SINGAPORE – The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) is considering further action against
academic Donald Low for his Facebook post on Oct 18, which the AGC said was in contempt of court.
In a statement on Oct 19, the AGC said Mr Low has taken down his Facebook post at its request, and added that members of the public should refrain from prejudgment of issues which will be decided by the Court while proceedings are ongoing.
Such issues include whether a witness is credible or not, and whether the accused is guilty or not, it added.
In its statement, the AGC said that intentionally publishing public comments which prejudge issues, such as the credibility of witnesses, when court proceedings are ongoing would prejudice or interfere with the course of the court proceedings.
This would amount to the offence of contempt of court, under the Administration of Justice (Protection) Act 2016, it said.
Mr Low, a senior lecturer at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology’s Institute for Public Policy, had in his post on Oct 18 commented on evidence put before the State Courts in
the ongoing trial of Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh.
Singh is
fighting two charges over his alleged lies to a 2021 Committee of Privileges (COP) which investigated
former Workers’ Party MP Raeesah Khan’s lying to Parliament. He is alleged to have lied to the committee about advising Ms Khan to come clean about an untrue anecdote to Parliament involving a sexual assault victim.
Mr Low’s original post, which he has since deleted, said it “looks like the COP got it wrong” in its case against Singh, as its case was built on two witnesses, including Ms Raeesah Khan’s former aide Ms Loh Peiying, “who have turned out to be not credible”.
“One has now admitted to tampering with evidence – apparently with the knowledge of a PAP MP,” said Mr Low.
He also identified this MP as Minister of State for Digital Development and Information and Health Rahayu Mahzam, who was on the COP.
In two Facebook posts on Oct 19, Mr Low admitted to making false allegations about Ms Rahayu’s role on the COP and apologised to the courts.
In his first post, Mr Low apologised to the Court for publishing remarks that could interfere with the ongoing trial.
In his second post, Mr Low said he had made “false allegations” a day before that “wrongly impugn her character and integrity”, referring to Ms Rahayu.
He added: “I undertake not to make any further statements on these matters, or to make any allegations to the same or similar effect, in any manner whatsoever.”
MORE ON THIS TOPIC
Rahayu Mahzam plans legal action over ‘untrue’ post relating to Pritam Singh’s trial
Recap: Ex-WP cadre Yudhishthra Nathan takes the stand at Pritam Singh’s trial
This comes after Ms Rahayu said on Facebook earlier on Oct 19 that she had sought legal advice and her lawyers had written to Mr Low to ask for an apology and to “explain her position”. She said some of Mr Low’s statements “crossed the line and impugned my character and integrity,” adding that they were also defamatory.
Ms Rahayu, an MP for Jurong GRC, said that she believes in robust discussions and exchange of ideas, and that people are entitled to different views and to ask questions, but are not entitled to make baseless allegations.
She had the day before said she was seeking legal advice and intending to take action in a Facebook post on Oct 18, after Mr Low’s initial post.
Mr Low’s post came after new information came to light over the course of Singh’s trial.
On Oct 17, the fourth day of the trial, Ms Loh had under questioning from Singh’s lawyer, admitted to redacting a message from another WP cadre and aide to Ms Khan, Mr Yudhishthra Nathan, in her submissions to the COP because “it does not look good on him”.
Mr Nathan had, on Oct 12, 2021, suggested that Ms Khan should continue to maintain her lie, having already lied to Parliament on Aug 3 and Oct 4 that year.
The redacted message read: “In the first place, I think we should just not give too many details. At most apologise for not having the facts about her age accurate.”
At one point, Ms Loh mentioned that the redaction process was verified by a senior parliamentary staff member and Ms Rahayu.
“They read every single message before I redacted it,” said Ms Loh.
When asked later if Ms Rahayu knew what Ms Loh was redacting and had agreed to the redaction, Ms Loh said “this redaction was mine”, but Ms Rahayu would have seen the message.
https://www.straitstimes.com/singap...ic-donald-low-over-post-on-pritam-singh-trial
