Singapore Justice in the Dock Indeed
Monday, 18 October 2010
The government goes after the author of a book questioning the fairness of the courts
This week the Singapore government is taking on a 75-year-old British author for publishing a book arguing that the country's secretive but mandatory death penalty for drug trafficking is unevenly applied against poor and marginalized defendants while the wealthy or well-connected are spared.
If the past is any precedent, Alan Shadrake, who wrote Once a Jolly Hangman: Singapore Justice in the Dock (reviewed here in Asia Sentinel) and had the bad judgment to go to Singapore to publicize the book, can expect to be jailed for "scandalizing the judiciary." Shadrake's case was postponed Monday for two weeks to give his lawyer time to file an affidavit of "fair criticism and fair comment." The lawyer, M. Ravi, said he needs to consult with various government bodies and other parties about their views and Shadrake's medical condition.
Singapore, whose justice system has been heavily criticized for its political bias, has never lost a case like this, and unless something totally unexpected happens, it won't lose this one. In that regard, Shadrake's trial highlights not just the controversy over Singapore's use of the death penalty against traffickers in minute amounts of drugs, but the broader issue of freedom of speech in a city-state where sticking your head up is an invitation to get it shot off.
A wide range of human rights groups say the Singapore courts are used as a tool to silence critics. Any political or press criticism of the government results automatically in defamation suits that have been unanimously won by the prosecution and fines and charges that have bankrupted the opposition and sent major news organizations scrambling for cover.
In July 2008, the International Bar Association issued a 72-page report concluding that "Singapore cannot continue to claim that civil and political rights must take a back seat to economic rights, as its economic development is now of the highest order. In the modern era of globalization, isolationist policies and attitudes are no longer tenable."
For his part, Shadrake remains defiant. For his first hearing in the High Court, he entered the building holding up his fingers in a V for Victory salute and shouting "Freedom and Democracy for Singapore." The government has since backed away from the criminal defamation charge, although it hangs in the air as a threat, and Shadrake was charged with a species of contempt of court called "scandalizing the judiciary," in other words, writing something that could make the court system look bad.
In the months since his arrest – his passport was confiscated, marooning him on the island – he has been granting interviews, basking in his demi-celebrity, repeatedly reiterating his intent to fight the charge and undergoing an angioplasty for a blocked aorta. While the Singaporean government has offered Shadrake leniency if he would purge himself of the alleged contempt by apologizing, he has so far refused to do so.
He is being defended by perhaps Singapore's most prominent defense lawyer, M Ravi. Sometimes, it seems that the defendant in every high-profile death penalty or free expression case in the city-state is represented by M Ravi. That is close to the truth. For a nation with a population of more than five million, Singapore has a tiny number of lawyers, about 3,500. Critics argue that young Singaporeans don't enter the law because they see the profession as a closed shop in which a handful of loyalist firms land the lucrative government contracts and litigation work; others, including Singaporean leader Lee Kuan Yew, bemoan a general lack of local legal talent. And many Singaporean lawyers seem reluctant to represent clients in politically sensitive cases. It is not advisable, lawyers say, to practice any kind of law that brings lawyers into conflict with the government.
That can't be said about Ravi. In the last decade, he has represented death row inmates Vignes Mourthi and Shanmugam Murugesu, whose appeals were unsuccessful, and Yong Vui Kong, whose appeal is pending. It was Mourthi's case that formed a major part of Shadrake's book. Shadrake charged that Mourthi, a 23-year-old Malaysian, was convicted on the basis of a handwritten transcript of a conversation with an undercover officer. However, the officer faced allegations of rape, sodomy and bribery at the time he testified against Mourthi, and subsequently was jailed for 15 months on bribery charges. Those charges were kept from the court.
Ravi has an aggressive and somewhat discursive courtroom style that can yield dividends. In the Yong case, Ravi backed the government into a corner, forcing it to admit that the President of Singapore does not make an independent judgment on clemency petitions but merely executes the will of the Cabinet.
David Chong Gek Sian, the prosecutor, is not the usual hard-bitten career prosecutor from Central Casting. Rather, he looks and acts like the mild-mannered law professor he was. The man who will be leading the charge to imprison and fine Shadrake is not a criminal law lifer. After obtaining his law degree from the National University of Singapore and a master's from University College London, Chong worked in a private civil practice for about five years before accepting a post at NUS. His academic publications focus on maritime and arbitration law. During his years in the Attorney-General's Chambers, he has worked in various policy positions as well as the Internal Affairs Division.
Chong is currently posted to the Civil Division, and contempt cases are, technically, civil rather than criminal actions. He has won before, in recent years successfully pursuing the Wall Street Journal Asia on a similar charge, resulting in yet another judgment against the paper and its editors as usual.
Justice Quentin Loh Sze On is hearing the case. Alan Dershowitz, the outspoken criminal defense attorney and Harvard Law School professor, has stated that he would rather defend a client before an old judge than before a new judge. In Dershowitz's opinion, an old judge is more likely to rule fairly while a new judge is too concerned with promotion and the potentially career-debilitating impact of freeing an unpopular defendant.
Quentin Loh is a very new judge. He was appointed a judicial commissioner in September 2009, and was promoted to Judge of the High Court less than six months ago. The Shadrake trial is his first high-profile case with political implications, and it will be absorbing to see how Justice Loh handles the myriad evidentiary and procedural issues which Ravi will raise.
Justice Loh's background is similar to the prosecutor's. After obtaining a degree from NUS, Justice Loh spent much of his career in private practice specializing in construction, insurance and arbitration. Prior to his elevation to the bench, Loh was a managing partner of Rajah & Tann, the establishment law firm which has represented many of Singapore's most important government-linked corporations, including SingTel and the real estate unit of GIC, the sovereign wealth fund chaired by Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and his son, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.
Under Singaporean law, there is no right to a jury. Loh will make the ultimate decision of guilt or innocence and, if he finds Shadrake to be in contempt, will determine the sentence. Consequently, despite the fact that the courtroom this week will be packed with lawyers, clerks, security and reporters, it could be said that Shadrake and his defense team will be performing for an audience of one.
That is not quite true. Justice Loh will be performing for his own audience, headed by Lee Kuan Yew, Lee Hsien Loong, and a cast of cadres hanging about the Istana.
asiasentinel.com
Attacks were 'baseless'
Oct 18, 2010
The book contains a profile of Darshan Singh, the former chief executioner at Singapore's Changi Prison who, according to the author, executed around 1,000 men and women from 1959 until he retired in 2006.
It also features interviews with local human rights activists, lawyers and former police officers on various cases involving capital punishment.
Shadrake, who is based in Malaysia, was arrested in Singapore when he was in the city-state in July to launch the book. He is out on bail but his passport has been seized to stop him leaving the country.
His lawyer, M. Ravi, said in his opening arguments that the book was 'a serious-minded and compassionate examination of the death penalty in Singapore'.
He said the charges based on selected lines in the book 'strikes one as being somewhat hypersensitive'.
'Only by reading the book by its entirety can one properly determine how a reader would understand and interpret the selected quotations,' he added. -- AFP
British author Alan Shadrake (above) shows a victory sign as he arrives at the Supreme Court in July, 2010.
PHOTO: REUTERS
A BRITISH journalist who wrote a book on the death penalty in Singapore made 'baseless' attacks against the country's judiciary, a government lawyer said on Monday at the start of his contempt trial.
At least 14 statements contained in Alan Shadrake's book constituted a direct attack on the judiciary, Ms Hema Subramanian, a lawyer from the Attorney General's Chambers, told the High Court.
She said the statements implied that Singapore courts succumb to political and economic pressure, are biased against the poor and are being used to suppress the government's political opponents.
In her opening argument, Ms Subramanian said the statements in the book constituted 'baseless, unwarranted attacks... that directly attacked the Singapore judiciary'.
She also described the allegations as 'outrageous and offensive' and were 'irresponsible'.
Shadrake, 75, is being tried for contempt of court for the allegations made in his book entitled Once a Jolly Hangman: Singapore Justice in the Dock.
The offence is punishable by a jail term and fine.
Ms Subramanian said the book's title 'not just criticises but impugns the Singapore judiciary'. -- AFP
straitstimes.com
^ When a court renders a verdict; its not unreasonable to use a contempt of law to punish those who choose to ignore the verdict. Especially in civil cases.
But it is unreasonable to use the law to prevent open discussion and comment on the verdicts. I think the main difference between thailand and the UK regarding stifling debate through contempt of court is that the press UK press are prepared to fight their corner from time to time, rather than hide in the corner crying for mommy and promising to do what ever the judge wants.
Shadrake guilty of contempt
Khushwant Singh
Nov 3, 2010
PHOTO: AFP
BRITISH author Alan Shadrake, 75, was found guilty of impugning the impartiality, integrity and independence of Singapore courts in his book.
High Court Judge Quentin Loh found the author of A Jolly Hangman: Singapore Justice In The Dock had scandalised the judiciary in 11 of the 14 passages that the Attorney-General had listed as contemptuous.
In the three passages, Shadrake could be said to be making allegations against institutions other than the courts. He will be sentenced next Tuesday.
During the three-day hearing last month, Deputy Senior State Counsel Hema Subramanian argued that the 14 statements alleged or insinuated that the Singapore courts bowed to pressure from foreign governments, favoured the rich and privileged and were used as a tool by the ruling party to muzzle political dissent.
Shadrake, through his lawyer, Mr M. Ravi, maintained that the selected passages did not scandalise the courts and constituted fair criticism on matters of public interest. But Justice Loh said that Shadrake had included half-truths and falsehoods in his book and this cannot constitute fair criticism.
The judge noted that 6,000 copies of the book have been sold so far, and if left unchecked, it would result in readers losing confidence in the administration of justice in Singapore.
The author declined to comment on the judge's decision but told reporters after the verdict: 'I think I have been given a fair hearing.'
Separately, Shadrake is being investigated by the police for criminal defamation, an offence which carries a maximum two-year jail term and a fine. His passport is being held by the police.
straitstimes.com
^
He's fecked. And good luck trying to get "the Singapore courts (to bow) to pressure from foreign governments". He'll be doing time in Changi soon unless he can get outta there..
CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE
Apology a 'tactical ploy'
Selina Lum
Nov 9, 2010
In arguing for a lenient sentence for Shadrake (above), Mr M Ravi maintained that the freelance journalist has never intended to undermine Singapore's courts in his book Once A Jolly Hangman: Singapore's Justice In The Dock.
PHOTO: AP
THE lawyer acting for British author Alan Shadrake, who has been held in contempt of court, told the High Court on Tuesday that his client 'will certainly apologise if he has offended the sensitivity of the court'.
In arguing for a lenient sentence for Shadrake, 76, Mr M Ravi maintained that the freelance journalist has never intended to undermine Singapore's courts in his book Once A Jolly Hangman: Singapore's Justice In The Dock.
Mr Ravi said his client should be given only a censure.
But Deputy Senior State Counsel Hema Subramanian dismissed it as a 'half-hearted' apology that was 'insufficient and insincere' and a 'tactical ploy' by Shadrake to escape punishment.
Ms Subramanian said the contempt in Shadrake's case far exceeded past cases.
'This is an especially pernicious case of grave and aggravated contempt that is without precedent in Singapore,' she said, pressing the court to jail Shadrake for at least 12 weeks.
Mr Ravi argued that Ms Subramanian's arguments were a mockery to logic that 'brings us back to the dark era of the Middle Ages'.
He said it was 'the joke of the century' that the Attorney-General's Chambers claim the book undermines public confidence in the courts but yet has done nothing to ban it.
'If they mean what they say, ban the book,' he said.
Justice Quentin Loh, noting that submissions from both sides are 'far apart', said he would think about it and give his decision on Shadrake's sentence next Tuesday.
straitstimes.com
Reporters without borders should take up his cause. So should Amnesty. They won't of course, they're too busy going after the 'enemies pre-decided by the West'
The author comes off as a self righteous douchebag who hasn't gotten the news the Empire no longer exist. Them stupid little coolies don't need your permission to do things anymore Alan. He has no real argument against the Singaporean government either, because his UK government is no better, they throw people in prison for the words they speak or write down too.
16 November 2010 Last updated at 05:20
UK author Shadrake jailed for six weeks in Singapore
Shadrake now faces a second trial on defamation charges
A Singapore court has sentenced the UK author Alan Shadrake to six weeks in prison for insulting the judiciary in a book he wrote about the death penalty.
The 76-year-old was found guilty last week, and faces a further trial on defamation charges.
He was also ordered to pay a S$20,000 (£9,585; $15,400) fine.
In his book, Once a Jolly Hangman - Singapore Justice in the Dock, he criticised how the death penalty is used, alleging a lack of impartiality.
Prosecution lawyers had sought a prison term of 12 weeks.
Shadrake offered an apology, which High Court Judge Quentin Loh called "nothing more than a tactical ploy in court to obtain a reduced sentence".
Shadrake's lawyer, M Ravi, said an appeal was unlikely to succeed.
He said his client was in ill health and regretted that he had received no support from the British public.
Mr Ravi added that Shadrake did not have any money and the fine could not be paid.
Judge Loh said that Shadrake would have to serve an additional two weeks in prison if he failed to pay the fine.
Malaysia-based Shadrake was arrested in July when he visited Singapore to launch his book.
The book contains interviews with human rights activists, lawyers and former police officers, as well as a profile of Darshan Singh, the former chief executioner at Singapore's Changi Prison.
It claims he executed around 1,000 men and women from 1959 until he retired in 2006.
"I think I've been given a fair hearing," Shadrake told the media after the verdict was issued last week.
US-based Human Rights Watch and other rights groups had urged Singapore to exonerate the author.
Separately, Shadrake is being investigated by the police for criminal defamation; his passport is being held by the police.
It's difficult to see how any "impartial" judge with an eye on a career in the judiciary would give any judgement different from one given. No judge in such circumstances is going to risk his testicles by upholding the rights of a maverick attacking the judiciary that pays and promotes him. In effect, an ethical conflict of interest side-stepped, leaving a nasty taste in the mouth and a 75 yo man in prison.
A pretty dumb 75 year old man. Did he seriously think he could visit Singapore to promote his book without being arrested?
No worries though, he'll survive.
He is no douche bag and his major point is correct: Execution is for the nobodys. It does not happen to people of influence very often. Actually Singapore Justice system is based on the British and British QC's can actually practice there. I attended a case defended by the wonderful George Carman QC.
Of course there are no juries.
^Much the same as Thailand then, would you do a book on it and continue to live here?
Author jail term ‘dismays’ minister
November 20, 2010
LONDON: A minister has said he is “dismayed” by the prison sentence handed to a British author convicted by a Singapore court of insulting the city-state’s judiciary.
Foreign office minister Jeremy Browne said in comments posted on the website of the British High Commission in Singapore that author Alan Shadrake’s views on the judicial system should be covered by the right to freedom of expression.
“The government attaches importance to freedom of expression around the world,” Browne said in remarks seen on the website on Friday.
“I am therefore dismayed that Mr Shadrake has been charged, convicted and sentenced to six weeks in jail in Singapore for expressing his personal views on the legal system.”
gulftoday.ae
Originally Posted by Mid
New Hope for Sentenced Malaysian
Marwaan Macan-Markar
BANGKOK, Feb 4, 2011 (IPS) - A young Malaysian’s legal battle to escape the hangman’s noose in Singapore is finding new hope. "He has a 50-50 chance of being spared," Madasamy Ravi, the lawyer appearing for 23-year-old Yong Vui Kong, said in a telephone interview from the city-state.
The 41-year-old lawyer, who traded a lucrative career in corporate law in 2003 to become an outspoken human rights crusader, stepped in to take up Vui Kong’s case shortly after the Malaysian was sentenced to death in December 2009 by a Singaporean court that found him guilty of trafficking 47.27 grams of heroin. Vui Kong was only 19 when arrested in mid-2007 under Singapore’s draconian Misuse of Drugs Act.
The efforts to save Vui Kong won a reprieve mid-January when the Court of Appeal reserved judgment, in what anti-death penalty activists say is the young Malaysian’s last hope. Ravi argued in the court that his client had been deprived of a fair clemency process.
The lengthy appeals process has emboldened Singapore’s small group of anti-death penalty campaigners. "Vui Kong’s case since the sentence has taken a surprisingly long time. It has been dragging on and this, for us, is change from the status quo," says Sinapan Samydorai, a director of regional affairs at the Think Centre, a local, independent human rights lobby. "This is an opportunity to push for change."
Samydorai faces a formidable challenge. During 1991-1999, Singapore recorded 13.57 executions per one million population. Saudi Arabia, with 4.64 executions per one million population, was a distant second, according to a UN Secretary-General’s report assessing capital punishment.
But such numbers are far from conclusive, because the Singapore government has always been "secretive about the number of executions," says Lance Lattig, a South-east Asia researcher at Amnesty International.
"Singapore might or might not be in the first place (today) when it comes to executions per capita," Lattig said in an e-mail interview. "Either way, the government’s secrecy about its record on executions suggests that this is one indicator Singapore isn’t entirely proud of."
In November, 76-year-old Malaysia-based British author Alan Shadrake was sentenced to six weeks in jail for contempt of court and fined 15,400 dollars for the contents of his book: ‘Once A Jolly Hangman: Singapore’s Justice In The Dock’.
Shadrake was arrested in July last year when he visited Singapore to launch his book. The book includes an interview with Darshan Singh, the chief executioner at the city-state’s Changi Prison. Singh reportedly executed about 1,000 men and women from 1959 till he retired in 2006, the book notes.
In at least 11 passages of the book Shadrake questioned the impartiality of the judiciary in making rulings on death penalty cases.
Critics question the rationale of the country forging ahead with a mandatory death penalty for drug traffickers and murderers – while keeping the number of executions hidden.
"They justify executions to deter crime but they don’t publish the details," says Danthong Breen, chairman of the Union of Civil Liberty, Thailand’s oldest human rights organisation. "It is extraordinary. They treat the details of executions as a state secret."
But what is not a secret is the manner in which condemned prisoners meet their death: all hangings take place at dawn on Friday.
The law that sets out a mandatory death penalty for anyone trafficking more than 15 grams of heroin or over 30 grams of cocaine, and the manner of execution still enjoy wide public support, according to polls. (END)
ipsnews.net
The Court of Appeal has reserved judgment on the appeal by author Alan Shadrake against a six-week prison term and a S$20,000 fine for contempt of court relating to passages in his book: "Once a Jolly Hangman: Singapore Justice in the dock."
It was argued that Shadrake had deliberately impugned the impartiality and integrity of the Singapore judiciary with his book.
Asia Sentinel - Singapore Death Book Has a Sympathetic Hearing
Ready for the big drop
Upon his arrest, Chun Yin also gave officials at Singapore's Central Narcotics Bureau, or CNB, the telephone number and a detailed description of "Lau De," the man whom he said had arranged the trip to Burma.
Investigators did not follow up on the lead. But in handing down the death sentence, High Court Judge Choo Han Teck described the CNB's lapse as "immaterial" to the case.
Full Article :
Asia Sentinel - Hanging Mules in Singapore
Comments
Go to the top
written by Johnny , April 26, 2011
They should use the mules to go to the supplier, and then use the suppliers to go to the producers, and then they will find out that the producers are the Burmese dictators with which they make a lot of money.
OK, better just hang the mules and keep making money with the Burmese dictators.
What exactly is the difference between Singapore and the former Soviet Union?
Seems like the existence of a market economy covers a multitude of sins for these facists.
They're fascists in your book? A bit of a surprise there, Jools.
Singapore rejects contempt appeal by Brit author
May 27, 2011
SINGAPORE (AP) — A Singapore court has rejected an appeal by a 76-year-old British author against a contempt of court conviction related to one of his books deemed critical of the city-state’s judiciary.
The High Court said Friday that Alan Shadrake will begin his six-week jail sentence on June 1.
The court also added an extra two weeks to the sentence because Shadrake failed to pay a 20,000 Singapore dollar ($16,100) fine.
British author Alan Shadrake.
Pic: AP.
Shadrake’s lawyer M Ravi said his client’s jail term will likely be reduced by one third for good behavior.
Shadrake said he would never apologize for his book, “Once a Jolly Hangman: Singapore Justice in the Dock,” which was critical of the country’s use of the death penalty for crimes such as drug trafficking.
asiancorrespondent.com
If it's made clear that smuggling drugs into or via Singapore carries the death penalty what's the beef?
It's a matter of personal choice risk your neck for the money, take a different route or just DON"T smuggle drugs anywhere not just Singapore!
No doubt the same idiots here and in many other places will continue argue that drugs are harmless and don't actually do any harm anyone.
I totally disagree, I was carrying 40 kg of heroin over the Laos border and because the load was unevenly distributed in my rucksack I got a trapped nerve..
On a more serious note, this is good read about The Death Sentence in Thailand, I actually met the bloke and got him to sign my copy..
Cheers
The Last Executioner: Memoirs of Thailand's Last Prison Executioner: Amazon.co.uk: Chavoret Jaruboon: Books
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)