Mr Ashok Kumar Mipuri, Singapore’s ambassador to the United States has issued a rebuttal to an article that was published by the New York Times about the Lee family saga on 4 July 2017, stating that “there is no national crisis in Singapore.”

The NYT article entitled, “Dispute Over Singapore Founder’s House Becomes a National Crisis” covered the allegations that Dr Lee Weiling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang had made against Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in June and commented that the dispute over the fate of 38 Oxley Road has “shattered Singapore’s image as an orderly authoritarian ideal and hinted at deeper divisions about its political future.”

Mr Mipuri’s letter criticized the article for promoting the absurd notion that Singaporeans link the legitimacy of their government with the fate of Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s house. The NYT time had written that “just as it was difficult to separate Mr. Lee from the country he built, it is impossible to erase the politics from the house. Preserving it would provide a physical reminder not only of Mr. Lee, analysts said, but also of the current prime minister’s connection to him.” and quoted Li Shengwu, Lee Hsien Yang’s son saying that the People’s Action Party viewed the house as a symbol of their legacy and a symbol uniquely associated with them which gives the party legitimacy.

The article further quotes from individuals such as Kirsten Han, an activist and freelance journalist and Sinapan Samydorai, the director of Southeast Asian affairs at Think Center, who noted that the issues arising from the saga is far more than a simple family dispute but a question of whether the Prime Minister abused his political power.

In his letter, the ambassador parroted Ministers on how PM Lee has made a full statement in Parliament against his siblings’ accusations and explained how he had recused himself from all government decisions concerning the house.

Mr Mipuri further states that “no Member of Parliament made any allegations of impropriety or wrongdoing against the PM during the debate, nor has anyone else produced specific evidence to back the siblings’ vague allegations.” Something which the PM Lee and other Ministers have also said in Parliament during the Parliamentary debate on 3 and 4 July.

While the letter from Mr Mipuri was published on 11 July, but the letter that was published by Channel News Asia shows it to be dated on 8 July.

Mr Mirpuri’s letter is reproduced in full below: 

To the Editor:

Family Dispute Over House of Singapore’s Founder Erupts as National Crisis” (news article, July 5) promotes the absurd notion that Singaporeans link the legitimacy of their government to the fate of former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew’s house.

In response to accusations by his siblings of abuse of power over the house, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong made a full statement in Parliament. He explained how he had recused himself from all government decisions concerning the house, and also sold the house to his brother, so that he no longer has any interest or influence over the house.

No member of Parliament made any allegations of impropriety or wrongdoing against the prime minister during the debate, nor has anyone else produced specific evidence to back the siblings’ vague allegations. There is no national crisis in Singapore.

ASHOK KUMAR MIRPURI
WASHINGTON

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Allowing exiles film is "like allowing jihadi terrorist groups" to show film publicly

In its latest attempt at explaining why the film by Tan Pin…

Nepal suspends permits to climb Everest amid COVID-19 pandemic

On Friday (13 March), Nepal announced that it has suspended permits for…

马国前首相纳吉认刷卡13万美元 买手表送太太

马国前首相拿督斯里纳吉在SRC国际公司洗钱案审讯中,承认刷卡13万625美元(约17万762新3元)只为买一只手表作为太太的生日礼物。 综合媒体报道,纳吉被控七项涉及一马公司(1MDB)前子公司SRC国际私人有限公司4200万令吉(约1380万新元),近日以辩方首名证人的身份三度上庭供证。 纳吉被指分别于2014年12月22日,在美国檀香山的香奈儿店“刷了”13万625美元(马币46万6330令吉11仙);以及2015年1月份,在曼谷的香格里拉酒店“刷了”12万7017令吉46仙的相关交易,对此辩方律师要求纳吉提出解释。 纳吉则指出,他前往哥打峇鲁视察水灾情况后,以私人假期在泰国曼谷的消费。尽管是私人假期,他表示,他仍趁机与泰国首相巴拉育见面,讨论如何与泰国政府应对当时的水灾。 他说,在香格里拉酒店缴付的12万令吉,包括本身和随同者的住宿费,以及在行程中无法预料的开销。 纳吉也表示,当时正是出于假期在处理公务,因此他有权向政府报销费用,尽管如此,他仍然选择以个人承担这些消费,因为他不想将事情复杂化。 “就如我所说的,我觉得如有必要,我有权动用资金。我再次说,我对花钱非常小心。” 为此,他的律师也提供了新帐户的从2013年8月至2015年3月的使用金额明细,其个人指出总额仅占账户收到资金的0.4巴仙。 此外,他也曾在2014年8月8日在意大利一家著名金库De Grisogono消费了76万3500欧元,纳吉则表示,当时是购买首饰作为送给卡塔尔时任首相夫人的礼物,是为了促进两地关系,因此该笔消费是无可否非的。

Government Scholarships – A case for greater representation of Minority Races?

by Pritam Singh Earlier this week, Yahoo! Singapore ‘Fit to Post’ (FTP)…