Friday, November 17, 2006

UncleYap filed Defense Summery & new Criminal Motion

The followings are Defense Summery & Affidavit for Defense.
Following below are new Criminal Motion & Affidavit for new Criminal Motion.




  1. This is a politically motivated charge by the Lee Kuan Yew family regime.

  2. Similar charge had been brought on Dr Chee Soon Juan, 2nd co-defendant of this case as well as Mr Gandhi Ambalam, 1st co-defendant of this case to convict and disqualify them both from taking part in the General Elections.

  3. This is an event during the General Election Period, and the said activities are part of Singapore Democratic Party's Walk-About in their contesting Sembawang GRC, as well as Meeting The People Session. Similar activities are conducted by all other political parties on that very same day. More than 10 members and Election Candidates of Singapore Democratic Party were together with the 3 accused conducting the same activity, except that the 3 accused were playing their roles as the events' perambulators.

  4. This is a case of Selective Prosecution in violation of Rep of Singapore Constitution Article 12, in that no other political parties' Walk-About or Meeting The People Session were charged.

  5. This is a case of Selective Prosecution in violation of Rep of Singapore Constitution Article 12, in that the activity conducted by the 3 accused were essentially sales of Singapore Democratic Party's publications in streets sales manner identical to many street hawkers in their daily business selling all sort of household products, and that these hawkers are never charged under this act.

  6. Such selective prosecutions had been done for the reason that the both Singapore Democratic Party's election campaign for general election 2006, as well as the party's publication The New Democrats had been exposing and highlighting very sensitive political scandals and crimes committed by Lee Kuan Yew family regime.

  7. Such selective prosecutions and the huge series of defamation suits were all brought in by Lee Kuan Yew family regime, in the aim of preventing and silencing the propagation of sensitive scandals.

  8. Such selective prosecutions had been brought by Lee Kuan Yew family regime, to prevent the highlighting of a serious election corruption crime, namely vote-buying via the Progress Package distributed nation-wide just only 5 days before the polling. This prosecution has the intention of covering up serious corruption crime, which had been exposed by Singapore Democratic Party's election campaign.

  9. The 3 accused have no intention to compromise any public interest by conducting speeches, or hold any activity that is against the rights or interest of the state or public, and whatever is done is all for the interest of state and public, as a part of the lawful activities of General Election 2006 under the Parliamentary Election Act.

  10. The License Regulatory Authorities of Lee Kuan Yew family regime had been clearly instructed by the regime not to issue any license, especially to strong opposition parties which exposed and highlighted sensitive political scandals as well as corruption crimes of the regime.

  11. The scandals and crimes exposed by accused were recorded by police in video as case exhibit P10 & P11, these serious scandals includes:

  • Nation-wide General Election Vote Buying via Progress Package

  • National Kidney Foundation Scandal

  • State fund investment in Myanmar in connection with drug syndicate's money

  • Drug & corruption money laundry

  • Billion dollar deals with corrupted Thai regime of Thaksin Shinawatr

  1. The accused had repeatedly and clearly expressed willingness to cooperate with police during the whole election period. Police had be repeatedly and persistently asked to provide the accused with guidelines that Singapore Democratic Party's campaign can be ran within the law. Police had been made known very clearly that the accused Yap Keng Ho who is an appointed Election Agent under Parliamentary Election Act have no intention to break any law.

  2. However, the police consistently failed to provide any of such guidelines relevant to the laws regulating these campaign Walk-About & Meet The People activities. The law enforcement had been over the entire campaign refused to provide any guidelines, only kept warning the accused to stop the election campaign activities, while filming these activities on video.

  3. The 3 accused had not caused any public disorder; nuisance; pollutions; obstruction of traffic, and had repeatedly told the law enforcement officers that we are willing to comply anything guideline if the law enforcement could just provide. Police did not asked for the activity to be moved or shifted or modified in any way, except that the campaign event's perambulators is required to have license, which the regulatory authority had been instructed by minister of Lee Kuan Yew regime to issue none.

  4. The evidence videos exhibit P10 & P11 clearly shown that the accused only perambulated the presence of the Singapore Democratic Party, the sales activities of Party Publications , and the contents of the publications highlighting the crimes and scandals published within the publications, for durations less than 15 minutes each time. At the scene which is a market area, there were many hawkers using loudspeakers to promote their own sales and their sales talking activities will last for entire day. Their activities were deemed as legal by the dozen of law enforcement officers at scene, who had testified against the accused in court.

  5. Therefore it is clear that only activities which exposes the Lee Kuan Yew family regime's crimes and scandals had been harassed and filmed by the regime's police, and selectively prosecuted in court in the hope of covering up the regime's crimes and scandals.

  6. Vote Buying is a serious crime in clear violation of Parliamentary Election Act, Criminal Law as well as Corruption Act (Cap.65A), accused persons are exposing and reporting crimes to voters as a part of election campaign, while the criminal Lee Kuan Yew family regime had been trying to stop the accused from doing so.

  7. The contents of exhibit P10 & P11 clearly showing accused persons mentioning these crimes and scandals, therefore the evidence P10 & P11 themselves are so sensitive to the Lee Kuan Yew family regime, that they had to change their mind 3 times in using them as case evidence for the charges against the 3 accused.

  8. For the same reason, they spear no effort to prevent these evidence videos from getting to the public, first by not giving any copies to the accused, and then withdrawing the use of this evidence, then readmit the evidence after being forced by the defense, and then apply order of court to prevent the video from reaching the public, and then applying order of court to have them removed from the accused's Internet blog.

  9. All these showed clearly that the corrupted Lee Kuan Yew family regime is fearful of their crimes exposed and the citizens and voters come to awareness of these crimes and scandals, especially before the polling day. And even during the trial of this charge under Public Entertainment Act, they are still doing the best they can to conceal the crimes and scandals.

  10. The selective prosecution done against the 3 accused are in violation of Rep of Singapore Constitution Article 12, in that accused are to be treated equally and fairly before law, that other political parties and street hawkers were not made to face the public entertainment act for activities identical to what the accused was doing.

  11. The political expression as well as exposure of crimes and scandals had been prevented by Lee Kuan Yew regime by abusively applying Public Entertainment Act against the 3 accused is also in violation of Rep of Singapore Constitution Article 14 against the accused's rights of free speech.

  12. This politically motivated charge is a repeat persecution aimed at disqualifying the political opponents against Lee Kuan Yew family regime in future elections, which the other 2 co-accused Dr. Chee & Mr. Gandhi had been convicted under the same act to be disqualified to contest against Lee Kuan Yew family regime in several past elections. This charge is abusively applied with political motivations, and should had been dismissed by court.

  13. The 3 accused are not guilty, but together they face the Public Entertainment Act abused corruptively by the Lee Kuan Yew family regime, in similar way the regime had abuse defamation suits for political and criminal motives such as covering up their own crimes and scandals. Yap Keng Ho is not afraid to confront the corrupted regime in any front, to state resolve, Yap Keng Ho ask for the maximum sentence under this act, and fine will not be paid, and Yap Keng Ho is prepared to take hunger-strike in prison, to protest against corrupted & incompetent regime & election fraud via Progress Package as well as all the cowardly oppressions, not limited to the sufferings by Singapore Democratic Party.


Yap Keng Ho


  1. This affidavit is made in respect to the hearings at the Subordinate Court 18 between 25 October 2006 and 10 November 2006.

  2. I am aware of a ministerial press statement clearly stating that no Licence or permit would be issued under Public Entertainment Act for any outdoor civil campaign such as marching; demonstration; speech or rally, save the regular election rallies, as a policy of this government. Thus applications by political oppositions and civil activists would not be granted any licence whenever applications were made.

  3. In the past 20 years I am not aware of any member of any opposition party having been granted any such license beyond the very short election period which is only once in every 5 years. No license was ever granted to go on a walkabout or meet the people session by the members of any oppositions party.

  4. I had in numerous applications made between 2004 to 2006, applied to the Police who were the regulatory authorities for various licenses and permit to hold outdoor public activities. All of my applications had been turned down, and mostly without providing any reasons.

  5. My role in the General Elections 2006 was Election Agent under the Parliamentary Election Act, in Sembawang GRC.

  6. I had repeatedly asked various law enforcement officers to provide guidelines under which I can conduct election campaign activities within the law, including sales of Singapore Democratic Party publications and Walk About and Meeting The People activities, I expressed willingness to cooperate with police, during entire election campaign period of 2006. However police failed consistently to provide any such guidelines.



TAKE NOTICE that the Court will be moved on the day of

2006 at am/pm on an application on the part of the Applicant for the following

  1. Article 9 of constitution had been serious violated in that applicant's hearing had been unduly restrained physically and legally and tortured mentally, in the trial held on 7th Nov 2006.

  2. The principal of natural justice had been grossly and encroached upon by the undue interference by the trial judge in favor.

  3. The adversarial system guarantied under the constitution had not been complied with and the trial judge has misdirected himself on the criminal process of the trial.

  4. The trial process in the court below had threatened all the basic guarantees enshrined for the accused under the constitution article 9 & 12 & 14.

  5. The trial process adopted by the court below violate all the basic norm of international customary law provided by UN under UDHR.

  6. The applicant to be granted a re-trail on the ground of mistrial.

  7. The elected president of Singapore be directed to convince a constitutional court under article 100 of constitution to seek an advisory opinion of the constitutional court of 3 judges in the event that this court does not apply it's mind and powers on the determination of 1 & 5 above. As the all accused in Singapore who are tried politically suffer a state of emergency calling for UN intervention.

The grounds of this application will be set out in the affidavit of the Applicants to be filed herein.


  1. This affidavit is made with reference to Notes of Evidence of the hearings at Subordinate Court 18 between 25 October 2006 and 10 November 2006.

  2. During the cross examination of the prosecution witnesses, the trial judge had ruled dozens of times that the defence's questions to the witnesses as irrelevant, while these questions were leading towards the following angles:

  • The charges are selective prosecution in violation of Article 12 of the Republic of Singapore Constitution

  • The charges are full of political motives, specifically targeting Singapore Democratic Party's election campaign

  • The accused had repeatedly asked the police officers to provide guidelines under which their election campaign activities could be conducted without infringing any law

  • The witnesses being police officers at the scene witnessed other similar activities in which the other persons involved in these activities were not being made to face charges under the public entertainment act. The accused had not been treated equally under Article 12 of he Republic of Singapore Constitution

  1. There were a consecutive series of such ruling by the trial judge in court 18, during the cross examination by Dr. Chee Soon Juan & Yap Keng Ho during the joint trial in which both the accused face the same charge. This prevented the defense from proceeding with any further cross examination and this had seriously compromise of the accused person's defense at the trial.

  2. Yap Keng Ho was nearly totally without a legal council, since his council Mr M Ravi got suspended from the bar at the very beginning of the trial.