Singapore Democrats

Awesome Words

It doesn't take a majority to make a rebellion; it takes only a few determined leaders and a sound cause.

H. L. Mencken

Your SDP Forum

forum-sepia.jpg
Join the online policy discussion II
1. The Economic System
2. Social Security and the CPF
3. Healthcare
4. Kopitiam
 

Tak boleh tahan!

dancing-ministers.jpg
 

Singapore's #1 political website

no1_website.png
 

Friends of SDP

 
Banner
Banner
Banner
Home News Singapore More to Reuter's report on Lees v FEER case
More to Reuter's report on Lees v FEER case PDF Print E-mail
Saturday, 23 August 2008

Singapore Democrats

Reuters reported yesterday that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong upped the stakes of the defamation suit with the Far Eastern Economic Review (FEER) by seeking to find a higher defamatory meaning to the words published in its interview with Dr Chee Soon Juan (see below).

That's not really surprising given the track record of the PAP leaders. But get this: It wasn't Mr Lee who originally sought this.

The Singapore Democrats understand that in the midst of considering his decision of whether to award summary judgment to Mr Lee Kuan Yew and Mr Lee Hsien Loong, High Court Judge Woo Bih Li summoned parties back to court a few weeks ago and asked if both sides would make further submissions on a more serious meaning to the words published in the FEER article.

Needing no second invitation the Prime Minister's lawyer, Mr Davinder Singh, promptly submitted an amended claim which now pleads a more serious defamatory charge.

Mr Singh roared in his submissions: "The article clearly asserted that like Durai, who abused defamation suits to silence his critics and conceal his corruption, Lee Hsien Loong has abused libel suits as a tool to conceal his corruption."

Yes, Mr Senior Counsel, but why did it take you one-and-a-half years to come up with the amendments and only after Judge Woo raised the matter?

FEER was obviously taken aback by this and now has to amend it's defence to address the new and higher claims.

The details of the matter are murky as so far proceedings are all held in chambers and not open to the public.

And to keep our readers updated in a related matter, Judge Belinda Ang has yet to announce her decision on how much to award the Lees in their suit against the SDP. The hearing concluded with the Judge sentencing Dr Chee and Ms Chee Siok Chin to prison for contempt of court.

In the contempt hearing, Judge Ang refused to give Mr J B Jeyaretnam, acting for Dr Chee, time to prepare the case. Dr Chee then told the Judge that it was unfair to ask Mr Jeyaretnam to argue the matter when counsel did not have time to prepare. Dr Chee then discharged Mr Jeyaretnam as his lawyer.

The SDP secretary-general has appealed, on a matter of principle, against Judge Ang's decision on the contempt charges. He has already served the 12-day prison sentence. He will cite the happenings in Judge Ang's courtroom relating to Mr Lee Kuan Yew, and wants the Court of Appeal to hear the matter and record its decision. The Supreme Court has yet to fix the date for the appeal.

Ms Chee also served a 10-day prison sentence for the contempt conviction. She is not appealing because the courts insist that a $1,000 fee is required to file the appeal.

Also, Mr Gopalan Nair's charge of insulting Judge Ang in his blog will be heard on 8 Sep 08 in the High Court before Judge Kan Ting Chiu. Judge Kan had awarded Mr Lee Kuan Yew and Mr Goh Chok Tong a total of $500,000 in 2004 in the lawsuit the two former prime ministers brought against Dr Chee in 2001.

The 2004 assessment hearing was held when Dr Chee was away. Mr Davinder Singh had then taunted Dr Chee that he had chickened out and was afraid to face his clients in court. But when Dr Chee confronted the Lees in May this year, Mr Singh kept jumping up to object to the questions and even asked the Judge Ang to limit the cross-examination to two hours.

Bullies shy away when you stand up to them.

 

Singapore PM raises stakes in FEER defamation case
Daryl Loo
Reuters

Singapore's Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has raised the stakes in a libel suit against the Far Eastern Economic Review, now saying an article in the magazine implied he was corrupt, court documents show. The amendment this week by lawyers representing Lee adds a more serious charge to an earlier claim that FEER implied the prime minister was unfit for office because he had condoned corruption by his father, former premier Lee Kuan Yew.

The August 2006 story that sparked the lawsuit, entitled "Singapore's Martyr: Chee Soon Juan", criticised the government's handling of a pay-and-perks scandal at the country's largest charity the National Kidney Foundation. The charity's former CEO T.T. Durai has since been jailed.

"The article clearly asserted that like Durai, who abused defamation suits to silence his critics and conceal his corruption, Lee Hsien Loong has abused libel suits as a tool to conceal his corruption," the Lees' lawyer Davinder Singh argued in his written submissions to the court for the amendment.

The story written by FEER editor Hugo Restall, who is also being sued, had quoted opposition politician Chee attacking the Lees. The magazine is owned by Dow Jones & Co, in turn owned by media mogul Robert Murdoch's News Corp.

Lawyer Peter Low, representing Restall and the magazine, told Reuters on Friday that he was now amending his defence.

"It raises a serious question as to the genuineness of that pleading if, sometime later, (the plaintiff) applies to amend to allege an altogether different and much more serious meaning," Low said in submissions to the court against the amendment.

The magazine has argued the article did not defame the prime minister and his father because it was based on facts and fair comment.

But lawyers for Lee Hsien Loong and his father have dismissed the defence statement by the Hong Kong-based magazine as "frivolous, vexatious, scandalous, and an abuse of the process of the court".

Singapore leaders have won damages in the past from foreign media groups when they report on local politics, including the Economist, the International Herald Tribune and Bloomberg.

The leaders in the Southeast Asian city-state say the lawsuits are necessary to protect their reputations.

http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSSIN20311620080822?sp=true


Comments
Add New Search RSS
V.Benedict  -  Who can verify that?    Sun, 24 Aug 2008 4:56 am
The Singapore Government said and instilled alot of feel-good and feel-nice to all Singaporean.

1. HDB subsidy - who to verify?

2. Singapore lack talent peoples - who to verify?

3. Temasek assets and balances - who to verify?

4. Mas Selamat escaped - who to verify?

5. Executives and judiciary independency (LKY and former CJ caught mingling together in Changi Airport T3 driving a golf-cart) - who to verify?

The list goes on and on and on ......

The impression I got from the government is 'secrecy' in all above mentioned matters. Given this 'secrecy', how can I believed the matters in totality.
Who can I believed and verified? If they remained to be 'not-so-open' policy, then I remained to have doubts in all their undertakings. Fair right?
Anonymous  -     Sun, 24 Aug 2008 5:23 am
Everybody knows only in Singapore's kangaroo courts can the Lees get away with this. The mud will stick no matter what the judgement is. The court becomes irrelevant as with most kangaroo courts. This case shows just how true the findings of IBA have been.

Why not sue the IBA as well? The fact that you didn't sue mean you agree to the findings right?
seebeng  -  What else from compliant judiciary.....     Sun, 24 Aug 2008 5:30 am
Singapore's compliant judiciary bending over backwards to please Lee Kuan Yew and his son Lee Hsien Loong, both of whom came out humiliated after cross-examination by Dr Chee.
AnnA  -  World Court - Queen's Counsel?    Sun, 24 Aug 2008 5:41 am
Isn't there any world d court to decide about this? I suggest that FEER who is not from Singapore to seek defense from nay place in the world instead of abiding to Singapore's injustice laws. I am sure they do have the right to use QC since they are foreign.

Please.. this time reveal ALL. Let all this bullshitsss backfires PAP.
Mike  -  World Court? You must be joking    Sun, 24 Aug 2008 8:06 am
LKY and gang have never won any defamation suit outside of Singapore? Talk about credibility ... and track record. Clearly none out of Singapore.
greyheyn  -     Sun, 24 Aug 2008 8:27 am
News do spread fast and one fine day it will all go back to Lee. FEER's boss - Rupert Murdoch will not suffer fools gladly.
Tan Tai Wei  -     Sun, 24 Aug 2008 9:01 am
I had always wondered, whenever our former Chief Justice and others after him, hearing an appeal by defence for a lesser sentence, upped it instead, even to the extent of doubling it, whether it was legal for a judge to act as both judge and prosecutor.

Surely, in processes of court, it is the role, not of the appeal judge, but the prosecution and the defence, to decide whether a lower court's judgement and sentencing is just and proportionate, and whether to appeal.

An appeal judge's role is surely to only consider the appeal, whether it be from one side or the other. So, where he disagrees with the defence's appeal, the most he should do is to let the lower court's sentence stand.

To go beyond this and increase the sentence, the appeal judge has in effect taken on the prosecutor's role, initiated a new appeal, and judged to allow it, all done at one instance, coterminous with hearing the present appeal by the defence!

And all this done, countermanding the Attorney General's judgement (whose business it is to so judge) that due justice has been executed by the lower court (for he has not appealed).

The same misgiving I now feel, regarding SDP's observation above, that it was the judge hearing the legal suit of the Lees against the FEER who initiated the move for the plaintiff to enhance it to a more serious libel.

Can a judge hearing a libel suit also act on behalf of the plaintiff? In any case, what business has he to prejudge, even before hearing the case, that the plaintiff had been more seriously maligned than worded in the suit tabled before him?
g_e  -  FEER today, gone tomorrow?    Sun, 24 Aug 2008 2:11 pm
Simply shamelessly amazing. The Lees are trying again, for the umpteenth time, their cowardly scam of the summary judgement to avoid facing rigorous cross-examination. And even more jaw-droppingly amazing, the presiding kangaroo has taken it upon himself to suggest that the plaintiffs consider a more serious allegation. Priceless! Only in Singapore!

How curious that Davinder seemed all prepared for the judge's proposal whereas the defendant's counsel appeared quite taken aback. It's almost as if Davinder had prior knowledge...nah, it must have been his Boy Scout's motto "Be Prepared".

Like clockwork, the pious phrase "frivolous, vexatious, scandalous, and an abuse of the process of the court" is wielded to shield the Lees' hilariously divine reputations from being examined under oath by the defendant's lawyers. Bound and hog-tied, why bother going through the charade? It's rough 'justice' by the numbers, don'cha know.

No prizes for guessing their personal court's verdict of course. Cue IBAHRI nodding grimly and sharpening their pencils for their next report.

Will FEER's new owners back their editor to the hilt and take the fight to the Lees? Realistically, not if Rupert Murdoch is quietly offered a deal which he sees to his advantage. He sold out 'pragmatically' in 2001 when he dropped the uber-critical BBC World Service from Hong Kong's Star TV services in order to curry favour with China. Murdoch did not become the world's mightiest media baron by putting sentiment before profit. His critics call him "the Dirty Digger" for good reason.
Uncle Ver SG  -     Sun, 24 Aug 2008 9:51 pm
Dont equate Singapore Inc. with China Inc. please. It's like comparing Conference league with Premier League. Rupert Murdoch does not need to appease an untalented hack dictator who is even older than he is, much less one who is now deeply unpopular in his country. As a pragmatist, he knows when to follow the winds of change a la Kevin Rudd v John Howard.
Low Fuk loong  -  Can Feer's lawyers ask to audit sinkapor govt?    Mon, 25 Aug 2008 12:25 am
Everytime when there is such a court case like this in sinkapore's courts, everybody in the streets know the verdict beforehand. Why is it so?

Why people in the streets seem to know the monkey family will win?

Can the lawyers defending FEER ask the judge whether they could audit Temasick and GIC as well as the country's reserves indepedantly by non-partisan auditors?
Corruption case or defamation case perhaps can only be resolved this way.
This kind of case reminds me about NKF, the truth may be the victim. When the truth is out, the victim is forgotten, and the damage done to the victims cannot be undone.

I think you need to audit the sinkapore Govt before the feer case is put on trial.

my 2 cents.
relevant questions  -  thinking citizen    Mon, 25 Aug 2008 4:20 pm
Quote:
Everytime when there is such a court case like this in sinkapore's courts, everybody in the streets know the verdict beforehand. Why is it so?

Why people in the streets seem to know the monkey family will win?


Such very very relevant questions which must be answered by every thinking citizen- ha!ha!
AnnA  -  Open Court    Mon, 25 Aug 2008 7:39 pm
Why don't the FEER ask for open court?

I hope there's no money offered to FEER once if the devil Lees knew they will lose because FEER will make more money not to keep quiet.
Carlson  -     Tue, 26 Aug 2008 5:07 am
If all foreign media groups like FEER, the Economist, the International Herald Tribune and Bloomberg stop selling their publications in Singapore, it's not going to be a pretty picture here. Singapore is a very small market after all; its not going to hurt these media groups much. Without access to these publications and free flowing of information, will we lose out in global competition? Can Singapore still attracts FT?
Hawk Eye  -  So excited    Tue, 26 Aug 2008 7:09 am
Oh, i'm so excited about this news and i'll sure do keep myself posted.

It sounds like the NKF saga. I am sure this time, LHL will not win. He might just drop the case incase he will get audited, more informations on his corruptions will be digged out.

So if he is clever enough, he might just drop the charges.
??  -  to V.Benedict    Tue, 26 Aug 2008 9:51 am
I am saddened by the reality in our homeland. indeed, secrecy clouds this whole issue of governance, it seems.

but may i ask v.benedict, the distressed ciziten, to cite me a country whereby the governments do not conceal or withhold information from the people?

think usa. who knows what goes on in CIA? think china, who knows what goes on in the PLA? think philippines, the most "Democratic" govt in SEA. it is so "democractic" that marcos' wife can have over 3,000 pairs of shoes without being stopped in time?

so, i hope you can neutralize my disillusion with governments worldwide about this. hope to hear a positive reply from you.

on another note, the sdp, being the supposed antithesis to all that this govt is about, has also engaged in INFORMATION CONCEALMENT. or at least, it has taken them months to release certain information.

for the uninformed, please proceed to the "The Psrty" section of the top toolbar, under the "who are we" section and see what i mean.

the sdp has, after nearly 3 months of request, not released a piece of information so basic, so necessary and so traditionally "unsecretive".

the double-standards must be stopped. and more importantly, the belief that sdp will correct every wrong in the pap government must also stop.
Write comment
Name:
Email:
Website:
Title:
UBBCode:
[b] [i] [u] [url] [quote] [code] [img] 
 
Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

3.26 Copyright (C) 2008 Compojoom.com / Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."

 

Donate to Legal Defence Fund

 

Vantage

Riding out the financial crisis

Chia Ti Lik

Year 2008 is a year of change, of forced consolidation and rebirth.

Out of university in 1998, I entered the workforce in 1999 fresh with memories of having to work part-time throughout my practice law course. The economy was still feeling the effects of the Asian financial crisis.

Read more
 
The quicksand of Sands

Singapore Democrats

Just weeks after the Singapore authorities gave an upbeat report that the Integrated Resort Casino will create thousands of jobs, developer Las Vegas Sands (or as some wit cracked, Lost Wages Sands) reported that it is haemorrhaging cash and will likely file for bankruptcy.

Read more
 

People's Power

Banner
Banner
Joomla Templates by JoomlaShack