Report by Susan Loone – Malaysiakini -
Yong Vui Kong, a Malaysian national currently on death row in Singapore, may finally be getting a shot at keeping his appeal alive, as Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Nazri Aziz and our Ministry of Foreign Affairs have reportedly agreed to a meeting with his lawyer.
M Ravi (left), a human rights lawyer representing Yong on a pro-bono basis, said the government has requested to meet him when he visits Kuala Lumpur next week, between June 25 and 29.
“They have requested that I write a formal letter to them, which I have just forwarded to the media. I will keep you informed of the developments,” said Ravi, in an SMS to Malaysiakini yesterday evening.
Ravi says the Singapore Malaysian High Commission’s second secretary Rohani Hussain conveyed the request.
Ravi met with Rohani and Juraida Abd Jamil, the other second secretary from the Consular’s officer, for about an hour in Hotel Hilton this morning to discuss Yong’s case.
Rohani visited Yong, who was caught trafficking 47g of heroin into the island city in 2007, in Changi prison yesterday following media reports seeking Malaysia’s intervention in the case
Duty to protect citizens
At the same time, Ravi said he is exploring with Malaysian lawyers to file an application in court for mandatory injunction to compel the Malaysian government to file a complaint in the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
“This would be done if (Malaysia) fails in its duty to exercise its right to this vital legal remedy, which is available to our client via the ICJ,” he said.
“We note with regret the de facto law minister of Malaysia’s (Nazri) response, that the case was an internal matter. His remark was of grave concern to us, our client as well as the legal community and civil society in Malaysia,” he added.
“It is the duty of the Malaysian government to protect the rights of its nationals,” he stressed.
Ravi, in his letter to the High Commissioner, explained that Yong was making a clemency petition to the Singapore cabinet and President SR Nathan.
S’pore minister prejudiced case
His recourse for remedy was unfortunately pre-empted when Singapore Law Minister K Shanmugam made a remark about the latter’s case even before he could file the clemency, said Ravi.
Ravi added that Shanmugam’s remark has prejudiced Yong’s relief to the clemency process.
“In our view, as well as based on the opinion of legal experts in London, this is a serious breach of due process. We would urge the Malaysian government to file a complaint at the ICJ on behalf of its national facing imminent death arising out of the breach of local and international laws by Singapore,” he said.
“In view of the denial of the clemency process, the only option available to the Singapore government is to commute Yong’s death sentence, which is the same remedy that can be sought by the Malaysian government at the ICJ”.
On May 9, Shanmugam said publicly that “Yong Vui Kong is young, but if we say, we let you go, what is the signal we are sending?”
The island’s legal experts said that these comment had potentially prejudiced an appeal before it had been decided in court, making Nathan’s rejection of Yong’s clemency appeal both “illegal and flawed”.
The International Court of Justice should also looked into all the abuses of the Singapore Government when exercising political powers.
It is pathetic that this Singapore Government will seek the protection as a United Nations member, but will abrogate its responsibilities as a signatory to all the UN Conventions as a recognised member.
In the first place, Singapore DOES NOT practice international laws. It practices its own brand of Singapore ++ laws. Very clear.
Look at Myanmar & NKorea, a retard will know these countries violate basic human rights to the core yet nothing is done because all outside member countries are ball-less. All members of NATO-No Action Talk Only.
It seems to be that the lawyer is trying to wriggle his client out of his death sentence based on a statement made by the Law Minister taken out of its full context based on the _possibilities_ of biasness. The argument seems to be that it doesn’t matter whether there is really biasness in either the judge or anyone in the cabinet. Because there is a possibility of biasness, the client get a free out of jail card without the need to prove that biasness actually take place or not.
It is easy to argue the case for Yong because his crime is drug trafficking. How would everyone think of this case if the client in question is a mass murder and rapist caught on video? If the Law Minister makes the same statement, will so many people be willing to come out and argue that the client should not be on the receiving end of the death sentence because of what the Law Minister said?
ToC seems particularly interested in championing the case of this Malaysian on Singapore death row.
I hope to see ToC report on Singaporeans on death row in other countries and what the Singapore Government is doing (or not doing) anything about it.
This is not the only case of abuse. There are many more, especially when they involve members of the opposition. It’s about time the ICJ take a serious look at these abuses and demand that compensation be paid to the abused parties.
Compensation to JBJ can be given to charity while those still living should be cleared of their bankruptcy as well. Mr. francis Seow and Mr Tang Lian Hong should be allowed to return and be appropriately compensated.
The numerous ex detainees also deserve to be compensated and have their names cleared and the trumped up accusations be reversed.
The PAP must be reminded that nobody lives forever. This includes their MM. The angel of dearth will definitely come to visit. You either admit your sins now or you pay for it in the next world. Ignore this at you own peril. God never forgets.
For those who don’t believe in the existence of God should know about karma. There is no escape. If you have commited a serious sin and injustice against your fellow being you or children will have to answer for it someday, some how.
Its unfortunate really that whilst Ravi makes a specific case about a specific issue which I will disagree with, the reporting and commentary by the writer is not accurate and not reflective of the actual position
The writer has confused Yong’s first Clemency Appeal to the President which failed, his subsequent attempt at the Legal Court of Appeal which Ravi argued , the comments by the Minister on the Court of Appeal when it was ongoingl and his final second and on going appeal to the President which has yet to be filed
“On May 9, Shanmugam said publicly that “Yong Vui Kong is young, but if we say, we let you go, what is the signal we are sending?”
The island’s legal experts said that these comment had potentially prejudiced an appeal before it had been decided in court, making Nathan’s rejection of Yong’s clemency appeal both “illegal and flawed”. ”
Locke
If you happen to be reading this Mr MM, you aught to know that your time is almost up. Better make the best of it. Don’t wait until its too late. REPENT!
Seek forgiveness fromm all those you have sinned against. Many of them are still living.
Kudos to Mr.Ravi for his actions.Could he be the Mr.David Marshall of our generation.?
Anti-PAP is not Anti-Singapore! Inviting another gov to interfere in Singapore’s internal affair amount to Anti-Singapore. And that is unacceptable!
Suggest that if readers want the ICJ and other UN offices to look at the 10018 cases of whatever that the PAP govt has not done or in breach of–that they do something about it.
Ravi went out on a limb for his client although some may still complain that its to gain popularity.. But will you put yourself in his shoes? Guess not.
Do you know what kind of flack he has faced from members of his own profession? Some lawyers think that he is not one of “us”. They gave him the stiff upper lip from day one he started working on death penalty cases. Ravi plodded on nevertheless. If you google you can track some information to show the personal obstacles Ravi has to surmount. Anybody interested can read that info and find out.
Cheers for the Malaysian Bar who highlighted this case in Malaysia-enough to move public displeasure at their govt’s oblivion.
I salute Ravi for his courage and commitment to seek judgement with discretionary compassion. People who insists on robotic executions deserve the death penalty themselves.
Good Luck Ravi and God be with both you and Vui Kong.
whateven happen it happen already thing
cannot bring back the mistake.law also
can change by people. I belived this guy
inside the jail has get a lesson.let us
ware his shoe and feel if you are the one
ask your self are u the god.every body
perfact no problem.
God bless Ravi, Vui Kong, all here, and all those who cares and has shown concern in one way or another. Death by hanging for Drugs is not the way.The drug barons and some nations top men are involved.I will make this short and straight to the point. It is all money. As the saying goes ” forbidden fruit taste sweeter”. Why give these Barons and “Inside Men” to make this happen. Laws in certain EU countries has done it. Legalise and have centres for drug users. When this happens these SHIT Barons and “Inside Men” will loose out and there will be no need of trafficking and smuggling and killing by Hanging. As for the social disease, there are programmes and treatmens to handle it.The point is Poppy and Coca can never be destroyed. Their medical use is very important so what are we talking about hanging when the root cause is always there.Open up and have a motion to debate