Singapore charges political cartoonist Leslie Chew for contempt of court

[BuiKia]

Singapore's government on Thursday commenced legal proceedings against political cartoonist Leslie Chew for contempt of court.

This, said the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) in a single-page statement on Thursday, comes from four comics Chew produced and published between July 2011 and mid-June last year.

In the first comic, published on 20 July 2011, Chew featured four separate cases that appeared to accuse Singapore's judiciary of unfairness — three of which portrayed the court as ruling unfairly in favour of foreigners or against Singaporeans, and the fourth appeared to allude to an instance where current Member of Parliament Tin Pei Ling was believed to have posted on her Facebook page in violation of Cooling Off day regulations.

The second, published on 3 January last year, depicted two cases side by side — one showed a celebrity who was sentenced to probation for "beat(ing) someone up", while the other showed the judge sentencing a national serviceman who went AWOL to five months' jail. Chew also drew the phrase, "The Kangaroo Court of Singapore" on the wall behind where the judge was seated.

In the third, published two days later, Chew depicted what appeared to be the case of opposition politician Chee Soon Juan's application to leave Singapore, which was subsequently denied. He also drew in other panels what looked to be the case of former Romanian diplomat Silviu Ionescu, who fled Singapore before finally being charged and sentenced in Romanian court, as well as another "ang mo" (literally translated as "red hair", but the phrase typically refers to Caucasians) who was charged for an assault on a Singaporean, but was allowed out on $25,000 bail.

In Chew's fourth comic in question, published on 16 June last year, he appeared to question the disparity in sentences meted out to people committing similar crimes.

After the High Court granted permission for the AGC to sue Chew on Tuesday, documents would have been served to him on Thursday afternoon. The case will be heard at the High Court on Monday, 12 August.

Earlier this year in April, Chew was arrested by police on charges of sedition over two comics he produced on his Facebook page, entitled "Demon-cratic Singapore". At that time, the AGC said it would not commence further proceedings against him if he apologised publicly on his page and removed the cartoons, but Chew refused, saying his work was entirely fictional and not related to any real events or persons.

 

[Agoraphobic]

Never heard of Leslie Chew before. Now I have.

Cheers!

 

[Narong Wongwan]

Repost and spread his cartoons.
Educate the young who will be eligible to vote in future and re-educate the zombie 60.1%

 

[Dreamer1]

Repost and spread his cartoons.
Educate the young who will be eligible to vote in future and re-educate the zombie 60.1%

PM Lee and his elites still do not understand what is "Creativity",they are wasting their time and our money thinking of 'Creativity' day and night.

 

[Yingge]

Chew refused, saying his work was entirely fictional and not related to any real events or persons. (Quote)

Looking at the cartoon, I am sure they are referred to certain events and person... Just admit it and see what the PAP can do to him!!! Why Have to lie???

You call this creative??? I can say 90% of the works are copies from here... Maybe Sam can sue him for compensation too...

 

[laksaboy]

Chew refused, saying his work was entirely fictional and not related to any real events or persons. (Quote)

Looking at the cartoon, I am sure they are referred to certain events and person... Just admit it and see what the PAP can do to him!!! Why Have to lie???

You call this creative??? I can say 90% of the works are copies from here... Maybe Sam can sue him for compensation too...

Probably more creative than you. I bet you can't even draw your own penis.

 

[laksaboy]

On one hand, the PAP regime clamps down on political satire.

On the other hand, it wonders why the arts/creative scene never took off.

 

[Yingge]

Probably more creative than you. I bet you can't even draw your own penis.

You call this creative?? Pinky, toothpick and girly Minister?? I can find all the answer here... Is the people here that is creative...

Lastly, you are right, I really cannot draw my own penis... My drawing is very bad... But do I need to be good in drawing before I can commend here???

A lot of people do not know how to run a country or never run a country. But they commend like they have been running a few countries for many years!!!

 

[Leongsam]

On one hand, the PAP regime clamps down on political satire.

On the other hand, it wonders why the arts/creative scene never took off.

Drawing cartoons which are defamatory and absolutely untrue can hardly be classified as "creativity".:kma:

 

[Rumpole]

The archaic offence of Scandalising the Court has already been abolished in England. Wake up, my dear Stinky Smelly Sinkie AG! Respect should be earned and not commanded. Even a five year old will know that.

Lord Pannick (in the House of Lords debate on the abolition):

“It is no longer necessary to maintain as part of our law of contempt of court a criminal offence of insulting judges by statements or publications out of court. The judiciary has no need for such protection. The wise judge normally ignores insults out of court. Judges, of course, are as entitled as anyone else to bring proceedings for libel, and some have done so.

The law of scandalising the judiciary could have been left in the moribund state in which it has rested for many years. However, the Attorney-General for Northern Ireland unwisely chose earlier this year to seek to breathe life into it by bringing a prosecution, later dropped, against Peter Hain MP for some critical comments he had made in his autobiography concerning a Northern Ireland judge. That prosecution had two main consequences. First, it substantially increased the sales of Mr Hain's book and secondly, it led to this amendment.

Much of the criticism to which judges are subjected is ill informed and unsubstantiated. However, even where criticism is unjustified, it should not be a criminal offence. As Justice Albie Sachs said on this subject in a judgment in the Constitutional Court of South Africa in 2001, respect for the courts will be all the stronger, to the degree that it is earned, rather than to the extent that it is commanded."

http://sammyboy.com/showthread.php?...Courts-to-be-Abolished!&p=1511259#post1511259

 

[Yingge]

The archaic offence of Scandalising the Court has already been abolished in England. Wake up, my dear Stinky Smelly Sinkie AG! Respect should be earned and not commanded. Even a five year old will know that.

Lord Pannick (in the House of Lords debate on the abolition):

“It is no longer necessary to maintain as part of our law of contempt of court a criminal offence of insulting judges by statements or publications out of court. The judiciary has no need for such protection. The wise judge normally ignores insults out of court. Judges, of course, are as entitled as anyone else to bring proceedings for libel, and some have done so.

The law of scandalising the judiciary could have been left in the moribund state in which it has rested for many years. However, the Attorney-General for Northern Ireland unwisely chose earlier this year to seek to breathe life into it by bringing a prosecution, later dropped, against Peter Hain MP for some critical comments he had made in his autobiography concerning a Northern Ireland judge. That prosecution had two main consequences. First, it substantially increased the sales of Mr Hain's book and secondly, it led to this amendment.

Much of the criticism to which judges are subjected is ill informed and unsubstantiated. However, even where criticism is unjustified, it should not be a criminal offence. As Justice Albie Sachs said on this subject in a judgment in the Constitutional Court of South Africa in 2001, respect for the courts will be all the stronger, to the degree that it is earned, rather than to the extent that it is commanded."

http://sammyboy.com/showthread.php?...Courts-to-be-Abolished!&p=1511259#post1511259

Has it abolished in Singapore??? Asked this so call creative Singaporean to go make such cartoons in England than...

 

[laksaboy]

A lot of people do not know how to run a country or never run a country. But they commend like they have been running a few countries for many years!!!

You don't need to put your hand on a hot stove to know it is a bad idea. Observation and common sense would suffice.

A lack of personal experience doesn't negate the validity of an argument.

By your silly logic, no movie reviewer has the right to say a movie is poor, as they have not personally directed or produced a movie.

 

[laksaboy]

Has it abolished in Singapore??? Asked this so call creative Singaporean to go make such cartoons in England than...

Better yet: change the laws in Singapore, and get rid of those lawmakers who persist with draconian laws.

 

[Yingge]

You don't need to put your hand on a hot stove to know it is a bad idea. Observation and common sense would suffice.

A lack of personal experience doesn't negate the validity of an argument.

By your silly logic, no movie reviewer has the right to say a movie is poor, as they have not personally directed or produced a movie.

How can you compare a country law with movie review??? Your head got problem??

You are telling me if I find a law stupid I will be exempted from it??? A law is a law whether you like it or not!!!

To me screw girls under the age of 16 or 18 is an offence under woman charter is really stupid... So if I got caught is not an offence???

 

[Leongsam]

By your silly logic, no movie reviewer has the right to say a movie is poor, as they have not personally directed or produced a movie.

Damned right they don't. People who comment from the sidelines are the worst scum of all.

It you're going to judge something, you first have to know what you're talking about.

 

[Rumpole]

Has it abolished in Singapore??? Asked this so call creative Singaporean to go make such cartoons in England than...

No, it hasn’t been abolished in Sinkieland.

The key points are:

1) This “speech crime” is archaic and not in tune with the times and public expectation that Powers That Be in a First World democracy subject themselves to scrutiny.

2) Prosecution is counter-productive. It draws attention to the fact that the Courts are held in low esteem by some segments of society. To the layman it looks like the Court is trying to silence critics. After all, the author is criticising the Courts and it is these same Courts that will decide his fate. Conflict of interest? End result is the critic is punished by fine or whatever but the standing of the Courts in the eyes of the public is not restored and may in fact have been diminished.

3) Therefore, respect must be earned and not commanded. This is a REALITY, based on human nature. It applies to Courts, Ministars, Perm Secs, big time and small time PAPzis, etc. Even applies to ordinary dads and moms. They can’t expect their children to respect them just because they can use the cane. Leadership by example is the best. This seems to be in short supply in Sinkieland.

 

[ray_of_hope]

The archaic offence of Scandalising the Court has already been abolished in England. Wake up, my dear Stinky Smelly Sinkie AG! Respect should be earned and not commanded. Even a five year old will know that.

Lord Pannick (in the House of Lords debate on the abolition):

“It is no longer necessary to maintain as part of our law of contempt of court a criminal offence of insulting judges by statements or publications out of court. The judiciary has no need for such protection. The wise judge normally ignores insults out of court. Judges, of course, are as entitled as anyone else to bring proceedings for libel, and some have done so.

The law of scandalising the judiciary could have been left in the moribund state in which it has rested for many years. However, the Attorney-General for Northern Ireland unwisely chose earlier this year to seek to breathe life into it by bringing a prosecution, later dropped, against Peter Hain MP for some critical comments he had made in his autobiography concerning a Northern Ireland judge. That prosecution had two main consequences. First, it substantially increased the sales of Mr Hain's book and secondly, it led to this amendment.

Much of the criticism to which judges are subjected is ill informed and unsubstantiated. However, even where criticism is unjustified, it should not be a criminal offence. As Justice Albie Sachs said on this subject in a judgment in the Constitutional Court of South Africa in 2001, respect for the courts will be all the stronger, to the degree that it is earned, rather than to the extent that it is commanded."

http://sammyboy.com/showthread.php?...Courts-to-be-Abolished!&p=1511259#post1511259

Interesting. How many Commonwealth countries have done the same?

 

[tanwahp]

Damned right they don't. People who comment from the sidelines are the worst scum of all.

It you're going to judge something, you first have to know what you're talking about.

Since you have never joined the PAP, why are you supporting them?

Since you have never been part of WP, why are you always criticizing them?

Scum.

 

[winnipegjets]

Chew refused, saying his work was entirely fictional and not related to any real events or persons. (Quote)

Looking at the cartoon, I am sure they are referred to certain events and person... Just admit it and see what the PAP can do to him!!! Why Have to lie???

You call this creative??? I can say 90% of the works are copies from here... Maybe Sam can sue him for compensation too...

We all know that he will be convicted by the kangaroo court. I hope he will be become sinkapore's newest international dissident.

 

[Rumpole]

Interesting. How many Commonwealth countries have done the same?

An example of the herd mentality. You don't pay Ministars and Civil Serpants OUT OF THIS WORLD salaries to follow the herd. The Swiss certainly did not get to their present standing by doing so. Who was it who promised Sinkies a Swiss standard of living? In material terms only? What? Sinkies not deserving of the intangible benefits of a Swiss standard of living?

Prosecution is counter-productive. It draws attention to the fact that the Courts are held in low esteem by some segments of society. To the layman it looks like the Court is trying to silence critics. After all, the author is criticising the Courts and it is these same Courts that will decide his fate. Conflict of interest? End result is the critic is punished by fine or whatever but the standing of the Courts in the eyes of the public is not restored and may in fact have been diminished. This applies irrespective of what the letter of the law is. It applies because human beings are in general not dumb.