LawSoc patching the stroyline to make it look more legit.
Source: http://www.singaporelawwatch.sg/slw...vi?utm_source=web subscription&utm_medium=web
Source: http://www.singaporelawwatch.sg/slw...vi?utm_source=web subscription&utm_medium=web
18 July 2012 Singapore Law Watch Text: A | A Search... .AdvertiseFeedbackSitemapFAQ.HomeHeadlinesCommentaryJudgmentsLegislationNotices & DirectionsContinuing Legal Education.Skip to content.Law Society explains events relating to Ravi Share on facebookShare on twitterShare on emailShare on printSourceStraits TimesDate18 Jul 2012AuthorGoh Chin LianTHE Law Society of Singapore (LSS) has come out to explain what happened on Monday morning, when one of its officials turned up at a High Court hearing to tell the judge that lawyer M. Ravi was found to be medically unfit to practise.
Mr Wong Siew Hong, also a lawyer, had acted on his own but with the best intentions, the society's president Wong Meng Meng said in a statement last night.
The society's council, however, did not know about the morning events until later that afternoon, he added.
Mr Wong Siew Hong had gone to the High Court on Monday where he handed the judge a letter from Mr Ravi's psychiatrist Calvin Fones.
Dr Fones said the lawyer was having a manic relapse of his bipolar disorder and was unfit to practise. Mr Ravi was representing a Hougang resident in her bid to get a court declaration on the calling of by-elections in Singapore.
Mr Wong Siew Hong's unusual move and its timing drew swift criticism from some quarters, including the Association of Criminal Lawyers of Singapore which wrote to the society yesterday seeking an explanation.
Its president Subhas Anandan called the society's behaviour 'strange' and 'less than satisfactory'.
'You don't send somebody with a letter to see the judge in open court. It looks as though you are trying to ruin the hearing from going on.
'The talk in the Bar and outside is what was done was not appropriate,' said Mr Subhas.
Last night, the society clarified that Mr Wong Siew Hong, a member of its Member Care subcommittee, had been assigned to liaise with Dr Fones on the medical reports that Mr Ravi has to submit to the society regularly as a condition for getting his practising certificate.
Mr Wong had learnt from Dr Fones on Sunday about Mr Ravi's condition and decided to go to court 'on his own volition', said the statement.
'LSS is satisfied that although Mr Wong had acted very much on his own, he did so with the best of intentions,' it added.
A member of the society's secretariat who had gone to court to observe the proceedings also did so 'at his own initiative' and had no right of audience before the court, it said, adding:
'There is no basis to suggest that he was there to make an application to prevent Mr Ravi from arguing his case.'
The statement by Mr Wong Meng Meng also said the council members of the LSS were aware of the situation only in the afternoon when the secretariat informed them that the media were making queries.
Without the full facts, the statement it issued on Monday evening was wrong in saying the society had initiated the intervention in the court proceedings, Mr Wong said.
He made short shrift of talk of a conspiracy, saying: 'Any suggestion of a conspiracy involving LSS is untrue and irresponsible.'
He also had strong words for critics.
He said: 'It is very easy to speculate and criticise LSS. LSS is confident that it has discharged its duties properly and in good faith.
'LSS asks that commentators check their facts, preferably with LSS, before making their comments.
'LSS believes that it is important that the public has confidence in LSS as an independent professional body which has always balanced the interests of the public and individual lawyers.
'Unsubstantiated criticism of LSS is unfair to its volunteers and does the public a grave disservice.'
Mr Wong, in the statement, also gave the conditions the LSS set out for approving Mr Ravi's practising certificate for the past four years.
It said the LSS relied very much on Mr Ravi's own physician regarding his state of health. 'The conditions were discussed with Mr Ravi, and he accepted them.'
When asked yesterday why he acted as he did, Mr Wong Siew Hong said it was in the public's interest and that as an officer of the court, he had to let the court know about Mr Ravi's condition.
He said he was abroad on Sunday when Dr Fones alerted him about Mr Ravi.
The Straits Times learnt that on Sunday morning, the police received a call about a man, later identified as Mr Ravi, who was said to be creating a disturbance at Sri Mariamman Temple in South Bridge Road. Officers talked to him and he eventually left the temple.
When Mr Wong Siew Hong learnt more about Mr Ravi's condition from Dr Fones on Monday morning, he alerted the LSS' secretariat. He also said he went to two court hearings with Dr Fones' letter - in the morning before Justice Philip Pillai and in the afternoon before Justice Quentin Loh.
In the light of Dr Fones letter, the LSS statement said its Practice Committee will review the matter and make recommendations to its council.
In arriving at a decision, the council will continue to take into account the interests of the public and its members, it added.
The council also plans to speak to Dr Fones and Mr Ravi.
Yesterday, Mr Ravi was back in the High Court for the pre-trial conference on an application by Reform Party chairman Kenneth Jeyaretnam to stop the Government giving loans to the International Monetary Fund.
Its next pre-trial conference is set for Aug 21.
Mr Ravi told reporters yesterday that he was 'just stressed'. He plans to report Dr Fones to the Singapore Medical Association.
Contacted yesterday, the Ministry of Law said it had no oversight on the matter.
'This is a matter relating to the conditions under which Mr Ravi has been allowed to practise, and is within the purview of the Law Society and the Courts.'
[email protected]
SOCIETY NOT INVOLVED IN ANY CONSPIRACY
It is very easy to speculate and criticise LSS. LSS is confident that it has discharged its duties properly and in good faith. LSS asks that commentators check their facts, preferably with LSS, before making their comments.
LSS believes that it is important that the public has confidence in LSS as an independent professional body which has always balanced the interests of the public and individual lawyers. Unsubstantiated criticism of LSS is unfair to its volunteers, and does the public a grave disservice. Any suggestion of a conspiracy involving the LSS is untrue and irresponsible.
Mr Wong Meng Meng, president of the Law Society of Singapore (LSS), in a statement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawyer allowed to practise on several conditions since 2009
SINCE 2009, lawyer M. Ravi has been allowed to practise on several conditions after he was diagnosed with bipolar disorder.
The Law Society of Singapore (LSS) said its council had set these terms after being informed of his medical condition about four years ago, as part of an effort to carry out its duty both to the public and to its members.
At a meeting with Mr Ravi's physician Calvin Fones - made with the lawyer's permission and in his presence - Dr Fones advised that Mr Ravi was fit to practise, but had to take his medication regularly. He suggested that the lawyer be 'properly supervised'.
In 2009, the LSS approved Mr Ravi's application for a practising certificate on the condition that he do so under Ms Violet Netto's supervision. Mr Ravi, who chose her, agreed.
In 2010, the condition was relaxed to allow him to practise in partnership. In both years, Mr Ravi was to submit reports from Dr Fones every three months.
Last year, the supervision condition was re-imposed, and Mr Ravi had to submit medical reports at two-month intervals. Another condition that he take his medication was added.
This year, the first condition was removed so he could again practise in partnership, and the frequency of the medical reports reduced to four months.
The LSS stressed that it had relied on Mr Ravi's own doctor for assessments of his state of health, and that the lawyer had accepted the conditions.
'LSS took the view that these conditions were a fair balance regarding the interests of the public and the interests of Mr Ravi as a practising lawyer,' it said.
People with bipolar disorder suffer severe changes of mood, from deep depression to soaring exuberance. The condition can be controlled with drugs, but stress or drug and alcohol misuse can trigger a depressive or manic relapse.
This could affect a person's ability to work effectively, as he either cannot concentrate if he is depressed, or tries to do too many things if in a manic state.
In 2010, the Institute of Mental Health treated more than 1,000 bipolar patients.
MELISSA PANG
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timeline of events
SATURDAY, JULY 14
Lawyer M. Ravi is examined by his psychiatrist Calvin Fones, who says the lawyer's friends have voiced concern about his recent behaviour.
SUNDAY, JULY 15
Police say they get a call at around 8am about a devotee said to be creating a disturbance at Sri Mariamman Temple along South Bridge Road. It turns out to be Mr Ravi. The officers talk to him and he leaves some time before 10.20am.
Dr Fones alerts the Law Society's Mr Wong Siew Hong,but he is abroad.
MONDAY, JULY 16
9.30am: Mr Wong calls Dr Fones after returning, and asks him to prepare a letter. He says he also alerts the Law Society's secretariat and goes to the High Court, where he informs Mr Ravi and State Counsel David Chong outside the courtroom that he wishes to get the court to stand down and to inform the judge about the letter in chambers.
10am: The hearing over a by-election case begins, but Mr Wong has not received Dr Fones' letter, so he waits.
10.45am: Mr Wong gets the letter and enters the courtroom while the hearing is in progress. Mr Chong asks Judge Philip Pillai to let Mr Wong speak, but is told to continue with his submissions.
Later, after the arguments by both sides are over, the judge calls for a meeting in chambers and Mr Wong hands the letter to all parties. When asked by the judge, he admits there is no precedence for the Law Society to go to court in this manner, and that Mr Ravi still has his practising certificate.
Later, Mr Wong turns up at another court case, thinking Mr Ravi would be there to argue the case. But he is not.
TUESDAY, JULY 17
Mr Ravi is in court for a pre-trial conference on an application concerning Singapore's loans to the International Monetary Fund.
Source: Straits Times © Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. Permission required for reproduction.
