Ladies and Gentlemen,
You must not forget to keep a list of all the king's men. Lee Kuan Yew is 85 and trying hard to stay alive a little longer. He is desperate. But he cannot escape death who is just one step behind. Each time he looks back, the spectre of death is a step closer.
And just as all other dictators throughout history, he has made the same mistake of placing bureaucrats; men who have just passed their exams and done their sums to positions of authority. His ministers and politicians have no leadership skills, their only qualification being able to blindly obey authority. And history has shown that when the dictator dies there is nothing left to replace the vacuum. These weak men and women are incapable of wielding authority. And neither will the people be willing to obey them.
With his death these men and women will have no authority to rule. The people will no longer be prepared to accept their dictates. There will be unrest and confusion.
And you can imagine what will happen. The first thing these men do will be to flee the country with whatever they have before it is too late. And in a small island like Singapore, it is enough if a single person in authority flees. Then it will trigger a flood. And that will ruin the country.
Eighty five year old Lee Kuan Yew knows this. He worries what will happen with his impending death. He worries for his son, whom he appointed the Prime Minister, whether he can govern as he does now. I have no doubt that history will repeat itself. There has to be change once Big Brother leaves.
And talking about Orwell's Big Brother in his book 1984, the situation in it was different. There Big Brother is eternal. He will never die. No one knows even whether Big Brother is human. No one has seen him. He exists as an idea. In such a situation, an oligarchy can go on forever because people fear Big Brother who is ever present as an idea, and his dictates, or rather the dictates of the oligarchy can rule forever. If only Lee Kuan Yew could have devised a system where he exists as an idea, ever present and eternal, he and his cronies could rule forever. But sadly for him, George Orwell's book is fiction. Lee cannot do it in real life. We know who he is. We also know that he is the strongman of Singapore. We also know that he must die. We also know that he rules through fear. And we also know that when he dies the fear will be lifted from the people's hearts and when that happens, it will be the end.
That is why I say you have to make a list. And that is why every Singaporean must keep a list of those in authority who have abused their power to hurt innocent people to please the strongman and advance their careers.
Davinder Singh, counsel for Lee Kuan Yew for all his defamation actions against his critics is high on the list. He has used his profession to knowingly destroy Lee Kuan Yew's critics when he knows it was wrong. He does it to advance his career and for money. Singh in any American jurisdiction would have been disbarred long ago. Almost all American jurisdictions code of ethics for lawyers makes it malpractice for a lawyer to knowingly further a cause which he knows to be without merit. Every case in the long series of defamation cases that he conducted was totally without merit or legal basis. I am of course talking of the series of cases which he won, with the connivance of Singapore judges to bankrupt and impoverish JB Jeyaretnam, Dr. Chee Soon Juan and Tang Liang Hong. Every one of those cases showed various defences to the claims. Any politician is liable to be criticised in a free society and every one of those cases involved legitimate criticism which was covered by the defences of justification, fair comment and qualified privilege. But despite that Singh wins each time and each time he knows that he has destroyed an innocent man. He must be held to account.
We can expect Singh to take the first plane out with Lee's death. He must be stopped and held to account.
Take Belinda Ang whom I had criticized and which landed me in jail. She is a corrupt judge misusing the law to please Lee Kuan Yew. I have narrated a few egregious instances of her actions in this blog. You can get further details in Dr. Chee Soon Juan's blog and also hear the audio transcripts in it. You will walk away with disgust hearing it. She and Singh made sure that Dr. Chee was not given any meaningful opportunity to do anything or say anything at all. I am sure she too is worrying now. I am sure her plans will also be to flee to safety. She has to be stopped. She has to be forced to account for her actions. She must be on the list.
And the same goes for Jeffrey Chan, the solicitor general of Lee Kuan Yew who was commissioned to prosecute Lee's critics and send them to jail. You will recall his actions in court when 4 young men and women took their case to court to demand justice, after protesting at the CPF building, when he asked for court costs against them, which the complaint judge willingly agreed resulting in the 4 being made bankrupt.
And you will recall his prosecution in the kangaroo T shirt case where he was demanding long imprisonment terms against the 3 men for just exercising their right of free speech. The men were sent to jail and ordered to pay court costs in excess of $5,000.00, which will cause intolerable financial hardship on them, when he knew they were only doing what they were entitled to do. That is to criticize.
In my case, when I was charged for contempt of court, he was demanding a long prison term if I did not do what he wanted; that is to apologize. And he demanded that I pay $5,000.00 in court costs. I have not paid it but that is not the point. The point of it all was to send a message through the state controlled press that others should beware of criticizing Singapore judges, because if they do, they will be sent to jail and made to pay $5,000.00 fine. He has to on the list. I have no doubt that he too worries what will befall him with the death of Lee Kuan Yew. Will he be held to account? Will the people demand that he himself be put on trial and punished for his actions?
Judith Prakash was the judge that convicted the Kangaroo T shirt trio with that unjust punishment. I am sure she too is turning in her sleep thinking about what will happen to her when the Big Boy goes. I won't be surprised if she is already planning to move to Australia. She too has to be on the list. Very high on the list.
The same goes for judge Kan Ting Chu, and every other judge in Singapore. He must be held to account. So too with retired judge Mohideen Haja Rubin. So must ASP Abdul Razak Zakaria, Lee's chosen policeman to arrest and prosecute innocent people merely for criticizing Lee Kuan Yew and his judges. It is not enough for him to say that he was merely following orders. There are just orders and unjust ones. And when you enforce an unjust order knowingly, you are held to account. Having received superior orders is not a defence to hurt ordinary people. Oh yes, he is on the list. In his case, I doubt if he can run anywhere, so among the worriers, he has to worry the most.
Everyone who has deliberately hurt others to further their careers and for money, serving as Lee's agents have to answer for their actions. Justice demands it.
I hear that Lee Kuan Yew was recently in hospital and fitted with a pacemaker. His heart has begun to beat irregularly. I also understand that he travels around with a squad of doctors to treat him in an emergency. These are signs of desperation. The man is desperately trying to keep alive because he knows how bad it will be for his son when he goes. And at this time, the people of Singapore have to keep a lookout for their fellow men and women, the king's men, who have deliberately hurt them for profit.
Singaporeans are a gentle people. I don't think they will shoot them as was the case in countries such as Iran or Russia, after the overthrow of the Shah and the capture of the Tzar. No, there is no need for violence. Singaporeans should treat them according to law. A just and fair law; not the law that these men and women of Lee Kuan Yew used against them. We will have to see what happens and it will happen very soon.
But please, don't forget to make that list.
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.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Singapore's lawyers
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Singapore's lawyers dress in their traditional black suits pulling formal leather briefcases looking all serious and hurrying in and out of Singapore courtrooms. You cannot be faulted if you believed that they were real lawyers. Sadly, except for their outward appearance, they are far from lawyers in the real sense. Truly, they are not in a position to further the interests of their client one bit, except with the agreement of Lee Kuan Yew and his complaint judges. They are helpless in furthering the law. They can go through the motions, but truly, the law is Lee unto himself, through the medium of his willing judge.
Any red blooded lawyer in this situation would have protested to high Heaven and demanded that the law should rule, not Lee Kuan Yew. But not in Singapore. In Singapore, the lawyers themselves are terrified of him and therefore their main purpose is to stay out of prison and earn a living, because to demand that the law be upheld would mean ruination in every sense of the word.
I had to remain in Singapore for 6 months, 2 of which I spent in prison for writing an article critical of one of his judges. During the rest of the time, I spent a great deal of time in court defending myself, where I met many lawyers going about their work.
One of the lawyers I met, whom I knew from the days I practiced in Singapore was G. Raman. The meeting with him was short. I asked him whether he was aware of the abuse of the legal system by Lee Kuan Yew and what was he doing about it. He answered me with a question. He asked me whether I wished that he should lose his house, meaning of course that if he challenged Lee Kuan Yew, he would be sued and would have to sell his house to pay him. And then he promptly left, wearing his black suit and tie and pulling a large bag with many files in it, looking very intelligent and wise.
Another lawyer I spoke to in court was Mangalam Amaladass. To the same question, he had nothing to say, and after that meeting he never spoke to me again when I met him.
If there is one profession that should be ashamed of themselves, it is the lawyers. It is they who have intimate knowledge of the law, the importance of the Constitution, and the need to uphold it. It is upon their shoulders that lie this burden by the very fact they are lawyers. And it is very sad to see their complete abdication of their duty to their calling.
Dr. Chee Soon Juan has to fight his cases himself because no Singapore lawyer is prepared to represent him. Chia Ti Lick, solicitor, is one lawyer who is prepared to do it, and we give him credit for it. But understandably he too is constrained from going the full extent of calling a rat a rat. He has to moderate his arguments, making sure that it will not invite the wrath of Lee Kuan Yew which would be the end of his career. So in effect, sadly, someone who is being persecuted by Lee Kuan Yew in his courts might feel it best to argue his own case, since there is no one; not a single lawyer who is prepared to say it as it should, come what may, because that is what the duty of a lawyer really is.
I understand the legal profession in Singapore is shrinking, which shows that many lawyers are unwilling to continue with this charade. Many are emigrating. New entrants to the profession are declining. We must applaud those who take this route. But it is those who stay behind and continue practicing without protest who must think of what they are doing. They must examine their conscience. Pretending to be lawyers, going around dressed in black suits and pulling bulky files in and out of courtrooms is not enough.
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.
Singapore's lawyers dress in their traditional black suits pulling formal leather briefcases looking all serious and hurrying in and out of Singapore courtrooms. You cannot be faulted if you believed that they were real lawyers. Sadly, except for their outward appearance, they are far from lawyers in the real sense. Truly, they are not in a position to further the interests of their client one bit, except with the agreement of Lee Kuan Yew and his complaint judges. They are helpless in furthering the law. They can go through the motions, but truly, the law is Lee unto himself, through the medium of his willing judge.
Any red blooded lawyer in this situation would have protested to high Heaven and demanded that the law should rule, not Lee Kuan Yew. But not in Singapore. In Singapore, the lawyers themselves are terrified of him and therefore their main purpose is to stay out of prison and earn a living, because to demand that the law be upheld would mean ruination in every sense of the word.
I had to remain in Singapore for 6 months, 2 of which I spent in prison for writing an article critical of one of his judges. During the rest of the time, I spent a great deal of time in court defending myself, where I met many lawyers going about their work.
One of the lawyers I met, whom I knew from the days I practiced in Singapore was G. Raman. The meeting with him was short. I asked him whether he was aware of the abuse of the legal system by Lee Kuan Yew and what was he doing about it. He answered me with a question. He asked me whether I wished that he should lose his house, meaning of course that if he challenged Lee Kuan Yew, he would be sued and would have to sell his house to pay him. And then he promptly left, wearing his black suit and tie and pulling a large bag with many files in it, looking very intelligent and wise.
Another lawyer I spoke to in court was Mangalam Amaladass. To the same question, he had nothing to say, and after that meeting he never spoke to me again when I met him.
If there is one profession that should be ashamed of themselves, it is the lawyers. It is they who have intimate knowledge of the law, the importance of the Constitution, and the need to uphold it. It is upon their shoulders that lie this burden by the very fact they are lawyers. And it is very sad to see their complete abdication of their duty to their calling.
Dr. Chee Soon Juan has to fight his cases himself because no Singapore lawyer is prepared to represent him. Chia Ti Lick, solicitor, is one lawyer who is prepared to do it, and we give him credit for it. But understandably he too is constrained from going the full extent of calling a rat a rat. He has to moderate his arguments, making sure that it will not invite the wrath of Lee Kuan Yew which would be the end of his career. So in effect, sadly, someone who is being persecuted by Lee Kuan Yew in his courts might feel it best to argue his own case, since there is no one; not a single lawyer who is prepared to say it as it should, come what may, because that is what the duty of a lawyer really is.
I understand the legal profession in Singapore is shrinking, which shows that many lawyers are unwilling to continue with this charade. Many are emigrating. New entrants to the profession are declining. We must applaud those who take this route. But it is those who stay behind and continue practicing without protest who must think of what they are doing. They must examine their conscience. Pretending to be lawyers, going around dressed in black suits and pulling bulky files in and out of courtrooms is not enough.
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.
Friday, December 19, 2008
Dr Michael D Barr: "Singapore is at heart a corrupt dictatorship"
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Another confirmation of what everyone is saying. Which is, Singapore is Lee Kuan Yew's dictatorship which he manages principally through a corrupt and compliant judiciary. Can we expect another round of defamation and contempt of courts lawsuits, or is it only in cases where the victim is helpless? That is, if he is within Singapore?
Dr. Barr has done a great service to the people of Singapore. Thank you. And so has Mr. Francis Seow for writing the book. Thank you.
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.
Beyond Suspicion? The Singapore Judiciary
Pacific AffairsFall 2008: Vol 81, Number 3
ProQuest Asian Business and Reference pg. 494
Review by Dr Michael D Barr
Flinders University, Australia
BEYOND SUSPICION?
The Singapore Judiciary By Francis T. Seow; with a foreword by Gary Woodard. New Haven (Connecticut) : Yale University Southeast Asia Studies, 2006. xxii, 405pp. (Tables.)
US$26.00 paper. ISBN 0-938692-87- 9.
Order from Amazon
FRANCIS Seow's third book is a savage and unmerciful critique of Singapore's judicial system. He provides convincing evidence that the Singapore court system is basically the play-thing of former Prime Minister (currently Minister Mentor) Lee Kuan Yew, through which he toys with and destroys his enemies at his leisure; corrupting the Bench, the legal profession, the police and the profession of journalism on the way through. The case presented by Seow – which is overwhelming drawn from the intimate detail of a single legal battle – demonstrates beyond reasonable doubt that Singapore is at heart a corrupt dictatorship separated from Third World dictatorships primarily by its national income and the cleverness of the techniques by which it manipulates institutional power.
It is a damning indictment that could have been much more powerful if Seow had resisted the temptation to indulge in childish name calling and heavy-handed didacticism. These acts of self-indulgence dominate the first part of the book and are never far away in the rest. Their main impact, as far as I can see, is to give defenders of the Singapore system and of Lee Kuan Yew the excuse they need to dismiss the book as 'just another anti-Singapore rant'. Seow's arrogant style was probably perfected while he was part of the system he is now critiquing (having been Lee's choice for the position of Solicitor-General in the 1980s), but if the reader can put these defects aside it will become clear that this is a deeply disturbing story of manipulative and duplicitous behaviour on the part of Lee Kuan Yew as he set out to use a quiescent judicial and legal fraternity to destroy an innocent man, along with his wife and his lawyer.
The man in question is Tang Liang Hong who had the temerity to question the procedure by which Lee Kuan Yew and other notables (including his son and the current prime minister, Lee Hsien Loong), were cleared of any suggestion of impropriety when they accepted million dollar discounts from a property developer. Much of the book is concerned with the political and public relations machinations by which Tang was caught up in Lee's web of retaliation, but in this review it must be sufficient to relay just a few of the most salient facts to give the reader a sense of the book.
For instance, what are we to make of a legal system that gives a defendant a couple of hours (literally) to find a solicitor, a translator (since she could speak no English), and prepare and present a defence in court to a procedure about which she had literally no understanding? Or where a judge sits in judgement on a case where he himself is implicated as a recipient of one of the real estate discounts that started the whole procedure, and who had previously worked for the family law firm of the primary litigant (Lee Kuan Yew)? Or where a judge (not the same judge) can receive many sets of documents, each hundreds of pages thick and so badly copied and paginated as to substantially illegible and unreadable, and yet two and a half hours later bring down a legal judgement based on his considered legal interpretation of the implications of their contents? Or where a summons to chambers is issued by an appellant's lawyers rather than by the court, but the court upholds it? Or where evidence that proves beyond all reasonable doubt the innocence of the defendant is not only refused admission in court, but all record of its existence is expunged from the record?
Seow has drawn primarily on court documents for his evidence, having been supplied with a complete set (included documents later expunged from the record) by Tang Liang Hong, who is now a de facto exile from Singapore. Fully the last third of the volume is occupied by transcriptions of some of the most damning court documents, including a fair sample of documents where Lee Kuan Yew and his allies condemn themselves by their own words. (Seow delights in using Lee's own words to demonstrate his capriciousness and duplicity. At one point he was even able to cite Lee as his primary source to sustain his charge that Lee was the arch-manipulator of the proceedings. Seow tends to overplay his hand when using this technique, but Lee's arrogance and peremptory choice of words do rather lend themselves to ridicule.)
This is a powerful book, but it could have been much more.
Dr Barr :Lecturer in International Relations, School of Political and International Studies, Flinders University School Director of Studies (B.A) School Ethics Research Adviser Deputy Chair, Faculty of Social Sciences Undergraduate Standing Committee.
Home
Another confirmation of what everyone is saying. Which is, Singapore is Lee Kuan Yew's dictatorship which he manages principally through a corrupt and compliant judiciary. Can we expect another round of defamation and contempt of courts lawsuits, or is it only in cases where the victim is helpless? That is, if he is within Singapore?
Dr. Barr has done a great service to the people of Singapore. Thank you. And so has Mr. Francis Seow for writing the book. Thank you.
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.
Beyond Suspicion? The Singapore Judiciary
Pacific AffairsFall 2008: Vol 81, Number 3
ProQuest Asian Business and Reference pg. 494
Review by Dr Michael D Barr
Flinders University, Australia
BEYOND SUSPICION?
The Singapore Judiciary By Francis T. Seow; with a foreword by Gary Woodard. New Haven (Connecticut) : Yale University Southeast Asia Studies, 2006. xxii, 405pp. (Tables.)
US$26.00 paper. ISBN 0-938692-87- 9.
Order from Amazon
FRANCIS Seow's third book is a savage and unmerciful critique of Singapore's judicial system. He provides convincing evidence that the Singapore court system is basically the play-thing of former Prime Minister (currently Minister Mentor) Lee Kuan Yew, through which he toys with and destroys his enemies at his leisure; corrupting the Bench, the legal profession, the police and the profession of journalism on the way through. The case presented by Seow – which is overwhelming drawn from the intimate detail of a single legal battle – demonstrates beyond reasonable doubt that Singapore is at heart a corrupt dictatorship separated from Third World dictatorships primarily by its national income and the cleverness of the techniques by which it manipulates institutional power.
It is a damning indictment that could have been much more powerful if Seow had resisted the temptation to indulge in childish name calling and heavy-handed didacticism. These acts of self-indulgence dominate the first part of the book and are never far away in the rest. Their main impact, as far as I can see, is to give defenders of the Singapore system and of Lee Kuan Yew the excuse they need to dismiss the book as 'just another anti-Singapore rant'. Seow's arrogant style was probably perfected while he was part of the system he is now critiquing (having been Lee's choice for the position of Solicitor-General in the 1980s), but if the reader can put these defects aside it will become clear that this is a deeply disturbing story of manipulative and duplicitous behaviour on the part of Lee Kuan Yew as he set out to use a quiescent judicial and legal fraternity to destroy an innocent man, along with his wife and his lawyer.
The man in question is Tang Liang Hong who had the temerity to question the procedure by which Lee Kuan Yew and other notables (including his son and the current prime minister, Lee Hsien Loong), were cleared of any suggestion of impropriety when they accepted million dollar discounts from a property developer. Much of the book is concerned with the political and public relations machinations by which Tang was caught up in Lee's web of retaliation, but in this review it must be sufficient to relay just a few of the most salient facts to give the reader a sense of the book.
For instance, what are we to make of a legal system that gives a defendant a couple of hours (literally) to find a solicitor, a translator (since she could speak no English), and prepare and present a defence in court to a procedure about which she had literally no understanding? Or where a judge sits in judgement on a case where he himself is implicated as a recipient of one of the real estate discounts that started the whole procedure, and who had previously worked for the family law firm of the primary litigant (Lee Kuan Yew)? Or where a judge (not the same judge) can receive many sets of documents, each hundreds of pages thick and so badly copied and paginated as to substantially illegible and unreadable, and yet two and a half hours later bring down a legal judgement based on his considered legal interpretation of the implications of their contents? Or where a summons to chambers is issued by an appellant's lawyers rather than by the court, but the court upholds it? Or where evidence that proves beyond all reasonable doubt the innocence of the defendant is not only refused admission in court, but all record of its existence is expunged from the record?
Seow has drawn primarily on court documents for his evidence, having been supplied with a complete set (included documents later expunged from the record) by Tang Liang Hong, who is now a de facto exile from Singapore. Fully the last third of the volume is occupied by transcriptions of some of the most damning court documents, including a fair sample of documents where Lee Kuan Yew and his allies condemn themselves by their own words. (Seow delights in using Lee's own words to demonstrate his capriciousness and duplicity. At one point he was even able to cite Lee as his primary source to sustain his charge that Lee was the arch-manipulator of the proceedings. Seow tends to overplay his hand when using this technique, but Lee's arrogance and peremptory choice of words do rather lend themselves to ridicule.)
This is a powerful book, but it could have been much more.
Dr Barr :Lecturer in International Relations, School of Political and International Studies, Flinders University School Director of Studies (B.A) School Ethics Research Adviser Deputy Chair, Faculty of Social Sciences Undergraduate Standing Committee.
Home
Thursday, December 11, 2008
In Pravda there is no "truth" and in Izvestia there is no "news"
Ladies and Gentlemen,
There was a joke in the former Soviet Union which goes like this. In Pravda, there is no "truth" and in Isvestia there is no "news", which by the way were the 2 main newspapers in Soviet Russia. In Russian, Pravda meant "truth" and Izvestia meant "news". Both, of course, were state owned and controlled newspapers in the former Soviet Union. But what you got was neither truth nor news, just plain propaganda. That the Soviet Union is doing well. Grain production has gone up ten fold. The country cannot be in a better shape. Everything is just perfect. Except that the Soviet Union in truth was crumbling.
Which reminds me of the state owned and controlled Singapore newspapers such as the Straits Times. And by the way, the entire Singapore press and media is both owned and controlled by Lee Kuan Yew and his government. No one is allowed to print and publish any newspaper in Singapore without a permit from Lee Kuan Yew's government under the Newspapers and Printing Presses Act. And you guessed it. If you were going to write anything critical of him, you not only would be denied that permit, but you will be sued for defamation, crippling damages will be awarded and you will be promptly bankrupted.
I have not been able to get any real news in the state controlled Straits Times. For instance today's Straits Times carried an article about a teenage boy who had sex with another teenager; a prostitute was found precariously hanging from a high rise HDB flat and Walter Woon, Singapore's Attorney General counters an argument of a lawyer who says there is one law for the rich and another for the poor. But what news is there about the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Ministry of Trade, the Ministry of Manpower, the Foreign Ministry? Nothing.
And no one can contradict anything put out by this state controlled press one way or the other, for the simple reason that no one knows what is really happening.
Which leaves me to guess as best I can, reading what is out there in the foreign media. They tell us that Singapore has turned into a tax haven for the rich from other countries, as a money laundering center, like Vanuatu, a Pacific atoll. A place where the poor are no longer able to live due to unbearable costs. A place where one person takes his life everyday mainly by jumping off high rise HDB flats and where the government uses the law courts to punish dissenters by throwing them in jail, one of the victims being myself.
On the whole, one thing is clear. The reputation of Singapore has been irreparably tarnished. There is no doubt about it. The Washington Post is the foremost and most highly respected newspaper in the United States together with the New York Times. And if the Washington Post reports that Singapore is a country which uses its laws to suppress legitimate criticism, then this must be the end for Singapore. And this is exactly what they did in their report titled "Public enemy in Singapore" dated Dec 9, 2008 when they described the shameful use of the law courts to silence Dr. Chee Soon Juan.
Singapore is not a self sufficient agricultural country that can ignore international opinion. It is not Burma. Every aspect of Singapore's existence depends on the goodwill of the world. Trade, education, investment, banking and commerce. Once it's reputation is sullied, it can no longer pretend to be a place that one chooses to invest in, a place where one gets educated in, a place where one does honest banking.
And in the end, the truth always has a habit of surfacing. Tyrants and dictators around the world will try to put up a good face in public, but their lies and deceit must eventually begin to take a toll. As is the case with Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew.
Another report of significance is the Asian Wall Street Journal's article titled "Democracy in Singapore" of June 26 2008 and the article titled "Singapore maneuvers in response to Chee" in the Far Easter Economic Review of Dec 9, 2008. These are not papers that one can easily dismiss. They are read by people of importance all over the world. And what they say is the same thing. That Singapore's attempt to show themselves as a democracy with the rule of law is nothing but a front. That it is in fact plain and simply a dictatorship with Lee Kuan Yew the dictator since 1959, as long a Fidel Castro of Cuba.
Dr. Chee Soon Juan is undoubtedly winning in this battle between democracy and tyranny, between truth and falsity and between the rule of law and rule by dictate. And with the Godsend, the Internet, Lee Kuan Yew cannot win in his desperate attempt to continue to keep criticism under wraps.
The effect of this bad publicity will undoubtedly take a toll on the Singapore dictator's ability to continue with business as usual. The rot has already begun to spread. The edifice has to fall in due course. This is the time for everyone who cares for Singapore to weigh in with the truth and help to turn this place into a real democracy. Agitate, write, protest, go to jail, do whatever you can. It cleanses the soul. And you can look at yourself tomorrow and tell yourself, there was a man. Not a dictator's lackey.
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.
There was a joke in the former Soviet Union which goes like this. In Pravda, there is no "truth" and in Isvestia there is no "news", which by the way were the 2 main newspapers in Soviet Russia. In Russian, Pravda meant "truth" and Izvestia meant "news". Both, of course, were state owned and controlled newspapers in the former Soviet Union. But what you got was neither truth nor news, just plain propaganda. That the Soviet Union is doing well. Grain production has gone up ten fold. The country cannot be in a better shape. Everything is just perfect. Except that the Soviet Union in truth was crumbling.
Which reminds me of the state owned and controlled Singapore newspapers such as the Straits Times. And by the way, the entire Singapore press and media is both owned and controlled by Lee Kuan Yew and his government. No one is allowed to print and publish any newspaper in Singapore without a permit from Lee Kuan Yew's government under the Newspapers and Printing Presses Act. And you guessed it. If you were going to write anything critical of him, you not only would be denied that permit, but you will be sued for defamation, crippling damages will be awarded and you will be promptly bankrupted.
I have not been able to get any real news in the state controlled Straits Times. For instance today's Straits Times carried an article about a teenage boy who had sex with another teenager; a prostitute was found precariously hanging from a high rise HDB flat and Walter Woon, Singapore's Attorney General counters an argument of a lawyer who says there is one law for the rich and another for the poor. But what news is there about the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Ministry of Trade, the Ministry of Manpower, the Foreign Ministry? Nothing.
And no one can contradict anything put out by this state controlled press one way or the other, for the simple reason that no one knows what is really happening.
Which leaves me to guess as best I can, reading what is out there in the foreign media. They tell us that Singapore has turned into a tax haven for the rich from other countries, as a money laundering center, like Vanuatu, a Pacific atoll. A place where the poor are no longer able to live due to unbearable costs. A place where one person takes his life everyday mainly by jumping off high rise HDB flats and where the government uses the law courts to punish dissenters by throwing them in jail, one of the victims being myself.
On the whole, one thing is clear. The reputation of Singapore has been irreparably tarnished. There is no doubt about it. The Washington Post is the foremost and most highly respected newspaper in the United States together with the New York Times. And if the Washington Post reports that Singapore is a country which uses its laws to suppress legitimate criticism, then this must be the end for Singapore. And this is exactly what they did in their report titled "Public enemy in Singapore" dated Dec 9, 2008 when they described the shameful use of the law courts to silence Dr. Chee Soon Juan.
Singapore is not a self sufficient agricultural country that can ignore international opinion. It is not Burma. Every aspect of Singapore's existence depends on the goodwill of the world. Trade, education, investment, banking and commerce. Once it's reputation is sullied, it can no longer pretend to be a place that one chooses to invest in, a place where one gets educated in, a place where one does honest banking.
And in the end, the truth always has a habit of surfacing. Tyrants and dictators around the world will try to put up a good face in public, but their lies and deceit must eventually begin to take a toll. As is the case with Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew.
Another report of significance is the Asian Wall Street Journal's article titled "Democracy in Singapore" of June 26 2008 and the article titled "Singapore maneuvers in response to Chee" in the Far Easter Economic Review of Dec 9, 2008. These are not papers that one can easily dismiss. They are read by people of importance all over the world. And what they say is the same thing. That Singapore's attempt to show themselves as a democracy with the rule of law is nothing but a front. That it is in fact plain and simply a dictatorship with Lee Kuan Yew the dictator since 1959, as long a Fidel Castro of Cuba.
Dr. Chee Soon Juan is undoubtedly winning in this battle between democracy and tyranny, between truth and falsity and between the rule of law and rule by dictate. And with the Godsend, the Internet, Lee Kuan Yew cannot win in his desperate attempt to continue to keep criticism under wraps.
The effect of this bad publicity will undoubtedly take a toll on the Singapore dictator's ability to continue with business as usual. The rot has already begun to spread. The edifice has to fall in due course. This is the time for everyone who cares for Singapore to weigh in with the truth and help to turn this place into a real democracy. Agitate, write, protest, go to jail, do whatever you can. It cleanses the soul. And you can look at yourself tomorrow and tell yourself, there was a man. Not a dictator's lackey.
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.
Monday, December 8, 2008
Break
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Taking a break from writing. Taking care of business. Will resume shortly. Thanks very much.
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.
Taking a break from writing. Taking care of business. Will resume shortly. Thanks very much.
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.
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Why is Singapore not applying to extradite me?
The Singapore government forcing me to remain in Singapore for 6 months, waiting for my trial for allegedly insulting a judge on this blog has caused me to suffer great financial loss. Your financial donations will help greatly. Please send then to the address below. Many thanks.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
On the 17th of September 2008, I was convicted and sentenced to 3 months imprisonment in Singapore for allegedly insulting a judge in a blog post in this blog. While I was serving sentence in prison with 1 week to go for my release, I was again charged for contempt of court for allegedly showing disrespect for the judge in another case, for saying things such as " I do not expect to get a fair trial in this court". As I knew that a denial of the charge would mean further time in prison, I pleaded guilty and said anything they wanted to hear, which resulted in no further jail time.
Since my return to the US, I have not only further criticized the Singapore judges as corrupt and agents for the dictator of Singapore Lee Kuan Yew, as can be seen in all my 6 blog posts since Nov 28, 2008, I have further defied them by intentionally and publicly being in contempt of the court order off Judge Leslie Chew, of Court 15, Subordinate Courts Singapore by not only attacking the Singapore judiciary, but also by putting up the blog posts of Sept 1, 2008 and Sept 6, 2008, which were ordered removed.
By reading this blog, you can see that I am deliberately attacking the Singapore judiciary by calling them stooges of the Singapore dictator Lee Kuan Yew. The Singapore government, their Attorney General and the Singapore judiciary cannot pretend not to know what I write here because it is they who had charged and imprisonment me for 3 months because of the contents of this blog.
Singapore, as you know claims to be a first world modern city. It also claims to have the rule of law. It also claims to be a nation, proud of itself. In such a case, what I want to ask is this. Why, if this is so, if in fact Singapore claims to be country of laws; why is it doing nothing about a man in the United States deliberately calling its judges lackeys of the government and deliberately violating a court order; all of which has been given wide publicity, not only in Singapore but internationally?
I am sure if any person, had deliberately broken the laws of America or Australia or India or any other self respecting country and escaped to another, that country would use all means to repatriate him to stand trial for his crimes and be committed to prison for his contempt. I am sure that I would not dare to violate a law of any state in the US and run to another country, because I am certain that I will face extradition proceedings to have me returned to stand trial. Why, because America is a proud nation and will not stand by to see anyone brazenly flouting its laws.
I want to reiterate. While in Singapore, I had called Judge Belinda Ang a stooge of Lee Kuan Yew and his son, in my blog. According to Singapore judge Kan Ting Chiu, I had committed a serious, mind you serious, crime, for which he sent me to jail for 3 months. Now having returned to the US, I have done the same thing, expect that the criticism was even harsher. I have called High court judges Kan Ting Chiu and Judith Prakash shamelessly corrupt for being agents of Lee Kuan Yew and his government. What is more, I have deliberately broken a court order and boasting about it.
The Singapore government's complete failure to pursue me by law, clearly confirms what I have said all along. This is a government that continues to stay in power by bullying it's people into not criticizing their policies, which they do by using compliant judges to imprison dissenters. The disgusting thing is that they know that if they ever tried to apply for extradition proceedings through the American courts, they would be laughed at as a bunch of comedians. Realizing that they have no chance of convincing an American court, or for that matter, an Australian or Canadian or British or French, or any court in the free world that I have committed a crime, they remain silent as I continue from here to expose the corruption of Lee Kuan Yew and his disgraced judiciary.
As someone said it very nicely "Come and get me if you can, you bunch of bully boys. Why not try your dirty tricks in a free country, like the the USA"?
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.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
On the 17th of September 2008, I was convicted and sentenced to 3 months imprisonment in Singapore for allegedly insulting a judge in a blog post in this blog. While I was serving sentence in prison with 1 week to go for my release, I was again charged for contempt of court for allegedly showing disrespect for the judge in another case, for saying things such as " I do not expect to get a fair trial in this court". As I knew that a denial of the charge would mean further time in prison, I pleaded guilty and said anything they wanted to hear, which resulted in no further jail time.
Since my return to the US, I have not only further criticized the Singapore judges as corrupt and agents for the dictator of Singapore Lee Kuan Yew, as can be seen in all my 6 blog posts since Nov 28, 2008, I have further defied them by intentionally and publicly being in contempt of the court order off Judge Leslie Chew, of Court 15, Subordinate Courts Singapore by not only attacking the Singapore judiciary, but also by putting up the blog posts of Sept 1, 2008 and Sept 6, 2008, which were ordered removed.
By reading this blog, you can see that I am deliberately attacking the Singapore judiciary by calling them stooges of the Singapore dictator Lee Kuan Yew. The Singapore government, their Attorney General and the Singapore judiciary cannot pretend not to know what I write here because it is they who had charged and imprisonment me for 3 months because of the contents of this blog.
Singapore, as you know claims to be a first world modern city. It also claims to have the rule of law. It also claims to be a nation, proud of itself. In such a case, what I want to ask is this. Why, if this is so, if in fact Singapore claims to be country of laws; why is it doing nothing about a man in the United States deliberately calling its judges lackeys of the government and deliberately violating a court order; all of which has been given wide publicity, not only in Singapore but internationally?
I am sure if any person, had deliberately broken the laws of America or Australia or India or any other self respecting country and escaped to another, that country would use all means to repatriate him to stand trial for his crimes and be committed to prison for his contempt. I am sure that I would not dare to violate a law of any state in the US and run to another country, because I am certain that I will face extradition proceedings to have me returned to stand trial. Why, because America is a proud nation and will not stand by to see anyone brazenly flouting its laws.
I want to reiterate. While in Singapore, I had called Judge Belinda Ang a stooge of Lee Kuan Yew and his son, in my blog. According to Singapore judge Kan Ting Chiu, I had committed a serious, mind you serious, crime, for which he sent me to jail for 3 months. Now having returned to the US, I have done the same thing, expect that the criticism was even harsher. I have called High court judges Kan Ting Chiu and Judith Prakash shamelessly corrupt for being agents of Lee Kuan Yew and his government. What is more, I have deliberately broken a court order and boasting about it.
The Singapore government's complete failure to pursue me by law, clearly confirms what I have said all along. This is a government that continues to stay in power by bullying it's people into not criticizing their policies, which they do by using compliant judges to imprison dissenters. The disgusting thing is that they know that if they ever tried to apply for extradition proceedings through the American courts, they would be laughed at as a bunch of comedians. Realizing that they have no chance of convincing an American court, or for that matter, an Australian or Canadian or British or French, or any court in the free world that I have committed a crime, they remain silent as I continue from here to expose the corruption of Lee Kuan Yew and his disgraced judiciary.
As someone said it very nicely "Come and get me if you can, you bunch of bully boys. Why not try your dirty tricks in a free country, like the the USA"?
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.
Saturday, December 6, 2008
Judge or PAP politician? Justice Kan Ting Chiu of the Singapore High Court.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I claimed trial and disputed the charge that I had intentionally insulted Justice Belinda Ang of the High Court when I wrote in this blog that she had "prostituted her position as a judge" during the Lee Kuan Yew vs Dr. Chee Soon Juan trial, held from May 26 to May 28, 2008 in Singapore. I was charged under the following Penal Code section:
Section 228, Singapore Penal Code: Whoever intentionally offers any insult or causes any interruption to any public servant, while such public servant is sitting in any stage of a 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, or with both.
I was clearly not guilty under the section. The elements of the section were inapplicable in my case.
Offering an insult: It is well established that any law has to be clear and precise on it's face. The word "insult" is so vague and open to a million interpretations that no one could know one way or the other whether something is an "insult" or not. It is precisely for this reason that this section is clearly unenforceable and void.
For instance, would calling someone "fat" if he was in fact fat amount to an insult. It is like a court convicting a person under a law which says "it is unlawful to be a bad person". Clearly no one could know what is precisely a "bad person". One person's opinion would clearly be different from another.
This is exactly what I argued in court. I told Justice Kang that it would have been impossible for anyone beforehand to know what was an insult and what was not. And such laws have a chilling effect on all speech, where people would not want to offer any criticism lest the court finds that it amounts to an insult. This completely contravenes the supreme law of the land, the Constitution, which guarantees free speech and expression. Justice Kang had nothing to say on this point.
Second, I argued that if something I said amounted to the truth, it cannot amount to an insult. The dictionary definition of the word "prostituting ones position of judge" (see my earlier blog post Dec 3rd 2008) clearly defines it as a person who abuses his or her office for an odious purpose. With various examples in my blog post of May 29, 2008, I had described factually my reasons why I said this. What I said was the truth. And therefore how can stating the truth amount to an insult? To this, Justice Kang made a remark which was out of this world. He said, a remark can be an insult even if it was true. He said, to tell someone that "his father was a drunk and his mother is a bigamist" even if true amounted to an insult. To this, I told him that it should depend on the circumstances in which it was said, but it all fell, as was to be expected on deaf ears.
Examine these words: any insult or causes any interruption to any public servant, while such public servant is sitting in any stage of a judicial proceeding. Any reasonable reading of these words should mean that the defendant should have been physically present in court and either insulted the judge or interrupted the proceedings. I had never insulted Justice Ang in her court and neither did I interrupt her proceedings. Instead, I wrote a blog post criticizing her conduct as a judge. I had never asked her to read my blog post. Other people read my blog. But how can that amount to my insulting her, without even any action by me in her court.
Of course, the judge took no interest in anything I said and wholeheartedly agreed with the prosecutor that a) the insult need not be in her court even though the section clearly means this and b) it did not matter that I did not personally insult her. It was sufficient that others read it in my blog!
Examine these words: Sitting in any stage of judicial proceeding. The case, assessment of damages before Judge Ang in the High Court between Lee Kuan Yew and Dr. Chee took place from May 26 2008 and ended on May 28, 2008. Justice Ang then said that she will state the amount of damages at a later date. The court was no longer sitting in proceedings after May 28, 2008. There will not be any court hearings after this at all. All that will happen after May 28, 2008 is for the Judge, at some unspecified time in the future, to inform the parties by mail of the quantum of damages that Dr. Chee has to pay. I had written this blog post criticizing her on May 29, 2008 at which date, the court was no longer sitting. The hearing was concluded by then.
I therefore told Judge Kang that I cannot be guilty of the charge since the court was no longer sitting in proceedings. To this argument, Justice Kang stated that because Judge Ang had yet to decide on the quantum of damages, the court, believe it or not, was still "sitting in proceedings". What then, I asked Judge Kang, if Judge Ang does not decide on the quantum of damages for 2 years! Can it then be said that her court was sitting in proceedings for the full 2 years!
To anyone reading this section, "sitting in proceedings" has to mean only one thing, that is, the court has to be physically in session with parties arguing their case before it. Otherwise, by no stretch of imagination, can it ever be argued that it is. Again all this fell on deaf ears. His stand was that because Judge Ang was yet to deliver her judgement on the quantum of damages, her court was "still sitting in proceedings", even though the court was not in session! As far as he was concerned, there was nothing more to it.
And further proof that the Judge was misusing this law was this. The prosecutor could not find a single authority that had any similarity to my case. He relied on one case, the only one he could find. In that case, the defendant, being angry at the sentence ordered by the judge, yelled expletives at him in Tamil and damaged the dock in court!
Judge Kang during my trial in the High Court from Sept 08, 2008 to Sept 17, 2008 was not acting as a judge. He was a PAP politician, silencing criticism of Lee Kuan Yew and his courts. He was also using me to intimidate everyone else in the island of Singapore, warning them them not to criticize Lee Kuan Yew's government or his courts, regardless of how much they abuse the law. And if they did, they will be have to serve a prison sentence of 3 months, like me.
It is up to the reader of this blog to ponder over this question. Are you going to be bullied by Judge Kang and keep your mouth shut (because that is what he wants you to do) or are you going to say that you are a human being and will not allow him to intimidate you?
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.
I claimed trial and disputed the charge that I had intentionally insulted Justice Belinda Ang of the High Court when I wrote in this blog that she had "prostituted her position as a judge" during the Lee Kuan Yew vs Dr. Chee Soon Juan trial, held from May 26 to May 28, 2008 in Singapore. I was charged under the following Penal Code section:
Section 228, Singapore Penal Code: Whoever intentionally offers any insult or causes any interruption to any public servant, while such public servant is sitting in any stage of a 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, or with both.
I was clearly not guilty under the section. The elements of the section were inapplicable in my case.
Offering an insult: It is well established that any law has to be clear and precise on it's face. The word "insult" is so vague and open to a million interpretations that no one could know one way or the other whether something is an "insult" or not. It is precisely for this reason that this section is clearly unenforceable and void.
For instance, would calling someone "fat" if he was in fact fat amount to an insult. It is like a court convicting a person under a law which says "it is unlawful to be a bad person". Clearly no one could know what is precisely a "bad person". One person's opinion would clearly be different from another.
This is exactly what I argued in court. I told Justice Kang that it would have been impossible for anyone beforehand to know what was an insult and what was not. And such laws have a chilling effect on all speech, where people would not want to offer any criticism lest the court finds that it amounts to an insult. This completely contravenes the supreme law of the land, the Constitution, which guarantees free speech and expression. Justice Kang had nothing to say on this point.
Second, I argued that if something I said amounted to the truth, it cannot amount to an insult. The dictionary definition of the word "prostituting ones position of judge" (see my earlier blog post Dec 3rd 2008) clearly defines it as a person who abuses his or her office for an odious purpose. With various examples in my blog post of May 29, 2008, I had described factually my reasons why I said this. What I said was the truth. And therefore how can stating the truth amount to an insult? To this, Justice Kang made a remark which was out of this world. He said, a remark can be an insult even if it was true. He said, to tell someone that "his father was a drunk and his mother is a bigamist" even if true amounted to an insult. To this, I told him that it should depend on the circumstances in which it was said, but it all fell, as was to be expected on deaf ears.
Examine these words: any insult or causes any interruption to any public servant, while such public servant is sitting in any stage of a judicial proceeding. Any reasonable reading of these words should mean that the defendant should have been physically present in court and either insulted the judge or interrupted the proceedings. I had never insulted Justice Ang in her court and neither did I interrupt her proceedings. Instead, I wrote a blog post criticizing her conduct as a judge. I had never asked her to read my blog post. Other people read my blog. But how can that amount to my insulting her, without even any action by me in her court.
Of course, the judge took no interest in anything I said and wholeheartedly agreed with the prosecutor that a) the insult need not be in her court even though the section clearly means this and b) it did not matter that I did not personally insult her. It was sufficient that others read it in my blog!
Examine these words: Sitting in any stage of judicial proceeding. The case, assessment of damages before Judge Ang in the High Court between Lee Kuan Yew and Dr. Chee took place from May 26 2008 and ended on May 28, 2008. Justice Ang then said that she will state the amount of damages at a later date. The court was no longer sitting in proceedings after May 28, 2008. There will not be any court hearings after this at all. All that will happen after May 28, 2008 is for the Judge, at some unspecified time in the future, to inform the parties by mail of the quantum of damages that Dr. Chee has to pay. I had written this blog post criticizing her on May 29, 2008 at which date, the court was no longer sitting. The hearing was concluded by then.
I therefore told Judge Kang that I cannot be guilty of the charge since the court was no longer sitting in proceedings. To this argument, Justice Kang stated that because Judge Ang had yet to decide on the quantum of damages, the court, believe it or not, was still "sitting in proceedings". What then, I asked Judge Kang, if Judge Ang does not decide on the quantum of damages for 2 years! Can it then be said that her court was sitting in proceedings for the full 2 years!
To anyone reading this section, "sitting in proceedings" has to mean only one thing, that is, the court has to be physically in session with parties arguing their case before it. Otherwise, by no stretch of imagination, can it ever be argued that it is. Again all this fell on deaf ears. His stand was that because Judge Ang was yet to deliver her judgement on the quantum of damages, her court was "still sitting in proceedings", even though the court was not in session! As far as he was concerned, there was nothing more to it.
And further proof that the Judge was misusing this law was this. The prosecutor could not find a single authority that had any similarity to my case. He relied on one case, the only one he could find. In that case, the defendant, being angry at the sentence ordered by the judge, yelled expletives at him in Tamil and damaged the dock in court!
Judge Kang during my trial in the High Court from Sept 08, 2008 to Sept 17, 2008 was not acting as a judge. He was a PAP politician, silencing criticism of Lee Kuan Yew and his courts. He was also using me to intimidate everyone else in the island of Singapore, warning them them not to criticize Lee Kuan Yew's government or his courts, regardless of how much they abuse the law. And if they did, they will be have to serve a prison sentence of 3 months, like me.
It is up to the reader of this blog to ponder over this question. Are you going to be bullied by Judge Kang and keep your mouth shut (because that is what he wants you to do) or are you going to say that you are a human being and will not allow him to intimidate you?
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
