Francie Seow
Francis Seow
by Teo Soh Lung

“… the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.” – John Stuart Mill

The People’s Action Party (PAP) government is fond of telling us that it has the mandate of the people and is free to carry out whatever it thinks is “good for the people”. Indeed, the government does get away with a lot of unjust policies which in any first world country would never have seen the light of day. The philosopher’s words are irrelevant to the PAP but his warning in the essay that there could be “tyranny of the majority” can often be seen in Singapore.
Indeed, the government does get away with a lot of unjust policies which in any first world country would never have seen the light of day. The philosopher’s words are irrelevant to the PAP but his warning in the essay that there could be “tyranny of the majority” can often be seen in Singapore.
Take the case of Francis Seow. He was elected by an overwhelming majority of his peers to be a member of the Council of the Law Society of Singapore in 1985. The majority of members in Council subsequently elected him to be the president for a term of two years.
But what did the then prime minister, Lee Kuan Yew together with two other ministers, Mr E W Barker and Prof S Jayakumar and five members of parliament, Dr Yeoh Ghim Seng (who was the chairman), Messrs Bernard Chen, Chua Sian Chin, Tang See Chim and Dr Tan Cheng Bok did to him shortly after in a televised parliamentary select committee hearing?
bill committee
They approved a bill that allowed the removal of Seow as the president of the law society. Incidentally, five of the eight members of the committee were lawyers.
Swiftly, and by an overwhelming majority of PAP members in parliament, the bill was passed and Francis Seow was unceremoniously removed from council even before his term expired. To be exact, he served as president for barely ten months. That blatant and shameful act though completely legal, was never debated in parliament or outside. Singaporeans did not protest. No one breathed a word because everyone knew then that they could be the next victim. Fear prevailed throughout the 1980s and after.
The constitution which was meant to protect the people with its clear pronouncement of fundamental liberties, has never been the supreme law as intended by the authors. It has time and again been amended and used against the people of Singapore, lending legitimacy to immoral acts of the government.
For ease of reading, I have inserted PM for Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew and Seow for Francis Seow and deleted the numbering of paragraphs which ran from 414 to 422 (pages B65 to B66) of the Report of the Select Committee on the Legal Profession (Amendment) Bill, 1986.

PM (Lee Kuan Yew): Do you know why those investigations proceeded?
Seow: Why? It is quite obvious why.
PM: Why?
Seow: Okay, you tell me why?
PM: If it is obvious, I want to hear your explanation?
Seow: Well, maybe my explanation is different from yours.
PM: Tell us. I will tell you mine in a moment?
Seow: Yes. You don’t like me to be the President of the Law Society. It is simple as that.
PM: No. I am astounded and outraged that a person with your moral qualities is being asked to uphold the integrity of the Bar?
Seow: And why not, may I ask? If my peers, if the rest of the members of the Bar who know the full circumstances of my two suspensions and convictions still see me fit to elect me, it is not for this Committee nor for you or indeed anyone to say that I should not be.
PM: Mr Seow, when we legislated it never occurred to us for one moment, first, that lawyers of more than 12 years’ standing would vote you into the Council and, second, that the Council members, 10 of them, would vote and make you President. And when that happens, the law will be changed because obviously the lawyers are not fit to look after their own affairs. By the time they elected you as President, I am entitled to tell Members of Parliament and Singaporeans that they are unfit to govern themselves, a right of government which we, as legislators, have delegated. That is why we are here — ?
Seow: I accept that.
PM: To change the law. And if you convince me further that we have not changed it adequately, I will go another step to make sure that this does not happen ever again. It is for me. It is not for you to decide?
Seow: I accept that. But as of now, the fellow members of the Bar, knowing fully what the position is. Look, my life has been an open book. The Straits Times has been canvassing everything about my convictions, my suspension, almost ad nauseam. So these members know it when they voted me in. They are also thinking people and they know what is right and what is wrong.
PM: By that you mean that they can absolve you from all moral blame because they have reposed confidence in you by voting for you?
Seow: I do not know what you mean by morality or —-
PM: You have no sense of right or wrong or shame? —
Seow: Of course, I have the sense of right and wrong as well as the expression of shame, as I am sure all of you do have. As a matter of record, may I mention this, that I was in fact suspended for one year from the 30th April 1973 to the 29th April 1974. That was my first suspension over that unfortunate Gemini affair. I stood and was elected as a Council member in 1976 and 1977.

The full report here

Subscribe
Notify of
10 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Amnesty International call for the halt of Prabagaran Srivijayan’s execution on coming Friday

Malaysian facing imminent execution for drugs conviction after unfair trial The Singaporean…

【武汉冠状病毒】马国新增117确诊 累计病例逼近八百大关

马国卫生部阿汉峇峇今日(18日)发文告,指马来西亚武汉冠状病毒(COVID-19)新增确诊病例117例,使得该国累计病例达790例。 今日新增病例中有80例,都与在吉隆坡大城堡举行的传教士集会有关联。 上述宗教活动在上月27日至3月1日举行,多达1万6000人出席,其中有1万4500名都是马国人。 不过,马国今日也有11名患者出院,累计治愈病例60起。还有15名患者需在加护病房接受治疗,使用呼吸辅助器。目前该国已有两起死亡病例。 警队也沦陷 与此同时,马来西亚警队也出现首宗确诊病例,使得至少51名警员和家眷需居家隔离。 根据马国《东方日报》报导,马国卫生总监诺希山则警告,马国可能出现第三波更严重的疫情,为此叮嘱民众必须留在家中远离人群。 “我们只有很小的机会来斩断新冠肺炎的传染网络。负起自己应尽的责任来帮助卫生部,因为每个人都有责任采取所有步骤来保护自己和家人。” 目前,马国于18日至31日,全国实施限制行动令,马国民众不得出国,也不准外国游客入境。

【国会】杨莉明:千人被发现申报错误 必须将补贴退回

杨莉明表示,有0.5巴仙的成功申请者被发现在申请自雇人士收入补贴计划(Self-employed Persons Income Relief Scheme,简称SIRS)时有错误申报。为了公平起见,要求错误申报者将补贴退款。 人力部长杨莉明于周二(5日)国会时答复盛港集选区议员林志蔚,有关在过去三个月内为何将部分援助收回的质询。 杨莉明称,申请条件是根据他们所申报的就业收入和,以及目前所拥有的产业作出评估。审计也发现大部分申请者均符合资格,然而,杨莉明强调,一些成功申请者却在事后才被发现申报错误,目前他们已向这些申请者收回援助。 “我们将单独与其余申请者联系,让他们有充足时间退款”,她表示。杨莉明续指当局发现有人诱骗非自雇人士申请补贴,当局已经把相关案件移交给警方调查。 林志蔚追问是否因申请标准所误导 林志蔚紧接追问,有关申请成功者后出现“误报”原因,例如申请者申报错误的部分。 “若真如此,他们是否是因为被申请标准所误导,导致他们误以为自己符合申请资格?”并续指,是否有任何行动能减少这种“误报”。 不仅如此,林志蔚也替被要求还款的申请者提问,是否可分期付款。 杨莉明则对此表示不同看法,她指她所理解“误报”申请者应该是原是符合条件,享有补贴福利却没有收到援助的人。 “事实上,我们在国会中所讨论的是,他们本是不符合条件者,却因申报收入的方式,让他们看似符合条件才会将补贴支付给他们。”…

乌节豪杰大厦命案:两名被告转为共谋蓄意伤人 一人面对谋杀控状

乌节豪杰大厦命案,再有两名被控嫌犯,26岁的陈云胜和洪大源,控状改为共谋蓄意伤人,目前只有陈显扬仍面对谋杀控状。(部分人名译音) 该起命案发生于去年7月2日,发生在乌节豪杰大厦里,死者是31岁的沙迪斯(Satheesh Noel s/o Gobidass)。 死者当时在二楼夜店疑似和被告们起冲突,遭他们围攻,颈部中刀后逃跑,却最终重伤倒在商场门口,随后被送往陈笃生医院急救,却因伤势太重而回天乏术。 警方于12小时内将七人逮捕归案,分别是陈云胜、陈家兴(26岁)、洪大源、萧玉珍(22岁)、陈显扬、卢文聪(25岁)以及陈洪成(22岁)共6男1女在谋杀罪名下被控。 陈云胜和洪大源被指涉及对沙迪拳打脚踢。洪大源的案子将展延到下月的审前会议,控方或对他提出进一步指控。 若罪成,陈云胜和洪大源可被判最高两年监禁、最高罚款5千元或两者兼施。 这意味着其中六人的控状已减轻,只有陈显扬面对谋杀指控。他被指当天携带了一把可折叠的弯刀。 若谋杀罪名成立,被告可能面对死刑,而在公共场所持有攻击性武器者,则将可能面对不超过三年的监刑,和不少于六下的鞭刑。