Saturday, August 27, 2011

Singapore Lee Kuan Yew throws the law to the swine

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Under the Common Law doctrine of Stare Decisis, which Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore courts also follow, court decisions have a binding effect on subsequent cases based on the same facts.

For instance if Belinda Ang Saw Ean, (not Lee Kuan Yew's judge, although it could also be her) had been caught embezzling $10 million from the bank, in the case PP vs Belinda Ang Saw Ean; then any other case following on similar facts would also be similarly found guilty, based on this case as precedent.

This principle is not only good, it is also necessary, since we have certainty in the law with like cases dealt in similar manner.

But of course it is good only as long as you have honest judges who make honest judgements.

But, as in the case of Singapore where Lee Kuan Yew uses the law as a tool to silence dissent, the principle of Stare Decisis can have devastating effect on the law of the country.

You will recall in the past JB Jeyaretanm being sued, and repeatedly found liable for a series of defamation lawsuits brought about by Lee Kuan Yew.

Any lawyer can tell you that all these cases were all wrong, based not on a proper application of legal principles but a total abuse of it.

But under the principle of Stare Decisis, all these cases, which were all unacceptable misuse of the law, are all lawful binding decisions in Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore. Which means if anyone ever did what JB Jeyaretnam had said, even though perfectly legal, would be found similarly liable and punished.

Take the case of Dr. Chee Soon Juan's numerous defamation of character cases he had to face and the other peaceful protest cases, all of which were completely lawful and justified but where he was found guilty and liable in Singapore's courts resulting in his having to suffer repeated punishment and imprisonment.

Under this principle, all these cases too have become the law and anyone else doing anything that Chee did, even though perfectly liable would be similarly unjustly punished by citing Lee Kuan Yew vs Chee Soon Juan 2006 SLR 502 or which ever other law citation that might be.

Gopalan Nair, myself have been fined for contempt of court as far back as 1991 in Attorney General vs Gopalan Nair, merely because I suggested the changing of the manner of appointing judges in the Singapore Subordinate Courts; suspended from practicing law for 2 years in 1993 in the case Singapore Law Society vs Gopalan Nair, merely because I had made enquiries of the Attorney General of Singapore and now my recent conviction for writing a blog and disbarment in Singapore.

All these case were wrongly decided and the law was made an ass by Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore Kangaroo courts.

But all these wrong decisions have become binding precedents in Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore island which means if anyone else did anything similar to what I did, they will suffer the same fate.

By abusing the law this way, Lee Kuan Yew is destroying the law in Singapore.

Instead of advancing the law, it continues to regress and weaken and ends up the laughing stock of the world, a law which one expects from a banana third world African dictatorship, not a first world country that Lee Kuan Yew calls it.

In this manner Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew throws the law to the swine, and wallows in the bog with them.

Is it any surprise therefore that the arbitration business in Singapore has hit rock bottom with international clients giving Singapore as wide a pass as they can, choosing other respectable countries for this such as Australia.

Even locals are not using the law as a means to settle disputes if they can avoid it since it is well known that government connected persons win and all others lose.

As for Lee Kuan Yew himslef he has never lost a case, and he is one man who not only knows that he has won, but how much money he will recover from his hapless victim even before stepping into the courtroom!

My recent disbarment in Singapore was an opportunity to give another example to the world of Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore misusing the law to silence it's critics which has contributed in seriously worsening their reputation, or the lack of it. I take comfort in doing that.

Gopalan Nair
Attorney at Law
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...

This is how the Lee Kuan Yew press reported the results of the presidential election -

- Results Decisive, Says Tony Tan
May Wong, Channel NewsAsia


Winning an election by 7,269 votes or a 0.34 per cent margin following a recount is a decisive victory? 2 out of 3 voters did not vote for Lee Kuan Yew's candidate.

The 'reporter', Miss May Wong, is an idiot.


And this is how the free press reported the results -

- Tan's Narrow Election Win Loosens Lee's Grip
Lindsay Murdoch, Sydney Morning Herald

- Ex-deputy PM Scrapes To Victory In Singapore Vote
Bernice Han And Martin Abbugao, AFP

- Tony Tan Wins Singapore Presidential Race With Narrow Victory
Shamim Adam, Bloomberg

- Ruling Party's Choice Wins in Singapore
Narrow Margin of Victory Signals Increasing Pressure on the Governing PAP to Give Voters More Say
Chum Han Wong, Wall Street Journal

- Singapore Picks Lee’s Man as President, Narrowly Avoiding Upset
By Shamim Adam and Christian Schmollinger, Businessweek

"I have no idea" said...

Hi Gopalan,

Lee Kuan Yew abuse of Singapore laws have extend wider to the new Singapore President Tony Tan.
The abuse of laws have also gone deeper into dipping into the country's Reserve and selling of strategic assets cheap to its own unaccountable buddy organisations.

This election rally speech will give you some idea.

SSSS said...

Dear Sir,

Tan Cheng Bock ex-PAP MP was leading 2% when he left the counting station at 12:30am. Then, there is a sudden surge of 8000 votes for Tony Tan. Now, remember that this guy has a character flaw with his favourable treatment of his sons when he is a Minister of Defence. The question is - where does the extra votes come from.

Now, who exactly is Tan Cheng Bock. He has enough guts to speak out in Parliament against his master. He is one of the possible rebels who are purged in the cleansing of PAP in 2006.

He is also a man who spoke of the 2 factions in PAP.

What is happening in Singapore is that the Loong faction has tighten its control of PAP. The new MPs are yes-men and yes-women. Among them are departmental store dummy MPs like little girl Tin Pei Ling.

Back to the election.
Who is mystery man, Mr Tan Jee Say. Is he sent by the PAP to split the opposition votes? Looking at his background leading to his application seems to indicate this.

With a silent majority of Singaporeans who cannot tell what are their rights, and a impotent press that prostitute itself with questionable pro-government news, it is not difficult to fool the people and create a wayang election.

Anonymous said...

Singaporeans like to quote USA.
Eg US State treasurer is from the private sector Goldman Sachs - conflict of interest.

So, Tony Tan, a person from PAP is checking on the PAP government.
The same Tony (from GIC) is on the receiving end of the people's reserve. Now, he is guarding the people's reserves.

But someone forget to tell Singaporeans that without rule of laws for all, without proper checks and balances and a free press, they cannot follow America.

The reserves have been used 26 times and used by secretive organisations like HIC & Temasek - who claims that only the state money is used -

CIA Factbook list Singapore with the 8th highest public debt in the world.

Perhaps the missing retirement money will wake Singaporeans up, but they are in the minority population by then.

Still aspiring? the Swiss standard of living for Singaporeans.

Anonymous said...

Lee Kuan Yew can have it his way. But reading the comments and realising the ignorant Singaporeans are giving low votes to the PAP backed Tony Tan.

Can you imagine what will happen if you or wikiLeaks open the pandora's box on the full extent of secret dealings of Lee and his millionnaire ministers to enrich themselves and leave the remaining people to rot.

Jessie said...

Does Singapore really need a PM, SM, MM and president?
It's only a small country.

Anonymous said...

This news should shock Singaporeans again.

The last time, I wrote about lawyers taking the Australian govt to court.

Just because the government want to stop people smugglers, it should not use a flawed solution where asylum seekers are left unprotected!

This time, the results are out. (see news below)

THE High Court has vetoed the Malaysian asylum seeker swap in a ruling that has smashed the Government's entire strategy to halt people smugglers.

It also could spell the end of its plans to set up any off-shore processing of refugee applications.

The Full Bench, in an expedited judgment, found by five to two that Malaysia was not bound to look after the human rights of the 400 asylum seekers now under Australian care.

It found Immigration Minister Chris Bowen could not declare Malaysia to be a country where people could be sent to be processed as refugees.

The court ruled that no country could receive asylum seekers from Australia unless it was legally bound by international law or its own domestic law to provide access for asylum seekers to protection pending processing of their applications for refugee status.

Malaysia is not a signatory of the United Nations conventions on refugees.

DEAR SINGAPOREANS, WHEN THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT FAIL TO TREAT PEOPLE WITH DIGNITY, THE LAWS ARE THERE TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE. These people need not be Australians, they include non-Australians who come to our shores for protection, including those escaping from dictators!

Anonymous said...


I would like to ask you one interesting question regards to law which is to quote cases. I know in law lawyers and judges like to refer to past cases to proof such similar cases was won in courts before be it in own country or other countries.

So like in your case, or other dodgy cases that was won in Singapore court before can other countries refer/uses these cases to proof and win?

These dodgy Singapore cases set precedents to lawyers to win which they can quote has been won in dodgy Singapore courts before.

Gopalan Nair said...

To Anonymous Aug 31, 0723,
Every country follows their laws and have no requirement and will not accept any judgement from abroad which is not in conformity with their own.

So some kangaroo court in Singapore saying that I or Chee Soon Juan or someone else has committed wrongdoing or has a judgemt against them in a civil case would not be automatically liable in any jurisdiction in the USA.

Quite different if the judgement is from a respected jurisdiction like the UK.

Which is why, Singapore whose legal system has been thoroughly discredited will have a very hard time enforcing any of their judgements in the US.

That is the price Singapore pays in the international sphere for abusing the law.