Thursday, June 19, 2008

Can you spot the difference?

From the Straits Times by Li Xueying (read somewhere online but can't find it now) and Legal News Archive states that there is an ongoing probe into how court recordings landed on SDP website.

Right. I don't think anyone denies the fact that if the parties had signed a written agreement, then they should not publish. But if they had not, what's the investigation about? To bring fear into people who are publishing online? Anyway I believe it was an observer who published them. Did the person sign such a document?

I think it's better for Straits Times to come out and publish all that had happened so people like me don't get one-sided views (albeit SDP's). C'mon it's such a publicised affair in Singapore and all you have are (poorly-written) stories from people like Chua Lee Hoong (whom I think had just shot herself in the foot)?

Mayhaps 146th position seems fitting.

The law article extract reads:

"According to lawyers, parties involved in a suit at the High Court can apply for copies of the official recording, for a fee, to help them prepare their arguments for the next day.

They have to sign a written agreement 'not to reproduce or transmit in any form or by any means, any material contained in the transcript or on any audio record supplied to us'.

Parties are not allowed to have their own recorders in court. Neither are observers or journalists allowed to (I think it refers to recording media).
" (bold italics mine)

and here I have SDP's version of the drama in the courtroom:

"One, halfway through a session on the first day (26 May), a group of men (7-8 of them) barged in and without so much as acknowledging the Judge took up positions around the courtroom. Mr Lee Kuan Yew was then ushered in. Dr Chee asked the Judge whether these people could identify themselves and to state the reasons for their presence. Mr Davinder Singh, the plaintiffs' counsel, had not applied for permission for these persons to be present.

In addition, one of Drew & Napier's partners, Mr Hri Kumar who is also a PAP MP, was seated beside Mr Lee Kuan Yew in courtroom. Mr Kumar was not involved in the case. His only function seemed to be to keep the Minister Mentor company. Again, no permission was sought for his presence and Judge Ang did not ask who Mr Kumar was and what he was doing in her courtroom.
" (bold italics mine)

Question: Why aren't these 'people' thrown out of court? Is it different strokes for different folks?


No comments: