Human Rights lawyer M Ravi will be appearing in State Court this coming Wednesday (16 Dec), to answer to a Criminal Defamation charge under Section 499 of the Penal Code for a Facebook post that he made on 6 Nov this year.

Mr Ravi was informed by the Police yesterday that he is being charged for the offence and issued with the charge sheet.

In a Facebook post on Saturday, Mr Ravi wrote that he will contest this charge as he knows the law is clearly on his side.

“There is nothing to fear my friends except fear itself. As a human rights lawyer, i cannot escape but to face such intimidation by the state.”

He wrote, “It is confounding and baffling that I am being charged with defamation as the post was highlighting a very relevant issue of public interest regarding two persons who hold important positions in the Executive and Judiciary, the Minister of Law and the Chief Justice.” and that he had made his stand very clearly in the last paragraph of the excerpt, exonerating both Mr Shanmugan and CJ Menon.

Earlier in its statement on 7 November, the police said that the Public Prosecutor has issued an order pursuant to Section 16(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code for the Police to investigate into the offence.

The offending material pertains to Mr Ravi’s claims in his 6 Nov Facebook post, which alleged that lawyer Eugene Thuraisingam had told him that Mr Shanmugam had said he “wields influence over the Chief Justice” and “calls the shot and controlls (sic) Sundaresh Menon”.

In its statement, the police added that Mr Thuraisingam wrote a letter to Mr Shanmugam the day before, in which Mr Thuraisingam said that “[t]here is absolutely no truth whatsoever” to Mr Ravi’s allegations”.

Mr Thuraisingam added that Mr Ravi had made similar allegations in a Facebook post on 12 June 2017.

He similarly reportedly clarified with Mr Shanmugam the next day that Mr Ravi’s allegations were false.

Police said in its statement earlier this month that no action was taken in relation to the 2017 incident.

Following police investigations commenced upon Mr Ravi, he shared that was the police who had filed a report on the matter.

Penalty for criminal defamation if found guilty is imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years, or with fine, or with both.

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

无缘角逐2019东运会留憾 苏睿勇批奥委会搞“小学生政治”

新加坡运动选手将在今年11月30日,赴菲律宾马尼拉出征2019年东南亚运动会,然而2015、2017年东运会马拉松冠军得主苏睿勇却无缘在这场体育盛事角逐金牌。 在昨日的文告中,新加坡国家奥林匹克委员会(SNOC)称,此次我国将派出585选手角逐49项目。不过名单中却没有苏睿勇。 奥委会指出,遴选委员会已审慎审核全国体育协会呈交的选手名单。 至于新加坡田径总会(SA)提名苏睿勇参加2019东运会,遭到遴选委员会驳回。 奥委会称,自2017年东运会以来,苏睿勇作为国家代表和青年运动员的典范,却表现出不符合该委会期望的态度和行为。 据《海峡时报》报导,虽然奥委会未明言苏的哪些行为令委会失望,但早在2017年吉隆坡的东运会前,苏睿勇曾因违反在社交媒体为个人赞助商宣传的规定,被奥委会警告;以及在吉隆坡赛事前,在比赛上镂洞,令赞助商2XU不满。 此外,苏睿勇也在4月1日收到来自奥委会的律师信函,要求他撤回有关2015年东运会马拉松赛的文章。但后来委会撤销对苏的诉讼。 他也指责新加坡奥委会在刘威延事件上,未有保持中立和没有做好调查,只听单方面目击者说辞。 此次奥委会的遴选委员会成员包括主席陈川仁(也是现任国会议长)、副主席Jessie Phua和Milan Kwee、财政Edwin Lee、马尼拉赛事主管Juliana…

Removing the mandatory death penalty as a first step towards full abolition

By Kirsten Han A workshop session at the first Asian Congress of…

为五月和六月作准备? 选举局:承包商自行选择选举筹备工作

日前,本社报导近期求职网站出现招聘“活动助理”的启事,求职条件之一为“五月到六月间”可被安排到各处地点。有相关参与培训课程的求职者也反映,有关职缺旨在提供选举的物流支援。 负责培训的公司是新科综合服务(ST Synthesis)。尽管本社曾针对此事质询选举局,惟后者则已接受《联合早报》质询并作出答复。有关报导则指,作为承包商,ST Synthesis是自行选择开始为选举筹备。 选举局称,ST Synthesis自行开始它每个季度的筹备工作,包括招聘与培训临时工。此举乃是为了履行承包合约的要求,并在大选随时启动时,都能做好准备。 选举局也指不会干涉上述承包商如何履行合约需求。 根据政府招标记录,有关承包商曾在2015年,为选举局提供选举物流支援和仓储服务长达六年。 本社也曾询问选举局,上述承包商要求求职者需在五月和六月作准备,为此选举局是否也在那段期间作相应筹备?惟后者未给予回应。