Thursday, April 22, 2010

Law Society of Singapore vs Gopalan Nair. Request for Adjournment of Summons Date of April 30, 2010, at 11am in Singapore

Ladies and Gentlemen,
For the sake of good order, I have officially sent the following Email to the relevant Singapore parties asking for an adjournment of the April 30, 2010 Summons date in Singapore. As the request is a reasonable one, we shall wait and see if they grant it.

Gopalan Nair
Fremont, California, USA

Request for Adjournment of Summons Date of April 30, 2010, at 11am in Singapore

Friday, April 23, 2010 2:46 AM

From: "Gopalan Nair"
Add sender to Contacts


Ng-Goh Siew (Mrs): Immigration and Checkpoints Authority Singapore
Angela Chopard: Disciplinary Tribunal Singapore
Yogeswari Daughter of N Vadivellu: Disciplinary Tribunal Singapore
Peter Low (aka Peter Cuthbert Low): Singapore lawyer representing Singapore Law Society

I presently live in Fremont, California, USA

I intend to come to Singapore to attend the Summons Application which requires my attendance there on April 30, 2010 at 11 am.

I am asking that the date of this Summons requiring my attendance in Singapore be changed to a date at least 30 days from today for the following reasons.

I was not informed of this hearing date of April 30, 2010 in Singapore in a timely manner.

Since I do not live in Singapore but in California USA, I would need sufficient time to make travel arrangements to travel there.

I was infomed first time of this summons in a letter which I received on April 19, 2010 at my office in California, USA. This would have left only 11 days for me to travel there and therefore the notice of 11 days was completely inadequate. I therefore ask the date of the Summons hearing in Singapore to to be postponed for 30 days for me to make the necessary travel plans.

If you do not give me the time requested, you would be seen as if you are deiberatley trying to avoid my presence at the Summons hearing in Singapore, thereby making any decision on this case patently unreliable and flawed for lacking due process.

In addition I am asking for a gaurantee that I will not be harmed while in Singapore by the government of Singapore or arrested and jailed; that you will allow me to enter the country peacefully and leave it immediately after the hearing in Singapore on April 30, 2010 at 11 am.

Further I am asking you to pay for my travel expenses to and from Fremont California to Singapore, reasonable hotel expenses and room and board while in Singapore.

Please let me have your answer whether you are agreeable to all the above terms or to one or more of them.

Since April 30, 2010 is fast approcahing, I request an immediate response from you without delay.

You were already put on notice to my claim in the Email that I sent you yesterday which was a blog post from my blog Singapore Dissident dated April 21, 2010.

Thank You.

Gopalan Nair
Attorney at Law


Anonymous said...

I like how you stated your terms and conditions to them. Kudos.

Anonymous said...

Singapore Officials Show Some Spine…

Anonymous said...

Singaporean judges have been extremely cautious about their decisions since January of 1984, when then-Senior District Judge Michael Khoo acquitted the late JB Jeyaretnam, Singapore's lone opposition member of parliament and mortal enemy of then-Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, of making a false declaration about the accounts of his Workers' Party.

Shortly after that, Khoo lost his job as senior judge and was unceremoniously moved to the attorney-general's chambers, widely considered to be a much lower posting. The Jeyaretnam episode is the last time on record that a high-profile case ever went against any members of Singapore's ruling Lee family or the government.

Anonymous said...

The Singapore government has declined to reappoint Attorney General Walter Woon after his two years on the job expired earlier this month. Woon was earlier criticized by Lee Wei Ling, the daughter of Singaporean patriarch Lee Kuan Yew. Wei Ling is the head of the National Neuroscience Institute.

In 2008 Woon brought a case against CK Tang department store chairman Tang Wee Sum for attempting to buy a kidney for transplanting. Both Lee Wei Ling and Lee Kuan Yew voiced public disapproval of Woon for bringing the charges against Tang. He answered back, pointing out what he called a number of misconceptions she held as to the facts and the law, and emphasizing that he had brought the case in a move to implement the law without favor.

The law was changed in March of 2009 to align with Lee Wei Ling's position.