AG acts to stop man after his fourth appeal

SINGAPORE - For the past three years, a 39-year-old man has made repeated bids to get the courts to review his conviction even though he has exhausted his right to appeal.

But enough is enough, the Attorney-General (AG) seems to feel after Mr Mah Kiat Seng filed his fourth application.

The AG took legal steps to bar him from filing further applications on his conviction without permission from the High Court.

On Tuesday, the AG's application came before the High Court and even before he began to argue his case, Mr Mah told Justice Lee Seiu Kin that he was prepared to file an appeal against his decision.

He then plunged into a 4 1/2-hour speech, during which he railed against the police and the judges who had ruled against him.

Mr Mah had been arrested in 2009 for causing grievous hurt but was convicted by a district court in 2010 for one charge of refusing to have his fingerprints and photograph taken by the police and one charge of refusing to give a blood sample.

He was fined $500 on each charge and he paid the fine.

But he appealed to the High Court in 2010 and succeeded in being cleared on the blood sample charge as proper procedures had not been followed.

Since then, every application - known as a criminal motion - to review his conviction on the other charge has been vexatious and an abuse of process, Deputy Senior State Counsel Mohamed Faizal said on Tuesday.

Mr Mah was making the same arguments over and over again and had raised no new evidence, he added.

The Court of Appeal, in dismissing his second criminal motion in May 2011, had said he was in effect seeking a back-door appeal.

But on Tuesday, Mr Mah alleged, among other things, that the police had fixed him by luring him to the police station and losing a charge sheet.

He claimed some cops were "ex-gangsters". "If somebody can have a good job outside, I don't see why they want to be a policeman," he added.

He likened the district court to a factory production operator whose error should be reversed by the High Court, which he said was responsible for quality control.

After Justice Lee said he would give his decision in writing at a later date, Mr Mah reminded the judge to include a certain part of his (Mr Mah's) arguments in the judgment.

Get a copy of The Straits Times or go to for more stories.