The UIA-IROL is outraged by the repressive measures recently taken against prominent Singapore attorney M. Ravi Madasamy (M Ravi) in a decision handed down by the Singapore Supreme Court, in an appeal filed by the Law Society of Singapore seemingly because of this representation of clients accused of capital crimes, including death sentences handed down for narcotics crimes.
The decision follows M. Ravi’s public criticism of the prosecution and the Law Society of Singapore, in the context of the representation of a client facing a death sentence for drug-related offenses.
M Ravi has been an international human rights lawyer in Singapore for over 20 years, and has spent years representing landmark human rights and constitutional law cases, including death penalty cases.
In its decision dated March 21, 2023, the Court of Three Judges of the Court of Appeal of Singapore imposed a five years’ suspension to M. Ravi, the maximum possible sanction for lawyers, and ordered him to bear the Law Society’s costs for their prosecution of an appeal against him.
These repressive measures constitute a grave violation of the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers and one of the most fundamental principles of the Rule of Law: the freedom of expression especially in matters concerning the law, the administration of justice and the protection of human rights.
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, when stating in 2020 notably that the Public Prosecutor had been “overzealous in his prosecution” against his client, that the “fairness of the administration of justice” by the prosecution was to be called into question, and when asking the State, the Prosecution, and the Minister of Law to apologise to his client.
These repressive measures constitute a grave violation of the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers (Havana 1990) and one of the most fundamental principles of the Rule of Law: the freedom of expression especially in matters concerning the law, the administration of justice and the protection of human rights.
The Law Society of Singapore challenged the decision of its own disciplinary committee to the Supreme Court of Singapore against, inter alia, statements by M. Ravi that the role of the Law Society of Singapore was to protect lawyers rather than prosecute them for doing their job.
The UIA-IROL wishes to remind the Law Society of Singapore of its primary duties, which are explicitly mentioned on its website: “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”.
Related:
