Is our Judicial System flawed when handling cases brought up by
the Ruling Party a.k.a the Singapore Government against those who
opposed them ?
LKY had also lost in another legal tussle between him and
Jeyaratnam, when Jeyaratnam appealed against the unlawful
conviction of charges of accounting misappropriation brought
against him and the Worker's Party.
LKY had challenged Jeyaratnam that if the Privy Council in UK can
find the judicial process to be wrong, LKY will plead on Jeya's
behalf for a Presidential pardon.
The Privy Council did find the High Court decision to be wronged,
and upheld the earlier decision of the District Court Judge to be
correct in initially throwing out the charges by the Singapore
Government.
For his decision, the District Court Judge - Mr Michael Khoo - was
demoted from the District Court, and made a Deputy Public
Prosecutor in the Attorney General Chambers.
For their decision, the Privy Council was no longer made the Last
Court of Appeal for the Singapore Legal Process - when it was so
proudly touted in the beginning, that the Privy Council will serve
as a benchmark to judge the standards of the Singapore Judiciary
System.
LKY claimed that the Privy Council was wrong in making their views
that included the criminal aspects of the judgment, which was not
part of the scope of the review by the Privy Council - (the Privy
Council had expressed that both charges against Jeyaratnam were
wrong in Law, and the convictions were necessarily wrong ) .
Extract from the following referenced site:
http://www.singapore-window.org/sw01/010720ai.htm
Following his re-election in 1984, J B Jeyaretnam was charged for
alleged financial impropriety related to the collection of party
funds.
In 1986 he was acquitted by a District Court of all charges
save one.
The prosecution appealed the acquittal and the then Chief Justice
allowed the appeal, with the direction that a re-trial be heard by
a District Court.
At re-trial JB Jeyaretnam was found guilty and sentenced to three
months in jail, which was reduced by the High Court but with the
addition of a S$5000 fine. The imposition of a fine of over S$2000
resulted in the automatic disqualification of JB Jeyaretnam as a
member of parliament and the conviction also triggered a Law
Society hearing that resulted in him being disbarred.
JB Jeyaretnam's earlier application for the re-trial to be heard
before the High Court rather than a District Court, which would
have allowed any subsequent appeal to be pursued up to Singapore's
then highest court, the Privy Council located in London, had been
refused.
After his conviction his appeal to the Privy Council was limited to
consideration of his disbarment.
In its judgement the Privy Council concluded that JB Jeyaretnam and
a co-accused had been "fined,
imprisoned, and publicly disgraced for offences for which they
were not guilty"
and directed the Law Society to reinstate JB Jeyaretnam.
The government refused to heed the Privy Council's advice to
facilitate a pardon for JB Jeyaretnam on the grounds that the
criminal convictions had not been the subject of the Privy Council
appeal.
JB Jeyaretnam was subsequently re-instated as a lawyer, but
prevented from standing again for election until 1997, when he ran
and was returned as a non-constituency member of parliament.
The Politics of Judicial
Institutions in Singapore
http://www.singapore-window.org/1028judi.htm