Singapore - An international law body's attack on Singapore's judiciary for its limits on freedoms prompted a sharp rebuttal from the government of the city-state. The report released Wednesday by the International Bar Association's Human Rights Institute acknowledged Singapore's good international reputation for the integrity of its judgements in commercial cases. It also cited concerns about an apparent lack of impartiality or independence in cases involving politicians and alleged executive interference in the judiciary.
Singapore was criticized for failing to meet "established international standards" on democracy and human rights.
The institute cited the Law Society's failure to speak out on law reform issues, saying, "That is its responsibility."
The Ministry of Law said the institute failed to provide evidence.
In its response to the media and on its website, the ministry slammed as "feeble justification" the institute's argument that "regardless of any actual interference, the reasonable suspicion of interference is sufficient."
Defamation suits brought by People's Action Party members usually related to scurrilous and untrue allegations, the ministry said, referring to the party that has ruled
Singapore since independence. It is "absurd to suggest that honourable and upright judges in commercial cases become compliant and dishonourable when dealing with defamation cases involving government ministers," it said.
"Every society must find and decide the appropriate balance between rights and responsibilities for themselves," the ministry said.
Singapore's courts have left a string of outspoken critics an opposition politicians bankrupt in defamation cases. The city-state defends the lawsuits as necessary to protect the reputations of its leaders.
