Connect with us

Politics

Lee Hsien Yang accuses Lee Hsien Loong of being involved in persecution in exclusive Guardian interview

Lee Hsien Yang, the brother of Singapore’s former Prime Minister, has been granted asylum in the UK, citing political persecution. He claims the government, under his brother’s leadership, used legal actions to repress him. The Singaporean government denies these accusations.

Published

on

Lee Hsien Yang (LHY), the younger brother of Singapore’s former Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong (LHL), has been granted asylum in the UK after leaving Singapore.

He claims his departure was driven by what he describes as a campaign of political persecution by the Singaporean government under his brother’s administration.

In an exclusive interview with The Guardian, LHY accused the authorities of using legal actions and investigations to intimidate and repress him and his family.

LHY, son of Singapore’s late founding father Lee Kuan Yew (LKY), has become a controversial figure in Singaporean politics, particularly after a 2017 family dispute regarding the fate of LKY’s home.

This dispute centred around the fate of LKY’s home and became symbolic of deeper family tensions and allegations of abuse of power by LHL who is now Senior Minister.

In recent years, LHY has openly supported opposition parties in Singapore, breaking ranks with his family’s long-standing association with the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP).

In the interview, LHY described Singapore as a repressive state that presents an outward image of prosperity and efficiency but maintains authoritarian controls over dissent.

“Despite the very advanced economic prosperity that Singapore has, there’s a dark side to it, that the government is repressive,” he said.

“What people think, that this is some kind of paradise – it isn’t.”

He cited a series of legal actions taken against him, his wife Lee Suet Fern (LSF), and their son as evidence of this repression.

LHY’s asylum application was accepted in August 2024, two years after he left Singapore.

He believes the asylum grant is a recognition of the dangers he faces if he were to return. “I think it is an acknowledgment that Singapore has been persecuting me,” said LHY.

“For my own personal safety, I should not continue to live in Singapore,” he stated.

He also expressed frustration with Singapore’s facade of rule of law and transparency, accusing the government of facilitating illicit financial activities such as arms trading and money laundering.

The Singaporean government, however, has denied these accusations.

A government spokesperson refuted Lee’s claims, stating that Singapore has a robust legal system designed to combat corruption and illicit financial flows.

The spokesperson pointed to Singapore’s strong performance in Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index, where the country ranks well above the UK.

“No one is above the law in Singapore, including the offspring of the founding prime minister,” the spokesperson added.

The family dispute that precipitated these events began after the death of LKY in 2015, when his children disagreed over the future of his house.

LKY had wished for his home to be demolished after his daughter, Lee Wei Ling (LWL), no longer lived there.

LHY and his sister supported this wish, but Lee Hsien Loong, then the Prime Minister, argued that their father had been open to government decisions regarding the house. This disagreement led to a series of legal and personal conflicts that have strained the family relationship, culminating in LHY’s decision to leave Singapore.

In 2017, LHY’s son, Li Shengwu, was fined for contempt of court over a Facebook post in which he criticised Singapore’s judiciary.

The government also launched disciplinary action against LSF, a prominent lawyer, accusing her of professional misconduct in relation to Lee Kuan Yew’s will. She was suspended from practising law for 15 months.

LHY and his wife are also under investigation for alleged perjury linked to the case, although the couple maintains that the charges are baseless.

LHY has been vocal in his criticism of his brother’s leadership.

In the interview with The Guardian, LHY implied that the legal actions against him and his family could not have occurred without the involvement of his brother, Lee Hsien Loong.

“In a tightly controlled country like Singapore, these kinds of actions could not have happened without the agreement and acquiescence of Lee Hsien Loong,” he said.

LHL has not commented publicly on this specific allegation.

He told the Guardian he believed the current allegations against him and his wife were politically motivated attempts to destroy him.

He also said he had been among the targets of Singapore’s “very extensive surveillance system”.

Despite the legal battles and personal strife, LHY remains hopeful about his future.

He continues to hold Singaporean citizenship and expressed his desire to return to his homeland if the political climate changes.

In a statement posted on his Facebook page, he wrote, “I remain a Singapore citizen and hope that some day it will become safe to return home.”

Singapore’s political system has long been dominated by the Lee family, beginning with LKY, who served as Prime Minister from 1959 to 1990.

His eldest son, Lee Hsien Loong, succeeded him as Prime Minister in 2004 and remained in office until May 2024.

Human rights organisations, including Human Rights Watch, have often criticised Singapore for its repressive measures, noting the country’s strict control over political dissent and freedom of expression.

Based on UN records, LHY and LSF are two of only seven Singaporeans who have been granted refugee status in the UK.

The UN refugee records indicate that as of mid-2024, there were 40 refugees from Singapore globally, with an additional 322 seeking asylum.

As LHY’s case continues to attract international attention, it raises questions about the future of Singapore’s political landscape and the influence of the Lee family within it.

His claims of repression stand in stark contrast to Singapore’s global image as a model of good governance, further complicating the legacy of  LKY and his successors.

Continue Reading
7 Comments
Subscribe
Notify of
7 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Politics

Chee Soon Juan highlights impact of rising costs after closure of Orange & Teal’s 2nd outlet

In a video message, SDP chief Dr Chee Soon Juan highlighted how rising costs and GST increase to 9% have widely affected businesses in Singapore, resulted in reduced consumer spending, lower sales, and retrenchments. His comments followed the announcement that Orange & Teal, the café he co-owns with his wife, closed its second outlet in Marina Square on 11 October.

Published

on

SINGAPORE: Dr Chee Soon Juan, Secretary-General of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), highlighted the rising costs and the impact of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) increase to 9% has widely affected businesses and reduced consumer spending, leading to lower sales and retrenchments.

This came after Orange & Teal, a café owned by Dr Chee and his wife, Dr Huang Chih Mei, announced on 11 October that they had closed down their second outlet in Marina Square.

The café, which opened in 2022, shared on social media that the closure was due to “rising costs,” while their Rochester Mall outlet would continue to operate as usual.

Dr Chee criticises Singapore’s “rentier economy” for contributing to economic downturn

In a video message on 22 October, Dr Chee Soon Juan addressed the closure of the café’s second outlet, noting that over the past couple of years, suppliers of coffee, cake, vegetables, and meat have been issuing notices about necessary “price adjustments.”

While he stated that he did not blame these businesses for their actions, he pointed out that they, too, face significant expenses and cost burdens.

He emphasised that these adjustments have been particularly noticeable since the increase of GST to 9%.

Dr Chee highlighted how this increase, combined with higher costs for supplies, rent, utilities, transportation, and fuel, has significantly contributed to inflation.

This inflationary pressure has created a double burden: rising costs for businesses and reduced consumer spending, resulting in lower sales and retrenchments.

He noted that these rising costs are forcing multinational companies such as Dyson and Samsung to either lay off workers or leave Singapore entirely, with UOB relocating to Kuala Lumpur.

Dr Chee also cited a report from Business Times, which revealed a significant increase in closures within the food and beverage (F&B) sector in 2024, surpassing even the pandemic year of 2020.

He criticised this downturn as a consequence of Singapore’s “rentier economy,” where the government relies on increasing fees and prices to extract wealth from the population, rather than fostering a productive and innovative economy.

To support his argument, Dr Chee referenced a recent study by Singaporean economists Professors Linda Lim and Pang Ng Fong, who described the current economic system as “inefficient, inequitable, and unsustainable.”

According to the study published on 15 October, this system’s weak productivity performance threatens Singapore’s competitiveness, economic growth, and living standards.

Dr Chee plans to corporatise Orange & Teal to fulfil his commitment as a full-time MP if elected

Dr Chee Soon Juan also reflected on his journey with Orange & Teal, expressing satisfaction with the success of the Rochester Mall outlet despite the challenges facing the F&B sector.

He mentioned that he had bigger plans for the café, which he would reveal in due course.

Dr Chee shared that the idea of starting the eatery was linked to his work with SDP over a decade ago, aiming to create a space that offered more than just dining.

He envisioned the café as a venue for passionate discussions, heated debates, and a place where minds and hearts could freely exchange ideas about life in Singapore.

Dr Chee described Orange & Teal as a microcosm of the Singapore he wished to see—vibrant, sophisticated, cultured, and built on open conversation.

He emphasised their efforts to keep prices low despite rising costs and called for continued support from customers to sustain the business.

Additionally, Dr Chee discussed his future plans to eventually corporatise the business and step back from daily operations as he prepared to honour his commitment to becoming a full-time Member of Parliament for Bukit Batok after the next general election, hinting at his intention to continue contesting in the constituency.

Continue Reading

Politics

SDP vice-chairman raises concerns over election advertising law amid upcoming elections

Bryan Lim Boon Heng of the Singapore Democratic Party raised concerns over new election advertising laws, questioning their fairness for opposition candidates.

Published

on

Bryan Lim Boon Heng, Vice-Chairman of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), voiced concerns over new election advertising laws in a Facebook post on 19 October 2024, following a briefing on election advertising requirements by the Elections Department and the Ministry of Digital Development and Information, which he attended with a few of his SDP colleagues.

Lim shared his apprehension regarding the Elections (Integrity of Online Advertising) (Amendment) Act (ELIONA), questioning its fairness in being applied equally to candidates from both the ruling party and the opposition.

The legislation, passed earlier this month, aims to prevent the spread of manipulated online content, such as deepfakes, during election periods.

Lim acknowledged the positive intentions behind ELIONA, which was introduced to curb misleading content generated by AI and other digital tools.

However, he emphasised that its actual implementation would be a test of the government’s commitment to a level playing field in Singapore’s political landscape.

With general elections expected by November 2025, Lim called on the public to help monitor potential misrepresentations of opposition candidates, stressing the importance of quickly reporting issues to the Returning Officer.

Lim also raised concerns over recent amendments to the Parliamentary Elections Act 1954, particularly those regarding Traditional Election Advertising (TEA), such as the display of flags, banners, and posters.

These amendments limit the permissible time period for displaying campaign materials to between the Issuance of the Writ of Election and the close of Nomination Proceedings.

Lim implied that this exemption would benefit the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP), as it would allow logos at PAP Community Foundation (PCF) childcare centres and the PAP headquarters to remain visible during the restricted period, without being counted towards the permissible TEA limits.

“No prizes for guessing which party stands to gain from these exceptions,” wrote Lim.

Lim further expressed strong criticism regarding the structural disadvantages faced by opposition parties in Singapore.

He argued that elections in the country “will never be free and fair” as long as the Elections Department operates under the Prime Minister’s Office.

Lim highlighted the significant challenges the opposition faces, stating that they are often forced to campaign with their “hands and legs bound” while competing against a ruling party that enjoys substantial resources and the backing of mainstream media.

ELIONA Bill and the new legal framework

The ELIONA Bill, passed by Singapore’s Parliament on 15 October 2024, updates existing election laws to address the rise of digitally altered or generated media, such as deepfakes, during campaign periods.

This legislation applies to both parliamentary and presidential elections, banning content that depicts manipulated and untrue representations of candidates, which could mislead the public.

According to Josephine Teo, Minister for Digital Development and Information, the law focuses on combatting the “most harmful types” of misinformation, especially in light of recent technological advances in AI.

The move was spurred by widespread concerns, with a study by Verian Research revealing that 60% of Singaporeans fear the potential impact of deepfakes on the upcoming elections.

Teo cited other countries, including South Korea and Brazil, as having similar legal frameworks to control deepfake proliferation.

Content restrictions and exceptions

To qualify as prohibited content under ELIONA, the material must meet four key conditions: it must be part of election advertising, digitally manipulated, depict an untrue representation of the candidate, and be realistic enough for public belief.

This encompasses AI-generated content and traditional techniques such as Photoshop or video editing.

However, certain exceptions apply. Content that is clearly unrealistic, such as memes, satire, or minor cosmetic edits, is exempt from the law’s purview. Nevertheless, merely labelling content as altered does not exempt it from regulation, as these labels can be easily ignored or removed when the content is redistributed.

The law covers not just original posts but also the sharing and reposting of manipulated content on public platforms, including large chat groups on apps like WhatsApp and Telegram. Private communications between individuals or within small groups are not subject to these restrictions.

Enforcement and penalties

ELIONA gives the returning officer the authority to issue directives to remove or restrict access to manipulated content during the election period.

The law will apply from the issuance of the Writ of Election to the close of polling, focusing only on officially declared candidates.

Violators may face penalties, with individuals potentially subject to a fine of up to S$1,000, 12 months in prison, or both, for distributing prohibited content. Social media platforms that fail to comply with removal requests could face fines of up to S$1 million.

To strengthen compliance, the government is also developing a Code of Practice, which will require social media platforms to implement safeguards against manipulated content before elections. This code is expected to be finalised by 2025.

Opposition concerns and AI in political campaigns

During parliamentary debates, Workers’ Party MP Gerald Giam expressed concerns about how the law might limit the use of AI in political campaigns, particularly for opposition parties that often have fewer resources than the ruling PAP.

Giam questioned whether AI-generated content, even if it conveys an accurate and pre-approved message from a candidate, would be restricted under ELIONA.

Minister Teo responded by clarifying that even AI-generated content, despite being truthful, would be prohibited under the law.

She emphasised that while the script might be accurate, the fact that a candidate did not personally appear in front of a camera to deliver the message makes the content problematic, thereby subject to restrictions under the new legislation.

This clarification raises questions about how opposition parties, which often rely on digital tools to bridge the resource gap with the PAP, will navigate the upcoming election campaigns while adhering to the new law.

Continue Reading

Trending