Choo Zheng Xi -
Alan Shadrake’s book “Once a Jolly Hangman” makes for uncomfortable reading. One case in particular might have made those in power uncomfortable enough to arrest Mr Shadrake on the rarely used draconian charge of criminal defamation.
A defamation action is usually instituted in civil proceedings by a person or an institution that believes its reputation has been harmed by a statement of the defendant. Even Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew used a civil defamation action in pursuing his detractors in the international press and local opposition.
Criminal defamation brings the resources of the State to bear in what is essentially a question of protecting personal reputations.
In 2009, the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) intervened to discontinue proceedings in a criminal defamation action on the grounds that “the law of criminal defamation is not to be resorted to lightly”. The AGC noted that in a civil action, the possibility that costs may be awarded against an unsuccessful plaintiff acts as a natural barrier to frivolous action. There is no such safeguard in criminal defamation.
The United Kingdom abolished criminal defamation in July 2009.
So what agitated the authorities enough to arrest Alan Shadrake for criminal defamation, amongst other charges?
The Vignes Mourthi case?
One possible contender is his characterization of the trial and execution of Vignes Mourthi as “arguably one of the most appalling miscarriages of justice in Singapore’s history”.
Vignes Mourthi was arrested on 20 September 2001 and convicted of trafficking 27.65 grams of heroin.
Mourthi’s conviction rested largely on the strength of evidence of the officer who arrested him, Sgt S Rajkumar, a senior officer of the Central Narcotics Bureau. Sgt Rajkumar was a key witness in the prosecution’s case, and Mourthi’s defense was that an incriminating piece of evidence collected by Rajkumar had been added at a much later date.
Shadrake reveals that just three days after Mourthi’s arrest, on 23 September 2001, Sgt. Rajkumar was himself arrested for allegedly handcuffing, raping and sodomizing a young woman and for subsequently bribing her to keep silent.
In the judgment convicting Rajkumar of bribery, Judge Sia Ai Kor described his actions as “so obviously corrupt by the ordinary and objective standard that he must know his conduct is corrupt”.
Shadrake points out how the ongoing case against Rajkumar was never revealed to Mourthi’s defense lawyer, and surmises that the prosecutor and other parties must have known about Rajkumar’s case but chose to keep silent.
In his book, Shadrake characterizes Mourthi’s case as groundbreaking enough to resemble the “catastrophic failures of the justice system in Britain” that contributed to the death penalty being abolished there.
If Shadrake is right, then the authorities could very well be stepping up to the criminal defamation plate to contest his version of events.
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
hhhmmm… since it is MDA that made the police report, maybe they initiated the “other charges” — i take this to be promoting book without licence?
Dear TOC,
Where can we purchase this book? I would very much like to know and I do believe that members of the public are interested too. :)
Good article!
I think the clampdown on Vincent Cheng, Lim Hock Siew and Alan Shadrake are engineered in view of the Games in Sept. and the possibility of a general election. I surfed in the internet and found that Singapore’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR) will be before the Human Rights Council in May 2011. The clampdown serves to warn Singaporeans of the futility of questioning PAP and its policies at home and abroad. It does not want a tainted image.
http://www.gerakbudaya.com/products-page/sird-titles/once-a-jolly-hangman-singapore-justice-in-the-dock/
Atrocious!!!
What else can be expected from a Government run by a Pro Alien Party but to further suppress information on a suppressed citizenry ?
Is it not typical that they keep Singaporeans ignorant of all issues and events so as to maintain their grip on power ?
Still the MM can find it fitting to pass caustic snide remarks about Singaporeans being ignorant even as he claim that the Taiwanese are ruthless, and Hongkongers are shameless ?
Now we see the hands of a ruthless, shameless Government acting in ignorant fashion to the rules of law, and being the law to suit itself.
http://www.upr-info.org/-Session-11-2011-.html
UPR Singapore Info
it could the last straw that breaks the camel’s back.
London will buzzing today morning.
Lets see where they are trying to go with this one.
Lets see tactics within the system prevail or justice.
Maybe after the next General Election, there will be a chance to write a book titled Once some jolly PAPmen (now no longer jolly).
Can someone inform Alan Shandrake’s that he can now start writing another book about Malaysia’s death penalty?
Where’s M Ravi too? Perhaps he can help these 3 death convicts?
==================================
Jul 19, 2010
M’sia to hang 3 Indonesians
KUALA LUMPUR – A LAWYER says a Malaysian court has sentenced three Indonesians to hang for drug trafficking.
Lawyer Rafidi Mohamad says a High Court in northern Kedah state has found his clients guilty of trafficking more than 1.8kg of cannabis.
Police found two slabs of marijuana inside a plastic bag in a car the men were driving five years ago.
Mr Rafidi says the men, aged 31, 33 and 42, were sentenced Sunday.
He said on Monday he would appeal the sentences.
A drug trafficking conviction carries the mandatory death penalty in Malaysia. — AP
The law applies to everyone. Hope he does not think that he can get away with it just because he is a foreigner.
It is embarrassing when a 70+ man can be arrested and in my view, intimidated for saying what needs to be said. Sad again that a foreigner is being arrested for something that Singaporeans ought to be standing up against.
The law is simple. Demonstrating that any offending words or phrases are true is sufficient to defend against the defamation.
There is a difference is it is an offending opinion. Then one cannot use the defence of truth.
The problem is the low (and lower) tolerance of negative opinions esp wrt the judiciary. The govt has already drawn the line more than once regarding negative and unsubstantiated comments on the judiciary.
I guess NLB will now not be making available their purchased copies…
I hope the British Community and others will come together and boycott the YOG. This dictatorial country does not deserve to hold any world event.
Our country’s reputation is so tarnished that I am ashamed to call myself a Singaporean. Can someone give me a face mask?
If Alan Shadrake is so sure of what he had written in his book, and he had evidence to support his claims, then going to court is indeed a strategic move for him to show that world what Singapore’s law is really about. Note that anything that goes to court will be publish openly for all to see, and Singapore government cannot hide anything now that it is going to court.
But on the other hand, if he cannot prove or substantiate his claims with clear evidences, and had rely on hearsays, personal biasness or fabricated lies to sensationalize his book, then we should prosecute him all the way, and ensure that he pays for his highly malicious intent!
So, Alan should not be afraid to go to the court, and we should reserve judgement and follow the court proceedings!
Boycott The Yog 19 July 2010 I hope the British Community and others will come together and boycott the YOG. This dictatorial country does not deserve to hold any world event
……………………
happenned before when i was in britain..
cannot remembered what was the outburst
tit-4-tat thinnggie
He don’t stand a chance here against the court which brings the charges against him. The British government should bring this case to the international court, to see a fair proceedings.
I don’t understand what’s the big fuzz here?
I meant, wouldn’t it be good for Alan to prove the issues and controversies he had raised in his books, produce proofs to dispute Singapore government in court, and bring the whole issue into the open for everyone to know that what he claims in his books are the truth and nothing but the truth.
Of course, on the other hand, he will also have to bear the consequences if he was simply sensationalizing his stories with personal perceptions and bisasness, hearsays or unverifiable rumours (in which case, the Singapore government has every right to prosecute him for his malicious intent).
There’s nothing to hide for both parties now that it is going to the court, and I personally think it is good for both Alan and the Singapore government!
Al Jazeera reports that Spore auth. says that the book is not banned. So why is MDA policing the sale of the book in Singapore? Confusion among PAP ministers and minions? Pray tell what is the official version to MDA’s attack on the book sales?
Saw the books on sale in JB.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gnemsty/4802407802/
Alan Shadrake will be treated by PAP like how they treat JBJ
Chow Ah Beng and Simon sound like members of the PAP internet brigade. Their comments reek of the typical PAP rhetoric – that foreigners cannot expect to get special treatment under our laws, that truth will be revealed in Singapore’s courts, etc.
I tell u Sporean are Frogs in the well. Mosy of them are sick, Especially the pap Mins n Mps. . It is an established facts that justice had not been done in the court, JBJ said it when he was alive that the judges Under the Thumb.Do u noe they take an oath when taking over an official posts, All of The min. the mps Uniform services. N did they folow that. They only think they are paid by the tops, not public money. I pray retributions will come to them, It is long overdue. A judgement should be based on the truths first. It Is high time Some one Points out the facts n see the truth. Not only this they are apply the laws at theis wims n wishes. Someone in the dept Gov. that the opposition are trying the pillars of justics down once. Everyone noes who does it, only nobody got the guts to see The truth, fairness, justice n righteous reign. Tell u sick people out there, better be God- fearing, dont think communnism will reigned. Retributions is very near.
Well there we go – the Beep has posted the story 5 hours ago. Its actually on the website’s news front page under the Asia-Pacific section, and it’s on the news bulletin this afternoon on the World Service. All I’m going to say here is that that’s probably more and better coverage than this story will ever get here in Singapore
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-10680143
Hey man, are they the Media Development
Authority or the Media Stifling Authority?
Find out where to buy Alan Shadrake’s Once a Jolly hangman: Singapore Justice in the Dock
http://sgdeathpenalty.blogspot.com/2010/07/where-to-buy-alan-shadrakes-once-jolly.html
See Gui Kia…
Or Murder Development Authority ?!?
Hi “Justin” who might be the same as “Jeremy” before in another article.
M Ravi campaigns for death penalty cases in Singapore because he is a Singaporean lawyer operating in Singapore. Why not you lobby Malaysian lawyers operating in Malaysia to save the 3 accused if you care so much?
And Alan wrote a book about Singapore’s death penalty because Singapore has the highest rate of executions per capita in the world. Why don’t you encourage Malaysia to increase their rate of hanging to beat Singapore as No.1, then ask Alan to write a book on it?
Singapore justice system ?
Read the trials and tribulations of Tan Wah Piow – President of the University of Singapore Students’ Union [USSU] in 1974.
Tan was charged for rioting in the premises of the Pioneer Industries Employees’ Union [PIEU].
During the trial, his attempts to produce evidences to refute the charges were consistently obstructed by a judge – who was seen to be clearly partisan – as the Secretary General of the PIEU was none other then Phey Yew Kok, a MP from the Pro Alien Party and seen as a rising star.
Phey was later charged for dishonesty and corruption when the PIEU built the Big Splash at the East Coast.
.
.
Public Prosecutor vs Tan Wah Piow
http://www.zoominfo.com/people/Piow_Tan_255659528.aspx
The Price of Truth
http://swordofdemocles.blogspot.com/2005/07/price-of-truth.html
Open Letter from USSU to all members – 1974
http://mms.elibraryhub.com/SHC/Donors‘%20Collection/06003_1975003m.pdf
{*need to copy and paste to access the contents}
The Politics of Judicial Institutions in Singapore
http://www.singapore-window.org/1028judi.htm
Interview with Tan Wah Piow
http://www.littlespeck.com/informed/2006/CInformed-060827.htm
Background
http://dummipedia.org/Tan_Wah_Piow
Online Citizen on Tan Wah Piow
http://theonlinecitizen.com/tag/tan-wah-piow/
Phey Yew Kok – A Real Rogue’s Gallery
http://swordofdemocles.blogspot.com/2005/09/real-rogues-gallery.html
The BBC reports on this topic and on Martyn See……
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-10680143
Stupid of authorities to rise to the bait.
Ignoring him would have been best for them.
The government’s statement is ambiguous as usual. But it’s odd because if they are so hung up about the use of death penalty and its critics, they would have handcuffed everyone here in TOC that supported the anti-death penalty campaign, but they did not. It’s not really about death penalty, but I’m sensing (a) criticizing our judiciary system (which the government is always hung up on defending since it’s rated among the tops – according to them) and (b) when a ang-moh criticize it.
This is also an anti-thesis of Shadrake who claims that the government do not dare to touch people with high connection. Let’s see whether they dare to whack a subject of our ex-colonial master.
Cool, see show.
The BBC that the GOS claimed that it has a right to get “Jolly Hangman” off the shelves. The GOS is a law unto itself. Under speech rights 101, the book should not have been banned in the first place. The book offers an explanation of the justice system on the death penalty which is garnered from interviews and the author’s research. It is called fair comment. It is not defamation. But GOS can always pass any law it likes because there is no real system of checks and balances under the PAP govt under the Lees. As far as speech principles are concerned , this latest persecution of an author is an abuse of process. Just because the law says you can, it does not make it right. The GOS is not embarrassed by its own arrogance, but as a citizen I am.
It has come pretty clear and apparent that anyone who tries to reveal any truth or make the general public ‘see’ what really is going on, will be punished severely.
As quoted from the BBC website,
“If they do anything, it’ll just draw more attention to it all, and they have no defence,”.. i think he’s right. its probably time for the world to see that the nation is probably not what it is so proud of.
Amnesty International weighs in…
http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/singapore-must-release-british-author-death-penalty-book-2010-07-19
It’s a pity that the defence of qualified privilege which protects political based statements or the defence of honest opinion don’t seem to apply under Singapore law.
What’s even worse, if its true, is that even the truth is no defence to an “offensive” assertion.
Clearly civil liberties isn’t high on the PAP’s manifesto.
I hope that the people of Singapore will vote them out of power though I’m doubtful considering the gerrymandering of the electorates and the fact that the electoral commission is not independent of the government in Singapore.
Your country needs true democracy and some basic civil liberties urgently.
At the moment it seems that the tail (the Government) is wagging the dog (the People of Singapore).
Geez, they arrested Alan Shadrake for real just for publishing facts & information the local gov doesn’t want the world to know. Is telling the truth a crime? Well then, Sg better change its textbooks to quote “dishonesty is a virtue”
Even if a book is not 100% factually correct, there’s no grounds at all to arrest the author. Else, authors who wrote books like “how to be a millionaire quick” or “How PAP Improved Lives of Singaporeans” should be arrested for fabricating lies.
All of you who are so keen to condemn the governement, please has anyone of you read the book? We see wirds liek ‘facts’ and ‘information’ liberally assumed in the responses above. Really? You think the MDA will pursue an action based on ‘facts’ and ‘information’ and be made a laughing stock. The MDA had one month to review its contents since the launch of the book in KL. Defamation is one legal instrument we condemn when the government uses it but when it is you, pugdragon, who is being defamed you would be glad of its protection and legal action it affords you.
What strict laws on defamation in Singapore have done is to keep politics and politicking relatively clean.As a result more honourable men get into Parliament, both government and opposition. This has raised the level of politics and is a major factor in Sinagpore’s progress. Compare the dirt that passes for ‘information’ in Malaysia and sadly,sometimes in Singapore too.
So it’s good to have a tough defamation law in general. As for the particular case, let’s not jump to conclusion.
His battle with the police is over as he has been released. His real battle is the legal one when he faces the courts.
Anyway, you all remember Harry Nicolaides? Just google and you will remember. He was sentenced to be jailed for 3 years in hailand for authoring abook that insulted the Thai king.
“I’ve been awake almost the entire time since they dragged me out of bed at 6am Sunday morning. I’ve had a few hours sleep on a very hard floor. I’ve been sitting at a desk being interrogated all day long explaining all the chapters of the book, going into the history of the book, my research, why I did the book.”
6AM on Sunday morning. So the Singapore powers that be are up to their usual tricks. They haven’t changed since the ’60s it would seem.
It is a criminal defamatory suit as he allegedly insulted the legal apparatus of the state. Such words damage public opinion and is in the interest of the courts to defend.
Since it is criminal, the police have to arrest.
This is my country, this is my wish!Shadrake thinks his pen is mightier than our courts?Ha Ha !If we can Bo Hiu whatever that indian policeman did to Vignes Mourthy,we can also easily put this Shadrake fellow away for good.
After all the lawsuits, Shadrake will wish it is easier to request for one more hanging a favour from Darshan Singh
Read the article, guys. This is not about the death penalty anymore. It is about a challenge on the integrity of the Singapore courts.
Welcome to Singapore, Alan.
“Shadrake, who has written articles for London’s Daily Telegraph and other newspapers, told AFP after the book’s Singapore launch on Saturday that he had expected trouble, but felt that the authorities were not going to take action.”
If Shadrake knew the authorities were going to take action, why did he enter Singapore? Bad advice from someone or he wanted to create a spectacle?
“It is a criminal defamatory suit as he allegedly insulted the legal apparatus of the state. Such words damage public opinion and is in the interest of the courts to defend.”
Nice fact distortion and propaganda there.
1) I think you’ll find he criticized the impartiality of the legal apparatus of the state which is in actually in the public interest.
2)There is no such thing as damaging public opinion. His book may in fact change public opinion but surely there is no cause to not allow people the freedom to make their own minds up?
Are citizens like children? Why does the Singapore justice system need to protect the sensibilities of adult citizens who can decide if he has facts to back up his claims?
“It is a criminal defamatory suit as he allegedly insulted the legal apparatus of the state. Such words damage public opinion and is in the interest of the courts to defend.”
Nice fact distortion and propaganda there.
1) I think you’ll find he criticized the impartiality of the legal apparatus of the state which is actually in the public interest.
2)There is no such thing as damaging public opinion. His book may in fact change public opinion but surely there is no cause to not allow people the freedom to make their own minds up?
Are citizens like children? Why does the Singapore justice system need to protect the sensibilities of adult citizens who can decide if he has facts to back up his claims?
@Conflicted
What part of “… but felt that the authorities were NOT going to take action.” didn’t you understand?
I seriously doubt he didnt suspect he will be arrested.. Gopolan Nair would be a recent example.
This chap is daring, criticising us fom head to toe. Didn’t know we’re so corrupted. How did I miss all the criminal activities, racial/political riots, bribery, gang fights, drug trafficking…? Well, may be becos I’m not an ang mo who straddles between Malaysia & Britain, & who can pronouce what is right and what is wrong. I only live here. S’pore govt, our reputation at stake, if his writings are fraud, pl put him where he belong!
“Criminal defamation brings the resources of the State to bear in what is essentially a question of protecting personal reputations.”
This means that they are using PUBLIC resources i.e. your and my tax money!!! And basically saying they are proceeding with the case in our name.