Attorney-General to M. Ravi - dun mess with me

†††††

Alfrescian
Loyal
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
1,746
Points
0
Lawyer offers to quit
He cites conflict of interest, but judge persuades him to stay
By Khushwant Singh

THE lawyer representing British author Alan Shadrake said on Wednesday that he could not continue if the Attorney-General was threatening him with contempt proceedings.

Mr M. Ravi (right) took centre stage on the third and final day of a High Court hearing to decide if Shadrake had scandalised the Singapore judiciary. He told the court: 'I must discharge myself for then there would surely be a conflict of interest if I continue acting for the author.'

Earlier, while rebutting Mr Ravi's arguments that nothing in Shadrake's book, titled Once A Jolly Hangman: Singapore Justice In The Dock, could be construed as being in contempt, Deputy Senior State Counsel Hema Subramanian had said that she had been instructed to express regret over the many mischievous and baseless allegations that the lawyer has made against the Attorney-General since the hearing started on Monday.

She said: 'We do not want to deal with these unwarranted attacks here at this stage because we do not want to indulge in the tactics of the defendant of distracting the court from the issue before it.'

In addition, Ms Subramanian said that Mr Ravi had accused the judiciary of 'rubber-stamping' the contempt applications of the Attorney-General in the past. 'No clearer or more egregious example of scandalising the judiciary can be found,' she added.

Mr Ravi decided to continue representing Shadrake, 75, after Justice Quentin Loh assured him that any application to hold the lawyer in contempt would very probably come before the same court, which would be fully aware of the facts.
 
Two Ah Nehs fight in court over an ang moh with a Cina arbitrating. Who is the trouble maker?

Some angmohs think they can come here and paint MRT graffiti or paint Singapore black or taint the judiciary. Luckily he is over 50 so cannot be rotaned.
 
Two Ah Nehs fight in court over an ang moh with a Cina arbitrating. Who is the trouble maker?

Some angmohs think they can come here and paint MRT graffiti or paint Singapore black or taint the judiciary. Luckily he is over 50 so cannot be rotaned.


If u haven't read Shadrake's book, I suggest u do so. Then u can draw your own conclusions on whether what he said reflects the position of the judiciary in Sinkieland.
 
If u haven't read Shadrake's book, I suggest u do so. Then u can draw your own conclusions on whether what he said reflects the position of the judiciary in Sinkieland.

Have to buy from JB? Supposed the book is ban rite?
 
LKY is the law. Contempt of the court is tantamount to contempt of LKY.
 
Dear Balls

I had the pleasure of reading Alan's book and the problems were not in so much as with the judiciary or the judges or the courts as defined below but rather with the discretionary power vested in the AGC and how it is and was decided in the cases listed in his book.

He blames the unfairness on the courts whereas the unfairness lie in the people who administer and prosecute the law.



Locke







The judiciary, also referred to as the judicature, consists of justices, judges and magistrates among other types of adjudicators. Under the doctrine of the separation of powers, it is one of the three branches of government. The primary function of the judiciary is to adjudicate legal disputes. The judiciary is also responsible for interpreting the law, but while in some legal systems this is a fundamental principle (e.g. common law jurisdictions), in others the primary responsibility for interpreting the law belongs not to the judiciary but to the legislature — traditionally, civil law and socialist law jurisdictions — although even in them, the judiciary inevitably must play some interpretive role, since interpretation of the law is an inseparable part of adjudicating legal disputes. This difference can be seen by comparing the United States and People's Republic of China — in the United States Federal Government, the Supreme Court is the final authority on the interpretation of the law; in the PRC, the final authority on the interpretation of the law is the National People's Congress.
 
Back
Top