Gobi, 32, who was sentenced to 15 years in jail and 10 strokes of the cane, is seeking unspecified damages from the defendants, alleging in court papers that the defendants had “abused their powers and acted in bad faith by improperly performing a legal act which resulted in harm to the plaintiff”.
According to The Straits Times, he also alleged that the defendants had “breached their fundamental duties to assist in the administration of justice”.
Nine defendants are named in the suit filed by lawyer M Ravi: The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC), current AG Lucien Wong, deputy AGs Hri Kumar Nair and Lionel Yee, deputy chief prosecutor Mohamed Faizal Abdul Kadir, and prosecutors Tan Zhongshan, Nicholas Wuan, Chin Jincheng and Chong Kee En.
A spokesman for the AGC confirmed that it has been served the court papers.
“The claims are without merit and we will defend them vigorously,” ST quoted the spokesman as saying in a report today.
The Court of Appeal’s decision was the result of a change in legal position last year over the doctrine of wilful blindness, as well as changes in the prosecution’s case against Gobi at the appeal.
Wilful blindness is a legal term for the mental state of a person who suspects the truth but deliberately refuses to investigate further.
Gobi was originally charged over the import of 40.22g of heroin, after being caught at the Woodlands Checkpoint in 2014.
He was initially spared the death penalty in 2017 when the High Court found he was unaware of the nature of the drugs he was carrying. However, the prosecution appealed and were able to convict him of the original capital charge.
Last year, after a Nigerian man avoided the death penalty on appeal after it was shown he did not know about the presence of drugs in his suitcase, Gobi asked the apex court to review its decision. The court agreed and quashed Gobi’s death penalty conviction.
After the judgment on Oct 19, Ravi called the prosecutors “overzealous” in an interview with news site, The Online Citizen.
The AGC demanded that Ravi apologise and retract his statement, but he did neither.
On Oct 23, the AGC said it had filed a disciplinary complaint to the Law Society against Ravi for possible professional misconduct.