or caused a disturbance. On the 29th of May 2008, the court of Judge Belinda Ang Saw Ean was not in session hearing this defamation case. And I was not in her court on that day.

I had said nothing to her in her court or interrupted her proceedings. All I did was to write a blog in my hotel a day after the case was over, that is, on May 29, 2008. By any reasonable reading of this criminal provision, I was not guilty at all.

Second, the charge itself was vague and overbroad. It refers to an "insult". What is an insult is never defined. I had argued at the trial before Lee Kuan Yew's stooge of a judge Kang Ting Chiu that what I had said was true. To “prostitute oneself” is according to all the dictionary definitions, to debase one's profession or calling for an improper personal gain. There is no doubt this is what Judge Belinda Ang Saw Ean was doing in the Lee Kuan Yew defamation case.

I argued that if what I said was true, there cannot possibly be an insult. The judge would not accept it. According to him, believe it or not, even if it was true, it could be an insult! According to him, believe it or not, it would be an insult, to tell someone "your father is a drunk". He was not prepared to listen to the argument that in Lee Kuan Yew's case, my comment was perfectly acceptable as it was a case of great public interest and notoriety.

Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore refers in the article that I had said perhaps the word "prostituting" was too strong, and by my saying so, it therefore became a criminal act! Surely there can be no more stupid argument than that!

Yes, the words "Belinda Ang prostituted herself during the entire proceedings....” may be a little strong. Perhaps I could have said that “she shamelessly abused her authority” or even that “she thoroughly misused her position” etc. But using a stronger or more moderated language does not detract from the fact that the words used were factually true in the English language; it was not vulgar or offensive; and it is a phrase that is acceptable in the usual and normal usage of the language.

Nothing that I said mattered to the judge. Perhaps, he already had orders from Lee Kuan Yew that I not only was to be punished, but also the length of the prison sentence.

Now the case of Tang Liang Hong.

Tang Liang Hong merely had the audacity of standing for elections against Singapore’s "Glorious Ruler" Lee Kuan Yew and to correctly accuse him of getting personal favors for himself and his entire family, in the form of discounts for the purchase of Apartment units in Jade Apartments.

These revelations if proven would fly in the face of Lee's claims that he is not corrupt.

So he does the only thing he knows.

He gets his compliant judges to go against Tang Liang Hong. We have heard of that dirty trick before for sure. Nothing more need be said.

In conclusion it says Singapore has grown prosperous because of its rule of law.

We don’t know whether it is in fact prosperous but we do know there is no rule of law.

As for prosperity, in a country where the average man has to eke out a living with a salary of about US$6,000 per year with a very high cost of living; and while the top few like Lee Kuan Yew and his corrupt judges earn several millions a year is hardly prosperous by any yardstick.

What the report does not say is that as many as 5,000 highly educated skilled Singapore citizens leave Singapore permanently for foreign residence; sufficient numbers of children are not being born; one in every 3 Singaporeans is a foreigner and we have very poorly qualified men being made Assistant Superintendants of Police like this man Abdul Razak Zakaria.

Singapore is not doing well at all.

And the reason is the lack of human rights and the rule of law.

Gopalan Nair
39737 Paseo Padre Parkway, Suite A1
Fremont, CA 94538, USA
Tel: 510 657 6107
Fax: 510 657 6914
Email: nair.gopalan@yahoo.com
Blog: http://singaporedissident.blogspot.com/

Your letters are welcome. We reserve the right to publish your letters. Please Email your letters to nair.gopalan@yahoo.com 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.