Connect with us

Civil Society

UIA-IROL stresses Singapore Law Society’s duty to support legal professionals in M Ravi Case

International lawyers group UIA-IROL voiced grave concerns over Mr Ravi’s “disproportionate and unfair” 21-day imprisonment in a letter to LawSoc on Monday.

UIA-IROL urged LawSoc to ensure Mr Ravi’s access to chosen legal representation and advocated for mental health support due to his acknowledged illness.

Mr Ravi was recently released from imprisonment on Wednesday (22 Nov).

Published

on

SINGAPORE: The Union Internationale des Avocats (UIA-IROL) has addressed a letter to the Law Society of Singapore (LawSoc) expressing profound concern regarding the recent imprisonment of prominent Singaporean human rights lawyer Mr Ravi Madasamy (M. Ravi) for 21 days without legal representation during the proceedings.

In a letter penned to LawSoc on Monday (20 Nov), Martin Pradel and Avninder Singh, both Director General and Deputy Director General of UIA-IROL, emphasized the imperative need for LawSoc to ensure Mr Ravi receives legal representation of his choice.

They urged LawSoc to provide this at no cost if he is unable to afford it, along with mental health counseling for his illness, as acknowledged by the court.

Mr Ravi has been an international human rights lawyer in Singapore for over 20 years, representing numerous landmark human rights and constitutional law cases, including death penalty cases.

The UIA, established in 1927, is a global, multicultural organization for the legal profession that promotes professional development, learning, networking, and the Rule of Law. It represents two million lawyers from 110 countries.

In the letter, both Mr Pradel and Mr Singh urged LawSoc for urgent consideration of the need for protection for Mr Ravi, who has recently been sentenced to 21 days of imprisonment, as well as costs of S$10,000.

Mr Ravi was recently released from imprisonment on Wednesday (22 Nov).

UIA-IROL highlighted that during the proceeding, Mr Ravi was “unrepresented by counsel, and it seems that the LawSoc did not provide counsel for his defence.”

The Institute for the Rule of Law of the UIA-IROL has diligently monitored the case of M. Ravi who faced repressive actions since March 2023.

At that time, the UIA-IROL issued a statement, expressing grave concern over the severe disciplinary sanctions imposed on Mr Ravi due to the fulfilment of his professional duties and exercise of freedom of expression.

“It is distressing that Mr Ravi’s defence is a mental health issue, no doubt exacerbated by the continuing sanctions and disciplinary proceedings against him, ” added the letter from UIA-IROL.

UIA-IROL reminded LawSoc of its primary duty: “Representing, protecting and assisting members of the legal profession in Singapore” […] “The mission of the Law Society is to serve its members and the public by sustaining an independent bar which upholds the rule of law and ensures access to justice”.”

UIA-IROL said a jail sentence seems “disproportionate and unfair” based on the facts at issue and on Mr Ravi’s health condition, which should at least constitute a mitigating factor.

“We hope as an immediate remedial measure, Mr Ravi is provided counsel of his choice, at no cost if he cannot afford one, and mental health counseling for his illness, which has been recognized by the court.”

“We respectfully request that you consider Mr Ravi’s case, and we seek your urgent intervention in this case.”

UIA-IROL also seeks a meeting to discuss strategies ensuring compliance with the principles outlined in the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers (Havana Principles 1990).

UIA-IROL strongly denounces suspension of Mr Ravi in May

In May 2023, UIA-IROL issued another strongly-worded statement condemning the five-year suspension of Mr Ravi by the Singapore Supreme Court.

The decision followed Mr Ravi’s public criticism of the prosecution and the Law Society of Singapore in the context of representing a client facing a death sentence for drug-related offences.

UIA-IROL believes these repressive measures constitute a grave violation of the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers and the freedom of expression in matters concerning the law, the administration of justice, and the protection of human rights.

According to the UIA-IROL statement, “We believe that M. Ravi was erroneously held to having ‘recklessly and baselessly undermin[ed] the very pillars of the legal system in which he (as well as his fellow practitioners) operates’. Indeed, M. Ravi only expressed a personal opinion in the press about the procedure and the outcome of a trial he had been involved in.”

UIA-IROL strongly disagrees with the court’s characterization of Mr Ravi as a “continuing danger” to the public’s confidence in the Singaporean judicial system.

The statement emphasizes, “In fact, it is the court’s decision that undermines the rule of law in Singapore, for which the independence of the legal profession is essential.”

The statement also expresses deep concern over the chilling effect of misconceived disciplinary proceedings, resulting in lawyers being unwilling to represent death row convicts. UIA-IROL notes several cases where persons facing imminent execution appeared unrepresented.

UIA-IROL urges the Law Society of Singapore to review its practice of initiating disciplinary proceedings against lawyers for their role as lawyers, which includes the freedom of expression in representation of a case, and calls for a moratorium on all disciplinary proceedings pending such a review.

M Ravi received 21 days imprisonment amidst recognition for advocacy

On 8 November, Mr Ravi was sentenced to three weeks’ imprisonment by the Singaporean courts.

Ravi contended with two charges of contempt of court, where the presiding judge, Justice Hoo Sheau Peng affirmed that the custodial threshold was surpassed.

The ruling also mandates Ravi to pay the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) S$10,000 for legal expenses.

AGC had sought S$12,000 in legal costs, excluding disbursements of over S$6,000.

His charges are rooted in his behaviour during two distinct court cases in November 2021. He first represented Chua Qwong Meng, a former bus driver suing SBS Transit for purportedly unfair work practices. The second case involved Magendran Muniandy, a 33-year-old Malaysian, charged with the forgery of various documents.

The Attorney-General’s Chambers charged Ravi with several offences, including baseless accusations of bias against judges, persistent disruptions during court sessions, and misrepresentation of his availability for proceedings, culminating in Justice Hoo’s ruling of contempt in March.

In spite of these legal challenges, Ravi’s contributions to human rights have not been overlooked. Earlier this month, he was lauded with the 2023 IBA Award for Outstanding Contribution to Human Rights by the International Bar Association.

This prestigious recognition celebrates his advocacy for the underprivileged, with emphasis on representing death row inmates and advancing LGBTQI rights.

Share this post via:
Continue Reading
10 Comments
Subscribe
Notify of
10 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

He has a medical problem. Why send him to prison and not to the hospital for 21 days? Seems like the civil service is serving the agenda of the PAP.

Ravi was right but the Court dismissed the case but now , “pliant,” should be used?

He has offended the PAP and put under Singapore PAP government Ministers blacklisted and become Singapore PAP government Ministers most hatred

His illness is caused by the police from Singapore Police Force who keep on harassing him day and night and using all sorts of psychological torture which drive him to crazy especially during his imprisonment

comment image

Law Society? Huh?
Or a PAP Administration legal society?
How about to Sheegaporeans, an illegal society – earning tons and tons of money, but no bite to assist lay citizens?
Singaporeans certainly knows best what this Law Society is, make no mistake.

Then use my Family as their hostages, Shield against ppl accusation and scapegoats Incase of hit back!!! These are the kind of Leaders at Helm Now!!!

What kind of leadership is that?!? Can’t stand on their own, need to drag ppl as shield and hostage. No difference form Israel and Hamas … Same as the team B they created!

Trending

Discover more from Gutzy Asia

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue Reading