Connect with us

Court Cases

Defamation trial: Judge rejects lawyer Lim Tean’s question on disclosing correspondences within the Lee family in relation to 38 Oxley Road

Published

4 years ago

on

Justice Audrey Lim on Monday (30 November) disallowed lawyer Lim Tean’s question to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on disclosing correspondences within the Lee family regarding to the 38 Oxley Road property on the first day of the PM’s defamation suit against TOC’s editor chief Terry Xu.

The suit concerns an article published on TOC on 15 August last year titled “PM Lee’s wife, Ho Ching weirdly shares article on cutting ties with family members”.

The article contained alleged defamatory statements made by PM Lee’s siblings Mr Lee Hsien Yang (LHY) and Dr Lee Wei Ling (LWL) in relation to the 38 Oxley Road dispute.

In his cross-examination of PM Lee on the witness stand, Mr Lim, who represents Mr Xu, said to PM Lee that the prime minister “did not disclose a single correspondence within the family that touched on the subject of 38 Oxley Road or gazetting which is the issue at heart in this case”.

PM Lee’s lawyer, Senior Counsel Davinder Singh of Davinder Singh Chambers LLC, interjected by saying that the application for specific discovery was already made by Mr Xu, which had already been dismissed by Justice Lim earlier.

This then prompted Justice Lim to ask Mr Lim to rephrase his question to make his point clearer.

Mr Lim then asked: “Mr Lee, you will agree with me that in this case you have not disclosed many relevant documents pertaining to the issue at hand?”

PM Lee then responded and said he disagreed with Mr Lim’s assertion, pointing out that he has “rendered up everything” that is required and which the court has found relevant.

When Mr Lim pressed PM Lee to answer about the application for discovery, Justice Lim objected and said that she thinks this is not a request question that needs to be answered by PM Lee.

“I will not allow this line of questioning, okay? Mr Singh’s points are valid. If you find that documents should have been relevant for disclosure, your client makes the appropriate application at the time before the trial, and then it is for the court to decide whether or not they are relevant and material to the case. So please move on to the issues at hand in the trial,” she said.

She added: “The documents are all already here. Don’t revisit the issue of discovery. It is not relevant”.

In March this year, the High Court dismissed an application made by Mr Xu to obtain certain documents from PM Lee in relation to the defamation suit filed by the PM against him, following a closed-door hearing in chambers.

Mr Xu told The Straits Times that he had sought to acquire documents on PM Lee’s correspondence with his family, as well as minutes of a Cabinet meeting, in a pre-trial process to obtain evidence.

Instances of communication between PM Lee and his family that Mr Xu had sought were:

  • Correspondence from Mr LKY to PM Lee on the removal of the latter as an executor of his will;
  • Correspondence between PM Lee and his siblings Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling regarding the family home, dated 20 Jul 2011 to 31 Oct 2012; and
  • Correspondence between PM Lee and Mr LKY on the family home, dated 20 Jul 2011 to 31 Oct 2012.

Background of PM Lee Hsien Loong’s defamation suit against TOC chief editor Terry Xu

In September last year, PM Lee asked TOC to remove the article as well as a Facebook post linking to it, and publish a full and unconditional apology.

It was said that the article contained alleged defamatory statements made by PM Lee’s siblings in relation to the 38 Oxley Road dispute.

At the heart of the 38 Oxley Road dispute is the house owned by the Lee siblings’ late father and Singapore’s founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew and the elder Lee’s wish to have the house demolished instead of being turned into a museum or government relic.

Mr LHY and Dr LWL are joint executors and trustees of Mr LKY’s estate.

In a joint statement released on 14 June 2017, which was shared on their Facebook pages, PM Lee’s two younger siblings claimed, among multiple other allegations, that PM Lee and his wife Ho Ching had defied Mr LKY’s wish to demolish the house.

They also alleged that PM Lee and Mdm Ho were responsible for instilling and perpetuating the Government’s stance to preserve the house at 38 Oxley Road, including PM Lee’s purported move to demonstrate that Mr LKY had changed his mind on having the house demolished.

Mr LHY and Dr LWL also claimed that PM Lee had engaged in abuse of power as Prime Minister to obtain a copy of the Deed of Gift from then-Minister of National Development Lawrence Wong, which was then passed to his personal lawyer Lucien Wong at the time for his own purpose.

The younger Lee siblings also alleged that Mdm Ho wielded significant influence in the Government despite not being a public official.

PM Lee issued a statement the same day to counter the allegations. Despite that, Mr LHY and Dr LWL continued to make claims against PM Lee in subsequent Facebook posts.

Following that, PM Lee announced in June the same year his plans to deliver a ministerial statement in Parliament the next month to address the allegations made by his siblings.

The prime minister delivered his ministerial statement on 3 July 2017, in which he branded the allegations as baseless.

PM Lee also said that he would not be suing Mr LHY and Dr LWL as doing so would further besmirch their parents’ name.

The next day, PM Lee delivered another ministerial statement, in which he said that he would not call for a Select Committee or a Commission of Inquiry to be convened into the 38 Oxley Road dispute and his siblings’ allegations.

Mr LHY and Dr LWL on 4 July — the same day PM Lee made his second ministerial statement on the matter — in a joint statement alleged that PM Lee had improperly misrepresented to LKY that the gazetting of 38 Oxley Road was either “inevitable” or that the house was already gazetted.

Two days later on 6 July, Mr LHY and Dr LWL jointly stated that they would not post any further evidence on the allegations if PM Lee and the Government do not interfere with Mr LKY’s wish — as well as their own — to have the house demolished.

PM Lee responded the same day by saying that he could not concede to his siblings’ demand to withdraw plans to deliver his ministerial statement and to hold the debate in Parliament, as well as disbanding the Ministerial Committee and not responding to their accusations.

Mr LHY and Dr LWL henceforth continued to make posts on matters relating to 38 Oxley Road.

However, PM Lee decided to file a defamation suit against Mr Xu for publishing the article that contained the allegedly defamatory statements made by Mr LHY and Dr LWL in relation to the 38 Oxley Road dispute.

Prior to that, PM Lee’s press secretary Chang Li Lin wrote to Mr Xu, asking the latter to remove the “libellous” article and to publish a “full and unconditional” apology.

PM Lee later began legal proceedings against Mr Xu after the latter had refused the demands made in Ms Chang’s letter.

The trial continues tomorrow on Tuesday (1 December).

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
10 Comments
Subscribe
Notify of
10 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Court Cases

3 Chinese nationals linked to global cybercrime syndicate face new charges in Singapore

New charges were filed on 8 October against three Chinese nationals linked to an alleged global cybercrime syndicate in Singapore. One suspect faces allegations of receiving S$11.6 million from “Biao Ge,” purportedly used for the upkeep and expenses of the group. The nationals entered Singapore on construction work passes but reportedly did not stay at their registered workplaces.

Published

2 days ago

on

9 October 2024

By

SINGAPORE: New charges were tendered on Tuesday (8 October 2024) against three Chinese nationals implicated in an alleged global cybercrime syndicate based in Singapore.

The latest revelations indicate a flow of funds amounting to approximately S$11.6 million (US$8.9 million) dedicated to the upkeep of the group and its connections to South Korea.

As reported by CNA, the court records, charge sheets, and a prior press statement jointly issued by the police and the Internal Security Department (ISD) outline that the trio is part of a larger group of seven men, all Chinese nationals except one Singaporean.

According to a police statement issued on 10 September, The group is accused of operating from a bungalow in Mount Sinai and is believed to be linked to a global syndicate involved in cybercrime activities.

Authorities seized laptops and devices from the suspects, which contained credentials to access Internet servers associated with known hacker groups, stolen data belonging to foreign victims, computer hacking tools exploiting vulnerabilities in Internet servers, and specialised software to control malware.

The Chinese nationals reportedly gained entry into Singapore with work passes intended for construction work but allegedly did not stay at their registered employer’s workplace.

The suspects were apprehended on 9 September in simultaneous island-wide raids conducted by approximately 160 officers from the Singapore Police Force (SPF) and ISD.

The seven accused men are: Sun Jiao, 42, Zhang Qingqiao, 38, Chen Yiren, 42, Yan Peijian, 38, Huang Qin Zheng, 35, Liu Yuqi, 32, and Singaporean Goh Shi Yong, 34. The three men receiving fresh charges on Tuesday are Sun, Zhang, and Chen.

Chen Allegedly Received S$11.6 Million for Criminal Group’s Expenses

Chen’s new charge alleges he received S$11.6 million from an individual known as “Biao Ge”, which he purportedly spent on the rent, upkeep, and expenses of an organised criminal group, including Yan, Huang, Liu, and Sun.

This allegedly covers funding for the Mount Sinai bungalow. Of the total amount, Chen is accused of having “expended” about S$399,000 on 11 occasions between 2022 and 2024, under the Organised Crime Act.

Zhang faces new accusations of abetting two individuals—Lim Clovis Leslie and Lee Kok Leong—to obtain the personal information of unknown individuals on 28 July 2023.

Meanwhile, Sun has been charged with sending a file containing the personal information of 1,055 unknown individuals from South Korea to a WhatsApp chat group on 12 August 2023, while he was in Singapore.

Additionally, he is accused of receiving 772,500 USDT in cryptocurrency from a wallet belonging to co-accused Liu, which allegedly stemmed from criminal conduct.

Suspects Accused of Targeting Websites to Exploit Vulnerabilities and Trade Stolen Personal Data

Previous charges against the suspects depict them as targeting websites to scan for open ports and exploit vulnerabilities, offering to purchase personal information of Indian nationals from gambling websites, and sending a file containing the personal information of 9,369 individuals from Thailand to other parties.

According to a prosecutor’s submissions in unsuccessful bail reviews on 1 October, the Chinese nationals involved are foreigners engaged in syndicated, transnational offences, with amounts involved “in excess of S$1 million”.

The public hearing list indicates that Sun is defended by Mr Hong Qibin, Ms Elaine Cai, and Mr Daniel Chia from Coleman Street Chambers. Yan is represented by Mr Ong Kelvin from Contigo Law, while Chen is defended by Mr Steven John Lam from Templars Law.

Both Huang and Liu are represented by Mr Lee Teck Leng from Legal Clinic.

Zhang is defended by Mr Sunil Sudheesan and Ms Joyce Khoo from Quahe Woo & Palmer, and Goh is represented by Mr Soon Wei Song from Goh JP & Wong.

Sun and Chen are scheduled for bail reviews on 10 October. They have been remanded for approximately a month, while the other five men are set to return to court later this month.

In addition to the main group, two Malaysian men, Seow Gim Shen (42) and Kong Chien Hoi (39)  are facing charges in Singapore for conspiring to supply the personal information of 9,369 individuals from Thailand in a file sent from Singapore. They are expected to plead guilty next week.

Continue Reading

Court Cases

AGC announces no charges against businessman Lum Kok Seng in Iswaran case

In a statement on 4 October, the Attorney-General’s Chambers announced no charges against businessman Lum Kok Seng. This follows the sentencing of former Minister S. Iswaran, who pleaded guilty to five charges, including receiving gifts from Lum such as wine, whisky, and a Brompton T-Line bicycle.

Published

6 days ago

on

4 October 2024

By

SINGAPORE: The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) announced on 4 October 2024 that no charges will be filed against businessman Lum Kok Seng  (林國城).

Mr Lum, the managing director of Lum Chang Holdings, had been named in March this year as one of two businessmen involved in a case concerning former transport minister S Iswaran.

The AGC had previously stated that it would take a decision regarding Mr Lum following the conclusion of Iswaran’s case.

On 24 September, Mr Iswaran pleaded guilty to a total of five charges, including receiving luxury items from Mr Lum between November 2021 and November 2022.

The items, allegedly given without any compensation, included several bottles of high-end whisky and wine, expensive golf equipment, and a premium bicycle.

The specific gifts from Mr Lum to Mr Iswaran were detailed as follows:

  • Four bottles of Gordon & MacPhail Caol Ila whisky valued at S$1,084.46
  • Fourteen bottles of whisky and wine worth S$3,255.75
  • A TaylorMade golf driver valued at S$749
  • Two more bottles of Gordon & MacPhail Caol Ila whisky, priced at S$542.23
  • A set of Honma Beres BE-08 Black AQ MX golf clubs worth S$4,420
  • A Brompton T Line bicycle worth S$7,907.50
  • Two bottles of M&H Elements Sherry Cask whisky worth S$198
  • A Scotty Cameron Phantom golf putter and two golf chippers valued at S$800

In total, these gifts amounted to approximately S$18,956.94.

These items were given during a period when Lum Chang Holdings was involved in a contract for construction work at Tanah Merah MRT station.

Attorney-General’s Chambers cites evidentiary risks in reducing Iswaran’s corruption charges

On 3 October, Iswaran has been sentenced to 12 months in jail after pleading guilty to four amended charges under Section 165 of Singapore’s Penal Code and one charge of obstructing the course of justice under Section 204A(a) of the Penal Code.

Iswaran admitted to accepting valuable gifts from prominent businessmen, including Ong Beng Seng, chairman of Singapore GP, and Mr Lum, while holding public office.

These gifts, which included private flights and other benefits, were worth over S$400,000 in total.

The 35 charges against Iswaran were amended by the prosecution on 24 September from corruption to lesser offences under Section 165, which pertains to public servants receiving valuable items in connection with their official duties.

The court also took into account Iswaran’s admission of obstructing the course of justice, for which he had repaid over S$5,000 to Singapore GP for a business-class flight he had taken at Ong’s expense.

The remaining 30 charges were taken into account during sentencing.

Iswaran had originally faced 35 charges, including two counts of corruption.

The charges were amended from two counts of corruption under the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA) to offences under Section 165.

This section, unlike Section 8 of the PCA, does not include a presumption of corruption, which would have placed the burden on the accused to prove the gifts were not given as inducements.

The AGC in an explanation cited substantial evidentiary risks in proving the original corruption charges, which involved  Ong Beng Seng and Lum Kok Seng.

The AGC noted that proving the original corruption charges under PCA would have been difficult due to the involvement of both Iswaran and Ong as primary parties.

Both would have had to implicate themselves to establish corrupt intent.

The AGC explained that “there are two primary parties to the transactions, and both would have an interest in denying corruption in the transactions.” This made securing a conviction for corruption highly uncertain.

In light of these risks, the AGC amended the charges to offenses under Section 165 of the Penal Code, which carries a lower evidentiary threshold and a reduced maximum sentence of two years’ imprisonment.

According to AGC, the amendment was made to ensure a fair and just outcome while considering public interest.

 

Continue Reading

Trending