Conflict of interest in Tangaraju’s case raises questions about Singapore’s legal system

Singapore executed Tangaraju Suppiah, 46, on Wednesday despite international appeals to halt the execution and review its use of capital punishment. Concerns were raised about the fairness of Tangaraju’s trial after human rights lawyer Mr M Ravi revealed a potential conflict of interest. In a Facebook post on Thursday evening, Mr Ravi expressed horror at discovering that Justice Steven Chong, who presided over Tangaraju’s appeal on Tuesday, was also the Attorney General (AG) when Tangaraju was charged on 19th May 2014. Justice Chong assumed the position of AG between 25 June 2012 to 24 June 2014. This apparent conflict of interest or appearance of biasness raises serious concerns about the fairness of the trial, as well as questions about the correct legal procedure. Mr Ravi stated in his Facebook post, “This is a travesty of justice. This is precisely the reason why a lawyer needs to be present at all stages. It is tragic that not only Tangaraju had no counsel but also did not even have a hearing where Steven J had dismissed the case summarily on Tuesday. We need answers.” The lack of legal counsel, interpreter, and circumstantial evidence against Tangaraju added to the troubling aspects of the case. Despite pleas for clemency, the execution proceeded, marking the 12th since last year.

Why 2 of the Judges Who Ruled on the Marsiling-Yew Tee By-election Case Should Not Have Done So

By International Human Rights Lawyer, M Ravi This article suggests that 2…