On 16 October 2023, an application to allow two King’s Counsel to represent four death row prisoners pro bono — Datchinamurthy, Saminathan, Lingkesvaran, Jumaat — in their ongoing constitutional challenge was heard in Court.
The court challenge pertains to whether the statutory presumptions in the Misuse of Drugs Act that shift the burden of proof onto accused persons, are in line with the presumption of innocence and are constitutional.
The prisoners had first sought out local lawyers to argue the case, but none had agreed to do so. Hence the help of foreign lawyers were sought. The foreign lawyers filed applications to the Singapore Court for temporary admission to the Singapore Bar to argue the constitutional challenge.
However, AGC and Law Society objected to the foreign lawyers advancing submissions in Court about their own temporary admission to the Singapore Bar. They argued that the foreign lawyers were unauthorised to make submissions, and could not be construed as ‘litigants in person’.
The foreign counsels argued that as a matter of statutory construction and common sense, that the exception in the Legal Profession Act allowing “any person acting personally for himself or herself only in any matter or proceeding to which he or she is a party” to advance arguments in the case should apply to them.
After all, the ad-hoc admission applications were applications the foreign counsel themselves filed, and brought on their own behalf. Further, nothing in the statute expressly excluded them from representing themselves.
Woo Bih Li JAD upheld the AGC and Law Society’s objections, taking the view that 4 death row prisoners were the true litigants in person in this case. The judge ordered the 4 death row prisoners to argue the ad-hoc admissions application of their foreign lawyers, on behalf of the lawyers.
The hearing is set to take place after 17 November.
Transformative Justice Collective 