A-G Chambers says action against minister and police chief is
'scandalous, frivolous'
Lee Ching Wern
[email protected]
THE application by the Attorney-General's Chambers to strike out an
application filed by three protesters against Home Affairs Minister
Wong Kan Seng and Commissioner of Police Khoo Boon Hui was heard
yesterday in High Court behind closed doors.
.
Ms Chee Siok Chin, the sister of Singapore Democratic Party chief
Chee Soon Juan, Ms N Gogelavany and Mr Yap Keng Ho were part of a
group of four protesters dispersed by police outside the Central
Provident Fund Building on Aug 11.
.
They filed an application in the High Court last month to seek a
declaration that Mr Wong and Mr Khoo had acted "in an unlawful and
unconstitutional manner" when the group was ordered to disperse for
causing a "public nuisance".
.
The fourth protester, Mr Tan Teck Wee, is not party to the
application filed against the Government. In the request to strike
out the trio's application, the A-G Chambers described it as
"irregular, scandalous, frivolous or vexatious" and "an abuse of
the process of the Court".
.
The A-G Chambers argued that the protesters were "attempting to use
the proceedings as a means to their political ends" and the Court
should not allow this action to go any further.
.
It argued that they wrongly named Mr Wong and Mr Khoo as
respondents to the legal action. Doing so "creates the impression
in the eyes of the public that this action is brought about by the
personal actions of the present holders of these offices".
.
It also said the application was an abuse of the process of court
as there must be a "real contest of legal rights" between parties
before the court grants a declaration.
.
The other reasons cited by the A-G Chambers: The trio are not
claiming any consequential relief or any legal redress for the
alleged wrong they suffered; and the application preempts criminal
prosecution.
.
Mr M Ravi, the lawyer representing the trio, argued that the
Constitution clearly states that four or less protesters is lawful
and that the police ought to determine how the protesters were a
nuisance.
.
Ms Chee, 39, told reporters after the hearing that the "peaceful
protest" was carried out in their personal capacity. According to
their affidavit, the trio were standing peacefully with a fourth
person, Mr Tan Teck Wee, outside the CPF Building in Robinson Road
on Aug 11 when police asked them to leave.
.
The hearing continues on Friday. A-G Chambers says action against
minister and police chief is 'scandalous, frivolous'
Lee Ching Wern
[email protected]
THE application by the Attorney-General's Chambers to strike out an
application filed by three protesters against Home Affairs Minister
Wong Kan Seng and Commissioner of Police Khoo Boon Hui was heard
yesterday in High Court behind closed doors.
.
Ms Chee Siok Chin, the sister of Singapore Democratic Party chief
Chee Soon Juan, Ms N Gogelavany and Mr Yap Keng Ho were part of a
group of four protesters dispersed by police outside the Central
Provident Fund Building on Aug 11.
.
They filed an application in the High Court last month to seek a
declaration that Mr Wong and Mr Khoo had acted "in an unlawful and
unconstitutional manner" when the group was ordered to disperse for
causing a "public nuisance".
.
The fourth protester, Mr Tan Teck Wee, is not party to the
application filed against the Government. In the request to strike
out the trio's application, the A-G Chambers described it as
"irregular, scandalous, frivolous or vexatious" and "an abuse of
the process of the Court".
.
The A-G Chambers argued that the protesters were "attempting to use
the proceedings as a means to their political ends" and the Court
should not allow this action to go any further.
.
It argued that they wrongly named Mr Wong and Mr Khoo as
respondents to the legal action. Doing so "creates the impression
in the eyes of the public that this action is brought about by the
personal actions of the present holders of these offices".
.
It also said the application was an abuse of the process of court
as there must be a "real contest of legal rights" between parties
before the court grants a declaration.
.
The other reasons cited by the A-G Chambers: The trio are not
claiming any consequential relief or any legal redress for the
alleged wrong they suffered; and the application preempts criminal
prosecution.
.
Mr M Ravi, the lawyer representing the trio, argued that the
Constitution clearly states that four or less protesters is lawful
and that the police ought to determine how the protesters were a
nuisance.
.
Ms Chee, 39, told reporters after the hearing that the "peaceful
protest" was carried out in their personal capacity. According to
their affidavit, the trio were standing peacefully with a fourth
person, Mr Tan Teck Wee, outside the CPF Building in Robinson Road
on Aug 11 when police asked them to leave.
.
The hearing continues on Friday. A-G Chambers says action against
minister and police chief is 'scandalous, frivolous'
Lee Ching Wern
[email protected]
THE application by the Attorney-General's Chambers to strike out an
application filed by three protesters against Home Affairs Minister
Wong Kan Seng and Commissioner of Police Khoo Boon Hui was heard
yesterday in High Court behind closed doors.
.
Ms Chee Siok Chin, the sister of Singapore Democratic Party chief
Chee Soon Juan, Ms N Gogelavany and Mr Yap Keng Ho were part of a
group of four protesters dispersed by police outside the Central
Provident Fund Building on Aug 11.
.
They filed an application in the High Court last month to seek a
declaration that Mr Wong and Mr Khoo had acted "in an unlawful and
unconstitutional manner" when the group was ordered to disperse for
causing a "public nuisance".
.
The fourth protester, Mr Tan Teck Wee, is not party to the
application filed against the Government. In the request to strike
out the trio's application, the A-G Chambers described it as
"irregular, scandalous, frivolous or vexatious" and "an abuse of
the process of the Court".
.
The A-G Chambers argued that the protesters were "attempting to use
the proceedings as a means to their political ends" and the Court
should not allow this action to go any further.
.
It argued that they wrongly named Mr Wong and Mr Khoo as
respondents to the legal action. Doing so "creates the impression
in the eyes of the public that this action is brought about by the
personal actions of the present holders of these offices".
.
It also said the application was an abuse of the process of court
as there must be a "real contest of legal rights" between parties
before the court grants a declaration.
.
The other reasons cited by the A-G Chambers: The trio are not
claiming any consequential relief or any legal redress for the
alleged wrong they suffered; and the application preempts criminal
prosecution.
.
Mr M Ravi, the lawyer representing the trio, argued that
the Constitution clearly states that four or less protesters is
lawful and that the police ought to determine how the protesters
were a nuisance.
.
Ms Chee, 39, told reporters after the hearing that the "peaceful
protest" was carried out in their personal capacity. According to
their affidavit, the trio were standing peacefully with a fourth
person, Mr Tan Teck Wee, outside the CPF Building in Robinson Road
on Aug 11 when police asked them to leave.
.
The hearing continues on Friday.
