publichouse.sg

By Andrew Loh

The behavior of the Law Society of Singapore (LSS) leaves very much to be desired indeed. After a series of bungles, which give the impression of a society seemingly acting like a headless chicken, it now wants lawyer M Ravi committed to the Institute of Mental Health (IMH). This comes after a lawsuit has been lodged against the society and one Mr Wong Siew Hong, its chairman of its Member Care committee; and a motion filed with the society and backed up by “more than 50 members” for the society “to hold an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) to explain what led to the recent debate between one of its officials, Mr Wong Siew Hong, and Mr Ravi.”

By Andrew Loh | Richard Wan

Before the controversy surrounding the Law Society’s attempts to stop lawyer M Ravi from carrying out his professional duties in the courts has died down, it has emerged that the society had tried 3 times in the space of 2 days to stop Mr Ravi from making representations for his clients in Court.

As previously reported on publichouse.sg and TR Emeritus, Law Society representative, Mr Wong Siew Hong, made the first attempt during Monday’s proceedings at the High Court. Mr Ravi was in Justice Philip Pillai’s courtroom putting forth his arguments in the case brought by Mdm Vellama Marie Muthu to have the Court declare the Prime Minister does not have unfettered discretion in calling by-elections.

UPDATE at 4:50pm, Friday 20 July: From M Ravi's office: "Please note that we will not be filing the Writ today. We will instead be issuing a Letter of Demand to The Law Society of Singapore."

-------------------

Lawyer M Ravi, who has been in the news lately, has filed a law suit against the Law Society of Singapore (LSS), and Mr Wong Siew Hong, who heads the sub-committee for Member Care in the LSS.

Mr Ravi is also filing a complaint against Dr Calvin Fones with the Singapore Medical Association (SMA).

The lawsuits and complaint stems from what transpired in the past week.

Dr Fones had informed the LSS, through a letter, on 16 July that he had seen Mr Ravi 2 days prior and had diagnosed him as having a “manic relapse” of his bi-polar condition. Dr Fones wrote that thus Mr Ravi was “currently unfit to practise law.”

Mr Ravi has described Dr Fones' diagnosis as "ridiculous."