” OUT OF AN Diversity OF CAUTION”
Mr. Shanmugam claimed in his published comment on Wednesday that the majority of the papers shared with AGC were used to plan the killings of prisoners awaiting the execution of prisoners, also known as PACPs.
According to him, SPS’s policy was to maintain AGC informed of developments involving these PACPs and to find legal counsel if any pertinent pending trials or problems that might lead to the imposition of the death penalty were to be avoided.
” This strategy was chosen out of a lot of precaution,” the author writes. The soldiers who made the disclosures believed in good faith that they could be shared with AGC so that they could get legal advice on planning and make sure that PACPs ‘ right were n’t violated when they were given additional instructions regarding how to serve their words.
Additionally, Mr. Shanmugam pointed out that the Court of Appeal had to obtain the relevant captives ‘ acceptance or a court order before the publication may have occurred.
He also pointed out that three of the thirteen prisoners who had violated a copyright had no justification for their claims for additional problems and that the Court of Appeal had determined that only three of the prisoners had the right to receive minimum problems of S$ 10 each.
SPS officers were permitted to open or examine any of the papers in accordance with prison rules, so there was no breach of their , assurance that resulted from this.
The Court of Appeal also acknowledged in a prior decision, which also addressed the publication of prisoners ‘ letter, that despite having received letter from SPS, there had not been an attempt to gain in court proceedings, he said.
Our organizations “accomplish their duties in accordance with the law.” Sometimes, there may be failures.
” Here the errors were such that the Court ordered S$ 10 in restitution each, to three of the candidates. SPS has put in place measures to avoid a reoccurrence.”
On the issue of ensuring , attorney-client opportunity for captives, Mr Shanmugam said that under laws, letters to or from a convict’s legal director cannot be copied or withheld.
” Yet, this privilege cannot be at the cost of ensuring safety and excellent order of prisons, which is SPS’s all obligation. This issue will be considered properly, “he added.