The Press WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 11, 1972. An eminent critic silenced

Press, Volume CXII, Issue 33044, 11 October 1972, Page 14

The Press WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 11, 1972. An eminent critic silenced

Mr David Marshall’s suspension from his legal practice in Singapore may not have been instigated by Mr Lee Kuan Yew, but the Prime Minister could certainly have given instructions to drop the charges against him. The charges concerned the release to the International Press Institute of affidavits by four Chinese newspaper executives detained last year without trial. Mr Marshall, according to the information, gave an undertaking not to release the affidavits until the four Chinese had been dealt with in Singapore’s courts. Mr Marshall evidently decided to release the affidavits in the hope of securing an early trial for his clients. Whatever the motives for his action, Mr Marshall has evidently aroused the displeasure of the Prime Minister, who has shown himself increasingly impatient of opposition or criticism. In the last 18 months his Government has closed several Englishlanguage and Chinese-language newspapers, expelled expatriate journalists, imprisoned political opponents, and used the People’s Action Party and the public service to stifle opposition. Several journalists last year complained of difficulties in finding lawyers prepared to defend them in court. Mr Lee insists that his measures are necessary to deal with subversion. But his party won all the Parliamentary seats at the General Election last month, securing nearly 70 per cent of the votes. Mr Marshall, formerly Chief Minister, is probably the most influential critic of the Prime Minister’s authoritarian rule. Being debarred from practising law for six months, he will be unable to defend anyone brought before the courts in that time. Lesser lawyers will note Mr Marshall’s suspension; and it will now be more difficult than ever for anyone charged with an offence against the country’s press laws to get adequate legal aid. Aged 64, Mr Marshall has been in poor health for more than a year. He may never return to active legal practice. Like Mr Lee, he was bom in Singapore and called to the bar in England. Both men are well versed in the English tradition of the rule of law; but the two have long since ceased to work together. The one has apparently lost the final round of his struggle to uphold the rule of law in Singapore while the other continues to consolidate his personal power and to stamp out the last vestiges of opposition. Little hope can be held for a return of democracy in Singapore so long as Lee Kuan Yew continues to hold office.