‘We cannot afford a 2nd Geno,’ Ben Leong announces 5 BTC fund to counter defamation lawfare

SINGAPORE: To counter the potential financial and emotional toll of litigative defamation lawfare, Associate Professor Dr Ben Leong has announced the establishment of a fund of approximately S$600,000 to assist individuals targeted by such lawsuits.

Dr Leong, an Associate Professor of Computer Science at the National University of Singapore (NUS), shared details of the initiative in a blogpost published on the online platform Medium.

He revealed that following his announcement of an impending lawsuit, a former student offered substantial financial support — five bitcoins, equivalent to over S$607,000 as of 19 November 2024 — to help set up the fund.

Leong said, “If you or someone you know is a victim, please get in touch with Mr Darwin Gosal at [email protected]. ”

“We will do what we can to offer support. If you have been a past victim, please also reach out. We would like to explore the possibility of providing restitution.”

Leong is currently facing a defamation lawsuit from Iris Koh, founder of the “Healing the Divide” group, which opposes COVID-19 vaccination.

Koh alleged that Dr Leong’s 2021 Facebook post accused the “Healing the Divide” group of being a “domestic terrorist organisation.”

@iriskoh11

I’m suing Prof Ben Leong for saying that Healing the Divide is a domestic terrorist organisation in Nov 2021. I’ll be filling in court shortly. Prof Leong took it like a man and said he will see me in court. Follow me to stay tuned and we’ll be healing the divide, one lawsuit at a time. #iriskoh #healingthedivide #medicalfreedom #medicalfreedomadvocate #sg #sgtiktok #sgnews#sgfyp #sgtt #tiktoksg #singapore#singaporetiktok #nus #getevenai @gazythegreat @dr_roland_victor_md @shabnampalesa @drmichaelfang @prabu_ramachandran @ferdaus.chia

♬ original sound – Iris Koh – Iris Koh

Defamation Lawfare Defence Fund

In his latest blog post, Leong detailed that he had since received heartfelt support from ex-students, friends, and supporters after they learned about the upcoming legal challenges, with some offering financial assistance.

Despite acknowledging the financial challenges, Leong stated that he had been hesitant to accept monetary contributions from his ex-students.

However, he pointed out that there could be individuals unable to handle similar defamation cases, which led one of his students to offer five bitcoins — enabling the establishment of the ‘Defamation Lawfare Defence Fund’.

Leong shared his initial thoughts, admitting that he was uncertain about what to do, and was still in discussions with his legal team regarding how they should best assist the victims.

The fund aims to alleviate financial burden for individuals targeted by defamation lawsuits

“It is unlikely that we afford to hire individual lawyers to defend each and every victim, ” he shared.

“At $50–70K a pop, our funds would be drained in no time, and we still don’t know exactly how many victims are out there.”

However, he said that the fund aimed to mitigate financial losses for individuals targeted by defamation suits, particularly those arising from the sharing of an article published by Rice Media in March 2021 about the Vendshare scheme, which was linked to businessman Raymond Ng.

The 2021 article reported that franchisees had accused the scheme of being a scam, allegations which Ng vehemently denied.

He insisted that Vendshare was “not an investment” and that the company had never made “any promises of returns” in the contract.

Raymond Ng is the husband of Iris Koh.

Leong said that, at a minimum, the fund would offer underwriting for the financial losses of victims who lost their defamation suits, after assessing the merits of each case.

Dr Leong emphasised the seriousness of such legal actions, underscoring systemic injustices

He acknowledged the emotional and financial toll on past victims and expressed his intention to explore potential restitution efforts.

He encouraged victims of prior suits (from the past three years) to come forward for possible restitution, though such assistance would be subject to the fund’s capacity.

Leong emphasised the gravity of such legal actions, highlighting systemic injustices.

“We do not have the powers to bring the evil-doers to justice; so we do what we can to protect those who cannot protect themselves,” Leong said.

“We cannot afford a second Geno, ” he added poignantly.

He was referring to a tragic incident in September 2024, when Singaporean woman Geno Ong took her own life after posting a suicide note accusing Raymond Ng of financially ruining her through multiple lawsuits.

Dr Leong warns against misuse of legal system for oppression and advocates for balanced reforms

In his blog post, Dr Leong expressed concern over the potential misuse of the legal system as a tool for oppression, calling for balanced reforms that would prevent harm without hindering access to justice.

He also highlighted a troubling “new lawfare defamation business model,” where individuals exploit the legal system by suing others over minor or vaguely negative comments.

Leong contrasted this with traditional lawfare, where legal actions were largely deterred by the high costs of legal representation. Only wealthy individuals or entities could afford to pursue frivolous lawsuits, as losing would require them to cover the defendant’s legal fees.

Recent legal reforms aimed to make justice more accessible by encouraging litigants-in-person (LIPs) to self-represent, reducing costs, and capping recoverable legal fees, which discouraged the use of expensive lawyers.

Defendants face dilemma: Defend themselves or settle to avoid high costs

However, Leong noted that while these reforms were well-intentioned, they had inadvertently created vulnerabilities in the system.

Leong discussed the challenges of defending against lawsuits filed by LIPs, particularly in defamation cases.

He explained that while hiring a lawyer to contest baseless suits is costly, the cap on cost recovery means that defendants may still face significant financial losses, even if they win.

This creates a dilemma for defendants: either take on their own defence, which is time-consuming, or settle to avoid substantial expenses.

“If you ask me, I only have 3 words to describe this situation: 没天理 (no justice) and this is the situation I have since found myself,” Leong remarked.

While acknowledging the Ministry of Law’s (MinLaw) efforts to make justice more accessible, Leong pointed out that the legal system’s susceptibility to abuse is not new and has historically favoured the wealthy.

He compared the legal reforms to a blacksmith crafting a knife, arguing that the misuse of the tool (the system) by bad actors does not negate its original purpose.

While appreciating MinLaw’s recent steps to address lawfare abuses, Leong emphasised that their measures, such as criminalising abusive behaviour, only address the issue after harm has already occurred.

Leong proposed further preventive measures, likening them to “security guards” that would mitigate potential misuse before any damage is done.