Multimillion-dollar civil suits against 3 Workers’ Party MPs go to trial
The suits were brought against three
Workers' Party MPs Low Thia Khiang, Sylvia Lim and Pritam Singh as well
as others, over alleged improper payments amounting to millions of
dollars....
An 'egregious, cavalier misuse of public funds': Town council lawyers rip into Workers' Party leaders
An 'egregious, cavalier misuse of public funds': Town council lawyers rip into Workers' Party leaders
Later
in the afternoon, lawyers for the three MPs and AHTC councillors Chua
Zhi Hon and Kenneth Foo stressed that at all times, the five were acting
honestly and in “good faith”. The five are represented by Tan Rajah
& Cheah.
“Various allegations have been made ... we have our responses to all those,” said lawyer Chelva Retnam Rajah in court. “At the heart of all our actions is the fact that at all times ... They were acting in good faith, acting honestly and for the purposes of the Town Councils Act in all their actions.”
Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/workers-party-trial-ahtc-prptc-lawsuits-low-pritam-sylvia-10793984
Three leaders of Singapore’s leading opposition party Workers’ Party will have to defend themselves in court today over (Oct 5) alleged mishandling of S$33 million in town council funding. The civil suit was lodged by the ruling party PAP-controlled town councils – through a fake “independent panel” filled with government cronies – after the police cleared the opposition MPs of criminal wrongdoings.
It is unknown who is sitting in the “independent panel” appointed by the ruling party dictatorship....thestatestimes
“Various allegations have been made ... we have our responses to all those,” said lawyer Chelva Retnam Rajah in court. “At the heart of all our actions is the fact that at all times ... They were acting in good faith, acting honestly and for the purposes of the Town Councils Act in all their actions.”
Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/workers-party-trial-ahtc-prptc-lawsuits-low-pritam-sylvia-10793984
Three leaders of Singapore’s leading opposition party Workers’ Party will have to defend themselves in court today over (Oct 5) alleged mishandling of S$33 million in town council funding. The civil suit was lodged by the ruling party PAP-controlled town councils – through a fake “independent panel” filled with government cronies – after the police cleared the opposition MPs of criminal wrongdoings.
It is unknown who is sitting in the “independent panel” appointed by the ruling party dictatorship....thestatestimes
Above are two quotations, one from Channelnewsasia and the other from thestatestimes.
Just reading them prompted me to ask a few questions. One who were the people filing the civil suits against the WP? What were the grounds that gave them the privilege or right to file a civil suit against a state organisation, a legal entity, constituted under a democratic system of govt? The AHTC may be run by the WP, an opposition party, but it is a legally constituted organisation, not a private organisation, not a social organisation or a NGO or a commercial organisation.
As this is allowed in this case, it is going to set a precedent for anyone to sue any govt organisations under the same pretext, especially town councils and more.
The second point that came out from thestatestimes is the ground for defence put up by the defence lawyers, ie 'They were acting in good faith, acting honestly and for the purposes of the Town Councils Act in all their actions.' This defence is against the charge for 'egregious, cavalier misuse of public funds'.
If this defence cannot hold, then in future, anyone being charged for the same egregious, cavalier misuse of public funds would also not be able to get away using this defence of acting in good faith, acting honestly and acting legally, as the WP representatives were acting legally too.
If this defence holds, then in future anyone acting in good faith, honestly and legally, could get away with 'egregious and cavalier misuse of public funds'.
The decision and judgement of the court would have far reaching consequences as whatever the court decides, it would become judicial precedents to be quoted in the future.
I repeat the three points being put before the court.
1. Anyone can sue any legally constituted state organisation, especially town councils...
2. For egregious and cavalier misuse of public funds
3. Acting in good faith, honestly and legally is or is not a ground for defence.
PS. I have not seen the names of the people filing the suit against AHTC. Have they been made public or is this not to be made public, anonymous?