The following judgment was read immediately upon the conclusion of a 2-3 hour hearing on May 21st, which means that it had been pre-prepared.
Furthermore, the Judge (Andre Maniam) had 4 other hearings in 4 other cases in the same week, and as such could not have read through the entire case and passed this judgment himself.
Furthermore, the judgment starts with the sentence:
“The Claimant is dissatisfied with being detained and treated at the Institute of Mental Health (“IMH”) on three occasions.”
First, this sentence is grammatically wrong and should say “having been detained”.
Second, although you are free to read the judgment and form your own opinion, I say that this first sentence already invalidates the entire judgment, because no one with a functioning brain could’ve read through my Statement of Claim and written the above.
I was the victim of (or I claim to have been the victim of) severe torture and human rights violations. Any one who turns that into “The Claimant is dissatisfied” can objectively not be taken seriously.
I am OBVIOUSLY not “dissatisfied” with having been tortured, and having had my life and and my relationships destroyed, and everything else I laid out in the Statement of Claim. The word “dissatisfied” already implies that the Defendant did nothing wrong and that I am in the wrong and that I am simply unhappy with what the Defendant did for me.
But feel free to go ahead and read the entire judgment, and draw your own conclusions. But I recommend you read through at least the Statement of Claim and Reply Affidavit first, and perhaps the other court documents, to get the full picture.
The Judgment
Leave a Reply