However, the request has been described as “frivolous and misleading” by Mr Lee’s lawyer, Senior Counsel Davinder Singh.

In his letter dated July 8, Dr Chee pointed to Mr Lee’s reference during the May court hearing that the president of the International Bar Association had written a letter to the Law Society of Singapore, praising the Judiciary.

However, Dr Chee, said both organisations had denied the existence of such a letter. Since Mr Lee’s evidence has “great impact” on the amount of damages to be awarded, “it is imperative that the hearing be reconvened”, Dr Chee added.

In his reply to the Supreme Court’s Registrar yesterday, Mr Singh described Dr Chee’s request as “frivolous” because “the views of the International Bar Association about our Judiciary have absolutely no bearing on the question of damages”.

The “only reason” that Mr Lee had referred to the IBA’s endorsement “was to demolish” Dr Chee’s “baseless suggestion in open court that there is no rule of law in Singapore”.

Mr Singh noted that Dr Chee had, in his letter, “sought to convey the false impression that, contrary to Mr Lee’s evidence, the IBA did not praise the Singapore Judiciary”. In fact, Mr Singh added, “as was the point of Mr Lee’s evidence, the IBA stated that our Judiciary is outstanding’.”

Mr Singh noted that IBA president Fernando Pombo, in his speech at the opening of the grouping’s conference in Singapore on Oct 14 last year, had said that Singapore was picked as the venue for the meeting because of its “outstanding legal profession, an outstanding judiciary and an outstanding academic world in relation to the law”.

“The only inaccuracy in Mr Lee’s testimony was his statement that the IBA had conveyed this view in a letter to the Law Society of Singapore, whereas it was actually in a public speech by the IBA president.

“If anything, Mr Lee’s testimony did not do enough justice to the fact an international organisation like the IBA was prepared to and did publicly endorse the excellence of our Judiciary,” Mr Singh said. Dr Chee’s “desperate hunger for publicity to make a false point will only serve to waste the Court’s time.”

                   Home