AGC winks at Alan Shandrake to run road

[silverfox@]

1 clever student in class doesn't mean all the students in school are smart.

1 corrupted policeman doesn't mean all policemen are corrupted.

1 caucasian getting 3 strokes of caning for vandalism, doesn't mean the rest only gets 3. If the rest of the foreigners got 6 strokes, does it mean special preference to that particular caucasian?

Allowing the guilty to leave the country after verdict awarded doesn't mean the courts are unfair. It goes on a case by case basis.

Why not aurvandil try committing a crime, then see can apply to go overseas or not and see whether he be denied. There are people who are deemed flight risks and denied to leave. There are also those who are not flight risks but allowed to leave and they left and never come back. What about those who left and came back to face the punishment?

1st of all, Shahdrake is not a rapist, murderer, armed robber, or even a terrorist.

2nd, he has admitted and pleaded guilty, verdict awarded.

3rd, he has been in Singapore for past few months leading from his arrest to sentencing already. So now this man wants to leave the country to spend time with his family for Christmas.

Whether he is a flight risk or not, the courts would have to see the extent of harm he can do if he leaves vs letting him stay around in Singapore.

Do you think it makes a difference by letting him leave or not allowing to go? The onus is on him to see whether he is that brave enough to come back and finish his sentence.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

perhaps...but the court still has to abide by the principle of separation of powers...so not wise to be seen to be rubber stamping executive rule both letter n spirit...

btw wonder why gopalan nair was not given such a 'privilege'?...looks like queen's english may still outweigh yankee doodle dandy under certain circumstances:p

i must say Menon is certainly getting a quick baptism of fire so soon after he has taken on SJ2 car plates

Either the way the implication is that the remit will not be contested to or objected to by the AGC or Prosecution and courts tend to look in any jurisdiction favorably when applications are uncontested by the Prosecution.
Locke

 

[silverfox@]

perhaps...but the court still has to abide by the principle of separation of powers...so not wise to be seen to be rubber stamping executive rule both letter n spirit...

btw wonder why gopalan nair was not given such a 'privilege'?...looks like queen's english may still outweigh yankee doodle dandy under certain circumstances:p

Gopalan too lau lan already

 

[aurvandil]

btw wonder why gopalan nair was not given such a 'privilege'?

The US STate Department declined to get involved in Gopalan's cases. For Alan Shadrake, the British FO has been quite aggressive and issued a threat that would have embarassed Singapore greatly if it was carried out.

 

[aurvandil]

Dear Arun

There are specific cases and outcomes I disagree with vis sa vis the courts. However does this mean I would say the Courts are unfair or have not treated anyone equally ? And even if I find one case unfair does it mean that the court system is itself unfair ?

Do I find the AGC dirty well what exactly do u mean by dirty ? Corrupt ? Nope. Unfair perhaps.


Locke

Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth.

Buddha

 

[kingrant]

Wonder if WKS winked at MSK?

 

[coolguy]

If it was Chee Soon Juan, I wonder what will happen.

 

[aurvandil]

The following report from Dow Jones sumarises the key allegations in Alan Shadrake's book.


UK Author Sentenced To Singapore Jail Asks To Leave Country - Lawyer
http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-ma...o-singapore-jail-asks-to-leave-country-lawyer

SINGAPORE -(Dow Jones)- A U.K. author sentenced to six weeks' jail in Singapore over his book on the city-state's death penalty has asked to leave the country pending his appeal of the conviction, his lawyer said.

Alan Shadrake on Tuesday informed the High Court he "wishes to leave the jurisdiction as soon as possible" in a letter sent by his lawyer M. Ravi. A hearing will be held Friday.

The 76-year-old Shadrake was sentenced last week after a Nov. 3 conviction on charges of scandalizing the court in his book, "Once a Jolly Hangman: Singapore Justice in the Dock." He also was fined S$20,000 (US$15,400) and ordered to pay S$55,000 in legal costs.

The six-week jail sentence was the stiffest ever in Singapore for contempt of court, beating the previous record of 15 days. Shadrake would have to serve an additional two weeks in jail if he doesn't pay the fine, and Ravi said last week his client might not have enough money.

He is also facing criminal defamation charges but is free on bail with his passport impounded.

The Attorney General's Chambers said in an emailed statement late Tuesday that criminal defamation investigations are ongoing and separate from the contempt proceedings. Shadrake must seek police permission to leave Singapore for that matter, it said.

The book, launched earlier this year, profiles a retired chief executioner and features interviews on death penalty cases with rights activists, lawyers, and former police officers.

Government lawyers said statements in the book constituted "baseless, unwarranted attacks" impugning Singapore's judiciary, and imply that Singapore courts succumb to foreign political and economic pressure, favor the rich and well-connected and are used by the government to suppress dissent.

 

[nkfnkfnkf]

The bastards wants his bailor's money

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Arun

You might be right, the truth might be out there, but when the facts are not present and you make allegations beyond what the evidence supports, and when you cannot in a court of law produce evidence to support your claims, well Alan is no messiah or prophet of the truth.



Locke

 

[aurvandil]

About That Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free Card

http://singaporedesk.blogspot.com/2010/11/about-that-get-out-of-jail-free-card.html

Britiain's Foreign Office Minister Jeremy Browne must be a very powerful man. All he had to do was "express dismay" after author Alan Shadrake was sentenced by a Singapore court on 16 November to 6 weeks in prison and fined S$20,000 for expressing his personal views on the legal system. “I look forward to constructive discussions when I visit Singapore next month, which I hope will serve to strengthen further the level of engagement and cooperation between our countries,” was his carefully phrased challenge to his diplomatic counterpart to recognise the right to freedom of expression as set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Buried somewhere in the diplomatic jargon must be a coded message that caused the foreign affairs ministry and/or judicial officials to soil their underwear. In an unprecedented move, the Attorney General’s Office made an extraordinary application for the court on 23 Nov, to remind Mr Alan Shadrake of his right to seek leave of court if he wants to "exit the jurisdiction". According to Shadrake’s lawyer M Ravi, normally it is the prerogative of defence counsel to explore this escape route for a defendant not domicile in Singapore, and the AG to gleefully and vehemently contest it. Most don't even bother, given the slim chance of success in the kind of judicial system documented in Shadrake's book. Just ask Swiss national Oliver Fricker.

The turn around couldn't be more dramatic. In passing sentence, Justice Loh had pointed out that the law was not concerned with the sensitivities of the judge ”but whether there was risk in public confidence of the independence of the courts being undermined". He even castigated Shadrake’s apology as “nothing more that a tactical ploy in court to obtain a reduced sentence while mounting a different stance elsewhere.” And there was the veiled threat of being investigated by the police for criminal defamation; for which his passport is being held by the police.

Shadrake wrote in his book that the German government applied maximum pressure on Singapore to save Julia Bohl from the gallows, through the clever ploy of issuing a revised laboratory report that said only 281 of the 687 grams of cannabis found in her possession were pure stuff. The 15 grams of heroin that Amara Tochi from Nigeria was hanged for did not benefit from similar laboratory analysis. If Britain is exerting pressure through Browne, public confidence of the independence of the courts will no doubt be undermined. And additional fresh material will be provided for Shadrake's new book.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Arun

Courts or the AGC ? Again you chose to confuse the two. Even assuming a deal was done, and SG bended on diplomatic pressure , It was between the Governments and the AGC.

If you want to debate then lets debate about the deal done between Govs, but in no way can one claim that the courts were part of the deal





Locke

 

[aurvandil]

Courts or the AGC ? Again you chose to confuse the two. Even assuming a deal was done, and SG bended on diplomatic pressure , It was between the Governments and the AGC.

If you want to debate then lets debate about the deal done between Govs, but in no way can one claim that the courts were part of the deal

It depends on whether you believe the courts in Sg are independent.

If you do, then of course this has nothing to do with the Courts.

On the other hand if you do not believe that the Courts are independent, then of course the Courts would be involved.

The empirical record for the Courts being independent in SG is very poor. There is for example no known instance of a PAP politican losing an important court case in Singapore.

Outside of Singapore, the record is very different. JBJ for example made a sucessful appeal to the Privy Council. Shortly after, the laws were amended so that such appeals can no longer be possible. Similarly "defamation king" LKY lost a case when he tried to sue Devan Nair in Canada.

Going back to this case, there seems to be an element of collusion when we see AGC winking for Alan to "fuck off" and the judge waiting to rubber stamp his approval for Alan to leave. All through the discussion so far, it has been taken almost as a given that the judge would approve the application.

If the judge is an independent party, shouldn't the judge independently examine whether Alan is a flight risk? If Alan is a flight risk, he should disallow the application even though a backdoor deal might have been struck.

The way the application was to be heard in chambers rather than open court suggest very much that the judge is aware of the deal and therefore did not want the details out in the public domain. It boggles the mind that it is ok for the whole trail to be heard in open court. However when it comes to Alan apply for leave to go home, things suddenly become so sensitive that it is heard in chambers.

 

[Ramseth]

Courts or the AGC ? Again you chose to confuse the two. Even assuming a deal was done, and SG bended on diplomatic pressure , It was between the Governments and the AGC.

Locke

The courts and judges (judiciary) are supposedly independent, yes. There's nothing between AG and government. AG is government's legal representative. AG is minister-scale rank. Just like government advises the president to sign laws, AG advises government on how or if to enforce laws.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Arun

Stop being a blithering idiot. The judge is in no position to determine whether ALAN is a flight risk or not. He only judges based on the evidence and cases presented to him by the AGC, Police and the defense. If the AGC Police have all said that Alan is not a flight risk and that he is free to take xmas leave , If the defense has not said well AGC is wrong I object my client is a fucking flight risk.......then why should the Judge waste his time searching for some sort of deepest darkest conspiracy.


Locke

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Arun

And with regards to the independence of the courts. This is an issue which can be said that the judgement is being tested or that his judgement is being biased in the government's favor. What judgement ? Its basically an uncontested application by both sides,




Locke

 

[aurvandil]

Stop being a blithering idiot. The judge is in no position to determine whether ALAN is a flight risk or not. He only judges based on the evidence and cases presented to him by the AGC, Police and the defense. If the AGC Police have all said that Alan is not a flight risk and that he is free to take xmas leave , If the defense has not said well AGC is wrong I object my client is a fucking flight risk.......then why should the Judge waste his time searching for some sort of deepest darkest conspiracy.

If what you say is true, then how can the judge be independent? Wouldn't he just be rubber stamping whatever the police, AGC present to him?

 

[Ramseth]

If what you say is true, then how can the judge be independent? Wouldn't he just be rubber stamping whatever the police, AGC present to him?

To be fair to the judges, you people with differing views to laws should settle with your Parliament first, your lawmakers that you voted for. According to the laws passed by Parliament voted by the people, I have to the say the judges have done well. Many Singaporeans still have no concept of separation of powers and Parliamentary supremacy.

 

[aurvandil]

Many Singaporeans still have no concept of separation of powers and Parliamentary supremacy.

Many Singaporeans beleive that there is seperation in name but not in practice.

 

[Ramseth]

Many Singaporeans beleive that there is seperation in name but not in practice.

Many Singaporeans don't know how to practise it.