A Disciplinary Tribunal appointed by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon has found lawyer Lee Suet Fern guilty of grossly improper professional misconduct in handling the final will of Singapore’s founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew under section 83(2)(b) of the Legal Profession Act.

In a Judgement released last Friday (21 February), it was noted that Mrs Lee and her husband Lee Hsien Yang – son of the late Mr Lee and an executor of his will – had encouraged Mr LKY to revoke the sixth will in the absence of his lawyer Ms Kwa Kim Li who had drafted all of Mr LKY’s previous wills between 2011 to 2012.

The tribunal said that Mrs Lee did not inform Mr LKY that the draft last will included a demolition clause not present in the sixth will nor did she confirm with him if he wanted certain other changes to be made in the first place.

However, Mrs Lee noted in her defence that she had informed Ms Kwa via email explicitly about the signing of the last will, “In fact, this is just going back to his 2011 will so it supercedes all. He read it extremely carefully before signing”.

Additionally, the tribunal noted that Mrs Lee did not advise Mr LKY to seek independent legal advice pertaining to the matter, especially given her own possible conflict of interest as Mr LHY’s wife and the absence of Ms Kwa. The final will, said the tribunal, increased Mr LHY’s share in Mr LKY’s estate.

The tribunal also noted the issue of whether Mrs Lee had properly and fully explained the final will to her father-in-law and it also addresses his condition at the time of signing. LKY was, after all, 90-years-old when the will was signed and passed away only 15 months after.

On this note, however, Mrs Lee explained that LKY was fully aware of her involvement and chose to proceed.

Ms Suet Fern has said during the tribunal: “I think Papa was his own best lawyer. He knew what he wanted.

The thing is, since the tribunal was convened to investigate the conduct of a lawyer, it did not address the issue of the validity of the will or the soundness of LKY’s mind when signing.

LKY’s state of mind – sound or not?

So the larger question here is whether LKY was in sound mind when he revised his final will and whether he was clear about what he wanted.

The PM’s sister Dr Lee Wiling had reportedly told Ho Ching—wife of PM Lee—that LKY “had been doing very well” because he hasn’t been in the hospital for more than a month.

However, Dr Lee did also say that her father was already very forgetful, noting that “age has caught up with his brain”.

The thing is, even at over 90 years old, LKY remained a member of Parliament and was praised as still being very sharp. On his 91st birthday, Mr LKY was even reportedly preparing for his regular Chinese lesson.

So while LKY might have been physically frail and forgetful, it does appear that he was still mentally sharp and would be aware of what he was doing. Unless a court makes a finding to say that he was not of sound mind after all relevant medical evidence is evaluated, we can assume that LKY was sharp as a pin.

But let’s assume for a moment that LKY was actually of unsound mind, wouldn’t PM Lee have applied for a legal challenge of the final will by now, given that it is the most troublesome of all seven wills with the reinsertion of the demolition clause?

No such complaint was made on that grounds.

Also, the probate for the seventh will was granted with no contest on 6 October 2015, meaning it has been recognised as final and binding.

Was LKY actually misled by LHY for personal gain?

On the point of whether PM Lee’s brother and sister-in-law misled LKY into signing the seventh will, the tribunal report found that Lee Hsien Yang and Lee Suet Fern were guilty on that count.

The question is, why would they do that? What did LHY and his wife stand to gain in the seventh will compared to the sixth?

To figure that out, we have to go back a little. We note that the sixth will gave a larger share of the inheritance to LKY’s daughter, Dr Lee, meaning that the two brothers will each be left with a smaller share. On the other hand, the seventh will stated that everything would be divided equally between the three siblings.

So at first glance, you could say that it seems LHY would gain a larger share of the inheritance in the seventh will, thus giving his wife a reason to bypass Kwa and rush the seventh will out.

But in fact, it was noted in her defence during the tribunal that Mrs Lee was only aware that LKY had reduced Dr Lee’s share to a life interest in the estate in one of his wills, thus increasing the respective shares of the two brothers, one of whom is her husband LHY.

So as far as she knew, reverting the seventh will back to the contents of the first will would result in an increase in Dr Lee’s share and decrease in LHY’s share.

On top of that, about four days before signing that latest will, LKY emailed Kwa to say that he wanted to make changes to the sixth will including giving an equal share to all his children. That particular decision was made solely by LKY with no evidence that it was “engineered” by LHY.

So really, the argument that LHY has something to gain by pushing to change the sixth will falls flat since LKY already made that decision for himself via email.

Additionally, if LKY is believed to have been of sound mind and knew exactly what he wanted to do when signing the last will, it would be tougher to conclude that he was actual misled by his son and daughter-in-law.

Also, why was LHY even pulled into the picture when the disciplinary tribunal hearing was about Mrs Lee’s conduct as a lawyer?

Confusion over the reinsertion of the demolition clause

The next question is on the demolition clause. It was taken out of the fifth will and remained out in the sixth. But by the seventh will, that clause was back in.

Why would LHY want to do that given that the issue of keeping the Oxley Road property up was an issue between his two siblings, PM Lee and Dr Lee?

Based on what we know from media reports, it doesn’t seem like LHY has much to gain from this latest 7th will. That begs the question: what do LHY and his wife have to gain by allegedly misleading LKY?

It was also noted in Mrs Lee’s defence that the Attorney-General’s complaint and charges does not raise the issue of the demolition clause being reinserted. The defence noted that no complaint was made to that effect and no party contended LKY’s intention of including that particular clause.

The defence emphasised that any arguments made on this matter goes beyond the complaint – yet the tribunal did, in fact, consider evidence on that particular matter nonetheless.

Even so, the defence noted that the reinsertion of the demolition clause is in fact aligned with LKY’s interest given that it has always been his intention that the house should be demolished after his death and not become a shrine.

It was also noted that LKY wanted to revert to the original will in which he was fully away included the demolition clause as originally drafted. This illustrates that he clearly knew what he wanted.

So this entire saga, is this actually about the seventh will being made by circumventing Kwa (who made all the earlier wills) and the conflict of interest in having Mrs Lee involved in creating the last will or is it the manifestation of a pre-existing soured relationship between the three siblings?

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

林学芬欣见李显扬成长 更为关注国家议题和挑战

在卷入律师公会提告的官司前,李显扬妻子林学芬向来在媒体前较为低调。近期她接受英语媒体《雅虎新闻》访谈,对于丈夫李显扬、家公家婆李光耀夫妇、三位孩子和李家风波侃侃而谈,吐露她的心声。 她坦言,他们一家无意成为媒体瞩目焦点,但事情还是发生了。但她也很欣慰,丈夫李显扬在父亲去世后,有在成长进步,“许多来自多元背景的人士和显扬对话,他也变得更为关心这个国家面对的重大议题和挑战。他热爱、也由衷地关心这个国家。” 她提及,由陈清木医生开创的前进党,理念价值也和李显扬想法相近,例如追寻真正的良好施政和问责、选择的自由和免于恐惧的言论等。不仅仅是对于陈清木夫妇,李显扬也赞叹前进党内的有志之士,以及来自各阶层、为国家作出贡献的群众。 在访谈短片中,林学芬提及李显扬哥哥李显龙,固然是母亲的中心;显扬作为幼子则更为觉得需要找到自己的出路、开拓自己的人生。她举例,过去送三位孩子去国民服役,李显扬深知可能会有人识得他,为了保持低调,都是林学芬送他们到德光岛。 “李显扬无法出席,不是他不关心孩子,但也深知孩子需要独立,且不去强调他们(与李家的)关系也很重要。” 在访谈中,她也怀念家翁李光耀和家婆柯玉芝,提及他们想要男孙,而李绳武的出生确实逗乐了他们,对他们也意义重大。 二子李桓武选择“出柜”,林学芬坦言桓武确实曾找她倾诉,虽然不清楚一开始是不是很好地处理此事,惟她深知桓武很需要父母的爱和支持。

AG’s definition of “sub judice” called into question

Mr Kenneth Jeyaretnam has questioned what he described as the Attorney General’s…

黄循财李智陞晋升行动党中委 前部长黄志明榜上无名

人民行动党在11月8日,召开两年一度的中委会选举及干部大会。李显龙仍是该党秘书长、王瑞杰和陈振声则任第一助理秘书长和第二助理秘书长。 卫生部长颜金勇任主席职,马善高为副主席;尚穆根为财政、王乙康为助理财政、傅海燕和李智陞则任组织秘书。 值得一提的是,两年前改选首次担任中委的前总理公署部长黄志明,此次却未入选,反之教育部长黄循财和国家发展部长李智陞则成功入选。 两年前总理李显龙已然开启第三代交棒第四代领导接班人的行动,资深中委卸任,准备逐步让第四代精英班底接手政权。除了在上届改选引退的许文远、林瑞生等五名第三代领导,此次中委也少了国防部长黄永宏和新闻部长和易华仁,这也显示行动党领导人的更新正在持续。 故此,有机会能晋升中委也被看好成为“接班人团队”的几率较高。而在昨日的中委改选候选名单有19人,除了获选和增补的14明第36届中委,其余候选人还包括律政部第二部长躺着牛、总理公署部长孟理齐博士、卫生部兼通讯及新闻部高级政务部长普杰立、西北区市长任梓铭和前部长黄志明。 黄志明原是总理公署部长,2009年至2013年任空军总长、2015年8月18日,卸下三军总长职。8月22日,行动党就宣布黄志明入党。 9月11日2015年大选之后,黄志明进入内阁,短短13个月内从代部长职位获擢升为正部长,一度被视作“潜能接班人选”的征兆。 然而,在2020选举,偕同原交通部兼卫生部高级政务部长蓝彬明医生、内政部兼卫生部高级政务次长安宁·阿敏等人,上阵盛港集选区,惟不敌工人党何廷儒团队败选。 行动党称将正视选举中问题 据了解,身为行动党秘书长的李显龙,指该党已完成2020年大选检讨工作,该党中委将正视选举中出现的问题。 其中,李显龙指行动党在新划分出来的盛港集选区失利,黄志明领军的团队败北,对于行动党和竞选团队是“惨重损失”,不过该党尊重选民决定,他也强调行动党不会放弃反对党选区。