On 19 March 2019, veteran blogger and human rights campaigner Leong Sze Hian posted the latest update of his infamous libel case with Prime Minister (PM) Lee Hsien Loong on his personal Facebook account, stating that he will appeal the decision to strike off his countersuit of the defamation suit against him.

The statement released by Lim Tean of Carson Law Chambers, the law firm representing Mr Leong reiterated that his client would stand firm by “the argument that the claim brought by the PM is an abuse of process as a defence at trial”.

This came shortly after a statement was sent by the prosecuting team, Davinder Singh Chambers (DSC) to Mr Leong the day before, requesting him to pay a total of S$21,000 for two summonses by 21 March.

To recap, it all began when Mr Leong shared an article published by The Coverage on 7 November 2018 regarding the IMDB corruption scandal and its link to the Singaporean PM. A few days later on 10 November, the Info-communications Media Development Authority (IMDA) ordered Mr Leong to remove the post, which he complied to do so as instructed.

Mr Leong then received a letter from the PM’s lawyer of defamation allegations and a suit was filed against him on 4 December 2018. Mr Leong attempted to countersuit PM Lee for the abuse of process of the Court.

However, the High Court ruled out the counterclaim in favour of PM Lee on the basis that “there is no tort of abuse of process and providing for no exceptions”. Abuse of process is defined as a form of dignitary tort which is closely related to malicious prosecution. Abuse of process can be brought against someone when there is a valid reason for the lawsuit, but the legal system has been misused for ulterior purposes.

Therefore, Mr Leong maintains his stand that the PM’s claim is a tort of abuse of process towards him and his freedom of expression as he did not “assert what the article was alleged to have said was true”. He also emphasised on the fact that there could have been no damage caused by the few readers of his post because the citizens of Singapore are aware that “the Government were asserting that the article was false.“

Lim Tean ends the statement by citing that Mr Leong’s appeal “will challenge the Prime Minister’s case on meaning, extent of publication, on re-publication and on malice.”

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

【冠状病毒19】9月9日75例新增确诊,14例入境病例

根据卫生部文告,截至本月9中午12时,本地新增75例冠状病毒19确诊病例,其中多达14例入境病例,一例社区病例,为工作证持有者 本地累计确诊已增至5万7166例。 60例新增病例均为住在宿舍的客工,其中31例来自西雅卓源宿舍(Westlite Toh Guan),大部分原本就被隔离,其余则是经当局监控检测时发现的。 入境病例者在抵境后已遵守居家通知。当局将在今晚公布更多细节。    

AGC potentially overlooking possible sub judice contempt by pro-PAP Facebook fanpage regarding ongoing WP MPs’ trial

Amidst the controversy surrounding the ongoing trial of three Workers’ Party (WP)…

Community groups and civil societies call for end of investigation into youth climate activists; urge gov't to serious reconsider public assembly laws

In an open letter today (14 April), various community groups and civil…

林志蔚解析最低薪金制 经济讲师要工人党先实验政策提案?

上周,工人党盛港候任议员、也是一名经济学者的林志蔚,分析政府渐进式薪金模式和最低薪金制的差异。即便最低薪金制不是毫无疑问的好政策,但却是能改善雇员处境的良好开端,近期的研究,也倾向支持最低薪资制,即时薪资涨幅很大,对于低薪工友的就业问题实则带来冲击微小。 不过,新加坡管理大学经济系高级讲师吴正晓,在《联合早报》的交流站则表示要给林志蔚“两个建议”,认为对工人党的政策如最低薪金制不能“为了同意而同意”;再者也建议若林志蔚认为工人党政策可行,如冗员保险可先在盛港市镇会试行看下效果如何。 由于目前在冠病疫情影响下,对经济和社会造成冲击,他认为林志蔚在电视辩论,却提起最低薪金制感到惊讶,因为大部分经济学家都会反对在失业率上升、经济下行之时,实行最低薪金制。 “林志蔚把视野放到疫情后” 但民众林师顺也在另一篇文章强调,大选不仅仅是为了克服此次疫情举行,也是决定国家未来五年发展由谁带领。“身为在野党一员的林博士,把视野放到冠病疫情后的新加坡,在辩论中有此发言,并不奇怪。” 他认为吴正晓似乎误解了林志蔚,为何在辩论时提出最低薪资和冗员保险等提案。 在新加坡现有的渐进式薪金模式下的低薪员工,也是重要的劳动力,给予他们一定的薪资,应超越学术经济分析,是社会应该在解决贫富差距的课题上所进行的讨论。 吴正晓是在评论中指出,最低薪金制在目前仍有争议,尽管部分经济学家赞同,但大部分都会坚决反对在失业率上升和经济下行时,提高最低薪资。 至于冗员保险,他则分析假设一名员工一生工作40年,大概只有40/280(七分之一)的机会,他能够领取到这个保险赔付。 羊毛出在羊身上。以每月4元的保费,如果想这个保险能够持续可行,那么平均每1万3428÷4=3357个月,也即大约每280年,员工可以拿到一次保险赔付。 他认为低保费,高赔付的保险产品是存在的,只是大部分顾客永远得不到赔付。 “五年以后,在下一次大选的辩论会上,在推荐新政策的时候,如果林博士可以说他们已经“实验过了”(done…