M Ravi fined S$3,000 for misconduct
Lawyer pleads guilty to accusing High Court judge of racial prejudice in 2011
by Amanda Lee Updated 07:15 AM Jan 10, 2013
SINGAPORE - Lawyer M Ravi has been fined S$3,000 by a disciplinary tribunal after he pleaded guilty to a charge of misconduct for accusing a High Court judge of racial prejudice.
On Jan 18, 2011, Mr Ravi appeared before then-High Court judge Steven Chong to seek a court order against police guidelines, which disallowed shouting, the playing of music and sounding of drums during religious processions.
Mr Ravi, who appeared as a litigant in person at the closed-door hearing, asked the judge to view a YouTube video of a Thaipusam procession.
Mr Chong, now the Attorney-General, declined. Mr Ravi then claimed the judge was "racially prejudiced" and asked that he disqualified himself from presiding over the hearing, according to a disciplinary tribunal report released yesterday.
Mr Ravi then said he would not proceed with the hearing "as it will dishonour my religion and disgrace my culture".
A complaint was subsequently filed by Mr David Chong, Chief Counsel of the Civil Division of the Attorney-General's Chambers, on the direction of the Attorney-General, three days after the hearing.
The Law Society then charged Mr Ravi with misconduct unbefitting an advocate and solicitor under the Legal Profession Act.
In mitigation, Mr Ravi said he was "extremely remorseful" for his conduct and had apologised to the judge in February 2011.
He also cited his mental health, in particular the bipolar disorder he is afflicted with.
However, the two-member disciplinary tribunal, headed by former High Court judge Kan Ting Chiu, said no lawyer should accuse a judge of racial prejudice, or tell a judge that he or she will take an adverse ruling of the judge outside the courts, or inform the judge that he or she will refuse to proceed in a hearing because it will be a disgrace to his or her religion and culture.
"In a situation where there are no exceptional circumstances, such conduct is clearly unbefitting an advocate and solicitor and such advocate and solicitor should not continue to practise in that manner, and should be suspended or even be struck off from the rolls," said the disciplinary tribunal in its 22-page report.
In Mr Ravi's case, the tribunal noted "some exceptional circumstances" that mitigated the gravity of his offence, including his bipolar disorder and the stress he was under when he appeared before Justice Chong.
"This tribunal has to take into account the fact that the incident in question is not an isolated one, and that the respondent has a record of misconduct inside and outside of the courtroom ... as well as the fact that he acted against medical advice when he decided to stop taking medication at the time of the incident," it said.
Another reprimand, as suggested by Mr Ravi's lawyer Eugene Thuraisingam, would be inadequate, while a suspension would be excessive, as Mr Ravi's condition is in remission and he has committed to undergo continued treatment, the tribunal noted.
Besides the fine, Mr Ravi was also ordered to bear S$2,000 in costs incurred by the Law Society. Amanda Lee
