Current Affairs
John Oliver talks about the chilling effects of SLAPP suits, calls it “an attempt to bully people into silence”
In the latest episode of late-night American talk show “Last Week Tonight” that aired on Sunday (10 November), its host John Oliver spoke about the controversial SLAPP laws and its chilling effect as it allows privileged individuals to bully others “into silence”.
He started off the episode by talking about American coal tycoon Bob Murray who had recently dropped the lawsuit that he filed against Oliver. Although, he addressed the suit as “a crazy story”, he stressed that it’s worth telling as it “points to a much bigger problem”.
It appears the business tycoon had sued Last Week Tonight over a segment they did in 2017 in which they jokingly addressed him as “a geriatric Dr Evil” – “which we did and he does” – Oliver noted.
In addition, Murray also didn’t like that “we (the show) arranged for a staff member to dress up in a squirrel costume and deliver the message, ‘Eat Shit, Bob’, which Oliver admitted they did as well.
“Murray’s lawsuit against us asked for damages because he claimed that ‘nothing has ever stressed him more than this vicious and untruthful attack,” Oliver added, noting that it’s odd for Murray to say that given that a mine company that he oversaw collapsed in Utah and resulted in the death of nine people.
On top of seeking for monetary damages, Murray also filed for a gag order in order to prevent the talk show from rebroadcasting the 2017 episode or have it up online, but the episode is very much online to date.
“Obviously, the lawsuit was a bullshit efforts to silence us,” Oliver noted.
Although the case was dismissed by the West Virginia Judge in February 2019, it didn’t stop Murray as he then decided to appeal to the West Virginia Supreme Court. However, in a rather surprising twist, one of the judges set to hear the case was Allen Loughry, which interestingly was roasted by Oliver himself in a 2015 episode of the show.
“So we were naturally concerned at this point,” Oliver said.
But thankfully for Oliver, Lounghry, along with three other state Supreme Court justices, were impeached in a scandal for inappropriate spending, forcing Murray to drop the lawsuit as the case has been unattended for years.
In fact, Oliver pointed out that Murray dropped the case about the same time when his coal company, Murray Energy, was reorganised into bankruptcy.
Although the lawsuit was dropped, Oliver noted it racked up over $200,000 in legal fees for his company.
He explained, “These lawsuits were infuriating, took up a lot of time and resources, and resulted in a tripling of our libel insurance premium.”
This then prompted the host to wonder the reason Murray would make them go through all this hassle, in which Oliver stated, “I would argue that because winning the case was never really his (Murray) goal”.
SLAPP laws
For those who are unaware, SLAPP is an acronym that stands for a “strategic lawsuit against public participation”, which basically is a lawsuit that attempts to intimidate and punish critics.
“These are frivolous suits with no legal merits, specifically designed to stifle public debate or dissent. And this happens all the time,” Oliver said.
Besides Murray, President Donald Trump – who happens to be a close friend of the coal tycoon – had “openly called for changes (in SLAPP laws) that would make it easier for them to file” suits.
In fact, President Trump had once sued journalist Tim O’Brien for a whopping $5 billion, solely for reporting that the President’s network is much lower than he claimed, Oliver mentioned.
Although the US President lost the case, he later admitted that he knew he couldn’t win, saying “I did it to make his life miserable, which I’m happy about”.
“Trump’s statement there actually get to the key characteristic of SLAPP suits. The whole point there is to put the defendant through a difficult, painful experience,” Oliver said.
He continued, “And even if cases fail in lower courts, as they often do, the plaintiff can find ways to extend them through intensive discovery requests, depositions and appeals that drains the target’s time and resources.”
SLAPP suits are not just used on journalists, but also to silence citizen activists as well, Oliver stated.
The need for more anti-SLAPP laws
Calling SLAPP laws a “scourge”, Oliver highlighted that there are 30 states in the US that have anti-SLAPP laws, which allows defendants to force the plaintiffs to justify their claims made earlier, and if they fail to do so, then the case will not only be dismissed but in some states, the defendants are also awarded attorney fees.
However, he also pointed out that the other 20 states don’t have those laws, including West Virginia and this is where Murray filed the case against Oliver, even though neither of them live there.
In addition, Murray has also filed at least nine lawsuits on journalists and their news organisations between the year 2001 and 2015 for reports that they view as critical.
“Lawsuits like his make people think twice before reporting on his business or pointing things out like the fact that Bob Murray’s general facial expression answers the question, ‘What would it look like is an egg was mentally undressing you?” Oliver joked.
He added, “And I would argue that some of Murray’s suits clearly been attempts to bully people into silence.”
Separately, the Oliver also revealed in his show that Murray once sued a couple for conducting a small protest in 2012 outside of Murray Energy Ohio headquarters. The protest only saw about 20 people gathering at the building but the business mogul still took the extreme step to not only sue the couple, but also a local newspaper who covered the protest.
“Both the couple and the newspaper beat Murray’s claims for defamation but he tied the both on appeals for years, causing the newspaper’s defence in hundreds and thousands of dollars,” Oliver disclosed.
In fact, the judge wrote in his decision that “Murray’s suit shows that ‘Ohio should adopt an anti-SLAP statute”.
This is because the newspaper had removed all articles it had written about Murray on its site, which the judge expressed “an example of the chilling effect this has”.
As such, Oliver expressed that “we badly need effective anti-SLAPP laws nationwide to deter powerful people like Bob Murray from using the cause to shut down people’s legitimate dissent.
Singapore’s PM Lee named as press freedom predator for using SLAPP
Separately, in 2016, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) published names of 35 presidents, politicians, religious leaders, militias and criminal organisations that have censored, imprisoned, tortured or murdered journalists.
Addressing them as press freedom predators, RSF stated that some of these individuals have been preying on the media for years, some for decades.
Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong was also listed as one of the predator by RSF, citing that his strategies in stifling media is to use SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation). Which consists of bringing defamation suits or other legal actions against isolated journalists and bloggers who cannot easily defend themselves against political powerful or wealthy plaintiffs, with the aim of deterring them and their colleagues from contributing to the public debate.
Going no higher than 135th, Singapore currently ranks 154th in RSF’s World Press Freedom Index.
Current Affairs
Hotel Properties Limited suspends trading ahead of Ong Beng Seng’s court hearing
Hotel Properties Limited (HPL), co-founded by Mr Ong Beng Seng, has halted trading ahead of his court appearance today (4 October). The announcement was made by HPL’s company secretary at about 7.45am, citing a pending release of an announcement. Mr Ong faces one charge of abetting a public servant in obtaining gifts and another charge of obstruction of justice. He is due in court at 2.30pm.
SINGAPORE: Hotel Properties Limited (HPL), the property and hotel developer co-founded by Mr Ong Beng Seng, has requested a trading halt ahead of the Singapore tycoon’s scheduled court appearance today (4 October) afternoon.
This announcement was made by HPL’s company secretary at approximately 7.45am, stating that the halt was due to a pending release of an announcement.
Mr Ong, who serves as HPL’s managing director and controlling shareholder, faces one charge under Section 165, accused of abetting a public servant in obtaining gifts, as well as one charge of obstruction of justice.
He is set to appear in court at 2.30pm on 4 October.
Ong’s charges stem from his involvement in a high-profile corruption case linked to former Singaporean transport minister S Iswaran.
The 80-year-old businessman was named in Iswaran’s initial graft charges earlier this year.
These charges alleged that Iswaran had corruptly received valuable gifts from Ong, including tickets to the 2022 Singapore Formula 1 Grand Prix, flights, and a hotel stay in Doha.
These gifts were allegedly provided to advance Ong’s business interests, particularly in securing contracts with the Singapore Tourism Board for the Singapore GP and the ABBA Voyage virtual concert.
Although Iswaran no longer faces the original corruption charges, the prosecution amended them to lesser charges under Section 165.
Iswaran pleaded guilty on 24 September, 2024, to four counts under this section, which covered over S$400,000 worth of gifts, including flight tickets, sports event access, and luxury items like whisky and wines.
Additionally, he faced one count of obstructing justice for repaying Ong for a Doha-Singapore flight shortly before the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) became involved.
On 3 October, Iswaran was sentenced to one year in jail by presiding judge Justice Vincent Hoong.
The prosecution had sought a sentence of six to seven months for all charges, while the defence had asked for a significantly reduced sentence of no more than eight weeks.
Ong, a Malaysian national based in Singapore, was arrested by CPIB in July 2023 and released on bail shortly thereafter. Although no charges were initially filed against him, Ong’s involvement in the case intensified following Iswaran’s guilty plea.
The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) had earlier indicated that it would soon make a decision regarding Ong’s legal standing, which has now led to the current charges.
According to the statement of facts read during Iswaran’s conviction, Ong’s case came to light as part of a broader investigation into his associates, which revealed Iswaran’s use of Ong’s private jet for a flight from Singapore to Doha in December 2022.
CPIB investigators uncovered the flight manifest and seized the document.
Upon learning that the flight records had been obtained, Ong contacted Iswaran, advising him to arrange for Singapore GP to bill him for the flight.
Iswaran subsequently paid Singapore GP S$5,700 for the Doha-Singapore business class flight in May 2023, forming the basis of his obstruction of justice charge.
Mr Ong is recognised as the figure who brought Formula One to Singapore in 2008, marking the first night race in the sport’s history.
He holds the rights to the Singapore Grand Prix. Iswaran was the chairman of the F1 steering committee and acted as the chief negotiator with Singapore GP on business matters concerning the race.
Current Affairs
Chee Soon Juan questions Shanmugam’s $88 million property sale amid silence from Mainstream Media
Dr Chee Soon Juan of the SDP raised concerns about the S$88 million sale of Mr K Shanmugam’s Good Class Bungalow at Astrid Hill, questioning transparency and the lack of mainstream media coverage. He called for clarity on the buyer, valuation, and potential conflicts of interest.
On Sunday (22 Sep), Dr Chee Soon Juan, Secretary General of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), issued a public statement on Facebook, expressing concerns regarding the sale of Minister for Home Affairs and Law, Mr K Shanmugam’s Good Class Bungalow (GCB) at Astrid Hill.
Dr Chee questioned the transparency of the S$88 million transaction and the absence of mainstream media coverage despite widespread discussion online.
According to multiple reports cited by Dr Chee, Mr Shanmugam’s property was transferred in August 2023 to UBS Trustees (Singapore) Pte Ltd, which holds the property in trust under the Jasmine Villa Settlement.
Dr Chee’s statement focused on two primary concerns: the lack of response from Mr Shanmugam regarding the transaction and the silence of major media outlets, including Singapore Press Holdings and Mediacorp.
He argued that, given the ongoing public discourse and the relevance of property prices in Singapore, the sale of a high-value asset by a public official warranted further scrutiny.
In his Facebook post, Dr Chee posed several questions directed at Mr Shanmugam and the government:
- Who purchased the property, and is the buyer a Singaporean citizen?
- Who owns Jasmine Villa Settlement?
- Were former Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and current Prime Minister Lawrence Wong informed of the transaction, and what were their responses?
- How was it ensured that the funds were not linked to money laundering?
- How was the property’s valuation determined, and by whom?
The Astrid Hill property, originally purchased by Mr Shanmugam in 2003 for S$7.95 million, saw a significant increase in value, aligning with the high-end status of District 10, where it is located. The 3,170.7 square-meter property was sold for S$88 million in August 2023.
Dr Chee highlighted that, despite Mr Shanmugam’s detailed responses regarding the Ridout Road property, no such transparency had been offered in relation to the Astrid Hill sale.
He argued that the lack of mainstream media coverage was particularly concerning, as public interest in the sale is high. Dr Chee emphasized that property prices and housing affordability are critical issues in Singapore, and transparency from public officials is essential to maintain trust.
Dr Chee emphasized that the Ministerial Code of Conduct unambiguously states: “A Minister must scrupulously avoid any actual or apparent conflict of interest between his office and his private financial interests.”
He concluded his statement by reiterating the need for Mr Shanmugam to address the questions raised, as the matter involves not only the Minister himself but also the integrity of the government and its responsibility to the public.
The supposed sale of Mr Shamugam’s Astrid Hill property took place just a month after Mr Shanmugam spoke in Parliament over his rental of a state-owned bungalow at Ridout Road via a ministerial statement addressing potential conflicts of interest.
At that time, Mr Shanmugam explained that his decision to sell his home was due to concerns about over-investment in a single asset, noting that his financial planning prompted him to sell the property and move into rental accommodation.
Mr Shanmugam is said to have recused himself from the decision-making process, and a subsequent investigation by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) found no wrongdoing while Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean confirmed in Parliament that Mr Shanmugam had removed himself from any decisions involving the property.
As of now, Mr Shanmugam has not commented publicly on the sale of his Astrid Hill property.
-
Comments1 week ago
Christopher Tan criticizes mrt breakdown following decade-long renewal program
-
Comments4 days ago
Netizens question Ho Ching’s praise for Chee Hong Tat’s return from overseas trip for EWL disruption
-
Current Affairs2 weeks ago
Chee Soon Juan questions Shanmugam’s $88 million property sale amid silence from Mainstream Media
-
Singapore1 week ago
SMRT updates on restoration progress for East-West Line; Power rail completion expected today
-
Singapore1 week ago
Chee Hong Tat: SMRT to replace 30+ rail segments on damaged EWL track with no clear timeline for completion
-
Singapore6 days ago
Train services between Jurong East and Buona Vista to remain disrupted until 1 Oct due to new cracks on East-West Line
-
Singapore5 days ago
Lee Hsien Yang pays S$619,335 to Ministers Shanmugam and Balakrishnan in defamation suit to protect family home
-
Singapore1 week ago
Major breakdown on East-West Line: SMRT faces third service disruption in a month