Defence Demands Acquittal for Trio in Controversial Case

In a gripping courtroom drama, defence lawyers representing three Singaporean women accused of organizing a pro-Palestinian procession to the Istana have passionately urged the court to acquit them of all charges. Their lawyers argued that the event aimed merely to deliver letters to the Istana, not a public demonstration.

Mr. Derek Wong and Mr. Uthayasurian Sidambaram from Phoenix Law emphasized that the gathering was structured to guide participants safely to the destination, challenging the prosecution's claim that it constituted an unauthorized public procession.

Understanding the Charges: What’s at Stake?

Mossammad Sobikun Nahar (26), Siti Amirah Mohamed Asrori (30), and Annamalai Kokila Parvathi (37) are contesting charges under the Public Order Act for organizing an assembly that advocated for Palestinian solidarity on February 2, 2024. Each woman faces serious legal implications as the prosecution seeks to establish that they intended to mobilize a public demonstration.

In a twist, the defence contended that Annamalai was not an organizer but a supportive friend, a claim that the prosecution swiftly countered, asserting that this isn’t merely about supporting a cause but about organizing an illegal procession.

Prosecutors Present a Strong Case!

Leading the prosecution, Deputy Public Prosecutor Hay Hung Chun insisted that the nature of the gathering went beyond mere letter writing. He painted a vivid picture of a well-orchestrated assembly, emphasizing the significant symbol of solidarity displayed—participants carrying umbrellas marked with the imagery of watermelons, a known emblem of support for Palestine.

Mr. Hay argued that the trio’s actions underlined their awareness of the potential consequences, pointing to a police advisory issued last year that strictly prohibited public assemblies related to the Israel-Hamas conflict due to safety concerns.

Judge Questions the Legal Basis!

The courtroom tension intensified as District Judge John Ng probed both sides on the implications of the police advisory regarding public permits. He questioned whether the accused should have known the area was off-limits, emphasizing the need for clarity in the prosecution's argument.

In response to the defence's plea that their intentions were simply to deliver letters, Judge Ng noted that there seemed to be a more urgent sentiment motivating the participants.

Awaiting the Verdict: What Lies Ahead?

After hearing compelling arguments on both sides, Judge Ng declared he needed time to deliberate before rendering a verdict. The three women will return to court on October 21, where they face the possibility of severe penalties, including up to six months in jail, a fine of up to S$10,000, or both.

As this high-stakes case unfolds, it raises critical questions about freedom of expression, public order, and the limits of activism in Singapore.