Readers of this blog who are unfamiliar with the goings on
in Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore, may think reading the comments that
there are many who think Singapore is a democracy based on the rule
of law. The reader is warned that they may be Singapore government
employees whose job is to discredit those who criticize Lee Kuan
Yew's authoritarian rule. Please use your discretion as to how much
weight you will give these comments.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The headline news of Singapore’s state controlled newspaper Straits
Times June 4, 2008 reads "Law won’t tolerate attacks". In Burma
too, I am sure the law won't tolerate any attacks. And neither
would any attacks be tolerated in North Korea.
One thing is clear to me. That is, just as they do in Burma,
Singapore finds itself in governance by one thing and one thing
alone; that is fear. This front page article in Singapore's state
controlled newspaper has one purpose and one purpose alone. To
intimidate and frighten the pants off every Singaporean from
criticizing the judges no matter what they do. They are free to
abuse the law any which way they want, but no one should dare so
much as raise a whimper.
And this clearly shows one thing. They are clutching at straws.
They know the winds are changing. They know the people want more
accountability from their courts. They know the disaffection among
the people against the abuse of the law. And they are determined to
do the one thing which they know, which is, punish any critic, any
dissenter, who complains.
Such desperation may work in societies like Burma where
impoverished peasants have no means to resist. The country declines
into poverty but the military junta remain in power through illegal
drug money. This is not something that will work in Singapore where
the people are better able to fend for themselves, with education,
skills and money. This desperate act on their part will turn
counter productive. With open borders unlike Burma, the skilled are
able to leave, which they are already doing now. The sooner they
realize this, the better not only for them, but for the people of
Singapore.
The Chief Justice and the Attorney General in the report based on
their speech at the opening of the legal year had said "they would
not brook any attacks on the courts here". And why not? Surely the
Law Courts exist on Singapore taxpayer’s money, don't they? And if
so, why should not a citizen have the right to "attack" a judge
when there is misuse of the law? No one should be intimidated by
this arrogance of these judges. Everyone has a right to criticize
the judiciary or any other branch of the government. This is what
free speech is all about. And I will do it as many times as I
want.
The Chief Justice, Chan Sek Keong says that "the mission of the
courts requires that its authority be respected by all". But how
can anyone respect it if throughout its history under Lee Kuan Yew
it has been nothing more than a tool to silence and punish those
who oppose him. What about the numerous cases against the late JB
Jeyaretnam where the courts systematically abused the law to
bankrupt him and kick him out of Parliament and his law practice
for merely engaging in legitimate criticisms? How does one respect
such a judiciary? And what about Dr. Chee Soon Juan, hounded and
bankrupted for doing what any citizen of any democratic country is
entitled to do, that is to criticize? How is it possible to respect
it? And how is it possible for me to respect it when they sent me
to jail for 3 months, for doing just that; criticism? Can I put it
this way? I respect the institution of the judiciary. But I have no
iota of respect for the individuals who hold that office in
Singapore. They are one corrupt lot, and they should be told
exactly that.
He then goes on to say that the governance of the country and the
rule of law require that no one should be allowed to scandalize the
judiciary. My dear Chan Sek Keong, let us not play with words here.
Lee Kuan Yew has abused the Constitution and whittled it down to
such an extent that Singapore in effect has no Constitution at all.
Let's face it, my dear Chan Sek Keong. And let me tell you what I
am saying. The Singapore Constitution guarantees free speech. And
therefore illegal laws which Lee Kuan Yew has in place which
requires a permit to speak publicly is void and illegal. Any first
year law student should be able to tell you that. No one has made
any false or scandalous allegations here. All we are doing is to
call a rat by its true name, which is a rat.
I should tell Chan Sek Keong this. What you are doing is to defend
the indefensible. Plain and simply put, your laws relating to
defamation of character, contempt of court and the laws that
require permits for public speaking and public assembly are plain
and simply wrong. And what you are doing is to continue in your
abuse of the law by convicting people who are engaging in nothing
more than their constitutional rights.
The report refers to Walter Woon the Attorney General speaking
about the need to protect the legal system. My question to him is
this. If the legal system has lost all integrity, what is left to
protect?
He then goes on to say that there is a campaign both in Singapore
and abroad to attack the integrity and independence of the
judiciary. What made him think that? As far as one can see, foreign
newspapers and myself have only reported on what we saw, which is
that Singapore’s judges have become corrupt and are using the law
to prop up the rule of Lee Kuan Yew. And punishing someone who says
it, which is entirely true, cannot amount to anything
illegal.
He then says that critics of the Singapore judiciary have been
charged for undermining the judiciary for political and ideological
reasons. I don't know where he got the idea, but in any case, there
is nothing wrong in attacking the courts either for political or
ideological reasons. Democracy is a political or ideological cause.
And democracy demands that the judges are fair and just, not
stooges of Lee Kuan Yew. Dictatorship is also a political or
ideological cause and I am entitled to resist a judicial system
which is determined to further such an ideology as in Singapore, a
dictatorship.
Singapore's Attorney General refers to an instance where activists
had gone to his office and refused to leave until their possessions
which were illegally seized by the police were returned to them.
What happened is this. Peaceful protestors had assembled before
Singapore Parliament demanding that the government show some
concern for the plight of ordinary Singaporeans who were in
poverty. As they did not have any permits to assemble, since the
police would not give it to them, the police arrested them for not
having permits. In the process the police in their usual high
handed manner seized the cell phones of several protestors. It is
quite clear that seizure of their personal belongings was clearly
illegal. Their cell phones had no evidentiary value in the alleged
offence of assembling without a permit. So naturally they went to
his office to demand the return of the items. I am sorry to hear
that they left the premises. They should have refused to go until
their personal possessions were returned. The Singapore Attorney
General was clearly abusing the law and the people have to right to
complain.
He then refers to the Kangaroo T shirt case where 3 activists, John
Tan, Shafi and Izrizal were charged and convicted and sent to jail
for wearing T shirts with the image of a kangaroo in judicial robes
to the court case where Lee Kuan Yew, the Singapore strongman was
suing Dr. Chee Soon Juan before the government stooge Judge Belinda
Ang. There was nothing wrong in their actions, simply because their
implying that Judge Ang was biased and corrupt was completely true,
as anyone in court that day, like I was will confirm. In any case,
this was a clear exercise of one's right to freedom of
speech.
And then there was the reference to me. He says that I had sent
various Emails to various people in Singapore stating that Judge
Belinda Ang, the offending judge, in the case of Lee Kuan Yew
against Dr. Chee Soon Juan had "prostituted herself" in those
proceedings. A state owned and controlled newspaper like Pravda or
the Singapore Straits Times is free to report anything they want,
since they are only accountable to Lee Kuan Yew and no one else.
Let me tell you that Singapore Attorney General is not being
truthful when he said this. In fact, what is worse, it is probably
he himself or his agent under his instruction that sent any Emails
to anyone, if in fact they were sent.
Let me remind the reader of what happened. On the 29th of May 2008,
after I had attended the shameful spectacle of a trial between Lee
Kuan Yew and Dr. Chee Soon Juan where Judge Belinda Ang appeared no
longer in her role as a judge but as an employee of Lee Kuan Yew
and his son, permitting them to get away with whatever they wanted,
I wrote a blog post in this blog saying among other things that
"she prostituted her position as a judge" see
Singapore. Judge Belinda Ang's Kangaroo Court. This is
factually correct. On May 31, 2008, I was arrested by a party of
police led by ASP Abdul Razak Zakaria from Central Police Station.
At the time of arrest, he confiscated a note book from my hotel
room in which there was my Email password for my Email [email protected]. He then
charges me with sending Emails to various people including this
judge. Since I did not send any Emails to anyone, it was very
probably the Attorney General himself who had the conduct of my
arrest who sent these Emails. I never sent any emails to anyone. I
wrote the blog. If he is the one who actually sent these Emails
himself, and now publicly claims that I did, he shows an ability to
stoop lower than even perhaps Adolf Hitler could. Of course, he can
say anything he wants and Singapore’s state controlled press will
report any lie that he utters.
And then he correctly says that I had re-posted the articles from
the US but does not say which they are. As to the blog post
Singapore. Judge Belinda Ang's Kangaroo Court , for which I was
charged, this was never deleted by me. So there was no question of
re-posting as it was always up on my blog. There were 2 other blog
posts which I had deleted which referred to my other case where I
was falsely accused of disorderly behavior by the Attorney General,
which I had deleted on orders of the judge. I had no intention of
keeping my undertaking to judiciary which is devoid of all
integrity and thus my re-posting them the moment I stepped foot on
American soil.
At one point he refers to an attempt by activists to change the
laws by extra judicial means. Well, Mr. Attorney General, you are
both right and wrong. Yes, I am trying to change Singapore's laws,
but wrong when you say it is by extra judicial means. Peaceful
protest and criticism are lawful means to bring about change. It is
a right enshrined in the Constitution. Nothing extra judicial about
it at all.
He refers to a deliberate attempt to force change in the law. Yes
you are right. Dr. Chee Soon Juan, the activists, I and anyone else
who knows Singapore understands that as matters rest, it is
impossible to remove the dictatorship and restore democracy in
Singapore through the ballot box. Mugabe of Zimbabwe, Than Swe of
Burma, Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore and you the Attorney General know
that if you give your people their constitutional rights, you would
no longer be in power. So Mugabe and Than Swe use brute force to
bring their people to heel. You do the same thing, except that you
do it by abusing the law.
You then use that very law you abuse and insist that the people
should obey the law. What law, Mr. Attorney general? It is a law
stood on its head. It is not a law that anyone should obey. It is
not just a right but the duty of every Singaporean to break it and
break it with pride.
Let me say finally to your Chief Justice, to you Attorney General
and to the newly appointed Minister for Law, Shanmugam, that there
are just laws and unjust laws. Just laws must be followed and
unjust laws should be broken. And that is the duty of every man
woman and child in that island.
And this blog is inspiring many in Singapore to do just that. I
know of more than one young man who have said enough is enough and
joined the growing number of Singaporean activists to stand up to
this railroading over them. And it is my hope that many more will
realize this hogwash being purveyed by Lee Kuan Yew and stand up to
what is right.
Gopalan Nair
http://singaporedissident.
as usual, another baseless attack without any substance
law is about reasoning. Every case, every judgement has its own
line of reasoning, analysis and predecedents. Can you quote the
flawed portions of the judgement instead of drowning your readers
in such partial and unconstructive comments?
"she prostituted her position as a judge" >> this is an
utterly disrespectful and rude comment. Having to resort to such
personal attacks only shows how uncouth and boorish you are.
