Dr Lee Wei Ling, who passed away on 9 October 2024, was a steadfast advocate for her father, Lee Kuan Yew’s (LKY)—Singapore’s founding Prime Minister—wish to demolish their family home at 38 Oxley Road.

Her funeral on 12 October 2024 was not just a moment of farewell but a poignant reminder of her lifelong commitment to honouring her parents’ final wishes, particularly the demolition of the Oxley Road house.

Even at her passing, Dr Lee never wavered in her dedication to fulfilling her father’s last wish—a cause she championed until her final days, despite battling progressive supranuclear palsy.

In his eulogy for his beloved sister, Lee Hsien Yang (LHY) conveyed a message from Dr Lee, in which she reaffirmed their parents’ wish for their home at 38 Oxley Road to be demolished after their deaths:

“My father, LEE KUAN YEW, and my mother, KWA GEOK CHOO, had an unwavering and deeply felt wish for their house at 38 Oxley Road, Singapore 238629, to be demolished upon the last parent’s death. LEE KUAN YEW directed each of his three children to ensure that their parents’ wish for demolition be fulfilled. He also appealed directly to the people of Singapore: Please honour my father by honouring his wish for his home to be demolished.”

The house, which had become a focal point of public and familial dispute, remained central to her legacy.

But why were Dr Lee and LHY so adamant about fulfilling their father’s wish, despite the personal sacrifices they faced?

Some netizens speculated that LHY, who acquired the property from their brother, Lee Hsien Loong (LHL), then-Prime Minister in 2015, might intend to sell it for financial gain—an allegation put forth by LHL in his statutory declaration.

However, given the persecution Dr Lee, LHY, and his family have endured—ranging from surveillance to political attacks—it is clear that financial benefit would hardly justify the immense personal and legal challenges they have faced over the years.

Their determination, therefore, seems rooted not in monetary interests but in a deep sense of duty to their father, LKY, and his values.

It could be argued that the siblings saw the demolition of the house as more than a matter of inheritance—it was a moral imperative, driven by filial piety and a desire to protect their father’s legacy from being politicised.

In their public statement on 14 June 2017, accusing LHL of abusing his power as Prime Minister, they articulated their commitment: “We have nothing to gain from the demolition of 38 Oxley Road, other than the knowledge that we have honoured our father’s last wish.”

Their determination to demolish the Oxley Road home may also have been rooted in a sense of guilt over failing to honour another of their father’s critical wishes: his desire for a quick death without being placed on life support.

Placed on Life Support for Weeks Despite Advance Medical Directive

LKY, known for his pragmatism, was clear that he did not wish to be kept alive artificially if there was no chance of recovery.

In his 2013 book One Man’s View of the World, he revealed that he had signed an Advance Medical Directive (AMD) stating that if he reached a point where he could not recover and would need to be kept alive by artificial means, he wished for the doctors to let him “make a quick exit.”

In his own words: “Some time back, I had an Advance Medical Directive (AMD) done which says that if I have to be fed by a tube, and it is unlikely that I would ever be able to recover and walk about, my doctors are to remove the tube and allow me to make a quick exit.”

He made it clear in his personal writings that he preferred a dignified end rather than prolonged suffering or incapacitation—likely a reflection of having cared for his wife, Kwa Geok Choo, who had been bedridden for over two years as a result of a series of strokes.

His desire for a swift and natural death was one of only two explicit wishes he made for his final days, the other being the demolition of his home after his passing.

Yet, when LKY’s health deteriorated in early 2015 due to severe pneumonia, this wish was not honoured.

According to the official statement from the Prime Minister’s Office, LKY was placed on mechanical ventilation in the Intensive Care Unit as his condition worsened in February of that year. This meant he remained on life support for weeks until his death on 23 March 2015.

The AMD was previously highlighted by Dr Lee in a Facebook post in April 2019, where she noted that Lee & Lee—the law firm co-founded by her parents—had handled her father’s personal matters, including his wills, powers of attorney, and AMD, which LKY reaffirmed in August 2014.

In that post, Dr Lee also accused LKY’s lawyer, Mdm Kwa Kim Li (KKL), of lying about her involvement in the events that led to LKY’s final will—a point crucial to the persecution her younger brother and sister-in-law are currently facing.

Dr Lee asserted that Mdm Kwa had been in discussions and exchanged emails about what LKY wanted in his December 2013 will, despite KKL’s denial.

In May 2023, a Disciplinary Tribunal (DT) found KKL guilty of misconduct, confirming Dr Lee’s assertions that KKL had misrepresented her role in LKY’s final will.

It was proven that KKL had misled the executors of LKY’s estate—Dr Lee and LHY—by withholding critical information regarding instructions she had received from LKY about his will.

Despite her claims to the contrary, evidence showed she had been in correspondence with LKY about potential changes in November and December 2013. The tribunal ruled that her conduct fell short of the standards expected of a solicitor and imposed penalties, including a fine of S$8,000 and additional costs to the Law Society of Singapore.

It remains unclear who made the decision to place LKY on life support despite his AMD or whether the AMD, overseen by KKL’s law firm, had been highlighted to the attending doctors. This will likely remain a mystery—just as it is unknown who misled LKY into believing that his house had been gazetted by the Singapore government.

Note by Kwa Kim Li that she couldn’t find the records of 38 Oxley Road being gazetted and that she had informed Lee Kuan Yew of this.

Regardless, this failure to honour LKY’s wish, along with the likely prolonged suffering he endured while on life support, may have placed an emotional burden on Dr Lee and LHY, knowing that they had been unable to fulfil their father’s desire for a quick and dignified end.

This experience likely intensified their resolve to ensure that his other major wish—the demolition of 38 Oxley Road—was honoured. For them, it went beyond fulfilling a practical request; it became a personal mission to ensure that at least one of their father’s final wishes was carried out.

This was made clear in their 2017 statement, where they expressed profound disappointment in LHL, whom they accused of blocking the demolition for political reasons—allegations that LHL categorically denied both in public and in parliament. They wrote, “Hsien Loong has everything to gain from preserving 38 Oxley Road—he need only ignore his father’s will and values.”

LKY feared that the house might become a symbol of his personal legacy, detracting from his contributions to Singapore as a whole. He always prioritised the collective good over personal glorification, viewing the house as a private space rather than something to be preserved for political or historical purposes.

Dr Lee emphasised this about her father’s personal beliefs in a 2016 Facebook post, stating, “Papa was dead set against a personality cult and any hint of cronyism.”

The siblings believed that by preserving the house, their brother was not only defying their father’s will but also eroding the values LKY stood for: humility, simplicity, and putting the country first.

Dr Lee went so far as to refer to LHL as a “dishonourable son” for trying to build a “Lee family cult.”

In response to the allegations, LHL stated in his 2017 Ministerial Statement that he had recused himself from all decisions regarding 38 Oxley Road and that a ministerial committee, led by Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean, had been studying various intermediate options related to the house.

In the same parliamentary session, DPM Teo stated that the government’s position was that “no decision is needed now” as Dr Lee was still living in the property—implying that a decision would be made after her passing. With Dr Lee’s recent passing, this deferred decision on the fate of the house will likely be addressed soon.

LHY and LWL’s Sacrifices to Fulfil Their Father’s Final Wish

LHY, who had expressed his sadness over his sister’s death and their shared commitment to their father’s wishes, has frequently highlighted the personal cost of their battle.

In March 2023, he spoke of feeling “deeply saddened” that he had become a “refugee” from his own country due to his refusal to back down on the Oxley Road issue. Both he and Dr Lee had faced what they described as harassment and surveillance in the years following their public dispute with their brother.

Their 2017 statement had already indicated their discomfort with the political environment in Singapore, where they felt “closely monitored in [their] own country” and could no longer trust their brother “as a brother or as a leader.”

Currently, LHY and his wife, Lee Suet Fern (LSF), who are living outside Singapore, face allegations of perjury by Singaporean authorities, accused of misrepresenting the circumstances surrounding LKY’s Last Will (dated 17 December 2013) during LSF’s Disciplinary Tribunal hearing for alleged misconduct.

It was alleged that they rushed the signing of the will for personal gain and misled LKY, particularly regarding the Demolition Clause, as described by DPM Teo in a 2023 parliamentary response, where he first revealed that the police had commenced investigations into LSF and LHY for potential offences of giving false evidence in judicial proceedings.

However, the findings from the DT in May 2023, which confirmed that LKY’s lawyer, KKL, had misrepresented her role, show that LKY had directly communicated his intentions about the will’s changes. This undercuts the allegations that LHY and LSF had deceived LKY, as his wishes—including those of 38 Oxley Road—were clear and known to KKL.

LHY, due to the perceived risk from Singaporean authorities, is unable to return to Singapore for Dr Lee’s funeral, much like how LSF had to be absent from her own father’s funeral in July of last year.

By staying abroad, LHY may feel he can better pursue LKY’s final wish—the demolition of the house—especially after Dr Lee’s passing, rather than risking being ‘trapped in the system.’

In many ways, the conflict over 38 Oxley Road represented more than just a family dispute—it was a struggle over the legacy of one of Singapore’s most iconic leaders.

Dr Lee and LHY believed that allowing the house to stand would betray their father’s values and final wishes, as they stated in their public posts. Their determination, however, may have been further fuelled by the emotional weight of having been unable to fulfil one of his other requests—the wish for a quick, dignified death.

Thus, the demolition of the house became not just an act of obedience but a personal mission to ensure that at least one of LKY’s final wishes was honoured.

As Dr Lee is laid to rest, the fate of 38 Oxley Road remains unresolved, especially with the 2021 amendments to the Preservation of Monuments Act, which allow the National Heritage Board to issue an Enforcement Notice (EN) to halt any activity that risks destroying, damaging, or altering a National Monument.

But what is undeniable is that she devoted her life to fulfilling her duty as a daughter, standing firm in her resolve to honour her parents’ wishes—even when it came at great personal and familial cost.

The Singapore Police have clarified that there are no legal obstacles preventing Mr Lee Hsien Yang (LHY), the younger son of the late founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew (LKY), and his wife, Mrs Lee Suet Fern (LSF), from returning to Singapore.

This statement, released on 11 October in response to media queries, follows renewed interest in LHY’s potential return after the death of his older sister, Dr Lee Wei Ling, on 9 October.

“In response to media queries, the police confirm that there are no legal restraints to Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Mrs Lee Suet Fern returning to Singapore. They are and have always been free to return to Singapore.”

“The police had asked both Mr Lee and Mrs Lee in June 2022 to assist in investigations by attending an interview. They had initially agreed but in the end did not turn up for the scheduled interview, left Singapore on Jun 15, 2022, and have not returned since.”

“They are and have always been free to return to Singapore,” said the police.

The topic of LHY’s return has resurfaced, particularly after he announced that he would not be present at his sister’s wake and funeral.

Instead, he is overseeing the arrangements remotely, while his son, Li Huanwu, manages them in Singapore in line with Dr Lee’s wishes. Dr Lee Wei Ling passed away at the age of 69, having battled progressive supranuclear palsy, a rare brain disorder, for four years.

While the police have emphasised that there are no travel restrictions for LHY and LSF, it’s important to recognise the potentially contradictory nature of this statement.

The police have not provided any guarantees that LHY and LSF would not be arrested upon their return or have their passports impounded, given that they could be considered a flight risk.

Furthermore, The Straits Times, Channel News Asia, and other media reports did not address a significant recent legal development involving Mdm Kwa Kim Li. This omission is notable because it relates directly to the ongoing legal complexities surrounding the Lee family’s disputes.

In its coverage, ST highlighted that “In 2020, the Court of Three Judges and a disciplinary tribunal found that Mr Lee Hsien Yang (LHY) and Mrs Lee Suet Fern (LSF) had lied under oath during disciplinary proceedings against Mrs Lee, a lawyer, over her handling of the last will of Mr Lee Kuan Yew, who died on 23 March 2015, at the age of 91.”

This framing appears to justify the ongoing investigations into LHY and LSF, yet the report notably omits a significant development: Mdm Kwa Kim Li, the former lawyer of Lee Kuan Yew, was found guilty of misleading the executors about her knowledge of the will.

In May 2023, a Disciplinary Tribunal (DT) found Mdm Kwa guilty of misconduct after determining that she had, in fact, been aware of the intended changes to the will and misrepresented her role in the matter.

The tribunal determined that Mdm Kwa had misled the executors of Lee Kuan Yew’s estate—Dr Lee and LHY—by withholding critical information regarding the instructions she received from Lee Kuan Yew about his will.

Her statements falsely claimed that LKY had never instructed her to amend his will, despite evidence of her correspondence with him about potential changes in November and December 2013.

The DT ruled that her conduct fell short of the standards expected of a solicitor and imposed penalties, including a fine of S$8,000 and additional costs to the Law Society of Singapore.

This development provides crucial context to the allegations put forth against LHY and LSF, who are accused of lying about Mdm Kwa’s involvement in the drafting of the last will.

Another critical aspect that I think needs to be highlighted is the open-ended nature of the ongoing investigations into LHY and LSF.

In theory, the police have the authority to continue their investigations for as long as they deem necessary. There is no legally prescribed timeframe by which they must conclude their inquiries, allowing them the discretion to keep the investigation active indefinitely.

This aspect adds to the uncertainty surrounding LHY and LSF’s situation, especially given that any return could potentially reignite legal scrutiny.

I’ve had my own experience with the lengthy nature of police investigations, which can take years to resolve.

When I was investigated for contempt of court back in July 2020, the authorities sought to impound my passport under Section 112 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Even after serving my time for criminal defamation of cabinet members for corruption, they seized my passport again until I challenged the decision in July 2022 to have it returned.

After regaining my passport in August 2022, I left Singapore immediately—without giving the police a chance to issue another order to seize it. Since the IMDA revoked its license, it is now illegal for me to operate The Online Citizen within Singapore.

Although the case took nearly three years to conclude, eventually closing in March 2023 with a warning issued to me, I was already out of the police’s jurisdiction by then. It’s uncertain how much longer the police might have taken to close the case if I had remained in Singapore, as the investigation could have been prolonged at their discretion.

This experience gives me some insight into why LHY might remain overseas despite the police’s statement that there are no travel restrictions.

LHY and his family have been subject to various investigations by the Singapore government following public criticism by Dr Lee and him in a highly publicised dispute, where they criticised their elder brother, Lee Hsien Loong, the former Prime Minister, over alleged abuse of his position.

His wife, LSF, was suspended for 15 months over alleged misconduct as a lawyer, related to the handling of LKY’s last will. His son, Li Shengwu, was fined for contempt of court over a private Facebook post.

In March last year, LHY posted on Facebook, “I am heartbroken that my own country has made me a fugitive for standing up for my father’s promise, Lee Kuan Yew.”

Back in 2022, Li Shengwu posted on X, stating, “It has been five years since I left home because of a political prosecution by the Singapore government. Friends often ask me if it’s safe to return.

The court case is technically over. However, I assess that there’s a substantial risk that my uncle, the Prime Minister, would find an excuse to imprison me if I were to return to Singapore. He likes to relitigate old disputes.”

It has been 5 years since I left home, because of a political prosecution by the Singapore government. Friends often ask me if it's safe to return.

— Shengwu Li (@ShengwuLi) July 10, 2022