In an attempt to discredit the financial consultant and vlogger, Leong Sze Hian who is countersuing the PM for the abuse of the process of the Court, someone called Jason Koh alleged that Leong Sze Hian stays in a landed property in Serangoon Garden and is wealthy enough to pay for his own legal fees.

This comes just after a friends and supporters of Leong Sze Hian started raising funds for his defence of the PM’s defamation suit against him and for his countersuit of PM Lee.

Mr Leong had told TOC that many people had expressed interest in contributing to his legal funds, adding that some had already contributed. Mr Leong also said he hoped to see 10,000 people contribute $1 to his legal funds.

Clearly, $10,000 won’t be nearly enough to fund both cases but Mr Leong said, “Singaporeans must let our overpaid Ministers know once and for all, that it does not pay to sue ordinary citizens for defamation. Singaporeans and their children, and their children’s children will never have to fear being sued, for exercising their rights of freedom of expression.”

Back to Jason Koh who alleged that Mr Leong can pay for his own legal fees, former NTUC CEO Tan Kin Lian shot down that rumour promptly in a Facebook posting. He said that the house Mr Leong lives in is old, not renovated, and was probably inherited from his parents.

If one has visited Leong’s house, one would be astonished at the contrast of his house with the surrounding estate. Sure, he stays in a landed property but to say that he is rich, is another totally different matter.

Netizens whole-heartedly agreed with Mr Tan’s clarification as well, supporting it with their own experiences of how owning a landed property in Singapore doesn’t automatically signal wealth.

Subscribe
Notify of
1 Comment
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Lorry driver involved in viral Pasir Ris incident gets jail time, fine and driving ban

A lorry driver, who was part of a traffic incident in 2018,…

Denial of rights in Myanmar, Bangladesh cause of boat refugee crisis: HRW

Rohingya and other survivors of dangerous boat voyages from Burma and Bangladesh…

研究指政府应考量国人对移民比率的接受度

李光耀公共政策学院新加坡政策研究所和种族和谐资源中心(OnePeople.sg),從去年8月至今年1月进行一项民调,探讨可能影响本地社会凝聚力的隐忧。 根据李光耀公共政策学院官网,发布有关研究报告的简介,指出近期发生的一些社会事件,都与五大关键议题有关:族群、宗教、移民、阶级和性少数权益(LGBT)。 “仅在今年,“美丽求求你”讽刺视频风波、立法禁止外国传教士发表煽动性言论、再到上周末出现摩根大通高管辱骂本地保安,引起社会反弹,”以及有要求废除刑事法典377A的呼声,都一再占据着本地媒体的版位。 故此,该研究旨在探讨本地居民如何受到上述五大隐忧影响,以及国家干预与公共论述的缓解机制。 研究认为国人都意识到管理社会隐忧的重要,尽管过去族群和宗教议题都由政府管理,惟相当大部分人口亦认为移民课题、LGBT和阶级需要政府的参与与公共讨论。 研究建议政府在制定移民政策时应考量国人对移民比率的接受度,特别是有六成受访者坦言,不喜欢和新移民做邻居,住家附近的新移民人口在1-20巴仙之间,对他们来说才是比较理想的。 近七成认为移民仍不够融入本土社会 此外,有将近67.5巴仙受访者,某种程度上赞同或非常赞同,新移民对于融入本土社会仍做得不够好;不过93巴仙受访者赞同孩子与不同背景的人一起玩耍。 而来自不同学历、不同年龄背景的受访者中,有近半认为在移民课题上认为政府应干预和管制移民涌入,这可能显示本地人的排外心理和对就业的不安全感在提升。 报告也提到近期发生的摩根大通高管辱骂保安事件,而坊间一些声音不外乎要求对这位外籍高官采取行动、调查他的学历背景、开除他/驱逐出境。 报告也分析居民在看待此事上把身份和阶级关联在一起,甚至将之关联到此前新加坡和印度政府签署的《综合性经济合作协议(CECA)》,使之成为当局必须处理的不利因素。此外,包括保安协会、工会和一些议员也站出来呼吁立法保障低薪劳工的权益。