SINGAPORE: The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) has issued lawyer M Ravi a letter demanding that he apologise and retract allegations he made during an interview over the case of a drug trafficker on death row.
Mr Ravi had made allegations against the prosecution that AGC called “false and highly inflammatory” in a video interview to The Online Citizen (TOC) on Monday, after Mr Ravi’s case for Gobi Avedian ended in the High Court.
In a statement on Tuesday (Oct 20), AGC said it sent Mr Ravi a letter earlier on Tuesday demanding an apology and asking him to unconditionally retract allegations he made during the interview.
Mr Ravi’s application on Gobi’s behalf resulted in the Malaysian convict being sentenced to jail and caning on a reduced charge of attempted drug importation instead of the death penalty for drug importation.
AGC has demanded Mr Ravi retract the following allegations in his interview with TOC: That the public prosecutor has been “overzealous” in the prosecution of Gobi, and this “has led to the death sentence” for Gobi; that it was “troubling” the prosecution ran a different case before the High Court and the Court of Appeal; that the public prosecutor, among others, should apologise to Gobi for the suffering he went through; and that the fairness of the prosecution was called into question by the Court of Appeal.
“These are serious allegations that the public prosecutor has acted in bad faith or maliciously in the prosecution of (Gobi),” said AGC.
“They are false and highly inflammatory. It is highly improper and entirely contrary to Mr Ravi’s obligations as an officer of the court for him to make these unfounded, baseless and misleading allegations.”
AGC added that the Court of Appeal made no adverse findings against the public prosecutor for the prosecution of Gobi.
In fact, the Court of Appeal said in its judgment that the initial decision to convict Gobi was “correct at the time (it was) made”, and that none of the arguments considered in the judgment “could have been made in view of the legal position as it was understood then”.
The judgment also highlighted that parties did not have the benefit of the guidance by the new case of Adili Chibuike Ejike v PP.
AGC gave Mr Ravi until noon on Oct 22 to respond.