Connect with us

Singapore

National Heritage Board to study 38 Oxley Road preservation despite Lee Hsien Yang’s demolition request

The National Heritage Board (NHB) is studying whether 38 Oxley Road should be preserved as a national monument, following Lee Hsien Yang’s demolition request. Minister Edwin Tong stated that “no option should be precluded,” stressing the need to approach the matter with an open mind and consider all possibilities.

Published

on

The National Heritage Board (NHB) has announced it will conduct a study to determine whether the property at 38 Oxley Road, the home of Singapore’s late founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, should be preserved as a national monument.

This follows an application by Lee Hsien Yang, Lee Kuan Yew’s youngest son, to demolish the property after the passing of his sister, Dr Lee Wei Ling, on 9 October 2024.

Lee Hsien Yang, in a statement on 15 October, reiterated his father’s long-standing wish that the house be demolished after Dr Lee Wei Ling vacated it.

“To honour my parents’ last wishes, I am applying to demolish the house at 38 Oxley Road and thereafter to build a small private dwelling, to be held within the family in perpetuity,” he said, stressing that it was his duty as the sole living executor of his father’s estate to carry out Lee Kuan Yew’s wishes “to the fullest extent of the law.”

Lee Hsien Yang, who has recently been granted asylum in the UK, also noted that in 2015, his elder brother, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, stated in Parliament that once Dr Lee Wei Ling no longer lived in the house, “it would be up to the government of the day” to decide whether to allow demolition.

“It has been nine years. That day is today,” said Lee Hsien Yang, making it clear that the time had come for the government to make a decision.

However, NHB’s 24 October 2024 announcement indicates that more time is needed to assess the site’s heritage and architectural significance.

NHB pointed out that making a move to demolish the house immediately “will rule out a proper and full consideration of the options” identified in the 2018 ministerial committee report.

This study will be carried out by NHB’s Preservation of Sites and Monuments Advisory Board, which will then submit its recommendations to the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth for a final decision.

Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Edwin Tong, in a Facebook post on Thursday, stressed that no option should be ruled out at this stage.

“We do not think that any option should be precluded, or closed off, at this stage,” he wrote. Tong underscored the importance of keeping an open mind, adding that the passage of time “will help us better appreciate the matter in its proper context, with the benefit of some hindsight.”

The ministerial committee’s prior assessment

NHB’s request for more time has raised some questions, given that the 2018 ministerial committee tasked with evaluating the future of 38 Oxley Road had already considered various options.

That committee, which was convened following a highly public family dispute over the house, examined a range of possibilities. It did not, however, make a specific recommendation, as no immediate action was required at that time.

In its conclusion, the committee stated: “The Committee has considered a range of options for the Property as well as their implications. We did not make any recommendation because no decision is required at this point in time. Ultimately, in the fullness of time, a future Government will have the responsibility to consider the public interest aspects of the Property, taking into account Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s wishes. They will have to decide what to do with the Property and be able to carry the decision.”

This raises the question of why NHB is requesting more time now, given that many of the options have already been discussed, and the government in 2018 is largely the same as today, with the notable exception of Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, who took over from Lee Hsien Loong in 2023.

The public may also wonder why NHB is revisiting issues previously considered by the ministerial committee, which had already reviewed Lee Kuan Yew’s evolving stance on the house and explored options such as full demolition, partial preservation, or designating the site for alternative uses, such as a heritage centre or park.

Lee Kuan Yew’s wishes and evolving stance on demolition

Lee Kuan Yew’s wish for the demolition of 38 Oxley Road has been well documented, both in private and public statements.

In his seventh and last will dated 17 December 2013, he stated unequivocally that it was his and his late wife Kwa Geok Choo’s “unwavering and deeply felt wish” that the house be demolished after Dr Lee Wei Ling no longer lived there. He directed his children to ensure this wish was carried out, and if demolition were not possible due to legal or regulatory changes, he requested that the property be closed off to all except family members and their descendants.

Dr Lee Wei Ling echoed this desire in her final message to the public before her passing, emphasising: “My father’s, LEE KUAN YEW, and my mother’s, KWA GEOK CHOO, unwavering and deeply felt wish was for their house at 38 Oxley Road… to be demolished upon the last parent’s death… He had also appealed directly to the people of Singapore. Please honour my father by honouring his wish for his home to be demolished.”

Lee Kuan Yew’s public stance on the matter evolved over time. In 2011, he sent several letters to the Cabinet outlining his preference for demolition, but after reflecting on the Cabinet’s unanimous opposition, he accepted that if the property were to be preserved, it would need to be properly maintained and refurbished.

This shift was acknowledged in the 2018 ministerial committee report, which explored several preservation options, including retaining the historically significant basement dining room where key meetings were held in the 1950s, leading to the formation of the People’s Action Party (PAP).

One key factor influencing Lee Kuan Yew’s changing stance was the belief that the property might be gazetted or had already been gazetted as a national monument.

In 2011, he bequeathed the property to Lee Hsien Loong, a decision purportedly influenced by the belief that the house would eventually be gazetted, as indicated in emails exchanged between him and his family members. The demolition clause was removed from his will in both the 5th (4 October 2012) and 6th (2 November 2012) versions of the will.

According to notes by his lawyer, Kwa Kim Li, the removal of the demolition clause was intended to give Lee Hsien Loong—who was then prime minister—”free reign” to manage the property. However, in his final will in 2013, Lee Kuan Yew reinstated the demolition clause, reaffirming his wish that the house be torn down. It should be noted that probate of Lee Kuan Yew’s last will was granted without contestation.

 

Future of the site and NHB’s next steps

As the sole legal owner of 38 Oxley Road, Lee Hsien Yang’s application to demolish the property comes after years of tension and public debate over its future, following the passing of his sister, who had been given a life interest to stay in the property.

He purchased the house from his brother, Lee Hsien Loong, in 2015 at market value, following their father’s passing and a dispute over the handling of the property.

In his 2024 statement, Lee Hsien Yang highlighted his duty to fulfil his parents’ wishes, noting: “I am the only living executor of my father Lee Kuan Yew’s estate… It is my duty to carry out his wishes to the fullest extent of the law.”

While NHB’s study progresses, the house remains a focal point for broader discussions on Singapore’s heritage and national identity. NHB has stated that if the site is designated a national monument, future governments will retain the flexibility to amend or revoke preservation orders, leaving room for further debate.

In the meantime, no rezoning or alternative use of the site will be allowed until a final decision is reached.

Community

Community mourns the loss of dedicated volunteer following Clementi stabbing incident

The community mourns the loss of 41-year-old Winson Khoo, a dedicated grassroots volunteer, who tragically died in a stabbing incident on 21 October at a Clementi HDB void deck. Senior Minister of State Sim Ann, in her eulogy, praised Mr Khoo’s contributions since 2017, emphasising his commitment to serving and supporting residents.

Published

on

SINGAPORE: Winson Khoo Chin Wah, aged 41, a long-time grassroots volunteer, tragically lost his life in a stabbing incident on 21 October 2024 at the void deck of Block 311B, Clementi Avenue 4.

The suspect, 50-year-old Toh Chee Hong, who was known to the victim, fatally stabbed Mr Khoo and later attempted to pursue Khoo’s wife with a knife.

The community was deeply shaken by the incident, with Senior Minister of State in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of National Development, Sim Ann, paying tribute to Mr Khoo’s contributions on Wednesday (23 Oct).

According to 8World News, Sim Ann, who is also representing Holland-Bukit Timah GRC, visited the wake twice to offer her condolences to the bereaved family.

In her eulogy, Sim Ann shared that Mr Khoo had been an active grassroots volunteer since May 2017 and had served as the vice-chairman of the  Trivelis Residents’ Network  since November 2022.

She highlighted his dedication to the community, organising numerous events and diligently managing community chat groups, always quick to respond to residents’ queries.

Quoting a message from a resident in the chat group, Sim Ann said, “I am deeply saddened by the loss of Winson Khoo. His passing is a significant loss to our community.”

She also expressed her gratitude for his contributions and wished him eternal peace.

Earlier on Tuesday, the People’s Association (PA) confirmed that the deceased was a grassroots volunteer.

While initial reports suggested that the alleged suspect was also involved in grassroots activities within the same network, the PA clarified that this was inaccurate, stating that the suspect is not a member of any PA grassroots organisation.

Friend Recalls Mr Khoo’s Selflessness

A close friend of the deceased, who requested to remain anonymous, described Mr Khoo as a kind-hearted individual who went above and beyond for the residents.

“Even for something as simple as replacing a pipe, he would personally go to the residents’ homes to help. He was loved by many.”

Meanwhile, the accused, Toh Chee Hong, was charged with murder via video link at the State Courts on Wednesday.

If convicted, he could face the death penalty.

The prosecution has requested for Toh to remain in remand for another week, with plans to revisit the crime scene for further investigations.

The judge approved the request, and the case will be heard again on 30 October.

Mr Khoo’s wake is being held at Block 311D, Clementi Avenue 4, and the funeral service is scheduled for Sunday at 1:30 p.m.

Continue Reading

Court Cases

Pritam Singh trial 1st phase ends, Defence to file submissions seeking dismissal of 1st charge

The prosecution closed its case against Workers’ Party chief Pritam Singh on 24 October, the ninth day of the trial. The defence intends to file written submissions arguing that there is no case to answer on the first charge. The trial will resume on 5 November for the next phase, which is expected to last seven days.

Published

on

SINGAPORE: The prosecution closed its case against Workers’ Party (WP) chief, Pritam Singh, on the ninth day of the trial without calling its final witness, an investigation officer, to the stand.

In a brief hearing on Thursday (24 October) morning, both the prosecution and defence settled administrative matters, including timelines for the submission of written arguments.

This marks the end of the first phase of the trial.

Singh, 48, is contesting two charges under the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act. The charges relate to testimony he gave to the Committee of Privileges (COP) on 10 and 15 December 2021 concerning a falsehood told by former WP Member of Parliament Raeesah Khan.

Ms Khan had lied in parliament by claiming she had accompanied a rape victim to a police station. Singh’s charges arise from his testimony to the COP, which was convened to investigate Ms Khan’s conduct.

Singh is accused of lying about what he instructed Ms Khan to do—whether to tell the truth or maintain the lie.

Allegations Against Singh

While being questioned in a public hearing at Parliament House, Singh is alleged to have falsely testified that:

  • At the conclusion of a meeting with Ms Khan and WP members Sylvia Lim and Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap on 8 August 2021, he wanted Ms Khan to clarify in parliament that her story about accompanying a rape victim was untrue.
  • During a conversation with Ms Khan on 3 October 2021, he allegedly conveyed that if the matter arose in parliament, she had to clarify that her story was a lie.

The charge sheets, spanning 17 and 20 pages respectively, include excerpts of the transcript from Singh’s exchange with Edwin Tong, Minister for Culture, Community and Youth, who questioned him before the COP.

Both Singh and Tong are lawyers by profession.

Defence Strategy

Singh’s defence team, led by lawyers Andre Jumabhoy and Aristotle Emmanuel Eng, intends to argue that there is no case to answer on the first charge.

This charge relates to the 8 August 2021 meeting in which Ms Khan admitted to lying.

If the defence’s argument succeeds and the judge agrees, the first charge could be dismissed, and the case would proceed solely on the second charge.

Alternatively, the court may modify the charges or frame new ones before requiring Singh to present his defence.

The judge, Deputy Principal District Judge Luke Tan, must determine if there is evidence that is “not inherently incredible” and satisfies each element of the prosecution’s case.

If he finds sufficient evidence, Singh will be called to testify. Should the judge find insufficient evidence, the case could be dismissed, resulting in an acquittal.

Submission Timelines

Judge Tan has instructed the defence to file their written submissions regarding the “no case to answer” argument by noon on 30 October. The prosecution is expected to submit its replies by 2 November.

The judge also asked both sides to address the specifics of the charges, noting that certain words in the allegations against Singh were not directly present in the excerpts from Singh’s COP testimony.

The court will reconvene on 5 November for the second phase of the trial. Judge Tan is expected to deliver his decision on whether the prosecution has presented enough of a case for the defence to answer.

If called to testify, Singh could choose to do so, though if he declines, an adverse inference may be drawn. Singh has yet to confirm whether he will testify, and his legal team has not disclosed their defence witnesses.

Agreement on Investigation Officer

Before finalising the timeline for submissions, Deputy Attorney-General Ang Cheng Hock informed the court that both sides had agreed on a set of facts regarding the investigation officer, Roy Lim, who was to be the prosecution’s final witness.

As a result, Lim did not need to take the stand.

The agreed facts reveal that Singh’s phone was seized by the police during the investigation. Singh informed investigators that the phone contained information relevant to the inquiry, including legally privileged communications with his lawyers.

Although he consented to the police reviewing the contents of the phone in his presence, no forensic extraction was performed.

Singh faces up to three years’ imprisonment, a fine of up to S$7,000, or both for each charge. The Attorney-General’s Chambers has previously indicated that if convicted, the prosecution will seek fines for each charge.

Under the Constitution, any Member of Parliament fined at least S$10,000 or imprisoned for at least one year is disqualified from standing for election.

A sitting MP who faces such penalties would lose their seat, with the disqualification lasting for five years.

Next Steps

The court will resume on 5 November for the next tranche of the trial, which is expected to last seven days.

The judge’s decision on whether to proceed with the defence’s case will be a key turning point in the proceedings.

Continue Reading

Trending