Powerpoint Slides on "Cause Lawyering in Singapore" by M. Ravi. Lists some landmark rulings in Singapore, on capital punishment, the mandatory death penalty, contempt of court, constitutional challenges, the presumption of guilt in homosexuality cases and other social justice cases.

1. CAUSE LAWYERING
SINGAPORE: AN
INTRODUCTION
Presented by: Mr M Ravi

2. What is Cause Lawyering?
 Motivations: act with and on behalf of those
suffering as a result of social neglect,
institutions, social structures
 Inextricably linked concepts of law and
morality: Authentic Justice
 Critique of Unjust Laws
 Law-centric vs politics
 Uniquely different from conventional lawyering

3. A dearth of cause lawyers in
Singapore?
 Singapore’s socio-political context, history
 ‘OB Markers’ set the parameters of what is
considered acceptable social justice lawyering
 Muted involvement through civil society rather
than public action: self-quarantine of legal
advocacy capacity
 ‘Masked’ Cause Lawyering
 Heartening trend: more stepping forward

4. A Climate of Fear
 Politics and Governance in
Singapore: dual system legality: efficiency on
commerce laws, curbing of laws related to civil
and political rights
 One party rule: homogeneity in thought,
expression
 1986 Legal Profession Act Amendments: Law
Society barred from commenting on legislation

5. Notable Cause Lawyers in
History
 T.T. Rajah and G Raman
 Francis Seow
 David Marshall
 J.B. Jeyaretnam
 Suspended legal licenses, contempt of court,
defamation, detention without trial under ISA, political
exile

6. Obstacles to Social Justice
Work
 Weak Civil Society (vis a vis counterparts in
Malaysia)
 An inhibited bar in SG vs proactive, vocal
Malaysian Bar
 Lack of funding for work
 Fear of Cost Orders: pertinence of Government
Proceedings Act amendments tabled by
Parliament recently

7. Cases: Capital Punishment in
Singapore
 Yong Vui Kong case
 Landmark ruling: death penalty
Sentence commuted to life imprisonment
 Provided momentum for changes to
Penal Code: discretion to judges in imposition of
alternative punishments vis a vis death penalty
 Mandatory Death Penalty: a violation of human
rights

8. Alan Shadrake: Contempt of
Court
 Author of ‘Once a Jolly Hangman’
 Charged with contempt of court
In his writings criticising judiciary
 Found Guilty, but landmark change
in doctrinal test applied to SG contempt
cases

9. Mdm Vellama’s Constitutional
Challenge
 PM Lee’s claim of ultimate discretion in deciding
whether a by election is to be called.
 Case as relevant as ever in the context of amendments
to GPA: concept of Protective Cost Orders (PCO)
 Importance of ensuring that no citizen finds it prohibitive
to enter litigation: fundamental right.
 Plaintiffs are always disproportionately disadvantaged
vis a vis government.
 PCO- Is it fair to be liable for private costs for a public
interest issue?

10. Article 377A, Penal Code
 Case of Tan Eng Hong vs AG (2012)
 “Any male person who, in public or
private, commits, or abets the commission
of, or procures or attempts to procure the
commission by any male person of, any
act of gross indecency with another male
person, shall be punished with
imprisonment for a term which may extend
to 2 years’’

11. Injustice in 377A
 If 377A was truly unenforced, then its repeal should not be
opposed
 Passive enforcement encourages discrimination and abuse
against gay men
 Singapore government has said that LGBT individuals are
protected under constitution
 Outreach to gay men with respect HIV/AIDS is inhibited by
377A
 Rights to Human and Personal Security: The fundamental
rights to life, freedom from violence and torture, privacy,
access to justice and freedom from arbitrary detention.
 Rights to Universal Enjoyment of Human Rights, Non-
Discrimination and Recognition before the Law: The
principles of the universality of human rights and their
application to all persons without discrimination, as well as
the right of all people to recognition before the law.

12.  "Take time to hear from friends who are gay
so that we too can understand their point of
views personally. In our democracy, we can
learn to agree to disagree, peacefully and
respectfully.”
 We should feel indignant at the discrimination that our
friends from the LGBT community face. No one,
especially the government, should arbitrarily impose
what they deem to be ‘acceptable behaviour’ for
society. Everyone has the liberty to live their lives how
they want to and it is their right to do so. To
discriminate is to demean not only the people we
discriminate against, but to demean us as humans
itself.

13. Final Words
 What is legal is often not just. And what is just is often
not at all legal.
 Developments in law, as history shows, follow social
change rather than lead to it. Exercise leadership, be
that change.
 Fight the good fight where so many others have made
their mark: Mandela, Gandhi, Karpal Singh, etc.
 Social Justice isn’t solitary work- engage the
community and like minded people. Great movements
were part of an amorphous group of peoples with like
minded goals and ideals.

14. THANK YOU
ANY QUESTIONS?