Matters of Chee's
-
2.SG PM met NZ's opposition leader openly.I dunt knowOriginally posted by Atobe:Even PM LHL called on the leader of the Oppostion during his recent visit to Australia, and it has also been the habit of MM LKY and SM GCT to call on the leader of the opposition when they visit those countries that practices democratic politics.
Are our political leaders not interfering in the domestic political agenda of other countries ?
CSJ made known to public that he met then OPP party
leader,now PM of NZ, in NZ High Comm
in Sg which is a rectricted area.
I guess CSJ now not happy NZ's PM not push his case to LHL
and now disclosed his meeting with her.
3.2 Jun 06 Media Release: Chees apply to court to stop summary judgment by Lees
i think it is reasonable for summary judgement for CSJ gave
up his right for defense .He has been very keen to x exam
Lee father and son in Court!!Responding, lawyers for PM Lee and MM Lee rebutted any suggestion that the leaders were shying away from a hearing in open court.
fr The Star Friday June 16, 2006
“Applications for summary judgment are made in cases where the defendants have no defence but try to waste the court’s time.
“The High Court hears thousands of such applications. During such applications, defendants are given the opportunity to persuade the court that they have a defence which should go for trial.
“They are given every chance to present their evidence and case,” the statement said, urging the Chees to focus on preparing their arguments to the court.
“In doing that, they will no doubt remember... the Singapore Democratic Party, and all their fellow CEC (central executive committee) members have accepted that there is no defence.”
yes,the Chees have to focus on preparing their arguments
to the court. Who is really not prepared well to
appear in Court?CSJ has not submitted his defense and
said summary judgement not fair,then later will say
there is no open trial....
Can mr Ravi explained why CSJ had not submitted defense?
2.read how
State Dept of US read Sporeand mention CSJ. -
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
Yes, SG PM was able to meet the NZ's opposition leader - as well as MM and SM were both able to meet the Opposition Leaders of other practising democracies - was entirely due to the open minded and generous attitude of a true Government Leader of a PRACTISING DEMOCRACY.
Quoted from post by Atobe:
Even PM LHL called on the leader of the Oppostion during his recent visit to Australia, and it has also been the habit of MM LKY and SM GCT to call on the leader of the opposition when they visit those countries that practices democratic politics.
Are our political leaders not interfering in the domestic political agenda of other countries ?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.SG PM met NZ's opposition leader openly.I dunt know
CSJ made known to public that he met then OPP party
leader,now PM of NZ, in NZ High Comm
in Sg which is a rectricted area.
I guess CSJ now not happy NZ's PM not push his case to LHL
and now disclosed his meeting with her.
Will our political leaders from the PAP - forming the Singapore Government of the day - have such open minded attitude of tolerance ?
It is probably out of deference to the highly sensitive nature of our Singapore Political Leaders that any contacts with Singapore Opposition Members have to be conducted behind the secure close doors of the respective Foreign Embassies. -
The Chees will not be interested in the trial.
They will employ all the delaying tactic they can muster.
Its publicity they want.
They want to sully the government of Singapore.
CSJ wants revenge.
Don't for one second believe that he is fighting for the rights of Singaporeans.
CSJ is not stupid, that he got himself into such a mess.
He is motivated by hate.
He couldn't care less for the SDP.
Do you think he care for Singaporeans.
He wants to embarrass the Singapore government, for what they did to him when he was a lecturer.
He was caught using university funds for his wife's thesis.
Oh! the embarassement of petty thievery of a learned person. -
Oh how I marvel at your child-like wonders.Originally posted by mancha:The Chees will not be interested in the trial.
They will employ all the delaying tactic they can muster.
Its publicity they want.
They want to sully the government of Singapore.
CSJ wants revenge.
Don't for one second believe that he is fighting for the rights of Singaporeans.
CSJ is not stupid, that he got himself into such a mess.
He is motivated by hate.
He couldn't care less for the SDP.
Do you think he care for Singaporeans.
He wants to embarrass the Singapore government, for what they did to him when he was a lecturer.
He was caught using university funds for his wife's thesis.
Oh! the embarassement of petty thievery of a learned person. -
At least he is right about one thing... The embuzzling of the funds... Where as the LEE family after so many years had yet to embuzzle any of the government funds... dispite the early trying years of Singapore. At least they had not taken any without making it legal for them to take. Which of course accounted for the clean government we have.Originally posted by LazerLordz:Oh how I marvel at your child-like wonders. -
2.will CSJ be arrestd just meeting opp party leader?do u think CSJOriginally posted by Atobe:
Will our political leaders from the PAP - forming the Singapore Government of the day - have such open minded attitude of tolerance ?
It is probably out of deference to the highly sensitive nature of our Singapore Political Leaders that any contacts with Singapore Opposition Members have to be conducted behind the secure close doors of the respective Foreign Embassies.
action hv not been noticed?
3.u mean they are corrupted and make it legally?Say it openly lah.Originally posted by banzie:. At least they had not taken any without making it legal for them to take. Which of course accounted for the clean government we have.
It is damn good if they are corruoptd and still make Sg so habitable. -
It is not so much that CSJ will be arrested for meeting the foreign opposition leaders, but more to the fact that the foreign opposition leaders have to consider the SENSITIVITY of the Singapore Authorities aka the Ruling Political Party, and its attitude towards such foreign interest in Singapore Opposition Members.Originally posted by lionnoisy:Original post by Atobe:
Will our political leaders from the PAP - forming the Singapore Government of the day - have such open minded attitude of tolerance ?
It is probably out of deference to the highly sensitive nature of our Singapore Political Leaders that any contacts with Singapore Opposition Members have to be conducted behind the secure close doors of the respective Foreign Embassies.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.will CSJ be arrestd just meeting opp party leader?do u think CSJ
action hv not been noticed?
Surely, the Ruling Political Party of Singapore has often made it clear of its position concerning FOREIGN INTERFERENCE in domestic politics ?
How often has this statement been made to trump up charges towards the Opposition Members, one leading to the demand for US Embassy personnel to be discharged from his duties in the Singapore Embassy ?
Surely, we cannot doubt the stupendous vigilance of our Singapore ISD and Police Force in closely monitoring controversial politicians such as CSJ, and would have known of all his activities constantly ? -
STimes 29.06.2006 Thurs,page H2.
Lawyer to face highest disciplinary committee.
He(M Ravi)could be struck off the rolls for being rude in courtMr M Ravi has dedicated himself to these cases and has, as with previous cases, worked tirelessly and pro bono. He needs all the assistance he can get.
pro bono, free of charge services.
.............
Looking ahead, there are many younger and very talented Singaporeans who can take up the torch and continue the struggle for democracy in our nation. Mr M Ravi, Mr Yap Keng Ho and members of the Think Centre are but a few examples.
2.it seems chee chose the wrong lawyer.
3.M Ravi
Managing Partner
4.Re posting follow this posting:
i am not in the circle,of course i dunt know what happen inside.
jus telling news here.u be the judge.
5.Corporate clients drop 'rude' lawyer
No regrets, claims lawyer M Ravi who was ticked off by a judge in court
LAST Friday, he was rebuked by a judge for his rude behaviour in court.
By Ian Tan,18 September 2003
6. -
if you don't know anything about what goes on in Chee's circle, don't try to act smart.Originally posted by lionnoisy:STimes 29.06.2006 Thurs,page H2.
pro bono, free of charge services.
2.it seems chee chose the wrong lawyer.
It really shows your inadequacies in foisting your uncorroborated beliefs.
-
csj copy and paste much opinions fr foreigners in HIS party web site.One of the tone of these essays saying that sg
run by Lee family.Coincidently,these essays always mentioned
the Great CSJ name!That is why this may be his own party and web site.
2.How can over 3 millions sg people so scared and stupid,like
CSJ and his foreign supports said,still live in this highly
suppressed country run by Lee family?Any one with passport and a one way ticket can leave sg for good,any time.
3.i am sick of these essays.
WHERE is photo of LKY?
4.One Malaysian ,who stayed in Aussie for long time,asked me this
question when he was in sg.he thinks ,like photo of Mao Tsz Tung in China decades ago, that he can see the face of LKY every where?
The supporters of CSJ like the MY man.Know a little bit but think
he knows much.Have the learned guys knows the logic of polices
of PAP?They need not.and will not,agree with the logic.But
at least ,they hv to understand others' logic and reasons of
policy.
4.Do sg need Teacher of Group Protests?Mr Ravi's first stop is Budapest, Hungary where he will participate in a human rights course at the Central European University organized by the Open Society Institute. The five-day course will cover subjects on the teaching of human rights, the organizing of group protests, the reform of the rule of law, and the advocacy of human rights & good governance.
-
CSJ seem s follows the thinking of socialist:The ruler and the ruled.
In such societies, there will inevitably emerge a ruling class that will seek to dominate those around it. For the dominated, remaining focused on food and shelter to the exclusion of protecting their right to have a say in how society is run is to invite exploitation and, ironically, eventual deprivation of oneÂ’s basic necessities.
-----unknown author. -
CSJ is an revolutioner
He(CSJ)is aiming for a much bigger goal: bringing down the city-stateÂ’s one-party system of government. His weapon is a campaign of civil disobedience against laws designed to curtail democratic freedoms.
----Chee Soon Juan's interview with FEER--Far East Economics Review
12 Jul 06
Singapore’s ‘Martyr,’ Chee Soon Juan
July/August 2006
Hugo Restall
http://www.feer.com/articles1/2006/0607/free/p024.html“You don’t vote out a dictatorship,” he(CSJ) says. “And basically that’s what Singapore is, albeit a very sophisticated one. It’s not possible for us to effect change just through the ballot box. They’ve got control of everything else around us.” Instead what’s needed is a coalition of civil society and political society coming together and demanding change—a color revolution for Singapore.
2.Just few times and call numberous.
He has already served numerous prison terms for this and other political offenses, including eight days in March for denying the independence of the judiciary. He expects to go to jail again later this year. -
i am sick of CSJ and our learned lawyer Mr Ravi to blacken
the name of spore that our laws shows favours to western
countries and show no mercy to,almost means we set them up,
to poor Africans."There has been a spate of executions of African nationals across Asia, which had gone unnoticed. The Australian and Western counterparts get different treatment in the media," Ravi wrote on the web site.
--http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,486030,00.html
For instance, German national Julia Bohl, who was convicted for drug trafficking in 2002, escaped the gallows in Singapore when she was released from prison and exiled in 2005.
2.This is a very serious accusation to Spore.It means sg
show fear to developed countries and show no mercy
to African.
3.Why the German was spared the gallow?Julia Bohl, 23, was spared the gallows after tests revealed this week that the amount of pure cannabis in the stash seized was below 500 grams.
4.The receive-no-fee lawyer of Chee Mr Rave should know(6) Unauthorised traffic in cannabis where the quantity is —
MISUSE OF DRUGS ACT,(CHAPTER 185)Second Schedule.
(a) not less than 330 grammes and not more than 500 grammes
Penalty--Maximum 30 years or imprisonment for life and 15 strokes
What is wrong if the below 500 g is the correct pure amount?
It seems Mr Ravi missed this section of the Act.
Did they mean Sg fabricated the less amount to let go the German
girl? -
Dr CSJ,you fail in this exam!!
how can u put forward so many unrelated topics in this Summary Judgement?
Chees want to cross-examine Lees on a host of issues
28 Jul 06
1. Why was NKF's IPC reinstated despite misgivings about its operations from many quarters including that of the National Council of Social Services (NCSS)? What transpired between the Ministries of Finance and Health, NCSS and the NKF when this took?
2. Reports on the torture and abuse of ISA detainees and the use of the ISA by the PAP to crush the opposition especially during the 1960s, 70s and 80s.
3. The appointment of Lee & Lee, the law firm owned by Mr Lee Kuan Yew's family members, as one of the few law firms to conduct conveyancing for the HDB and the amount of cases Lee & Lee has handled for HDB.
4. The business dealings between the GIC and Mr Lo Hsing Han, a Burmese drug lord.
5. The failure of the Suzhou Industrial Park project in China and the finances of the project.
6. The pricing of HDB flats vis-Ã -vis the labour and material costs that go into constructing the flats.
Because these matters are in dispute and require evidence to be adduced, summary judgement cannot be the means by which the matter is decided.
.....
Dr Chee shall we dicuss if sg should leave MY?
Give your proper defense on your charges.Not
to be distracted by other irrelevant topics.
This is the way a civilised society to deal with defamation. -
Is there anything wrong with advocating the reform of our political system? One party rule is a detriment to this nation.Originally posted by lionnoisy:CSJ is an revolutioner
2.Just few times and call numberous. -
2.can u show me multiple parties sure can make the lifeOriginally posted by LazerLordz:Is there anything wrong with advocating the reform of our political system? One party rule is a detriment to this nation.
of people better in general?Developed or developing
countries will do.
PAP make sg life improved a lot in the past dew decades.
I am not sure if multiple can achieved this for sg in .
of course the western ivory academic tell u 'sure can'
but look at MY,Indonesia after fall of Suhato,Chen's Taiwan,
Phillippines after Marcos etc.I am more scared of multiple party
ruling.
I am not saying people in all these countries under one party ruling
were very happy.Pl check with them if they prefer
strong man /one party ruling or now merry go round
party ruling. -
CSJ is very irresponsible to ask public go to Supreme Court
tomorrow on 3 Aug.He failed to tell them they are not allowed
go to Chamber 5C,so do CSJ very supportive western media.
CSJ shall withedraw his appeal now.
CSJ now use a new tactics,''I die and they also die'',''If u sue me,sue all of
them also''
he quote so many sources of
similiar statements that,in his eyes, may constitute defamatory.---
30 Jul 06 Chees' case against the Lees: Part I
30 Jul 06 Chees' case against the Lees: Part II5. Discussions commenting on the similarity of the operations of the Government and the NKF in the Internet was rife:
2.An PhD is really an PhD!!so smart!
Publish the salaries of PAP ministers for all to see
http://omekanahuria.blogspot.com/2005/07/publish-salaries-of-pap-ministers-for.html
T T Durai, Defamation Lawsuits, And The PAP Government
http://www.myapplemenu.com/singapore/2005/12/22/
Be Open on HDB Flat Pricing --- Open Letter to PM Lee
http://forums.hardwarezone.com/showthread.php?t=1235459
NKF Saga III: Transparency & Accountability?
http://singaporealternatives.blogspot.com/2005/07/nkf-saga-iii-transparency.html
WhereÂ’s the defamation?
http://singabloodypore.blogspot.com/2006/04/wheres-defamation.html
The Similarities Between Durai's NKF & the PAP
http://www.talkingcock.com/html/viewtopic.php?forum=6&topic=1439
Singapore's Greedy Ministers Compared With Other World Leaders
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sg_Review/message/1826
NKF Scam Places Spotlight On Rediculous Minister Salaries
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sg_Review/message/1811
Understanding Legitmized Corruption - The NKF Scam
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sg_Review/message/1808
The Board Behind The NKF Scam
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sg_Review/message/1802
NKF=PAP=CPF
http://search.blogger.com/?as_q=NKF&ie=UTF-8&ui=blg&bl_url=xenoboysg.blogspot.com&x=61&y=4
3.I think this is the plan of CSJ and supporters :They have not seen looking for
full trial!!
.This latest development comes after both leaders won in their defamation suit against the Singapore Democratic Party on June 7 2006.
The High Court ruled in their favour after the SDP failed to file its defence.
CSJ failed ,i think that did it on purposes,to file their defence.Then,
under the law,PAP leaders of course apply for summary judgement.
Now,when the day of summary judgement approach,they made a
lot of noises.
If court ruled PAP leaders in favours,u can expect CSJ and his westerns
supporters would say PAP leaders win the case without trial!!
But they never tell u they failed ,or did it on purposes,to file
their defence.
31 Jul 06 Why the case must go to trial
4.The problems of CSJ is he does not fight in board day light.
He ,like a child,want to win a game buy not following the rules of the game.
The simple thing like file defence on time.
What is the point citing HK and MY cases and asking for
jury system?This is Singapore lah.
How can he adopt ''u sue me.wHY DUNT U SUE THEM tactics?'' as i mention
above.
Added on 3 Aug WedThe alleged defamatory article “Govt’s Role in the NKF Scandal” is reproduced below for readers to judge for themselves if it makes allegations anywhere close to what the Lees have imputed.----Govt’s Role in the NKF Scandal
This is the essay get Chees into trobule.I do not post it here.
How is the hearing /representation today?
How can the learned CSJ quote so many foreign press and some blog
to defend ?Cant he think ot better reasons to defend?
CSJ chose not to submit their defence.This is the only reason that
leads court giving the summary judgement.
CSJ:dunt blame any one.Blame u ,or may be your lawyaer,not
to submit defence on time.
If u submit defence on time,u most likely get a full trail
and cross exam two Lee.
It is u give up this golden chance.
CSJ is very iresponsible to ask public go to Supreme Court
tomorrow on 3 Aug.He failed to tell them they are not allowed
go to Chamber 5C,so do CSJ very supportive western media.
CSJ shall withedraw his appeal now. -
Go and look up Switzerland, Nordic/Scandinavian nations, Australia etc.. all of which have better living index and more flourishing economy.
If you want to buy into the BS that is government crap from a mouthpiece, too bad for you. -
Thursday August 3, 10:17 PM
Judge disqualifies himself from court case involving Chee siblings
A High Court judge has disqualified himself from a case involving Singapore Democratic Party's Chee Soon Juan and Chee Siok Chin.
The pair had applied to challenge the constitution, on whether summary judgements should be allowed in defamation suits.
The case arose from an application by lawyers for Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew for a summary judgement against the Chees.
This was for alleged defamatory remarks made in the SDP's newsletter.
The Chees then questioned the constitutional premise for such judgements, and applied to disqualify Justice Woo Bih Li from the hearing for alleged bias.
Their lawyer M Ravi said he and Justice Woo had a heated exchange in open court on a separate case.
Justice Woo had later made a complaint against Mr Ravi to the Law Society.
In his grounds of decision, Justice Woo said it is common for the court to criticise or reprimand the counsel.
He assured that the past incident is closed.
However he felt that justice must not only be done but be seen to be done.
That is why he acceded to the request to disqualify himself.
The hearing for a summary judgment against the Chees has been adjourned till another judge has been appointed. - CNA/ir -
As usual, the Lees never fought fair.
They'd pull all kinds of technical tricks fearing exposure. -
pl read our not-yet-migrated-to -Aussie mr Ravi
smartest move----waste everyone time.
he may make the history of Sg Law Soceity for penalised four times
by the Society.Sure not a role model for would be or young
lawyers and even kids in the street.
03 Aug 06 Judge Woo recuses himself from hearing case
Could mr ravi apply earlier to save every one time for
yesterday hearing?
1.when did mr ravi know that Judge Woo would hear this case?
when did mr ravi remember that Judge make a complaint to Law
Society ?
when did chees and /or ravi feel the Judge could have biased
towards ravi and decideapply the Judge disqualify
from this case?
2.Under the precedure,when was the earlies possible time
that ravi can apply to court to disqualify the Judge?
Could he write to court/Judge earlier ?If so,
the Judge then may disqualify himself earlier and
both sides decide another day for hearing?
3.If chees and ravi could do this earlier and they did not
do so,it is a pure waste of time for everyone.
this news report is very good of our learned mr ravi
history and chee case--TODAY 04 aug 2006Loh Chee Kong
[email protected]
In an unusual development, the judge presiding over the defamation suits against Opposition politician Chee Soon Juan and his sister disqualified himself from the case.
.
This followed an application by Mr M Ravi, the lawyer for the Chee siblings, who had claimed that Justice Woo Bih Li may be biased against him.
.
The lawyer and the judge had been involved in a sharp, widely-reported exchange in court some three years back in a completely unrelated case.
.
It came back to cast a shadow over the current one in which the Chee siblings are being sued by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew. They are accused of publishing allegedly defamatory remarks in their party newsletter, The New Democrat. The two People's Action Party (PAP) leaders had applied for a summary judgment, which allows the court to reach a verdict without open trial.
.
Yesterday, Mr Ravi was to challenge the legitimacy of a summary judgment in a defamation suit. After that, Justice Woo was to hear the application made by the PAP leaders.
.
Instead, after about an hour, Principal Senior State Counsel Jeffrey Chan, who was representing the Attorney General's Chambers, emerged from the closed-door session and said that Justice Woo had decided to disqualify himself, to avoid any perception of bias.
.
"It was the first time a judge has disqualified himself in my years of experience," said Mr Chan. He added: "We were quite surprised. I never expected the application to be made. Usually, application for the judge to be disqualified is based on bias against the litigant and not the solicitor."
.
In 2003, Mr Ravi was representing convicted drug trafficker Vignes Mourthi, 22, who had been sentenced to death and had exhausted all avenues of appeal. Despite that, Mr Ravi sought a retrial and insisted on arguing even after the judge explained the case had run its course. He also sat down while the judge was taking notes.
.
"I find your conduct improper and I have to make a complaint to the Law Society," Justice Woo told him then.
.
To that, Mr Ravi had replied: "I have no fears ... I am migrating to Australia next month." Mr Ravi was subsequently fined.
.
Yesterday, he said he had made the application for the judge to recuse himself on behalf of his clients who felt that Justice Woo might be biased against him.
.
But Mr Ravi added: "I was assured by Justice Woo that he would not be biased against me". However, the judge accepted that the public's perception had to be taken into consideration, he said.
.
Said Mr Ravi: "(Due to) the fact that (the exchange) was played out in the media again and again, the judge also felt that it was not healthy in the interest of justice that he continues to hear the matter."
.
The hearing for a summary judgment against the Dr Chee and his sister and fellow Singapore Democratic Party member, Ms Chee Siok Chin, has been adjourned until a new judge is named.
.
Mr Davinder Singh, who was representing the PAP leaders and was present outside the chambers yesterday, left shortly after he was informed of the latest development.
.
Mr Ravi, who has been penalised four times by the Law Society, also told reporters that he has been served a letter of notice on Wednesday to appear before the Court of Three Judges — the legal profession's highest disciplinary body — over his latest disciplinary run-in, in which he was deemed to be disrespectful to a female district judge three years ago. -
CSJ ,quoting news ,implied FEER new requirement arising from his interview.
12 Jul 06 Chee Soon Juan's interview with FEER
2.Sg govt treat FEER as she treats other foreign newspaper:It has notified four publications - the International Herald Tribune, Financial Times, Newsweek and TIME - that the exemption granted to them will be lifted when their current permits expire.
CNA 04 Aug 2006
This means they will then have to appoint a legal representative in Singapore and post a bond of S$200,000.
Has Sg treated all foreign newspaper in equal terms?
If not,say your reasons,not your emotions.
Added 04 Aug 2200 H
3.Since the two men(Senior and Junior Lee) are not willing to take the witness box in Singapore, perhaps they are more amenable to doing it in a Hong Kong court.
Dr Chee,it is u failed to submit defence and u lost a chance
to cross exam them.If u had submitted defence,at least,
there is a chance.U give up the chance.
4.FEER rejects apology demand from Lees.Read
the same link. -
our Dr CSJ critized PAP
population policy.--07 Aug2006 Desperation in trying to increase populationSDP's comment: After nearly half-a-century of uninterrupted PAP rule, this outcome signals an utter and complete failure of the population-control policy.
As i always said,there is one fact but thousand opions.
First in was the Stop-At-Two policy, then came the hare-brained Graduate Mothers Scheme, and now its the the have-more-if-you-can-afford desperate measure coupled with the Foreign Talent Policy.
These policies have wreaked untold hardship on the people (the social impact of the foreign recruitment policy may yet prove disastrous for Singaporeans) and yet there is no way that the population can hold the PAP accountable.
Below:Total fertility rate of Singapore
Words:Births per woman...........................Replacement level(2.1)
25 years
of below replacement fertlity:Implications for Spore
Above: Productions of Spore parents
2.When did PAP call for stop at 2 policy?What were the situation then?
Dunt just critize,do some home works.
we should Assess the then situations,study the then polices,
study the effects etc . and at last ,air your voices
.Dunt do the other way round.Dr Chee.I think u know
how to do research.
3.Spore has been below replacement level for 30 years.
Shall we do somethings?
What options we have?
Dunt just critize.Do home work.Think options carefully.
Weigh them .Make conclusions and recommendations. -
csj is a smart guy who became disillusioned.
-
our learned CSJ said LEE's ignored the common law
.Lee'd saidstate that the decisions in other common law jurisdictions “are decisions borne of the special circumstances in England, Australia and New Zealand and which have no relevance in Singapore.”
2.Even sg is a common law system,Why Sg need follow rulings not
so good?Sg find jury system is a joke then
sg scrap.This is very simple.Sg has not followed some established rulings
and this is not the first time.
3.i dunt keen on ranking.
sg has been ranked so high for so many years.u should take a look and think
if sg is really so bad.
Sg was higher than US and UK etc for so many years.
4..Do some home works lah.?
www.singaporelaw.sg/,
Articles on Spore law,
Legal Topics,
Chapter 1-- The Singapore Legal System
by Eugene Tan
Assistant Professor, Department of Law
Lee Kong Chian School of Business, Singapore Management University
Gary Chan
Assistant Professor, Department of Law
Lee Kong Chian School of Business, Singapore Management UniversityThe Development of an Autochthonous Legal System
5.so Spore do not change the law now just to fix CSJ.
1.2.28 In the 1970s and 1980s, there was an implicit casual comfort with the inherited traditions, practices and laws of England. The drive to create an autochthonous legal system gained increased momentum in the late 1980s and accelerated with the appointment of the current Chief Justice Yong Pung How in September 1990. This coincided with the period of intensive constitutional remaking to develop an autochthonous government and parliamentary system of Singapore. The departure from the Westminster-inspired parliamentary system was evident through the innovations, which attempted to handle the unique political circumstances here....
1.2.31 11 July 1994: The landmark Practice Statement on Judicial Precedent declared that the Privy Council, Singapore’s predecessor courts, as well as the Court of Appeal’s prior decisions no longer bound the permanent Court of Appeal. The Practice Statement reasoned that ‘[t]he development of our law should reflect these changes [that political, social and economic circumstances have changed enormously since Singapore’s independence] and the fundamental values of Singapore society’. Increasing confidence in the growing maturity and international standing of Singapore’s legal system as well as the concern that Britain’s increasing links with the European Union would render English law incompatible with local developments and aspirations gave impetus to the legal autochthony effort....
SECTION 3 COMMON LAW IN SINGAPORE
The Doctrine of Judicial Precedent
1.3.2 In essence, the common law system of Singapore is characterised by the doctrine of judicial precedent (or stare decisis). According to this doctrine, the body of law is created incrementally by judges via the application of legal principles to the facts of particular cases. In this regard, the judges are only required to apply the ratio decidendi (or the operative reason for the decision) of the higher court within the same hierarchy. Thus, in Singapore, the ratio decidendi found in the decisions of the Singapore Court of Appeal are strictly binding on the Singapore High Court, the District Court and the MagistrateÂ’s Court.
The court decisions from England and other Commonwealth jurisdictions are, on the other hand, not strictly binding on Singapore. Other judicial statements (obiter dicta) made by the higher court in the judgment which do not directly affect the outcome of the case may be disregarded by the lower court.
1.3.6 Two recent examples shall suffice at this juncture as a manifestation of SingaporeÂ’s desire to develop an autochthonous legal system and body of laws. In the law of torts, the Singapore courts have consciously deviated from the exclusionary rule in the English case of Murphy v Brentford District Council (1991) so as to allow recovery for pure economic losses arising from negligent acts or omissions based on Anns v Merton (197 8 ) . More recently, in the law of contract, the Singapore Court of Appeal in Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd (2005) has chosen not to adopt the position in the English Court of Appeal decision in Great Peace Shipping Ltd v Tsavliris Salvage (International) Ltd (2002) on equityÂ’s jurisdiction in the case of unilateral mistake. This need for the autochthony of Singapore law is further driven by the European Union legal developments and their impact on the British system.
Sg has deviated for long time from common law,scrap jury system,
not follow case law so blindly etc.There are few famous cases deviated
from common laws.Pl share here.
CSJ should not look himself so high that sg need to change
the rules of game to fix him.
search'' common law cases + singapore''
6.i would be sad and suprised if qualified lawyer wrote
the article in SDP site.a first year law student should
know sg law has deviated from common law for some time.
But judging form the format of the article,it seems it
was written by a' learned' lawyer.
7.Why Sg was higher than US and UK etc for so many years.