Means wat?
https://www.todayonline.com/singapo...y_Today-Evening-Brief_newsletter_28122023_tdy
Ili Nadhirah Mansor/TODAY
Lim Tean at the State Courts on May 12, 2022.
SINGAPORE — The defence team acting for lawyer and opposition party leader Lim Tean said on Thursday (Dec 28) that it will apply to have charges against him thrown out now that the prosecution has closed its case.
Lim's counsel Patrick Fernandez said that he would make a "no case to answer" submission over the three charges under the Legal Profession Act (LPA) that Lim faces for allegedly acting as a lawyer without a valid practising certificate.
At the conclusion of the second day of the trial on Thursday, Mr Fernandez said that he would make the written submission, seeking an acquittal for his client, when the case resumes early next year.
The application would be made on the basis that the defence believes that the prosecution has insufficient evidence to support its case.
Lim, 59, who is leader of the Peoples Voice political party, pleaded not guilty to all three charges when the case got underway on Wednesday after four months of delays.
In a separate development on Thursday, Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Edwin Soh addressed two points raised by the defence during Wednesday's hearing.
The first related to notes of evidence detailing the times that Lim allegedly appeared in court without a practising certificate, which the defence claimed were incomplete.
DPP Soh said that the prosecution had checked and the notes of evidence were all complete sets with the exception of some military court trials as there were quite a number of pages of these appearances.
These missing pages had since been printed out and had been submitted to the court as part of the prosecution's evidence.
The second point DPP Soh raised was the defence team's request to view the first information report about Lim's alleged offending.
"There was no first information report lodged with the Commercial Affairs Department (CAD) as it was the registrar of the Supreme Court who notified the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) when the registrar noticed that Mr Lim was attending court without a valid practising certificate," DPP Soh said.
He added that AGC then handed over the case to CAD.
On Lim's instructions, Mr Fernandez had told the court that his client did not believe that the registrar was the one who told AGC that he was attending court without a valid practising certificate.
Lim also believed that he was not the only one who attended court without a valid practising certificate.
"Mr Lim is asking to see the correspondence to establish the truth of the complaint and to see whether other solicitors were in the list. If there were, why is he being singled out for prosecution?" the lawyer asked.
Mr Fernandez added that the defence should be able to see the correspondence between the Supreme Court registrar and AGC because without these documents, Lim feels that his defence will be "crippled".
Mr Fernandez also told the court that if the prosecution did not wish to disclose the correspondence, his client would file a criminal motion with the High Court to seek to obtain the documents.
"He is entitled to know the truth about the matter and whether he was the only one who allegedly came to court without a valid practising certificate," Mr Fernandez repeated.
In response, DPP Soh said that the prosecution will not be disclosing the correspondence since these were official communications between agencies that would reveal internal procedures of the government bodies involved.
He also said that Lim had already been charged with strict liability offences, which were made out when he attended court without a valid practising certificate.
It was not an inquiry into other cases, he added.
"(The defence is) free to file a criminal motion and the prosecution will vigorously fight it," DPP Soh said.
After the prosecution closed its case, Mr Fernandez told the court that the defence would be seeking an eight-week adjournment to file a written submission for the no- case-to-answer argument and the criminal motion for the correspondence between the Supreme Court registrar and AGC.
The prosecution countered that it should be a shorter time and the judge eventually granted five weeks for the defence to file submissions and a further two weeks for both sides to file reply submissions.
The case will return to court on Jan 11 for the judge and lawyers to hold a conference on how the next stage of the trial will unfold.
-----------------
https://www.todayonline.com/singapo...y_Today-Evening-Brief_newsletter_28122023_tdy
Lim Tean to ask court for 'no case to answer' acquittal on charges he acted as lawyer without licence
Ili Nadhirah Mansor/TODAY
Lim Tean at the State Courts on May 12, 2022.
- The prosecution concluded its case against Lim Tean, 59, on the second day of his trial
- Lim has pleaded not guilty to three charges of acting as a lawyer without a valid practising certificate
- Lim's lawyer said he would be making a "no case to answer" submission to seek an acquittal on all charges
- The defence lawyer also intends go to the High Court to get copies of the correspondence between the Supreme Court registrar and the Attorney-General's Chambers over this case
- The case will return to court on Jan 11 so the judge and lawyers can hold a conference on how the next stage of the trial will proceed
SINGAPORE — The defence team acting for lawyer and opposition party leader Lim Tean said on Thursday (Dec 28) that it will apply to have charges against him thrown out now that the prosecution has closed its case.
Lim's counsel Patrick Fernandez said that he would make a "no case to answer" submission over the three charges under the Legal Profession Act (LPA) that Lim faces for allegedly acting as a lawyer without a valid practising certificate.
At the conclusion of the second day of the trial on Thursday, Mr Fernandez said that he would make the written submission, seeking an acquittal for his client, when the case resumes early next year.
The application would be made on the basis that the defence believes that the prosecution has insufficient evidence to support its case.
Lim, 59, who is leader of the Peoples Voice political party, pleaded not guilty to all three charges when the case got underway on Wednesday after four months of delays.
READ ALSO
Lim Tean pleads not guilty to acting as lawyer without licence as trial begins after 4-month delay
In a separate development on Thursday, Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Edwin Soh addressed two points raised by the defence during Wednesday's hearing.
The first related to notes of evidence detailing the times that Lim allegedly appeared in court without a practising certificate, which the defence claimed were incomplete.
DPP Soh said that the prosecution had checked and the notes of evidence were all complete sets with the exception of some military court trials as there were quite a number of pages of these appearances.
These missing pages had since been printed out and had been submitted to the court as part of the prosecution's evidence.
The second point DPP Soh raised was the defence team's request to view the first information report about Lim's alleged offending.
"There was no first information report lodged with the Commercial Affairs Department (CAD) as it was the registrar of the Supreme Court who notified the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) when the registrar noticed that Mr Lim was attending court without a valid practising certificate," DPP Soh said.
READ ALSO
Lawyer Lim Tean found guilty of 'grossly improper' conduct in handling S$30,000 belonging to client
He added that AGC then handed over the case to CAD.
On Lim's instructions, Mr Fernandez had told the court that his client did not believe that the registrar was the one who told AGC that he was attending court without a valid practising certificate.
Lim also believed that he was not the only one who attended court without a valid practising certificate.
"Mr Lim is asking to see the correspondence to establish the truth of the complaint and to see whether other solicitors were in the list. If there were, why is he being singled out for prosecution?" the lawyer asked.
Mr Fernandez added that the defence should be able to see the correspondence between the Supreme Court registrar and AGC because without these documents, Lim feels that his defence will be "crippled".
Mr Fernandez also told the court that if the prosecution did not wish to disclose the correspondence, his client would file a criminal motion with the High Court to seek to obtain the documents.
"He is entitled to know the truth about the matter and whether he was the only one who allegedly came to court without a valid practising certificate," Mr Fernandez repeated.
In response, DPP Soh said that the prosecution will not be disclosing the correspondence since these were official communications between agencies that would reveal internal procedures of the government bodies involved.
He also said that Lim had already been charged with strict liability offences, which were made out when he attended court without a valid practising certificate.
It was not an inquiry into other cases, he added.
"(The defence is) free to file a criminal motion and the prosecution will vigorously fight it," DPP Soh said.
After the prosecution closed its case, Mr Fernandez told the court that the defence would be seeking an eight-week adjournment to file a written submission for the no- case-to-answer argument and the criminal motion for the correspondence between the Supreme Court registrar and AGC.
The prosecution countered that it should be a shorter time and the judge eventually granted five weeks for the defence to file submissions and a further two weeks for both sides to file reply submissions.
The case will return to court on Jan 11 for the judge and lawyers to hold a conference on how the next stage of the trial will unfold.
-----------------
