Ladies and Gentlemen,
If ever I have read a more cryptic, a more disguised, veiled,
statement or threat of any person, this is it. I am referring to
the article in Singapore’s state controlled newspaper the Straits
Times of April 04, 2008 titled "Let all have access to justice:
CJ Chan".
The entire report, no matter which way one wants to look at it,
appears to be one thing, and one thing alone. A mea culpa.
It appears the Chief Justice has finally had pangs of conscience
hurting him, and now it is time for him to admit once and for all,
that the Singapore legal system is not that free at all!
A careful reading of the state controlled newspaper report looks
like this.
He says "Singapore Lower Courts have been placed high in
international rankings but what matters is the quality of justice
people here receive".
Just what is he saying here? Is he finally admitting that these
international rankings that the government so proudly publishes are
rankings not to judge whether the law is impartially applied; but
instead, to judge how fast cases are dealt with and money
recovered.
Is he admitting that all respected international organizations who
truly judge whether rule of law and human rights exist; such as
Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have stated repeatedly
that Singapore courts do not exercise the rule of law?
Is he therefore admitting finally that Singapore does not practice
the rule of law, and that Singapore is nothing more than a
dictatorship ruled by Lee's dictates? Is he now saying that the
time has finally come for Singapore judges to actually behave as
judges and not as PAP politicians?
Chief Justice Chan says "While ranking matters, they should not
detract from what matters".
Again, we see what appears to be an admission that these rankings
such as PERC, a Hong Kong based organization which caters to multi
national businesses, gives high marks consistently to Singapore
legal system; because it is more concerned about how much profit
off shore businessmen can make in Singapore; not how much justice
an ordinary Singaporean Dr. Chee Soon Juan can get in Singapore’s
courts.
When he says "they should not detract from what matters"
is he now admitting there is in fact a serious problem with the
state of the law in Singapore, because of a lack of an independent
judiciary, and that something should be finally done about
it?
"We should not allow them to dominate and overwhelm our own
assessment of the quality of justice that we administer to our
people" Are we seeing an admission that he has neglected to
examine the quality of justice in Singapore; that rule of law is
indeed lacking and that something now has to be done about
it?
He then goes on to directly and deliberately admit that these
foreign rankings that Lee Kuan Yew has selectively relied upon were
"limited to certain aspects of justice such as how fast
litigants can get a judgment from the courts and enforce them, as
in cases in debt recovery and bankruptcy".
Is he therefore finally admitting that Lee Kuan Yew and his
government have been downright untruthful and dishonest all these
past 40 years when they routinely went around trumpeting the fact
that Singapore follows the rule of law based on these one sided
reports; but they knew all along that Singapore judges are not
impartial, beholden to Lee Kuan Yew and the law is nothing more
than decrees which he executes through his compliant judges.
Is he finally admitting that not only Lee Kuan Yew but he himself
has been somewhat untruthful all these years!
And here he finally admits that “these rankings surveys serve
as a useful purpose in alerting foreign investors to the potential
strengths and weaknesses of the judicial or legal systems of the
countries".
Is this therefore an admission, belated, but still welcome that
these business orientated rankings, do nothing for the average
Fatima binte Kastari, in her claim that she did not violate the
law, in the exercise of her constitutional right of freedom of
assembly, when she protested at the Tak Boleh Tahan, in front of
Parliament House?
I have no doubt in my mind that the Chief Justice of Singapore was
trying to tell us something. Since if he was trying to say two and
two are four, he could have done a much better job.
Let us hope that our expectation is indeed correct. That Mr. Chan
Sek Keong, the Chief Justice of Singapore has finally seen the
light, realized the folly of his ways and has finally picked up the
courage as Thomas Beckett did in King Henry's court; and has
finally declared that business cannot go on as usual. The time has
finally come for the rule of law and democracy!
And let us hope that finally he has decided after all to become a
judge, and not carry on in those robes as a PAP politician.
If that is in fact your intention, well done old man. But the
question is, if you did what you threaten, will you end up as a
bookseller just as JB Jeyaretnam and Dr. Chee Soon Juan have
become, after inviting the wrath of the tiger, Mr. Lee Kuan
Yew.
Please tell us more, Mr. Chief Justice.
Gopalan Nair
http://singaporedissident.blogspot.com/2008/04/is-this-singapores-chief-justice-chans.html