Tan Liang Joo John v Attorney-General: Election Eligibility & Criminal Contempt
In Tan Liang Joo John v Attorney-General, the Singapore High Court addressed whether the applicant, Tan Liang Joo John, was disqualified from standing for election as a Member of Parliament under Article 44 of the Constitution due to a prior conviction for contempt of court. The court, presided over by Aedit Abdullah J, ruled against the applicant, holding that the conviction for criminal contempt and the imposed fine of $5,000 disqualified him under Article 45(1)(e) of the Constitution. The court dismissed the application.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Application dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Constitutional
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore High Court ruled Tan Liang Joo John is disqualified from standing for election due to a contempt of court conviction.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attorney-General | Respondent | Government Agency | Application dismissed | Won | Tang Shangjun of Attorney-General’s Chambers Shivani Retnam of Attorney-General’s Chambers Beulah Li of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Tan Liang Joo John | Applicant | Individual | Application dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Aedit Abdullah | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Tang Shangjun | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Shivani Retnam | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Beulah Li | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Ravi s/o Madasamy | Carson Law Chambers |
4. Facts
- The applicant was convicted of contempt by scandalising the court and fined $5,000.
- The applicant is the vice-chairman of the Singapore Democratic Party.
- The applicant intends to run in the next general election.
- The applicant sought a declaration that he is not disqualified from standing for election.
- The Attorney-General argued that the applicant is disqualified under Article 45(1)(e) of the Constitution.
- The Returning Officer in 1988 had taken the position that disqualification in Art 45(1)(e) only applied to criminal offences.
5. Formal Citations
- Tan Liang Joo John v Attorney-General, Originating Summons No 911 of 2019, [2019] SGHC 263
- AG v Wham Kwok Han Jolovan and another matter, , [2019] SGHC 111
- AG v Wham Kwok Han Jolovan and another matter, , [2018] SGHC 222
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Administration of Justice (Protection) Act 2016 enacted | |
| Applicant found guilty of contempt by scandalising the court | |
| Sentence of a $5,000 fine imposed on the applicant | |
| Hearing date | |
| Judgment date | |
| Next general election must be held by this date |
7. Legal Issues
- Disqualification from Parliament
- Outcome: The court held that the applicant was disqualified from standing for election due to his conviction for criminal contempt.
- Category: Substantive
- Interpretation of 'Offence' in Article 45(1)(e)
- Outcome: The court interpreted the term 'offence' in Article 45(1)(e) to include quasi-criminal offences such as criminal contempt.
- Category: Substantive
- Applicability of Estoppel against the Government
- Outcome: The court held that estoppel was not applicable in this case to prevent the application of Article 45(1)(e).
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Declaration that the applicant is not disqualified from standing for election as a Member of Parliament.
9. Cause of Actions
- Application for Declaratory Relief
10. Practice Areas
- Constitutional Litigation
- Civil Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Li Shengwu v AG | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 1 SLR 1081 | Singapore | Cited to examine the distinction between civil and criminal contempt and to determine that both are quasi-criminal. |
| Karaha Bodas Co LLC v Pertamina Energy Trading Ltd and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2006] 1 SLR(R) 112 | Singapore | Cited for the requirements that must be satisfied before the court grants declaratory relief. |
| Tan Eng Hong v AG | High Court | Yes | [2012] 4 SLR 476 | Singapore | Cited for the applicability of the Karaha Bodas test in cases involving constitutional rights and for the court's discretion to hear theoretical cases. |
| Vellama d/o Marie Muthu v AG | High Court | Yes | [2013] 4 SLR 1 | Singapore | Cited to distinguish between personal and public rights in the context of declaratory relief. |
| Tan Cheng Bock v AG | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] 2 SLR 850 | Singapore | Cited for laying down the three-step approach to constitutional interpretation. |
| Seldon v Wilde | King's Bench Division | Yes | [1911] 1 KB 701 | England and Wales | Cited to show that there are numerous types of offences, many of which are not criminal. |
| Wee Choo Keong v Ketua Pengarah Perkhidmatan Awam Malaysia | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] 1 MLJ 45 | Malaysia | Cited for the Malaysian Court of Appeal's holding that Art 48(1)(e) of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia did not operate to disqualify a person convicted of civil contempt. |
| Yong Vui Kong v AG | High Court | Yes | [2011] 2 SLR 1189 | Singapore | Cited to highlight that the basis for the granting of a pardon is a broad one. |
| AG v James and Others | English Court | Yes | [1962] 2 WLR 740 | England and Wales | Cited for recognizing the power of the Crown to grant a discharge for criminal contempt. |
| Agbemava v AG | Ghanaian Supreme Court | Yes | [2019] 2 LRC 424 | Ghana | Cited for recognizing that the prerogative of mercy under the Ghanaian Constitution extended to the granting of a pardon to persons convicted for contempt of court. |
| AG v Shadrake Alan | High Court | Yes | [2011] 2 SLR 445 | Singapore | Cited to show that the term 'convict' has always been used in relation to criminal contempt. |
| Au Wai Pang v AG | High Court | Yes | [2016] 1 SLR 992 | Singapore | Cited to show that the term 'convict' has always been used in relation to criminal contempt. |
| Wong Keng Leong Rayney v Law Society of Singapore | High Court | Yes | [2007] 4 SLR(R) 377 | Singapore | Cited to show that a disciplinary tribunal is not a court of law. |
| Kong Hoo (Pte) Ltd and another v PP | High Court | Yes | [2019] 1 SLR 1131 | Singapore | Cited for the principle against doubtful penalisation. |
| PP v Low Kok Heng | High Court | Yes | [2007] 4 SLR(R) 183 | Singapore | Cited for the principle against doubtful penalisation. |
| Woon Brothers Investments Pte Ltd v MCST Plan No 461 and others | High Court | Yes | [2011] 4 SLR 777 | Singapore | Cited for the presumption that the same word is to bear the same meaning throughout a particular statute. |
| Immeubles Jacques Robitaille inc. v Québec (City) | Supreme Court of Canada | Yes | [2014] 1 SCR 784 | Canada | Cited for the principle that the doctrine of estoppel must yield in the public law context to an overriding public interest. |
| Chiu Teng @ Kallang Pte Ltd v Singapore Land Authority | High Court | Yes | [2014] 1 SLR 1047 | Singapore | Cited for the indication that estoppel in judicial review has been subsumed under the doctrine of legitimate expectation. |
| SGB Starkstrom Pte Ltd v Commissioner for Labour | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2016] 3 SLR 598 | Singapore | Cited for voicing some concerns about accepting the doctrine of substantive legitimate expectation. |
| Tan Cheng Bock v AG | High Court | Yes | [2017] 5 SLR 424 | Singapore | Cited for holding that the right to stand for election to the Presidency is not part of the enumerated fundamental rights in Part IV of the Constitution. |
| Yong Vui Kong v PP | High Court | Yes | [2015] 2 SLR 1129 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that Article 9 is only concerned with punishment. |
| Eng Foong Ho v AG | High Court | Yes | [2009] 2 SLR(R) 542 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the fact that the respondent in the present proceedings adopts a different position from the Returning Officer does not amount to deliberate and arbitrary discrimination against the applicant. |
| AG v Wham Kwok Han Jolovan and another matter | High Court | Yes | [2018] SGHC 222 | Singapore | Cited as the case where the applicant was found guilty of contempt by scandalising the court. |
| AG v Wham Kwok Han Jolovan and another matter | High Court | Yes | [2019] SGHC 111 | Singapore | Cited as the case where a sentence of a $5,000 fine, with 1 week’s imprisonment in default, was imposed on the applicant. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Articles 44 and 45 of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore | Singapore |
| Order 15, Rule 16 of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, Rule 5) | Singapore |
| Sections 3(1)(a) and 10(1) of the Administration of Justice (Protection) Act 2016 (No 19 of 2016) | Singapore |
| Article 22P of the Constitution | Singapore |
| Article 35(8) of the Constitution | Singapore |
| Section 55 of the Parliamentary Elections Act (Cap 218, 2011 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 323 of the Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 325 of the Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 53(1)(c) of the Medical Registration Act (Cap 174, 2014 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 50 of the Medical Registration Act (Cap 174, 2014 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 51(8) of the Medical Registration Act | Singapore |
| Article 74 of the Constitution | Singapore |
| Section 116 of the Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 90 of the Parliamentary Elections Act | Singapore |
| Article 48(1)(e) of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia (2010 Reprint) | Malaysia |
| Section 1 of the Representation of the People Act 1981 (c 34) | United Kingdom |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Contempt by scandalising the court
- Article 45(1)(e)
- Disqualification from Parliament
- Quasi-criminal offence
- Free pardon
- Returning Officer
- Estoppel
- Legitimate expectation
15.2 Keywords
- Election eligibility
- Criminal contempt
- Article 45(1)(e)
- Singapore Constitution
- Disqualification
- Parliament
- Returning Officer
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Constitutional Law | 90 |
| Contempt of Court | 80 |
| Statutory Interpretation | 70 |
| Civil Procedure | 50 |
| Judgments and Orders | 40 |
| Criminal Revision | 30 |
| Administrative Law | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Constitutional Law
- Elections
- Contempt of Court