In the USA, UK and much of Western culture, there is a cultural archetype that portrays the lawyer, and particularly the trial lawyer and criminal defense lawyer, as a heroic and honorable figure. US classic TV roles for lawyers include Perry Mason while the UK has the famous Rumpole the Barrister series.Classic movies portraying lawyers defending unpopular causes include ‘Inherit the Wind’ (about a trial lawyer fighting for the rights of a rural schoolteacher to teach evolution) and ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’ (a white criminal defense lawyer defending an African American person falsely accused of rape in a small Southern town).American presidents have mostly been lawyers, from a range of former law professors like Obama to a “dyed in the wool” solo practitioner like Lincoln.
This Western model of lawyers as idealists fighters is in stark contrast to the Singaporean cultural model, where the attorney’s role is basically seen as secondary to that of the all pwerful anti-intellectual Businessman. This is understandable perhaps insofar as Singapore is not founded on the liberal concepts of liberty and equality, but rather focused on obedience, discipline, consumerism and to a great extent, fear.
The travel writer Paul Theroux comments on abuses of the judiciary as follows:
“Nominally Singapore is a democracy. In reality it is no such thing. Any critic of the government is subject to criminal proceedings, heavy fines, libel suits, threats, or jail… The Singapore technique is diabolically effective. Foreign critics like Chris Lingle are deported or placed under house arrest, and if they are journalists, their newspapers or magazines are sued. This has happened numerous times to the Far Eastern Economic Review, the International Herald Tribune, Bloomberg.com and other news outlets. Singaporean critics or aspiring politicians are pursued through the court with financial zeal, and sued with such severity they are bankrupted…”
Where are the Singaporean lawyers in all of this? The role of attorneys in society is, or should be, to promote justice and fairness and not to be handmaidens and yes-men to dictatorial political oligarchies. The American Bar Association has codified the special duty of lawyers to fight for justice:
“A lawyer should strive to attain the highest level of skill, to improve the law and the legal profession and to exemplify the legal profession’s ideals of public service.” ABA Model Rules Preamble Section 7
The only Singapore lawyer who has, apparantly, stepped up to speak out against the abuse of the Singapore Legal System and the Singapore Political System is himself a victim of the system. Gopalan Nair, a Singapore attorney who relocated to the USA, has been a prolific critic of the Singapore judiciary in his blog “Singapore Dissident.” In a recent post in February 2011, Nair writes on Singapore’s Apathetic Lawyers:
“Singapore’s lawyers display an almost total disinterest in lawyering, when it comes the most important duty of a lawyer, and upon which every other law depends, the defense of human rights! And I am not just talking about a few lawyers, but the entire legal profession in that island is that way. They have no interest at all in defending any client who claims his human rights have been violated! They never have, and they never will….”
“…With the repeated lawsuits and criminal charges by Lee against human rights activists and foreign newspapers critical of him, Singapore’s legal profession has been thoroughly discredited which explains why today they find it almost impossible to get new entrants to the profession.”
Gopalin Nair, a Singapore attorney now residing in the USA, has been convicted in Singapore for offenses against the Court for speaking his mind against the Singapore Judiciary and its dominant political dynasty. Perhaps there is more to the story that I am not aware of. If so, please enlighten me. From my perspective, a single voice of dissent in a land dominated by fear and intimidation is a spark of hope. Gopalin Nair’s blog is called Singapore Dissident
{ 0 comments… add one now }