Is it "self-gain" or "common good" comes first?

[Administrator]

We often see opposition members appearing to be working together for the common good of Singaporean but is it really? There are rumours flying around which I am beginning to question.

We used to see M.Ravi fighting for opposition members whenever they get into trouble and I assumed he did it pro-bono or charge a minimal sum. Then during the Hougang by-election, he got a cleaner to challenge the Constitution on the by-election. They asked for donation to fight the case and they were given an undisclosed amount by the public. When the case was over, the court decided that no cost to be paid to the court but there were rumour that he charged the cleaner for the work done. I mean he actually charge a cleaner whom I guess would have no interest in whether there is a by-election or not in the first place.

https://sg.news.yahoo.com/hougang-resident-spared-from-bearing-legal-costs.html

Ravi also represented the foreign workers involved in the Little India riots but now he suddenly make public that he is discharging himself. Why? http://mypaper.sg/top-stories/lawyer-ravi-quit-little-india-cases-20140624

Now there is the Roy's case against PM coming up. Then again, Roy asked for public funding which he got more than $80,000. Now there is rumour spreading within the inner circle involved in the case that that Ravi is charging Roy a hefty sum for case. I dunno how true is this though.

Is M.Ravi milking the situation since there is public support?

 

[Leongsam]

He's an Ah Neh. Draw your own conclusions.

 

[sochi2014]

Conclusion....Ah Neh got balls.

We should have more AH nehs like him!!

The country is blessed!!

 

[frenchbriefs]

Never trust a fucking ah neh lying scum...they will sweet talk u...make ten thousand promises and never show up later or deliver.the funny thing is u don't even expect anything from them,u don't put any pressure on them...but they still feel compelled to lie anyway....

 

[da dick]

http://mypaper.sg/top-stories/lawyer-ravi-quit-little-india-cases-20140624

nobody donate money to chao ah neh rioters, so the ah neh also dun wanch to help his brudda bruddas! lol much? i can't believe any lawyer can be dumb enough to think people would support farang talentos who break the law here. he 's probably not a very good lawyer if he can't figure that out.

 

[da dick]

Conclusion....Ah Neh got balls.

We should have more AH nehs like him!!

The country is blessed!!

read properly, the article just shows the ah meh
lawyayaya papaya is just very good at begging for money, those that cannot make money one, he drop the case

 

[kryonlight]

Now there is rumour spreading within the inner circle involved in the case that that Ravi is charging Roy a hefty sum for case. I dunno how true is this though. Is M.Ravi milking the situation since there is public support?

If I were the lawyer, I would also charge that moron a hefty sum for the case. Killing two birds with one stone. Make good money and make myself famous positively. It's an opportunity not to be missed!

 

[BuiKia]

The Indian rioters, he work pro-bono. As for Roy, he can earn as much as $110,000. I guess the 3 workers are screwed as it is hard for someone to take up a case halfwway.

As he said, ""If these clients can pay me as well, I can take an additional lawyer to organise my resources".

LAWYER M. Ravi will be discharging himself from representing the five men who have been charged for their involvement in the Little India riot.

Mr Ravi told My Paper that his resources are limited for pro-bono cases as he is working alone, and his clients' access to justice will be better served by lawyers from the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme (Clas).

His five clients are among the 25 individuals who were charged for December's riot. They are: Arun Kaliamurthy, 29; Periyaiah Ganesan, 26; Rajendran Mohan, 26; Ravi Arun Vengatesh, 25; and Selvanathan Murugesan, 28.

Mr Ravi said that he had made an application to the court last week, and he will officially discharge himself during the next court hearing next month.

He was initially assigned two cases under Clas after the Dec 8 riot. He had said then: "I was one of the first to respond and volunteer."

The prosecution dropped charges in those cases. Meanwhile, he took on the cases of the five men he now represents.

Why has he changed his mind now? Mr Ravi admitted that while costs was one of the reasons he was discharging himself from the Little India riot cases, it was not the primary one.

"If these clients can pay me as well, I can take an additional lawyer to organise my resources... My primary consideration is not legal fees, but whether they are getting legal aid," he said.

The activist lawyer is also representing blogger Roy Ngerng, who is being sued by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong for defamation. Mr Ngerng has already raised more than $110,000 for his defence, which will go towards legal fees, research and filing fees.

Mr Ravi is also representing former National University of Singapore law professor Tey Tsun Hang. Mr Tey is seeking a court order to review his sacking from the university, following his acquittal on corruption charges.

Mr Ravi said he was still committed to other pro-bono cases, some of which involve clients facing the death penalty, and he has only two trainee lawyers helping him with his work.

In April, he applied for charges against his five clients to be quashed, because he said the Committee of Inquiry hearing into the incident that closed in March had "offended the rule of sub judice", and had denied the men a fair trial.

While Mr Ravi later withdrew his application, the Attorney-General's Chambers has asked the High Court last month to order him to pay $1,000 in costs incurred. The court's decision on this matter will be given today.

[email protected]