- Joined
- Oct 30, 2014
- Messages
- 36,768
- Points
- 113
SINGAPORE — The Workers’ Party (WP) slammed the Administration of Justice (Protection) Bill in Parliament yesterday as its members unanimously voted against it, with party chief Low Thia Khiang accusing the Government of “double standards” when it comes to fair comment on cases before the courts.
Speaking in Mandarin, Mr Low said the real purpose of the new law — which was eventually passed with 72 votes for the Bill and nine against — was not to protect the fairness of judicial proceedings, but to “deter members of (the) public from voicing their views, although they may be reasonable and legal”.
The new law, he said, would effectively give the Government or minister “unlimited rights”, such that “whatever statement which a member of the public makes can be considered as contempt of court”.
“Yet, when it (comes) from the mouth of the minister, it becomes completely legal, so long as the Government can say that this is in public interest,” Mr Low said, referring to a provision under the new law that would allow the Government to make a statement on a case if it is deemed necessary for public interest.
“The question is: What is in public interest? There’s no clear indication in this Bill, so who decides? Of course the Government decides,” he said.
Asking if the Ministry of Law was “chasing shadows”, Ms Lim pointed out that Law Society’s president Thio Shen Yi was “strongly criticised” by Law Minister K Shanmugam for commenting on the Benjamin Lim case, but public officials such as Mr Shanmugam “could make statements”.
Benjamin, 14, was found dead shortly after returning home from a police interview over an alleged molest case, and his case sparked much public discussion.
“Has he (Mr Shanmugam) been facing accusations that he acted in contempt of court, and wants a blanket licence to say what he likes?” charged Ms Lim.
http://www.todayonline.com/singapore...-views-says-wp
Speaking in Mandarin, Mr Low said the real purpose of the new law — which was eventually passed with 72 votes for the Bill and nine against — was not to protect the fairness of judicial proceedings, but to “deter members of (the) public from voicing their views, although they may be reasonable and legal”.
The new law, he said, would effectively give the Government or minister “unlimited rights”, such that “whatever statement which a member of the public makes can be considered as contempt of court”.
“Yet, when it (comes) from the mouth of the minister, it becomes completely legal, so long as the Government can say that this is in public interest,” Mr Low said, referring to a provision under the new law that would allow the Government to make a statement on a case if it is deemed necessary for public interest.
“The question is: What is in public interest? There’s no clear indication in this Bill, so who decides? Of course the Government decides,” he said.
Asking if the Ministry of Law was “chasing shadows”, Ms Lim pointed out that Law Society’s president Thio Shen Yi was “strongly criticised” by Law Minister K Shanmugam for commenting on the Benjamin Lim case, but public officials such as Mr Shanmugam “could make statements”.
Benjamin, 14, was found dead shortly after returning home from a police interview over an alleged molest case, and his case sparked much public discussion.
“Has he (Mr Shanmugam) been facing accusations that he acted in contempt of court, and wants a blanket licence to say what he likes?” charged Ms Lim.
http://www.todayonline.com/singapore...-views-says-wp
