Hubbry Logo
M RaviM RaviMain
Open search
M Ravi
Community hub
M Ravi
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
M Ravi
M Ravi
M Ravi
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Ravi Madasamy (Tamil: ரவி மாடசாமி), better known as M Ravi, is a Singaporean international human rights lawyer and activist. Known for his work as a cause lawyer, he has acted in multiple leading cases in Singaporean constitutional law and human rights.[1]

Key Information

After graduating from the National University of Singapore and Cardiff University, Ravi qualified and practised law in Singapore. He was defence counsel for death row inmates Yong Vui Kong, Gobi Avedian, and Cheong Chun Yin, all of whom had their death sentences separately commuted to jail terms. Throughout his career, he sought judicial review against the Singapore government on human rights issues, including the constitutionality of Section 377A, freedom of expression, and voting rights, which have led to judicial and political changes.[2]

Ravi is an activist for death penalty abolition and LGBT rights. He ran for the 2015 general election as a member of the Reform Party contesting in Ang Mo Kio GRC, but lost to the governing People's Action Party.[3][4] For his advocacy and pro-bono work, Ravi has been recognised by international activists and NGOs, including Richard Branson, Amnesty International, the International Bar Association (IBA), and Human Rights Watch. In 2023, he was awarded the IBA Human Rights Award.

Early life

[edit]

Ravi was born on 9 April 1969, the sixth of seven children, to parents of Tamil descent. His father was a construction worker while his mother was a homemaker. After attending Deyi Secondary School and Anderson Junior College, he graduated from the National University of Singapore with a Bachelor of Arts in political science and sociology. He subsequently completed a Bachelor of Laws at Cardiff University.[5]

[edit]

Early career (1996–2006)

[edit]

Ravi was called to the bar in 1996 and began to practise law in Singapore.[5] Initially having a general practice, Ravi was approached by opposition politician J. B. Jeyaretnam in 2003 to defend Vignes Mourthi, an inmate on death row for smuggling heroin into Singapore.[6][7] The case was Ravi's first capital punishment case and marked his transition into specialising in such cases after six years of practice.[5]

In 2004, Ravi represented Shanmugam s/o Murugesu, a taxi driver sentenced to death for smuggling cannabis, in Public Prosecutor v Shanmugam s/o Murugesu. After an unsuccessful appeal, Ravi led a public campaign to petition S. R. Nathan, the President of Singapore, to pardon Shanmugam, organising events protesting against the death penalty and Shanmugam's execution.[8][9] President S. R. Nathan ultimately did not issue a pardon, and Shanmugam was subsequently hanged.[10] In the same year, Ravi represented a number of political protestors in Chee Siok Chin v Minister for Home Affairs. In 2006, Ravi also defended Iwuchukwu Amara Tochi, a Nigerian sentenced to death for drug trafficking.

Cause lawyering (2006–2021)

[edit]

In 2008, Ravi represented opposition politician Chee Soon Juan and his sister Chee Siok Chin in a defamation lawsuit against them by Lee Hsien Loong, the Prime Minister of Singapore, and Lee's father, former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew.[11] Reuters and The New York Times noted that the waging of lawsuits by Singaporean political leaders have been criticised as attempts to "cripple opposition politicians".[12][13][14] Ravi later defended other opposition politicians and dissidents in lawsuits against them by politicians from the ruling party. These included Roy Ngerng, who was sued by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong for defamation;[15] Daniel de Costa, who was charged with criminal defamation for op-eds written on members of the Cabinet of Singapore;[16] and John Tan, who applied for a declaration that his contempt of court conviction did not disqualify him from standing for elections.[17]

In 2011, Ravi launched a constitutional challenge in the High Court after his client, Tan Eng Hong, was arrested and charged under Section 377A of the Penal Code, which criminalises gay sex. Tan was charged under Section 377A in 2010, despite the Singapore government stating in parliament that they would no longer prosecute citizens under the law. After years of proceedings, the Court of Appeal ruled that Section 377A was not unconstitutional. The case was described by The Guardian as a "milestone in the struggle against Section 377A".[18][19] In the same year, Ravi represented British writer Alan Shadrake in Shadrake v Attorney-General after Shadrake was charged with and convicted of scandalising the Singapore judicial system.[20][21][22] Another of constitutional law case Ravi took up was Vellama d/o Marie Muthu v Attorney-General, which involved Vellama d/o Marie Muthu, a cleaner, bringing a lawsuit against the Singapore government for not holding a by-election after opposition member of parliament Yaw Shin Leong was expelled from the Workers' Party and consequently lost his parliamentary seat.[23][24]

From 2009 to 2015, Ravi represented Yong Vui Kong, a Malaysian citizen sentenced to death for drug trafficking. The landmark case raised legal issues concerning human rights, including the constitutionality of judicial caning, as well as the reviewability of the clemency process and the exercise of prosecutorial discretion.[25][26] After six years of hearings, the Singapore government made changes to the laws on the death penalty for drug trafficking. During a re-sentencing trial in the High Court, Ravi successfully appealed for Yong to have his death sentence commuted to a lower sentence of life imprisonment with the possibility of parole after 20 years, as well as 15 strokes of the cane.[27][28] Ravi later appealed against the caning sentence, arguing that it was unconstitutional, prejudicial, and a form of torture. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, which Ravi described as "[bringing Singapore] back to the Middle Ages".[29]

Shortly after, Ravi successfully reopened the case of death row inmate Cheong Chun Yin, who also had his death sentence commuted to life imprisonment and 15 strokes of the cane under the new laws on capital punishment. Ravi later acted for the death row inmates Norasharee Gous (who was later executed in 2022) and Gobi Avedian, who were the second and third cases in Singapore's legal history which the Court of Appeal had agreed to reopen and review. He was successful in Gobi's appeal, which resulted in Gobi's sentence reduced to 15 years' jail and ten strokes of the cane, marking the second time in Singapore's legal history in which a death row inmate was spared on appeal to the Court of Appeal despite the exhaustion of all avenues of appeal.[30] Gobi was released from prison on 17 December 2024.[31]

Private practice, cost orders, and suspension (2015–2024)

[edit]

In 2015, after Ravi's psychiatrist diagnosed Ravi as being hypomanic and stated that Ravi's hypomania created risk of errors of judgment, erratic and abnormal behaviour and emotional outbursts, the Law Society of Singapore suspended Ravi from practising law until he submitted to a medical examination by his psychiatrist or a certified consultant psychiatrist.[32]

In 2019, Ravi criticised prosecutors and judges in Singapore for a lack of impartiality. He later apologised and withdrew the statements. The disciplinary tribunal of the Law Society later found that Ravi should be fined at least S$10,000, finding him guilty of two charges of misconduct under the Legal Profession Act.[33]

In October 2020, Ravi alleged that there was a "miscarriage of justice" and that prosecutors were "wrongdoers" and had been "overzealous" in their prosecution of Gobi Avedian. A month later, he filed a civil suit on Gobi's behalf against a number of prosecutors, alleging that they had abused their powers and acted in bad faith. The Attorney-General's Chambers disputed Ravi's claims and filed a disciplinary complaint to the Law Society for possible professional misconduct.[34] The Law Society's disciplinary tribunal found Ravi innocent of the first charge but guilty of three other charges. The Attorney-General's Chambers appealed the decision to the High Court on the first charge, seeking a guilty verdict on the charge, but the court affirmed the tribunal's decision and dismissed the appeal.[35] The Law Society appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, which, on 22 March 2023, found Ravi guilty of misconduct and suspended him from practice for five years.[36] In response to the judgment, a number of international non-governmental organisations, including Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and the Union Internationale des Avocats criticised Ravi's suspension on the grounds of infringing upon his freedom of expression.[37][38][39][40]

On 16 December 2020, Ravi was charged with criminal defamation after he published a post on his Facebook page alleging that Minister for Law K. Shanmugam "controls" Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon. On 3 March 2021, the Attorney-General's Chambers issued a warning to Ravi in lieu of continuing the criminal proceedings, after he deleted the post, apologised, and undertook not to repeat the allegations.[41]

On 14 May 2021, the Court of Appeal ordered Ravi to pay S$5,000 to the prosecution after they found that he had acted improperly in making an "unmeritorious" bid to reopen the case of convicted drug trafficker Syed Suhail Syed Zin, whom Ravi had represented pro bono. The court said that Ravi had brought an application without any real basis, misrepresented certain facts in his affidavit, and made baseless allegations against Syed Suhail's former lawyer without giving him a chance to respond.[42] In response, the International Bar Association and International Committee of Jurists condemned the courts' decision as a "troubling instance where the courts appear to have adopted an overly expansive and impermissible interpretation of what constitutes 'lack of merit'".[43] Former Malaysian member of parliament N. Surendran criticised the move, calling the cost order an example of "persecution".[44] The International Committee of Jurists, Amnesty International, and Civicus have described the Singapore government's actions against Ravi as harassment of human rights lawyers.[45][46]

In May 2024, Ravi was disbarred by the Court of Three Judges for making comments about the Singapore government and improper conduct during the proceedings of a trial.[47]

Since 2019, Ravi has been the founding director of M Ravi Law, a firm with offices across Southeast Asia.[48]

Impact

[edit]

As a lawyer, Ravi is known for his aggressive trial advocacy, having been described by Asia Sentinel as "perhaps Singapore's most prominent defence lawyer".[49] Human Rights Watch has described Ravi's work as having made "Singapore a better, more humane place".[50] Al Jazeera has described Ravi as "perhaps Singapore's most vocal anti-death penalty advocate".[51] Mark Findlay, a law professor at the Singapore Management University, describes Ravi as a "respected human rights advocate".[52] George Baylon Radics, a lecturer at the National University of Singapore, writes in the Columbia Human Rights Law Review that "Ravi [is] one of Singapore's most preeminent human rights attorneys... a staunch lawyer for social change."[53] Jothie Rajah, writing in an article published in the Wisconsin International Law Journal, states that:[54]

Ravi's impact as a cause lawyer has undoubtedly had some effect on the way the Singapore government has approached death penalty cases... [T]he visibility and presence of Ravi as a cause lawyer, the exception to the Singapore general rule, in some way created the conditions of possibility for other lawyers to step up and play the role of cause lawyer... It may well be that Ravi is the only lawyer in Singapore who can, at the present time, justifiably lay claim to being called a cause lawyer.

In 2019, Ravi began representing Nagaenthran K. Dharmalingam, a Malaysian citizen sentenced to death for smuggling drugs into Singapore. On appeal, Ravi argued that Nagaenthran was intellectually disabled, an argument that was dismissed. The case drew the attention of international activists,[55][56] including Richard Branson, who criticised the court's decision and Singapore's use of the death penalty.[57] Branson's activism led Minister for Law K. Shanmugam to publicly challenge Branson to a live debate on the death penalty, which Branson declined. In Branson's response, he described Ravi as "courageous".[58]

On 2 November 2023, Ravi was awarded the 2023 IBA Award for Outstanding Contribution by a Legal Practitioner to Human Rights by the International Bar Association for his work on LGBT rights and the death penalty.[59]

Activism and political career

[edit]
Ravi attending a Reform Party rally with fellow member Roy Ngerng during the 2015 general election, whom he had previously defended.

Ravi is an activist for death penalty abolishment and LGBT rights. After the Court of Appeal dismissed Malaysian citizen Yong Vui Kong's appeal against his death sentence for drug trafficking, Ravi lobbied Malaysian politicians and launched an activist movement in Singapore to appeal to President of Singapore S. R. Nathan for clemency. Although the movement managed to garner over 100,000 signatures in a petition, they were ultimately unsuccessful in obtaining presidential clemency for Yong.[51] When Kho Jabing, a convicted murderer, was sentenced to death in 2016, Ravi, in the capacity of an activist, applied for a motion in-person to stall the execution despite not having represented Kho in the case.[60]

In 2014, Ravi was awarded the Asia Pink Award, an LGBT rights advocacy prize by Element Magazine, for his pro-bono work in challenging the legality of Section 377A.[61][62]

Ravi stood for election during the 2015 general election, joining a six-member Reform Party team in contesting Ang Mo Kio GRC. The Reform Party lost to the governing People's Action Party after garnering 21.36% of the vote.[3][4] In October 2023, police reports were made against Ravi and Iris Koh after they allegedly published multiple social posts during the cooling-off period for the 2023 Singaporean presidential election.[63]

Personal life

[edit]

Bipolar disorder

[edit]

In 2006, Ravi was diagnosed with bipolar disorder, a condition his mother also had.[5][64] He has experienced multiple public manic episodes in the past, including at Hong Lim Park and places of worship.[65][66][67] He had been temporarily suspended from legal practice on a number of occasions, owing to his medical condition and conduct.[68][69][66][70] Human Rights Watch has recommended the Law Society of Singapore to ask "the government to promptly extend Ravi's certificate to practise law... [to] ensure that it was acting in line with the Disability Rights Convention."[50]

Criminal proceedings

[edit]

In November 2017, whilst on a manic episode, Ravi broke into Eugene Thuraisingam's law firm, where he had previously worked, and assaulted Jeannette Chong-Aruldoss and another lawyer. He was sentenced to mandatory psychiatric treatment for the attacks and trespass.[71][64]

In July 2023, Ravi was charged with assault and disorderly behaviour in public for slapping a man and shouting at Yio Chu Kang MRT station.[72][73] In September 2023, Ravi was charged for voluntarily causing hurt, disorderly behaviour in public and harassment, after slapping a woman in Sri Mariamman Temple and verbally harassing two other people.[74] He was sentenced to 14 weeks jail in 2024. In issuing the sentence, the District Judge did not consider Ravi's bipolar disorder mitigating due to his poor management of the condition and a history of previous offences.[75]

On 8 November 2023, Ravi was sentenced to 21 days of imprisonment for contempt of court. In the judgment, the High Court ruled that although Ravi had a hypomanic episode when he made the contemptuous statement, his bipolar disorder would not be greatly considered in mitigation. The trial judge Hoo Sheau Peng decided that Ravi's condition did not materially affect his decision-making ability, and found that he had not been compliant with his medication regime.[76]

Publications

[edit]

In 2014, Ravi wrote an autobiography, Kampong Boy, which was shortlisted for the Singapore Literature Prize.[77]

Notable cases

[edit]

Bibliography

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

M Ravi

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Ravi Madasamy (born 1969), professionally known as M. Ravi, is a Singaporean former lawyer and human rights activist who gained prominence for representing inmates and advocating against in a that maintains one of the world's highest execution rates. After qualifying as an advocate and solicitor following studies at the and , he practiced for over two decades in constitutional, criminal, and law, founding the Singapore Anti-Death Penalty Campaign in 2005 and contributing to the establishment of the Anti-Death Penalty Network. His efforts earned international recognition, including the 2023 International Bar Association Award for Outstanding Contribution by a Legal Practitioner to , despite ongoing professional scrutiny. However, Ravi's career was repeatedly disrupted by disciplinary proceedings related to misconduct, exacerbated by his diagnosed , culminating in a five-year suspension in 2023 for unfounded allegations against the Attorney-General and permanent in May 2024 by the Court of Three Judges for persistent dishonesty and improper conduct across more than ten prior violations. In 2024, he pleaded guilty to multiple criminal charges, including assault on a and a , reflecting a pattern of erratic behavior that authorities attributed not solely to but to deliberate actions.

Background

Early life

M. Ravi, born Ravi Madasamy in 1969 in , was the sixth of seven children to parents of Tamil origin. His family maintained a modest , with his father employed as a and his mother serving as a homemaker. They resided in a in Jalan Kayu, a multi-ethnic village near [Seletar Airport](/page/Seletar Airport), reflecting the typical rural-urban transition experiences of many Singaporean families during that era. Ravi's childhood was marked by adversity, including and domestic instability stemming from his father's abusive behavior, , and intermittent for related offenses. These circumstances contributed to a challenging home environment, where physical violence toward family members was recurrent. Early indicators of Ravi's resilience appeared in his mischievous yet determined nature, such as aiding patients with complaints and undertaking cultural rituals like fire-walking despite age restrictions.

Education and initial qualifications

M Ravi earned a bachelor's degree in political science and sociology from the . Unable to pursue legal studies locally, he obtained a degree from in the , which he funded by S$80,000 in loans from four benefactors including friends, mentors, and former teachers. Following completion of his legal education, Ravi was called to the Singapore Bar in 1997, qualifying him as an advocate and solicitor.

Entry into practice (1996–2006)

M. Ravi was called to the Bar in after completing his legal qualifications. He commenced practice as an and solicitor, initially focusing on general areas such as civil and criminal litigation. This foundational phase involved routine handling of standard cases, allowing him to build practical expertise in core legal domains without specialization in high-profile or ideological matters. During the early years, Ravi's work aligned with typical entry-level responsibilities for newly admitted , including engagements in corporate, commercial, and alongside litigation duties. He operated within established firm structures, accumulating experience through volume-based caseloads in non-contentious and adversarial proceedings. No indicate involvement in or cause-driven representations during this decade, emphasizing instead the development of procedural and substantive skills essential for sustained practice. By 2006, Ravi had established a competent foundation in these routine facets of Singapore's legal system, handling matters that reflected the profession's emphasis on and adherence to established norms. This period preceded any documented pivot toward , marking a conventional progression for a practitioner navigating the competitive local bar.

Shift to cause lawyering (2006–2015)

In the mid-2000s, M. Ravi transitioned from general legal practice to cause lawyering, driven by personal outrage over cases, culminating in the founding of the Anti-Death Penalty Campaign in 2005. This shift positioned him as an advocate for marginalized clients facing execution, particularly under the mandatory death penalty provisions of Singapore's Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA), where trafficking over 15 grams of triggers without judicial discretion. His early efforts emphasized appeals for young or vulnerable offenders, challenging procedural presumptions and urging clemency on grounds of rehabilitation potential. A pivotal representation began in with , a 19-year-old Malaysian arrested for trafficking 47.27 grams of diamorphine, convicted on November 14, 2008, and initially sentenced to death. Ravi's subsequent appeals, including a 2010 Court of Appeal challenge to the of section 9 of the MDA (which presumes trafficking based on possession), highlighted arguments on youth, , and disproportionate , though the court upheld the statutory framework while noting mitigating factors like the appellant's age. These submissions drew public scrutiny to the rigidity of , contributing to broader debates that influenced subsequent policy reviews, including provisions for reduced penalties upon certification of substantive offender assistance. Ravi's approach in these cases often featured assertive advocacy, pressing for of deterrence efficacy and procedural fairness, which occasionally elicited judicial cautions for straying into policy critiques deemed extraneous to legal merits. Despite such rebukes, his persistence in death row appeals—representing multiple clients confronting similar MDA charges—established initial precedents for mercy petitions, as seen in Yong's commutation to and 15 strokes of the cane by presidential prerogative on October 14, 2010, following extensive submissions on and family hardship. This period solidified Ravi's reputation for tackling high-stakes, unpopular defenses, though outcomes remained constrained by Singapore's legal emphasis on statutory mandates over equitable discretion.

Periods of suspension and restoration (2015–2023)

In February 2015, the Law Society of Singapore suspended M. Ravi from legal practice following concerns raised by his psychiatrist regarding a hypomanic state amid his diagnosed , prompting the to impose a formal suspension pending medical assessments. This action followed incidents including erratic courtroom behavior and an assault on a fellow lawyer, leading to requirements for psychiatric treatment and evaluation. Ravi's practicing certificate was restored on , , after approximately four years of suspension and compliance with treatment protocols, including an 18-month period of supervised care. The restoration came with stringent conditions, such as mandatory oversight by his attending , who was required to notify the Law Society of any medical leave exceeding three days in aggregate per month or significant changes in his condition. In December 2021, Ravi was directed by the Law Society to cease practice for six weeks under the terms of his conditional certificate, triggered by a issued for a relapse. This temporary interruption reflected ongoing monitoring of his health stability, amid prior disciplinary probes by the Law Society into professional conduct. By March 21, 2023, the Court of Three Judges imposed a five-year suspension—the maximum allowable for non-dishonesty —following Law Society proceedings over allegations of grave, against the Attorney-General's Chambers, prosecutors, and judicial officers, compounded by Ravi's disciplinary history and limited remorse. This period encompassed repeated Law Society investigations into both health-related lapses and behavioral issues, with partial revivals of his certificate contingent on medical compliance until the 2023 ruling halted practice.

Disbarment and post-legal activities (2024–present)

On 31 May 2024, the Court of Three , 's highest disciplinary tribunal for lawyers, ordered M Ravi to be struck off the roll of advocates and solicitors, permanently disbarring him from legal practice. The decision followed proceedings initiated by the Law Society of Singapore, which cited a pattern of serious professional misconduct across multiple cases, including dishonest representations to the court—such as falsely claiming a client's intent to withdraw a suit—and disrespectful conduct toward a . The tribunal emphasized that the cumulative gravity of these breaches eroded public trust in the profession, necessitating the sanction to safeguard the legal system's integrity. In August 2024, following his , a ruling required M Ravi to repay S$120,000 to his former , K.K. Cheng Law LLC. The funds had been advanced by a group of clients who engaged Ravi for representation; the firm had disbursed the amount to him upon receipt, but the clients later sued successfully for a refund, attributing the recovery obligation to Ravi due to his role in the engagements. Since his , M Ravi has shifted focus to political activism, appearing at events organized by the opposition party (RDU). On 21 March 2025, he participated in an RDU walkabout in Fernvale, part of Jalan Kayu constituency, volunteering support but stating he would not contest the upcoming . This involvement aligns with his prior electoral history, though limited to non-candidacy roles post-2024.

Notable cases

Challenges to death penalty convictions

M. Ravi represented several individuals facing capital charges under Singapore's Misuse of Drugs Act, primarily challenging the mandatory death penalty for trafficking specified quantities of controlled substances. In these appeals, he argued that the mandatory nature of the sentence violated constitutional principles by depriving judges of to consider mitigating factors such as the offender's age, cooperation with authorities, or role in the crime. His efforts contributed to broader legal scrutiny, culminating in 2012 amendments to the Act that introduced prosecutorial and judicial for certain cases involving smaller quantities or substantive assistance to investigations. A prominent case was that of , a Malaysian arrested in 2007 at age 19 for trafficking 47.27 grams of . Initially convicted and sentenced to in 2010, Yong's automatic appeal was withdrawn by prior counsel, but Ravi intervened with a last-minute application to the Court of Appeal, securing a . Ravi filed for leave to challenge the constitutionality of the mandatory death penalty, asserting it was arbitrary and disproportionate under Article 9 of the Singapore Constitution, which guarantees the . The court granted leave in December 2009, marking a rare review that influenced the 2012 legislative reforms. In November 2013, following presidential clemency and prosecutorial certification of cooperation, Yong's sentence was commuted to plus 15 strokes of the cane. In Gobi Avedian's 2017 conviction for trafficking over 40 grams of , Ravi pursued post-appeal avenues after the Court of Appeal upheld the death sentence in 2018. Arguing procedural irregularities, including alleged prosecutorial coercion to withdraw a defense , Ravi sought a and criminal revision. In October 2020, the Court of Appeal quashed the death sentence—the first such post-exhaustion reversal in Singapore's history—citing a material misdirection in the trial judge's handling of Gobi's testimony retraction. Gobi received instead, though Ravi later faced disciplinary action for public allegations of prosecutorial overzealousness in the case. Ravi also represented Cheong Chun Yin, a Malaysian convicted in 2010 for trafficking , whose death sentence was commuted to life in 2013 after demonstrating . Despite these successes, outcomes varied; for instance, in recent interventions like that for Pannir Selvam, convicted of trafficking 44.96 grams of diamorphine, appeals for stays of execution were denied, leading to scheduled hangings amid claims of inadequate deterrence evidence for strict thresholds. Ravi advocated revising quantity thresholds based on empirical data questioning the death penalty's marginal deterrent effect beyond long imprisonment, though authorities maintain its efficacy in suppressing trafficking rates. International pressure, including from , featured in some pleas but did not consistently avert executions.

Constitutional and political litigation

In May 2017, M. Ravi filed an originating summons in the challenging amendments to the Elected Presidency Scheme introduced via the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment) Act 2016, which established reserved elections for specific ethnic communities underrepresented in prior terms. He argued that the revised qualifying criteria under and the reserved election mechanism under Article 19B violated Article 12(2)'s guarantee of equal protection, by discriminating on ethnic grounds and depriving citizens of the fundamental right to stand for public office without rational justification. The dismissed the challenge in its judgment SGHC 163, ruling that Ravi lacked locus standi as he suffered no or special damage from the amendments, and that the substantive claims were meritless. The court rejected Ravi's invocation of the —contending the changes undermined core constitutional features like equality and the —affirming that Singapore's , as in Teo Soh Lung v Minister for Home Affairs 1 SLR(R) 461, does not recognize such a doctrine to invalidate amendments passed under Article 5's entrenchment procedures. It held the qualifications rationally ensured fiscal competence for the presidency's custodial role, while reserved elections advanced without constituting prohibited discrimination, and ordered costs of $6,000 against Ravi, deeming the application an and misuse of judicial resources for political advocacy rather than genuine legal scrutiny. In June 2020, amid the , Ravi mounted another constitutional challenge seeking to halt the general election scheduled for July, asserting that proceeding would infringe voters' rights to safe participation and equal under the . The dismissed the application on June 29, 2020, finding no viable basis to intervene in the executive's constitutional prerogative to call elections under Article 66, and emphasizing that pandemic-related safeguards did not render the process unconstitutional. These challenges exemplify judicial rebuffs to Ravi's attempts to litigate policy critiques as constitutional imperatives, with courts consistently prioritizing procedural validity and rational legislative aims over broad equality claims in electoral and governance contexts.

Other high-profile representations

In the aftermath of the riot on December 8, 2013, which involved over 400 Indian migrant workers overturning a bus following an accident, M Ravi represented affected foreign nationals, including filing an application in the to quash the deportation order of one among the 57 repatriated without formal charges. His challenge invoked Section 39A of the Immigration Act for of immigration decisions, but it did not halt the government's swift repatriation measures aimed at restoring public order. Prosecutors later sought costs against Ravi in May 2014, alleging his criminal motion was negligent and incurred unnecessary expenses on the state. Ravi also handled labor disputes for foreign and local bus drivers, commencing a civil suit in September 2019 on behalf of 13 employees, including former driver Chua Qwong Meng, who claimed underpayment of , built-in in basic salaries, and other unfair practices under employment laws. The representation ended acrimoniously in November 2021 when Ravi demanded the judge recuse herself for alleged bias, prompting the clients to discharge him amid claims of embarrassment and professional letdown; he countered by seeking to withdraw citing a breach of retainer. The case continued under new counsel, , highlighting procedural hurdles in migrant-heavy sectors where work pass dependencies limit . These representations underscore patterns in 's handling of cases, where public order breaches often lead to summary deportations under the Immigration Act with narrow appeal windows, and labor claims face evidentiary burdens on plaintiffs reliant on employer records. Outcomes frequently favor state or employer positions, with judicial emphasis on contractual compliance over systemic vulnerabilities like recruitment debts.

Activism and politics

Human rights campaigns

M. Ravi established the Singapore Anti-Death Penalty Campaign (SADPC), a community group dedicated to assisting families of inmates and advocating for the elimination of . The initiative, launched in the post-2010 period amid rising international scrutiny of 's executions, focuses on public education and support services outside formal legal channels. Ravi also co-founded the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN), a regional coalition promoting abolition across Asian countries through joint statements, awareness drives, and policy critiques. ADPAN's efforts include solidarity campaigns against specific executions and advocacy for aligning national laws with international norms, with Ravi contributing to cross-border networking since the network's inception. In these campaigns, Ravi has publicly contested Singapore's retention of the mandatory death penalty for drug offenses, citing data on low recidivism rates among supervised ex-offenders to argue that extended imprisonment achieves deterrence comparable to execution without irreversible errors. This position contrasts with government claims that bolsters Singapore's empirically low rates, which rank among the world's lowest at approximately 0.6 violent crimes per 100,000 residents in recent years, attributing efficacy to a mix of harsh penalties and . Ravi's earned him the International Bar Association's 2023 Human Rights Award for contributions to underprivileged rights defense.

Electoral involvement

M Ravi entered electoral politics as a candidate for the Reform Party in the 2015 Singapore general election, contesting the (GRC) against the (PAP) team led by Prime Minister . The Reform Party slate, which included M Ravi alongside candidates like Osman Sulaiman and , garnered 36,758 votes, representing 21.36% of the valid votes cast in the constituency with 187,771 electors. In contrast, the PAP team secured 135,467 votes or 78.64%, retaining all seats in the GRC. This result reflected the broader challenges faced by opposition parties in Singapore's , characterized by the GRC framework requiring multi-member teams and ethnic minority representation, alongside the PAP's longstanding incumbency advantages. The Reform Party's performance in marked a modest improvement from their 30.67% in the same constituency during the election, yet it underscored limited voter traction for non-PAP slates amid a national PAP vote share of 69.86%. In subsequent years, M Ravi maintained political associations without further candidacies. In March 2025, ahead of the general election, he volunteered and participated in walkabouts with Red Dot United in the newly formed Jalan Kayu Single Member Constituency, supporting the party's outreach efforts but explicitly stating he would not contest. Red Dot United did not advance M Ravi as a candidate in the 2025 polls, where opposition outcomes continued to show constrained support under Singapore's regulated electoral environment.

Organizational affiliations

M. Ravi served as a founding member of the Singapore Anti-Death Penalty Campaign (SADPC), a community group dedicated to supporting families of inmates and campaigning for the abolition of . He established the organization to address gaps in familial and legal support amid 's mandatory death penalty regime for certain and offenses. Ravi also co-founded the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN), a regional coalition coordinating advocacy across countries to challenge practices and promote alternatives through policy reform and public awareness. These groups operated under Singapore's stringent regulatory framework, including the Societies Act and Public Order Act, which impose registration requirements and restrictions on public assemblies, often constraining their operational scope and efficacy in mobilizing domestic support. In political activism, Ravi affiliated with the Reform Party, a minor opposition party advocating liberal reforms, and contested the as its candidate in the 2015 general election, where he garnered limited votes amid the party's broader challenges in gaining traction against the dominant .) This involvement highlighted tensions between opposition groups and Singapore's , including gerrymandering allegations and media control, which Ravi and allies critiqued as hindering alternative voices, though internal party dynamics remained secondary to state-imposed barriers. Ravi contributed to LGBT rights advocacy through legal representation, notably filing a constitutional challenge against Section 377A of the Penal Code in September 2010 on behalf of Tan Eng Hong, arguing the law's vagueness violated equality and liberty protections; however, the High Court dismissed the suit in 2011, underscoring activist groups' limited success in Singapore's conservative legal landscape. While not holding formal roles in dedicated LGBT organizations, his efforts aligned with broader networks pushing decriminalization, facing efficacy critiques due to government enforcement discretion and societal taboos rather than outright prosecutions. Pre-disbarment, Ravi collaborated with international entities, including advisory inputs to campaigns on Singapore's death penalty and engagements with regional forums, though these ties were informal and amplified by his work rather than institutional memberships. Such partnerships provided platforms for global scrutiny but encountered pushback in Singapore's sovereignty-focused environment, where foreign NGO influences are viewed skeptically by authorities.

Personal life

Family background

M. Ravi was born in 1969 as the sixth of seven children to parents of Tamil descent, whose forebears immigrated from , . His family lived in a in Jalan Kayu during his early years, amid conditions of . Ravi's father exhibited abusive behavior toward his wife and children, compounded by , spendthrift habits, and intermittent . These familial dynamics marked a childhood characterized by domestic strife alongside occasional tenderness. No public records detail Ravi's own marital status or offspring.

Publications and writings

M. Ravi has authored books centered on advocacy, drawing from his legal practice to critique Singapore's mandatory death penalty and constitutional framework. His Kampong Boy, published by Ethos Books in 2013, chronicles his personal background in a and his evolution as a handling politically sensitive cases, emphasizing themes of and systemic reform. The book blends with commentary on legal battles for rights protection, though its distribution remained niche amid Singapore's controlled media landscape. In 2023, Ravi released Hung at Dawn, a 238-page examination of a Malaysian national's case under Singapore's drug trafficking laws, arguing against the irrevocability of through detailed procedural analysis. The work, published independently, extends his abolitionist stance by highlighting evidentiary and sentencing flaws, positioning the death penalty as disproportionately punitive without proven deterrent value. Beyond books, Ravi contributed as external author to a 2007 European Parliament briefing on Singapore's death penalty application, detailing its mandatory nature for offenses like murder and narcotics trafficking, and advocating for discretionary sentencing reforms based on international standards.348620) In 2014, he published "Hougang By-election Judgment: A Victory for All" in Al-Mizan, the Association of Muslim Lawyers' journal, interpreting the ruling as advancing electoral fairness and opposition viability under Singapore's . These writings, often self-directed or via advocacy outlets, reflect Ravi's first-hand causal critiques of legal rigidity but have elicited limited academic engagement, with circulation constrained by his professional suspensions and the insular nature of Singapore's legal discourse.

Health and accountability

Bipolar disorder diagnosis and episodes

M. Ravi was diagnosed with in 2006. The condition involves recurrent episodes of or alternating with depressive phases, often requiring ongoing psychiatric management. In February 2015, a psychiatric report by Dr. Munidasa Winslow assessed Ravi as being in a hypomanic phase of his , characterized by elevated mood, increased energy, and reduced need for sleep. This coincided with professional scrutiny over his fitness to practice law. By October 2016, during a disciplinary proceeding, Ravi was again described as experiencing a hypomanic linked to his bipolar condition. Ravi has had multiple relapses requiring hospitalization. In June and August 2017, he was remanded at the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) for psychiatric evaluation and treatment following acute episodes. Another remand occurred in July 2023 for medical assessment amid reported instability. Treatment challenges have included intermittent non-compliance with prescribed medications, which psychiatric assessments link to relapse risks despite Ravi's awareness of his condition. In January 2018, following an episode, he was placed under an 18-month Mandatory Treatment Order mandating regular blood tests to monitor medication levels and adherence. Subsequent evaluations in noted ongoing issues with treatment adherence as a factor in recurrent instability.

Judicial assessments of mental health defenses

In disciplinary proceedings from 2015 to 2023, courts and tribunals frequently viewed M. Ravi's as a contributing factor to his professional misconduct, opting for temporary suspensions with reinstatement conditioned on psychiatric certification of fitness rather than permanent exclusion from practice. For example, a 2015 indefinite suspension by the Law Society explicitly tied resumption of practice to approval from an approved , reflecting acknowledgment of episodic impairment linked to his 2006 diagnosis. Subsequent rulings, including fines in earlier tribunals like SGDT 12 ($3,000 penalty) and SGDT 7 ($7,000 for client fund mishandling without dishonesty), similarly discounted severity due to the condition's influence on judgment. The High Court's 31 May 2024 decision in SGHC 141 marked a shift, recognizing bipolar disorder's prior mitigating role across multiple cases but rejecting it for the cumulative gravity of breaches, including . evidence, such as a 28 June 2022 report from Dr. Lim, affirmed Ravi's capacity to discern right from wrong during incidents, rendering personal circumstances secondary to public protection and professional integrity. The court emphasized that repeated lapses despite treatment undermined ongoing mitigation claims, justifying striking off the roll of advocates and solicitors. In Ravi's 2 August 2024 criminal sentencing for nine charges spanning 2022–2023, Deputy Principal District Judge Luke Tan largely discounted as mitigation, stressing the volitional quality of offenses and Ravi's poor rehabilitation record amid non-adherence to prescribed management. The judge imposed 14 weeks' jail and fines totaling $5,500, determining the condition neither substantially reduced moral culpability nor warranted leniency given prior judicial accommodations. This aligned with evolving assessments prioritizing over episodic defenses in volitional misconduct.

Criminal convictions linked to conduct

In November 2023, M. Ravi was sentenced to 21 days' imprisonment for nine instances of , stemming from disruptive behavior before two judges in separate proceedings between January and September 2023. These acts included shouting interruptions, unauthorized filings, and refusal to comply with judicial directions during hearings. On July 17, 2024, Ravi pleaded guilty to nine charges for offenses committed between November 2021 and September 2023, including one count of by pushing a at Sri Mariamman Temple on July 12, 2023, causing disorderly behavior there by creating a public ruckus, and ing a by choking him during an office dispute. Additional charges involved , such as sending abusive messages, and through verbal insults to a saleswoman. On August 2, 2024, the State Courts imposed a sentence of 14 weeks' jail, a S$5,500 fine, and compensation payments totaling S$2,000 to two victims for these offenses. Ten other related charges, including further assaults and , were taken into consideration. This series of convictions highlights repeated instances of physical confrontations and public disruptions following his suspension from legal practice in March 2023.

Controversies

Professional misconduct proceedings

In 2015, the Law Society of Singapore initiated proceedings against M. Ravi for professional misconduct arising from his conduct in a legal application, where he was found to have made baseless allegations and misrepresented facts in affidavits. The in Law Society of Singapore v Ravi M SGHC 110 determined that Ravi's actions lacked foundation and undermined judicial processes, resulting in sanctions short of suspension at that stage. Further investigations followed in subsequent years, including scrutiny over allegations made in against government ministers, which were deemed unfounded after clarification by involved parties and lacked evidentiary support. These patterns of unsubstantiated claims prompted ongoing monitoring by the Law Society. In October 2020, the Attorney-General's Chambers filed a disciplinary complaint with the Law Society regarding Ravi's public statements accusing the Attorney-General and prosecutors of improper conduct in handling a capital case, including claims of overzealous prosecution and bias. The Court of Three Judges, in its March 21, 2023, ruling, characterized these as "grave and baseless accusations" that eroded public confidence in legal institutions, imposing the maximum five-year suspension from practice effective immediately. While serving this suspension, Ravi faced additional proceedings for misconduct in 2022-2023, including filing applications with false assertions against then-President regarding prime ministerial appointments and exhibiting rude, disruptive behavior toward a judge during hearings. The Court of Three Judges, on May 31, 2024, ordered Ravi struck off the rolls, citing the cumulative severity of his dishonest conduct and repeated abuse of court processes as irredeemable breaches of . This disbarment followed findings that prior sanctions had failed to deter further violations, marking the end of his eligibility to practice law in .

Public statements and contempt findings

In June 2017, M. Ravi publicly accused Law and Home Affairs Minister of and in statements demanding the minister's resignation within 48 hours. These claims, disseminated via , prompted police investigations for potential but lacked supporting evidence and were later characterized as part of a pattern of unsubstantiated allegations against officials. Ravi frequently utilized media platforms, including posts and online s, to level unverified criticisms against judicial and governmental figures, often alleging bias or impropriety without substantiation. For instance, in an October 2020 concerning the case of Malaysian drug Gobi Avedian, he accused prosecutors of overzealous conduct and improper motives, claims courts subsequently deemed "grave and baseless." Such public remarks contributed to disciplinary scrutiny, including a 2023 five-year suspension for undermining confidence in legal institutions through reckless assertions. In November 2021, during State Courts proceedings before District Chay Yuen Fatt in Public Prosecutor v Magendran s/o Murthu, Ravi accused the judge of , interrupted proceedings, and remarked that the judge lacked "security of tenure" and could be "removed…at will by the State," implying vulnerability to executive influence. These statements, made amid disputes over case scheduling, were found to insult the and erode public trust, constituting . Later that month, in proceedings before Justice Audrey Lim in Chua Qwong Meng v SBS Transit Ltd, Ravi further alleged judicial bias, labeled the judge an "interrogator," interrupted her directions as "unlawful" and contrary to "," and declared "no in ." He also applied for recusal without client authorization and sent an unauthorized email misrepresenting instructions. On March 31, 2023, the held Ravi liable for nine instances of contempt across these episodes, rejecting defenses tied to relapse due to non-compliance with treatment and absence of remorse; the acts were deemed "highly reprehensible" for disrupting proceedings while representing clients. He was sentenced to 21 days' imprisonment on November 8, 2023, highlighting repeated failures of prior sanctions to curb such breaches of decorum.

Criticisms of activism and personal behavior

In a 2017 ruling dismissing M. Ravi's challenge to changes in Singapore's Elected Presidency scheme, Justice See Kee Oon criticized Ravi for misusing the judicial process as a platform for political , describing his arguments as unclear and lacking specific remedies while introducing irrelevant political commentary on . The judge characterized Ravi as a "mere and social gadfly" intent on ventilating polemical views rather than advancing meritorious legal claims, resulting in the case's dismissal for lack of standing and an order for Ravi to pay S$6,000 in costs. Singaporean legal peers have assessed Ravi's advocacy as disruptive, with lawyer Eugene Thuraisingam accusing him of instilling false hope in clients and families through repeated, ultimately futile appeals, as seen in the Yong Vui Kong case where persistent filings prolonged proceedings without altering outcomes. Local media reports have highlighted instances where Ravi's public confrontations overshadowed substantive advocacy, such as his disruptive involvement in the 2013 Sri Mariamman Temple dispute with politician Jeanette Chong-Aruldoss, which escalated to require an 18-month mandatory treatment order rather than resolution through dialogue. Ravi's personal conduct has further eroded his credibility among stakeholders, exemplified by a July 12, 2023, incident near where he was charged with assaulting a man by slapping his left and engaging in disorderly behavior by shouting loudly in public. He denied the charges but was remanded for psychiatric evaluation, with the case adjourned to July 28, 2023. Additionally, in August 2024, a ordered Ravi to repay S$120,000 to his former , which had received payments from clients for services Ravi promised but failed to deliver after his practice suspension, prompting client lawsuits for and underscoring lapses in professional reliability.

Recognition and legacy

International awards and endorsements

In 2023, Ravi Madasamy received the International Bar Association's Award for Outstanding Contribution by a Legal Practitioner to , recognizing his representation of inmates and advocacy against . The award, announced on November 2, 2023, highlighted his persistence in challenging systemic barriers to fair trials for vulnerable defendants, including those with intellectual disabilities. Front Line Defenders, an Ireland-based NGO focused on protecting defenders, has endorsed Ravi as an international , maintaining a dedicated profile on his work defending clients in politically sensitive cases over two decades. The organization has repeatedly attributed professional sanctions against him, such as his 2024 , to retaliation for advocacy, urging Singaporean authorities to revoke such measures and cease . The has further contextualized Ravi's experiences in its January 2024 report on the endangering of lawyers in , citing his 2023 five-year suspension as an instance of judicial repercussions for criticizing prosecutorial conduct in death penalty proceedings. This coverage frames his challenges within broader regional patterns of risks to practitioners, including arrests and professional disqualifications for contesting state policies. Such international acknowledgments contrast with Singapore's institutional assessments, emphasizing Ravi's role in advancing legal protections amid authoritarian pressures.

Domestic evaluations and impacts

M Ravi's challenges to mandatory death sentences under Singapore's drug trafficking laws spurred debates on judicial and , emphasizing the need for individualized assessments over rigid penalties. In cases like that of Gobi Avedian, Ravi successfully argued for resentencing on grounds of investigative , leading to a commutation to in 2018, though such outcomes remained exceptional. His filings often highlighted disparities in how discretion was exercised, critiquing the Attorney-General's Chambers for selective certification of capital charges, yet courts rejected broader calls to dismantle , affirming legislative intent for deterrence. Despite these efforts, Ravi's domestic influence faced systemic rejections, with appellate rulings consistently upholding the death penalty regime and imposing personal costs on him, including orders for legal fees in unsuccessful appeals. This pattern underscored limited precedents for , as evidenced by the persistence of capital convictions without widespread resentencing post his interventions. Ravi's advocacy illuminated rule-of-law frictions in , particularly around transparency in executive clemency and , but drew domestic critiques for eroding public trust in institutions through inflammatory statements. Disciplinary panels cited his "baseless allegations" against the and Law Society as demonstrating disregard for legal norms, potentially exacerbating perceptions of adversarial over constructive engagement. Post-disbarment on May 31, 2024, Ravi's capacity to shape Singapore's legal landscape waned, confining him to non-practicing commentary amid ongoing executions. Death penalty applications remained unaltered, with at least 10 executions carried out in 2024 alone, including multiple drug-related hangings, reflecting no empirical shift toward abolition despite his prior campaigns. By October 2025, his involvement persisted peripherally, such as urging moratoriums in cases like Pannir Selvam's, but without altering enforcement trends.

References

  1. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/7/death-penalty-the-singapore-lawyer
  2. https://www.nlb.gov.sg/main/article-detail?cmsuuid=0fa9cde2-7575-49fd-a606-ac5488acddb8
  3. https://www.ricemedia.co/culture-people-m-ravi/
  4. https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/case/human-rights-defender-and-lawyer-m-ravi-disbarred
  5. https://www.ibanet.org/Ravi-Madasamy-receives-IBA-Human-Rights-Award-2023
  6. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/m-ravi-lawyer-disbarred-court-3-judges-improper-conduct-dishonest-4376871
  7. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/former-lawyer-m-ravi-cannot-be-allowed-to-hide-behind-bipolar-disorder-prosecution
  8. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/disbarred-lawyer-m-ravi-guilty-choke-colleague-push-priest-4879256
  9. https://theindependent.sg/whats-your-agenda-mr-ravi/
  10. https://workingwithgrace.wordpress.com/2018/05/12/book-review-kampong-boy-by-m-ravi/
  11. https://sg.style.yahoo.com/does-m-ravi-crusader-condemned-093800359.html
  12. https://my.linkedin.com/posts/m-ravi_i-was-recently-featured-in-lawyer-stories-activity-7057200552882950144-buPF
  13. https://www.elitigation.sg/gd/s/2011_SGCA_9
  14. https://www.elitigation.sg/gd/s/2012_SGCA_23
  15. https://adpan.org/singapore-case-study-yong-vui-kong/
  16. https://deathpenaltyproject.org/my-journey-with-vui-kong/
  17. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/law-society-issues-statement-explaining-lawyer-m-ravis-suspension
  18. https://sg.news.yahoo.com/singapore-lawyer-m-ravi-told-to-stop-practising-law-pending-medical-exam--reports-234832002.html
  19. https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/m-ravi-returns-law-practice-after-reality-jolt-spurred-high-profile-incidents
  20. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/m-ravi-to-stop-practising-law-immediately-after-psychiatrist-prescribes-six
  21. https://sg.news.yahoo.com/m-ravi-ordered-law-society-stop-practising-law-lengthy-mc-115739021.html
  22. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/m-ravi-stop-practising-law-6-weeks-while-medical-leave-2356646
  23. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/lawyer-m-ravi-suspended-maximum-5-years-allegations-against-agc-law-society-3362521
  24. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/lawyer-m-ravi-suspended-for-5-years-over-baseless-allegations-against-justice-system
  25. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/m-ravi-disbarred-for-false-claims-against-president-over-pm-appointments-rude-behaviour-to-judge
  26. https://www.elitigation.sg/gd/s/2024_SGHC_141?ref=jom.media
  27. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/ex-lawyer-m-ravi-ordered-to-return-120000-paid-by-clients-to-his-former-law-firm
  28. https://theindependent.sg/court-orders-disbarred-lawyer-m-ravi-to-return-120000-paid-by-clients-to-former-firm/
  29. https://mothership.sg/2025/03/m-ravi-red-dot-united/
  30. https://deathpenaltyproject.org/press-release-reform-of-the-death-penalty-in-singapore-a-glimmer-of-hope/
  31. https://www.civicus.org/index.php/media-resources/news/interviews/6382-singapore-being-a-human-rights-lawyer-has-had-a-huge-personal-cost
  32. https://deathpenaltyproject.org/yong-vui-kong-removed-from-death-row-in-singapore/
  33. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-24940568
  34. https://deathpenaltyproject.org/malaysian-man-has-death-sentence-quashed-as-judgment-in-singapore-makes-judicial-history/
  35. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/press-release/2012/05/singapore-authorities-urged-save-malaysian-man-execution/
  36. https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2025/09/22/msian-on-death-row-in-singapore-to-be-executed-this-thursday
  37. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/m-ravi-files-constitutional-challenge-against-elected-presidency-changes
  38. https://www.elitigation.sg/gd/s/2017_SGHC_163
  39. https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/m-ravis-legal-challenge-against-ep-scheme-dismissed
  40. https://www.straitstimes.com/politics/singapore-ge2020-m-ravi-files-court-challenge-to-stop-election-from-being-held
  41. https://www.straitstimes.com/politics/singapore-ge2020-high-court-dismisses-constitutional-challenge-against-holding-election-now
  42. https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/singapore-lawyer-applies-to-quash-deportation-of-indians-545676
  43. https://sg.news.yahoo.com/give-authorities-room-to-make-decisions-in-repatriations-042422936.html
  44. https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/little-india-riot-prosecutors-seek-costs-lawyer-over-criminal-motion
  45. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/m-ravi-sbs-transit-lawsuit-bus-drivers-2332566
  46. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/bus-drivers-discharge-m-ravi-from-sbs-transit-lawsuit-saying-he-let-them-down
  47. https://www.asiaone.com/singapore/m-ravi-tells-high-court-judge-disqualify-herself-hearing-bus-drivers-suit-against-sbs
  48. https://mothership.sg/2021/11/lim-tean-sbs/
  49. https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2020/country-chapters/singapore
  50. https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/profile/ravi-madasamy
  51. https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/8841745/death-penalty-transcript-thomas-m-cooley-law-school
  52. https://thediplomat.com/2013/11/singapore-and-the-death-penalty/
  53. https://mothership.sg/2015/08/lawyer-m-ravi-might-join-reform-party-to-contest-ang-mo-kio-grc-against-pm-lee-hsien-loong/
  54. https://www.eld.gov.sg/elections_past_parliamentary2015.html
  55. https://www.straitstimes.com/politics/ge2015-pm-lees-team-wins-ang-mo-kio-grc-with-786-per-cent-of-votes
  56. https://mothership.sg/2015/09/ge2015-the-10-constituencies-with-the-most-improved-vote-share-from-ge2011/
  57. https://www.asiaone.com/singapore/former-lawyer-m-ravi-spotted-walkabout-red-dot-united-new-jalan-kayu-smc
  58. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/politics/opposition-red-dot-united-goes-on-walkabout-in-jalan-kayu-introduces-party-member
  59. https://the-singapore-lgbt-encyclopaedia.fandom.com/wiki/M_Ravi
  60. https://pacificaffairs.ubc.ca/perspectives/the-politics-of-compromise-analysing-the-repeal-of-section-377a-in-singapore/
  61. https://singaporeunbound.org/blog/2017/9/13/walking-on-fire
  62. https://workingwithgrace.wordpress.com/tag/m-ravi-biography/
  63. https://www.ethosbooks.com.sg/products/kampong-boy
  64. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18329920-kampong-boy
  65. https://www.amazon.com/Hung-At-Dawn-M-Ravi/dp/9810548486
  66. https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/11396021-hung-at-dawn
  67. https://mravilaw.org/team/m-ravi/
  68. https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/m-ravi-ordered-go-psychological-treatment-assaulting-fellow-lawyer
  69. https://sg.news.yahoo.com/lawyer-m-ravi-suspended-until-certified-fit-to-practice-by-approved-psychiatrist-130755767.html
  70. https://fn8org.wordpress.com/2016/12/06/a-miscarriage-of-justice/
  71. https://sg.news.yahoo.com/lawyer-m-ravi-charged-causing-public-nuisance-remanded-imh-two-weeks-052655497.html
  72. https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/m-ravi-charged-criminal-trespass
  73. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/m-ravi-charged-causing-hurt-slap-man-lawyer-3628986
  74. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/jail-fine-for-ex-lawyer-m-ravi-for-offences-like-pushing-priest-in-temple-insulting-saleswoman
  75. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/m-ravi-lawyer-fined-crimes-judge-rejects-bipolar-disorder-defence-4521981
  76. https://www.elitigation.sg/gd/s/2024_SGHC_141
  77. https://www.newindianexpress.com/world/2024/Aug/02/singapores-indian-origin-human-rights-lawyer-jailed-for-string-of-crimes
  78. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/suspended-lawyer-m-ravi-jailed-21-days-for-acts-of-contempt-before-two-different-judges
  79. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/m-ravi-jailed-21-weeks-contempt-court-lawyer-3905721
  80. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/m-ravi-pleads-guilty-latest-string-crimes-push-priest-sri-mariamman-temple-ruckus-paralegal-4484931
  81. https://lawyerz.com/api/caselaw/M.%2520Ravi%2520Case%2520%282015%29%2520Examined%2520Allegations%2520Of%2520Professional%2520Misconduct%2520Against%2520Human%2520Rights%2520Lawyer%2520M.%2520Ravi.?sessionID=mco1slca-3f2fa233-444b-4e87-a5c4-0277499c4be4
  82. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/police-investigating-lawyer-m-ravi-for-criminal-defamation
  83. https://www.reddit.com/r/singapore/comments/r2bkpa/law_society_closely_monitoring_matters_concerning/
  84. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/agc-makes-disciplinary-complaint-to-law-society-against-lawyer-m-ravi
  85. https://mothership.sg/2023/03/m-ravi-suspended-5-years/
  86. https://www.mlaw.gov.sg/news/replies/response-by-minlaw-article-on-ravi-madasamy-receiving-iba-human-rights-award-2023/
  87. https://coconuts.co/singapore/news/political-activist-m-ravi-accuses-law-minister-of-adultery-and-sexual-misconduct-hell-soon-to-follow/
  88. https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/case/human-rights-defender-and-lawyer-m-ravi-sentenced-21-days-prison-contempt-court
  89. https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/southeast-asia/article/3214344/singapore-lawyer-m-ravi-slapped-5-year-suspension-baseless-attacks-against-judiciary
  90. https://www.elitigation.sg/gd/s/2023_SGHC_78
  91. https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/m-ravi-misused-court-platform-political-point-scoring-judge
  92. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/suspended-lawyer-m-ravi-charged-with-disorderly-behaviour-in-public-and-assault
  93. https://www.asiaone.com/singapore/m-ravi-ordered-return-120k-paid-clients-his-former-law-firm
  94. https://www.ibanet.org/The-endangering-of-lawyers-in-Southeast-Asia
  95. https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/05/22/singapore-doubles-down-executions
  96. https://resolve.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/27F8182355493CC79B647CB986C18977/9781009513517c4_83-108.pdf/debate-and-contestation-in-singapores-death-penalty.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.