Connect with us

Politics

LHY: Public to judge why Shanmugam and Balakrishnan suing in Singapore and not UK

Last week, Singaporean ministers Shanmugam and Balakrishnan initiated a defamation suit in the Singapore High Court against Lee Hsien Yang, the son of Singapore’s founding father, Lee Kuan Yew.

In response, LHY stated that he had invited the two PAP ministers to pursue legal action in the UK, where the statements that upset them were made.

He added, “Instead, they have chosen to commence legal action in Singapore. It is for the public to judge their reasons.”

Published

on

SINGAPORE: Last week, Mr K Shanmugam, the Law and Home Affairs Minister, of Singapore, and Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, formally filed a defamation suit in the Singapore High Court against Lee Hsien Yang, the son of Singapore founding father Lee Kuan Yew.

The case is slated for an in-chamber hearing on Tuesday (5 Sept) at 9 am morning.

The two ministers are represented by three lawyers from Davinder Singh Chambers, including the prominent senior lawyer Davinder Singh, who previously represented Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in previous high-profile defamation cases.

In his latest Facebook post, Lee Hsien Yang, the younger brother of Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, said he invited the two PAP ministers to pursue legal action against him in the UK, where he “made the statement that upset them”.

“Instead, they have chosen to commence legal action in Singapore. It is for the public to judge their reasons.”

Lee Hsien Yang accuses Ministers Shanmugam and Balakrishnan of pressuring for false apology

On 27 July, Ministers Shanmugam and Balakrishnan announced plans to sue LHY over defamation allegations, unless an apology is issued and the statements are retracted.

LHY is accused of suggesting that the ministers acted corruptly, receiving preferential treatment by the Singapore Land Authority (SLA) through unauthorized tree felling and state-funded renovations of 26 and 31 Ridout Road. Both ministers have categorically refuted these allegations.

In a Facebook post, Mr Shanmugam outlined their demands: Mr Lee is to retract his accusations, issue an apology, and pay damages, which would subsequently be donated to charity. Non-compliance would trigger a lawsuit.

In a later post, Lee Hsien Yang dismissed the claims made by the two Ministers.

He has further challenged the ministers to sue him in the UK, a response following their threats of legal action unless he retracted his statements and issued an apology.

In a Facebook post on 29 July, LHY addressed the controversy, stating, “My post did not assert that Shanmugam and V Balakrishnan acted corruptly or for personal gain by having the Singapore Land Authority (SLA) give them preferential treatment by illegally felling trees without approval and also having SLA pay for renovations for them. My post simply stated facts that were already widely published in the Singapore and international media.”

Lee Hsien Yang on 31 July further alleged that the two ministers were pressuring him to issue a public apology that he perceived to be falsified.

He claimed the ministers demanded he make a specific statement: “I recognise that the Post meant and was understood to mean that Mr K Shamugam/Dr Vivian Balakrishnan acted corruptly and for personal gain by having the Singapore Land Authority give him preferential treatment by felling trees without approval and illegally and having it pay for renovations to 31 Ridout Road.”

LHY staunchly defends his initial words: “Two ministers have leased state-owned mansions from the agency that one of them controls, felling trees and getting state-sponsored renovations.”

He believes his original statement does not equate to an allegation of corruption or personal gain, and criticizes the ministers for insisting on a “false apology” for words he claims he did not utter.

Claim amount in High Court civil litigation starts at S$ 250,000

With the two ministers officially filing the lawsuit, the next step, following the court procedure, would be to serve the summons on Lee Hsien Yang, who is also the younger brother of PM Lee.

If Lee Hsien Yang’s address is unknown, the plaintiffs can apply to the court to serve the summons through methods such as email, social media, newspaper advertisements, and more.

Subsequently, if Lee Hsien Yang fails to submit a defence within the stipulated timeframe, the plaintiffs can apply for a default judgment, securing a victory in the case and seeking compensation from Lee Hsien Yang.

Typically, the claim amount in High Court civil litigation starts at S$ 250,000.

 

Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Politics

Dr Tan Cheng Bock questions S$335 million Founders’ Memorial cost, citing Lee Kuan Yew’s stance

Dr Tan Cheng Bock has raised concerns over the S$335 million cost of Singapore’s Founders’ Memorial, citing Lee Kuan Yew’s opposition to monuments and suggesting the funds could be better used for healthcare. The memorial, slated for completion by 2028, faces rising costs, with the estimated cost not including operating or land costs.

Published

on

On 14 September 2023, Dr Tan Cheng Bock, former People’s Action Party (PAP) MP and founder of the Progress Singapore Party, publicly expressed concerns over the estimated S$335 million cost for the Founders’ Memorial.

In a detailed Facebook post, he questioned the necessity of such an extravagant expenditure and referred to the late Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew’s known opposition to monuments in his honour.

Dr Tan highlighted a poignant moment from Lee Kuan Yew’s eulogy, delivered by his grandson, Li Shengwu, on 29 March 2015.

Li recalled how, when it was once suggested that a monument be built for him, Lee Kuan Yew had responded, “Remember Ozymandias.” This reference was to a sonnet by Percy Bysshe Shelley about Ramses II, in which a traveler encounters the ruins of a once-grand statue in the desert. The statue bore the inscription: “My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings; look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!” But nothing else remained of the empire.

Li Shengwu reflected that his grandfather’s remark underscored his belief that if Singapore failed, a monument would be useless, and if it thrived, a monument would be unnecessary.

“His legacy is not cold stone, but a living nation. We could no more forget him than we could forget the sky,” Li said, adding that Lee Kuan Yew’s enduring contribution lay in the strong institutions he built, which persist beyond the individual and ensure Singapore’s stability.

In his post, Dr Tan echoed these sentiments, questioning whether spending S$335 million on a memorial aligned with the founding leaders’ values.

He suggested that the funds might be better spent addressing pressing national issues, particularly healthcare, as Singapore’s population continues to age. Dr Tan, who served for decades as a practising doctor, called for investments in a home care system, noting that such a move would reduce the strain on hospitals while improving the well-being of the elderly.

The estimated S$335 million figure was revealed during a Parliamentary session on 9 September 2023, in response to a question posed by Louis Chua, a Workers’ Party MP for Sengkang GRC. Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Edwin Tong provided the cost breakdown, explaining that the figure covers construction, the fit-out of exhibition galleries, a viewing gallery, an outdoor amphitheatre, family spaces, amenities, and a five-hectare outdoor garden.

Mr Tong added that the final operating costs for the memorial are still being worked out alongside the development of operational plans.

Notably, Mr Tong’s disclosure did not include land costs.

Lee Hsien Yang, son of the late Lee Kuan Yew, also responded to Dr Tan’s post, pointing out that the five-hectare site in Bay East Garden could significantly increase the overall cost.

He noted that a nearby plot of land at Marina Gardens Crescent, measuring about 1.5 hectares, was tendered earlier in 2023 but rejected for a bid of S$984 per square foot, deemed too low by the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA). Based on this price, the value of the land for the Founders’ Memorial could exceed S$500 million, pushing the overall cost of the project even higher.

The Founders’ Memorial, initially slated for completion in 2025 to coincide with Singapore’s 60th birthday, is now expected to open by the end of 2028. The project was delayed due to extensive infrastructural work at its Bay East Garden location and disruptions caused by the Covid-19 pandemic. The twin two-storey buildings, designed by Kengo Kuma & Associates and Singapore’s K2LD Architects, will house an integrated gallery and public gardens, intended to serve as a space for reflection on Singapore’s past and inspiration for the future.

While Minister Tong emphasized that the memorial aims to capture the spirit of the nation and foster unity, Dr Tan urged that the focus should remain on practical solutions for Singapore’s future. He argued that a simpler, more humble memorial would be more in line with the founding leaders’ values, allowing the remainder of the funds to be redirected toward initiatives that benefit the nation’s aging population.

Continue Reading

Labour

Jamus Lim argues why Jobseeker Support Scheme is the PAP’s version of unemployment insurance

In a Facebook post, Workers’ Party MP Jamus Lim rejected PAP’s claim that the JSS isn’t unemployment insurance. He explained WP’s redundancy insurance plan, emphasizing shared responsibility between employers, employees, and the government. While noting concerns about dependency, he argued these fears are exaggerated, stressing a balanced support approach.

Published

on

SINGAPORE: Associate Professor Jamus Lim, Workers’ Party Member of Parliament for Sengkang GRC, has offered his take on the SkillsFuture Jobseeker Support Scheme (JSS), which he describes as the People’s Action Party’s (PAP) equivalent of unemployment insurance.

The JSS, unveiled with more details during Prime Minister Lawrence Wong’s National Day Rally speech on 18 August, has sparked comparisons with the Workers’ Party’s own long-standing proposal for redundancy insurance (RI), first introduced in its 2006 manifesto.

In a 12 September Facebook post, Assoc Prof Lim emphasised that the WP had been advocating for a redundancy insurance scheme for almost two decades, providing substantial details on it in their 2016 policy paper.

“We’ve been thinking about the issue for a while now,” Lim stated, adding that the WP’s proposal has been part of global best practices for advanced economies for nearly a century.

Assoc Prof Lim dismissed the PAP’s argument that the JSS is not unemployment insurance.

He pointed out that the differences the PAP cites—such as JSS being tied to job-seeking conditions and funded from general revenue rather than payroll taxes—are inconsequential.

“Tax revenue is fungible, so it all comes from the people anyway,” Assoc Prof Lim explained.

He argued that funding the scheme from general revenue might even make it less equitable, as it could potentially shift the burden onto non-workers to subsidise workers.

The Workers’ Party’s version of redundancy insurance, Assoc Prof Lim highlighted, envisioned a shared responsibility between employers, employees, and the government to ensure fairness and sustainability.

“We do believe in tripartism,” he remarked, underscoring that society should bear the responsibility for protecting its workers.

One of the central points in Assoc Prof Lim’s critique was that tying financial support to job-seeking efforts is standard in unemployment schemes globally, including in Singapore.

Assoc Prof Lim Addresses Concerns of Dependency, Calling Them Overblown

He acknowledged concerns that such a scheme might lead to dependency, but deemed these fears exaggerated.

“Most people, even in the West, do find value and meaning in some form of work,” he noted.

In discussing the design of unemployment insurance systems, Assoc Prof Lim pointed to the importance of balancing the duration of support with the amount provided.

While too long a tenure or too large a payout could discourage a return to the workforce and allow skills to erode, too little would leave workers struggling to cover household expenses during critical periods.

The WP’s redundancy insurance proposal included a payout of 40% of the last drawn income for up to six months, which Lim described as a “solid-but-not-excessively-generous” sum.

Although this amount is lower than what is typically found in advanced economies, and the duration is shorter than the OECD average of one year, he highlighted that it reflects Singapore’s shorter unemployment spells of around two months.

Assoc Prof Lim also suggested the introduction of greater flexibility in accessing redundancy insurance funds.

By allowing the unemployed to “front-load” their payouts, households would have more breathing room to adjust their expenses during difficult transitions.

With the JSS set to be debated in Parliament, Assoc Prof Lim reaffirmed the Workers’ Party’s commitment to advocating for expanded safety nets for Singapore’s workers.

“Whether you call it JSS or RI or something else, expanding the safety net for our workers is something that the Workers’ Party will always be fighting for,” he concluded.

Continue Reading

Trending