Breaking news: Author of death penalty book Alan Shadrake arrested

Home

News

Singapore

Sunday, 18 July 2010

Singapore Democrats

Shadrake speaking at the book launch yesterday

Mr Alan Shadrake, author of Once a Jolly Hangman: Singapore Justice in the Dock, was arrested this morning. Mr Shadrake, 75, had launched his book yesterday at the Post Museum. A British national, the author has written about the various cases of persons hanged under the drug law in Singapore.

It is understood that the Media Development Authority had lodged the complaint against Mr Shadrake who is being held for criminal defamation and contempt of court.

Authorities have ordered bookstores not to sell the book but have not officially banned it. There is no word yet about where Mr Shadrake is being held.

Mr Shadrake had first launched his book in Malaysia and had travelled to Singapore from Penang to launch it here.

At the launch yesterday, the author spoke about the difference in treatment between a German lady who was caught trafficking drugs and who faced the gallows. However, because of intense pressure from the German government her charge was reduced, and Ms Bohl was subsequently sentenced to five years imprisonment of which she served three.

Mr Shadrake compared her treatment to that of Vignes Moorthy, a poor labourer from Johor Baru, who was hanged for the same offence even though the prosecution's case was highly contentious.

Anti-death penalty activists who helped to organise the book launch have been told by the police that no bail has yet been set for Mr Shadrake, whose passport has been impounded.

This website will provide updates on the Mr Shadrake's situation when they become available.

Police statement

In response to media queries, Police confirm that they have arrested British national Alan Shadrake. He is being investigated for alleged offences of criminal defamation and other offences. The arrest was made pursuant to a police report that was lodged on 16 July 2010 by Media Development Authority. Alan Shadrake has also been served with an application by the Attorney-General for an order of committal for Contempt of Court.

Police investigations are ongoing.

Thanks and regards,

Sew Wei Ler, Humphrey
Media Relations Officer
Public Affairs Dept

Share this article:

Comments (5)

Sun 18 Jul 2010 11:25 PM | Tan Tai Wei

Especially in such a case, where on the surface there apppears government has the onus to answer its critics, arrests and use of force to silence them are counter-productive. You may be able to govern behaviour, but not how people think. And you cause them to be even more suspicious by the clamping down.

The onus of prove is on the government, as the comparison between the German's case and the Malaysian labourer's does show up an anomally, and stands in need to be justified.

Also, more generally, there is, undoubtedly, the seeming gross disproportionality of punishment by death and the offence, which again puts the onus of proof on the authorities.

So, wiser governing would be to engage the author in open debate. Only this might stand the chance of convincing rational people. And surely, we want to cultivate rationality rather than foster unthinking fear and submission.

Mon 19 Jul 2010 12:00 AM | Jufrie - The noose gets tighter

As the day (election) draws nearer the noose gets tighter;
Every darn thing must appear to be smooth
Even if you have to continue hiding the truth
The most effective way to hide the flaw
Is for you to make a mockery of the law
If you happen to be on the other side of the fence
Whatever you do becomes an offence

Mon 19 Jul 2010 12:25 AM | quantum - What is the meximum sentence?

Will there be a political and legal battle between UK and Singapore over this issue?
What is the maximum sentence for "criminal defamation" and "contempt of court"?

Mon 19 Jul 2010 10:06 AM | Robox

Putting together all the recently taken actions, everything from not allowing Vincent Cheng to speak at the NLB to this, it would seem to me that the seriously tainted PAP government is attempting to obliterate all incriminating evidence of its longstanding and widespread wrongdoing. These cannot be anything but a strategic pre-election swoop; if the opposition parties campaign on something like the content of Shadrake's book, say, expect a defamation suit to be slapped.

What defamation?

Can it be "defamation" if the book is an account of the incontrevertible facts?

And contempt of court?

Perhaps, Shadrake is merely contemptuous of the corruption in the legal system in Singapore; he is in good company with thousands of others including Singaporeans like myself. But does that constitute "contempt of court" which is altogether another matter?

In fact, the charges laid against Shadrake is exactly why every right thinking person should be contemptuous of everyone from the civil servants who help the PAP to misuse State funds to further the party's political goals, to the corrupt police and worst of all the judges in the courts who are so gone where their corruption is concerned that they are guaranteed to deliver a guilty verdict.

On a brighter note, I am glad that Shadrake is British. If there is any foreign country that will pay close attention to news on Singapore especially when one of its own citizens is involved, it is Britain. The British legal fraternity as well as thgeir media are also so highly competent that we can be sure that news will be cause an explosion in Britain.

Sat 24 Jul 2010 6:47 AM | g_e - Kill a monkey to frighten the chickens...

This caustic comment was posted by British comedienne Natalie Haynes on her blog:
http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/2010/07/20/alan-shadrake-singapore/:

"...and now he’s been arrested. Arrested and charged with defamation, for which he could be imprisoned for two years.

You might be wondering who he defamed. The country’s most prolific hangman, perhaps? Or a judge? Or a policeman? Wrong every time, sunshine — he’s charged with defaming the country’s judicial system.

How can it be possible to defame a system? Has he hurt the feelings of individual lawyers? All of them? And if so, couldn’t they bill someone for an extra hour, cackle softly, and grow the f*ck up?

I hope Index on Censorship readers will jump up and down and make noise about this: his lawyer hasn’t been allowed to see him yet, and Singapore’s justice system doesn’t need another victim."