SINGAPORE: The Singapore government accused the New York Times (NYT) of advancing the publication's own agenda in a video featuring Mr Li Shengwu, the nephew of former prime minister Lee Hsien Loong.
In a letter to the NYT editor on Sunday (Jan 26), Singapore's Ambassador to the US, Mr Lui Tuck Yew, characterised the opinion video, titled How Tyranny Begins, as a commentary on the state of US politics.
"But you draw in Singapore via the misleading analogies provided by Mr Li Shengwu, masquerading as a persecuted dissident," said Mr Lui.
"Mr Li has never been exiled from Singapore, jailed or stripped of his possessions, as might some of the others in your feature. He remains a Singapore citizen and continues to travel freely on a Singapore passport," said Mr Lui.
He added: "It is not for us to comment on US domestic politics. But we must object when you use a false portrayal of Singapore to advance your own agenda."
The Jan 22 NYT video featured four people who said they had experienced repression in their countries.
The other three people spoke about their experiences under Vladimir Putin's regime in Russia, Hungary's government under Prime Minister Viktor Orban and the Nicaragua leadership under President Daniel Ortega.
In the video, Mr Li, a 39-year-old economics professor at Harvard University, accused his uncle of having a "pattern of using police investigations and criminal prosecutions to dispose of or exile his opponents".
"When it would be too obvious to prosecute someone for being an enemy of the state, you have to make something else up," he added.
Mr Li's father is Mr Lee Hsien Yang, who had sought asylum protection in the United Kingdom after making similar allegations against Mr Lee Hsien Loong, who stepped down as prime minister last May and remains in the Cabinet as Senior Minister.
Mr Li pointed to a private Facebook post he published in 2017, saying after that, "the Singapore government went after me with a criminal prosecution".
"I fled the country as soon as I could," he added.
Mr Li's Facebook post on Jul 14, 2017, accused the Singapore government of being "very litigious and (having) a pliant court system".
"This constrains what the international media can usually report," he added, including a link to a New York Times editorial titled Censored In Singapore.
In his response to NYT, Mr Lui said Singapore takes the rule of law seriously and that Mr Li was not above the law - having been charged with contempt of court in 2020. He paid the S$15,000 fine imposed by the court and has not been under investigation for anything else since.
He is free to return to Singapore at any time, he added.
In response to Mr Li's point that it was better to fight rather than give in, Mr Lui said Mr Li can contest in the next General Election, which must be held before November this year.
"Instead, Mr Li parleys his status as the grandson of Mr Lee Kuan Yew and lends himself to the Times to provide false analogies for US politics," said the ambassador.
"It is deeply regrettable that he has chosen to denigrate the very country his grandfather had a pivotal role building."
Mr Li's video on NYT also mentions the appointment of Mr Lucien Wong as Attorney General in 2017, after he had served as then-prime minister Lee's personal lawyer.
The New York Times video juxtaposed this against Donald Trump’s controversial nomination of Pam Bondi as Attorney General. In 2020, Bondi was on Trump's legal team for his first impeachment trial.
After the Workers’ Party raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest over Mr Wong's role as Attorney General, then-senior minister of state for law and finance Indranee Rajah said in parliament on Jul 3, 2017, that the appointment was made "after a thorough and rigorous" process.
The prime minister had consulted Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, Public Service Commission chairman Eddie Teo, as well as then-attorney general V K Rajah before arriving at the decision, Ms Indranee said.
Mr Lui said: "Contrary to the dark picture that you and Mr Li paint, the Singapore that Mr Lee Kuan Yew built ranks 16th on the 2024 Rule of Law Index, well ahead of the US for many years.
"The 2023 Corruption Perceptions Index ranked Singapore the 5th least corrupt country in the world – again, well ahead of the US for many years."
A view of an empty guard post outside former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew's 38 Oxley Road residence in Singapore on Jun 14, 2017. (File photo: Reuters/Edgar Su)
In another letter to NYT, dated Jan 15 but only made public on Jan 27, Mr Lui referred to a Jan 11 NYT article, titled Why Singapore's First Family is Locked in a Bitter Feud Over a House.
The Lees have been locked in a dispute over the family home at 38 Oxley Road - an issue that spilt into the public domain after the death of their father, Singapore's founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew.
Mr Lee Hsien Yang and his wife Lee Suet Fern have been out of Singapore since 2022 after deciding not to attend a scheduled police interview over potential offences of giving false evidence in judicial proceedings regarding the will of his father.
A disciplinary tribunal as well as the Court of Three Judges - the highest disciplinary body dealing with lawyers' misconduct - had found that the couple misled the late Mr Lee in the context of the execution of his last will, and that they had lied under oath during the proceedings.
Mr Lui said Singapore does not have a "first family", and that nobody is above the law, least of all the children or grandchildren of Mr Lee Kuan Yew.
The ambassador also noted a "befuddling but revealing correction" in the article, which states that Mrs Lee Suet Fern had given a contrived but ultimately untrue account of her role in the will.
"How is 'contrived and ultimately untrue' not a lie?
"Indeed, the judges had also said Lee Hsien Yang 'was not telling the truth' in his sworn evidence in an earlier disciplinary proceeding, and that Lee Suet Fern had acted 'with a degree of dishonesty' in those proceedings," said Mr Lui, adding that that was why the police investigated the couple for possible perjury.
They refused to cooperate and left the country, claiming persecution, said Mr Lui.
"Like many others, the couple benefited from the system that Lee Kuan Yew helped build - in their case, more handsomely than most, given their abilities," he added.
"They now claim that system is deeply flawed; criticise both Lee Kuan Yew as well as his wife, whose legacies they claim to protect; and cynically lend themselves as proof that the western liberal media is right to criticise 'authoritarian' Lee Kuan Yew and Singapore."
In a separate response to NYT's queries in December 2024, the Singapore government said Mr Lee Hsien Yang’s assertions and accusations in the Jan 15 article are meant to “distract international attention” from the fact that the couple was found by the court to have misled his father in the execution of his last will and testament.
They have also lied under oath, said the government.
The court found that Mrs Lee Suet Fern had “acted with complete disregard for the interests” of Mr Lee Kuan Yew, and had “blindly followed the directions of her husband, a significant beneficiary under the very will whose execution she helped to rush through”.
Mr Lee Hsien Yang said the saga around 38 Oxley Road had made him realise there are “fundamental problems in the way Singapore is governed and run”.
The government called this a “grandiose claim” that is meant to “distract attention from the real issue” that the couple were found by the court to have lied under oath.
“The Singapore government has never ‘maintained that it can function without any checks on its power’, as you assert,” it said.
The government, it said, is subject to laws enforced by an independent judiciary and is answerable to an elected parliament. It is also accountable to the people of Singapore through open elections, which have been held at regular intervals without fail since independence.
Mr Lee Hsien Yang had also considered contesting in the last General Election, only to “back off” at the last minute, said the government.
It added that Mr Lee Hsien Yang had dismissed his father’s political legacy “in terms obviously calculated to win applause among some in the West”, and that it is regarded by most Singaporeans as “deeply offensive to and disrespectful of his father”.
The government said the ministerial committee on 38 Oxley Road did not inquire into Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s last will, as his younger son had alleged.
The disciplinary tribunal and Court of Three Judges looked into Mrs Lee Suet Fern’s professional conduct in the execution of Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s last will.
“Far from being “secret”, the Ministerial Committee invited and received representations from all of Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s children. It later published its findings,” said the government.
The committee was set up to work out options for the future of 38 Oxley Road.
It examined Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s wishes on the house and found that he was prepared to accept other options beside demolition, as he had indicated in his last will and on other occasions, including a letter to the Cabinet, said the government.
“Decisions on 38 Oxley Road were and continue to be made transparently, following due process,” it added.
“As prime minister, Mr Lee Hsien Loong had recused himself from all discussions on the matter. He continues to do so now as senior minister.
“Neither he nor members of his family are consulted by any government agency on any decision pertaining to 38 Oxley Road.”
Mr Lee Hsien Yang also alleged that his older brother and his wife, Mdm Ho Ching, wanted to use 38 Oxley Road to milk “Lee Kuan Yew’s legacy for their own political purposes” and harboured “dynastic ambitions for their son”.
These charges are baseless, said the government.
Mr Lee Hsien Loong sold the house, which had been deeded to him in the will, to his younger brother in December 2015 and donated the proceeds to charity.
“He had earlier offered to transfer the house to his sister for $1. He did all this voluntarily months before his siblings made public their conflict with their brother,” said the government.
Mr Lee Hsien Loong’s son, Mr Li Hongyi, has repeatedly stated he has no wish to enter politics. None of his children has expressed such interest.
“None has done anything to even vaguely suggest political interest,” said the government.
It noted another report by the Financial Times, which said that Mr Lee Hsien Yang and his wife had argued that the Singapore government had persecuted their family to “block any chance” that Mr Li Shengwu might enter politics in Singapore and “one day rise to the position of prime minister”.
“This has left many wondering if it isn’t Lee Hsien Yang himself who harbours ‘dynastic ambitions’,” said the government.
Addressing Mr Lee Hsien Yang’s claim that he was not jealous or envious of his older brother, the government said readers can judge what “really prompted” him to launch this “extravagant vendetta” against his brother.
“It has so consumed him that he has extended the vendetta into an international campaign against Singapore itself, as well as the legacy of his parents,” said the government.
“While claiming to fulfil his father’s wish to demolish the house, he doesn’t hesitate to demolish all that his father had built in Singapore."
Continue reading...
In a letter to the NYT editor on Sunday (Jan 26), Singapore's Ambassador to the US, Mr Lui Tuck Yew, characterised the opinion video, titled How Tyranny Begins, as a commentary on the state of US politics.
"But you draw in Singapore via the misleading analogies provided by Mr Li Shengwu, masquerading as a persecuted dissident," said Mr Lui.
"Mr Li has never been exiled from Singapore, jailed or stripped of his possessions, as might some of the others in your feature. He remains a Singapore citizen and continues to travel freely on a Singapore passport," said Mr Lui.
He added: "It is not for us to comment on US domestic politics. But we must object when you use a false portrayal of Singapore to advance your own agenda."
The Jan 22 NYT video featured four people who said they had experienced repression in their countries.
The other three people spoke about their experiences under Vladimir Putin's regime in Russia, Hungary's government under Prime Minister Viktor Orban and the Nicaragua leadership under President Daniel Ortega.
In the video, Mr Li, a 39-year-old economics professor at Harvard University, accused his uncle of having a "pattern of using police investigations and criminal prosecutions to dispose of or exile his opponents".
"When it would be too obvious to prosecute someone for being an enemy of the state, you have to make something else up," he added.
Mr Li's father is Mr Lee Hsien Yang, who had sought asylum protection in the United Kingdom after making similar allegations against Mr Lee Hsien Loong, who stepped down as prime minister last May and remains in the Cabinet as Senior Minister.
Mr Li pointed to a private Facebook post he published in 2017, saying after that, "the Singapore government went after me with a criminal prosecution".
"I fled the country as soon as I could," he added.
Mr Li's Facebook post on Jul 14, 2017, accused the Singapore government of being "very litigious and (having) a pliant court system".
"This constrains what the international media can usually report," he added, including a link to a New York Times editorial titled Censored In Singapore.
In his response to NYT, Mr Lui said Singapore takes the rule of law seriously and that Mr Li was not above the law - having been charged with contempt of court in 2020. He paid the S$15,000 fine imposed by the court and has not been under investigation for anything else since.
He is free to return to Singapore at any time, he added.
In response to Mr Li's point that it was better to fight rather than give in, Mr Lui said Mr Li can contest in the next General Election, which must be held before November this year.
"Instead, Mr Li parleys his status as the grandson of Mr Lee Kuan Yew and lends himself to the Times to provide false analogies for US politics," said the ambassador.
"It is deeply regrettable that he has chosen to denigrate the very country his grandfather had a pivotal role building."
Mr Li's video on NYT also mentions the appointment of Mr Lucien Wong as Attorney General in 2017, after he had served as then-prime minister Lee's personal lawyer.
The New York Times video juxtaposed this against Donald Trump’s controversial nomination of Pam Bondi as Attorney General. In 2020, Bondi was on Trump's legal team for his first impeachment trial.
After the Workers’ Party raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest over Mr Wong's role as Attorney General, then-senior minister of state for law and finance Indranee Rajah said in parliament on Jul 3, 2017, that the appointment was made "after a thorough and rigorous" process.
The prime minister had consulted Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, Public Service Commission chairman Eddie Teo, as well as then-attorney general V K Rajah before arriving at the decision, Ms Indranee said.
Mr Lui said: "Contrary to the dark picture that you and Mr Li paint, the Singapore that Mr Lee Kuan Yew built ranks 16th on the 2024 Rule of Law Index, well ahead of the US for many years.
"The 2023 Corruption Perceptions Index ranked Singapore the 5th least corrupt country in the world – again, well ahead of the US for many years."
A view of an empty guard post outside former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew's 38 Oxley Road residence in Singapore on Jun 14, 2017. (File photo: Reuters/Edgar Su)
OXLEY ROAD
In another letter to NYT, dated Jan 15 but only made public on Jan 27, Mr Lui referred to a Jan 11 NYT article, titled Why Singapore's First Family is Locked in a Bitter Feud Over a House.
The Lees have been locked in a dispute over the family home at 38 Oxley Road - an issue that spilt into the public domain after the death of their father, Singapore's founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew.
Mr Lee Hsien Yang and his wife Lee Suet Fern have been out of Singapore since 2022 after deciding not to attend a scheduled police interview over potential offences of giving false evidence in judicial proceedings regarding the will of his father.
A disciplinary tribunal as well as the Court of Three Judges - the highest disciplinary body dealing with lawyers' misconduct - had found that the couple misled the late Mr Lee in the context of the execution of his last will, and that they had lied under oath during the proceedings.
Mr Lui said Singapore does not have a "first family", and that nobody is above the law, least of all the children or grandchildren of Mr Lee Kuan Yew.
The ambassador also noted a "befuddling but revealing correction" in the article, which states that Mrs Lee Suet Fern had given a contrived but ultimately untrue account of her role in the will.
"How is 'contrived and ultimately untrue' not a lie?
"Indeed, the judges had also said Lee Hsien Yang 'was not telling the truth' in his sworn evidence in an earlier disciplinary proceeding, and that Lee Suet Fern had acted 'with a degree of dishonesty' in those proceedings," said Mr Lui, adding that that was why the police investigated the couple for possible perjury.
They refused to cooperate and left the country, claiming persecution, said Mr Lui.
"Like many others, the couple benefited from the system that Lee Kuan Yew helped build - in their case, more handsomely than most, given their abilities," he added.
"They now claim that system is deeply flawed; criticise both Lee Kuan Yew as well as his wife, whose legacies they claim to protect; and cynically lend themselves as proof that the western liberal media is right to criticise 'authoritarian' Lee Kuan Yew and Singapore."
Related:
GOVERNMENT'S REPLY
In a separate response to NYT's queries in December 2024, the Singapore government said Mr Lee Hsien Yang’s assertions and accusations in the Jan 15 article are meant to “distract international attention” from the fact that the couple was found by the court to have misled his father in the execution of his last will and testament.
They have also lied under oath, said the government.
The court found that Mrs Lee Suet Fern had “acted with complete disregard for the interests” of Mr Lee Kuan Yew, and had “blindly followed the directions of her husband, a significant beneficiary under the very will whose execution she helped to rush through”.
Mr Lee Hsien Yang said the saga around 38 Oxley Road had made him realise there are “fundamental problems in the way Singapore is governed and run”.
The government called this a “grandiose claim” that is meant to “distract attention from the real issue” that the couple were found by the court to have lied under oath.
“The Singapore government has never ‘maintained that it can function without any checks on its power’, as you assert,” it said.
The government, it said, is subject to laws enforced by an independent judiciary and is answerable to an elected parliament. It is also accountable to the people of Singapore through open elections, which have been held at regular intervals without fail since independence.
Mr Lee Hsien Yang had also considered contesting in the last General Election, only to “back off” at the last minute, said the government.
It added that Mr Lee Hsien Yang had dismissed his father’s political legacy “in terms obviously calculated to win applause among some in the West”, and that it is regarded by most Singaporeans as “deeply offensive to and disrespectful of his father”.
The government said the ministerial committee on 38 Oxley Road did not inquire into Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s last will, as his younger son had alleged.
The disciplinary tribunal and Court of Three Judges looked into Mrs Lee Suet Fern’s professional conduct in the execution of Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s last will.
“Far from being “secret”, the Ministerial Committee invited and received representations from all of Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s children. It later published its findings,” said the government.
The committee was set up to work out options for the future of 38 Oxley Road.
It examined Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s wishes on the house and found that he was prepared to accept other options beside demolition, as he had indicated in his last will and on other occasions, including a letter to the Cabinet, said the government.
“Decisions on 38 Oxley Road were and continue to be made transparently, following due process,” it added.
“As prime minister, Mr Lee Hsien Loong had recused himself from all discussions on the matter. He continues to do so now as senior minister.
“Neither he nor members of his family are consulted by any government agency on any decision pertaining to 38 Oxley Road.”
Mr Lee Hsien Yang also alleged that his older brother and his wife, Mdm Ho Ching, wanted to use 38 Oxley Road to milk “Lee Kuan Yew’s legacy for their own political purposes” and harboured “dynastic ambitions for their son”.
These charges are baseless, said the government.
Mr Lee Hsien Loong sold the house, which had been deeded to him in the will, to his younger brother in December 2015 and donated the proceeds to charity.
“He had earlier offered to transfer the house to his sister for $1. He did all this voluntarily months before his siblings made public their conflict with their brother,” said the government.
Mr Lee Hsien Loong’s son, Mr Li Hongyi, has repeatedly stated he has no wish to enter politics. None of his children has expressed such interest.
“None has done anything to even vaguely suggest political interest,” said the government.
It noted another report by the Financial Times, which said that Mr Lee Hsien Yang and his wife had argued that the Singapore government had persecuted their family to “block any chance” that Mr Li Shengwu might enter politics in Singapore and “one day rise to the position of prime minister”.
“This has left many wondering if it isn’t Lee Hsien Yang himself who harbours ‘dynastic ambitions’,” said the government.
Addressing Mr Lee Hsien Yang’s claim that he was not jealous or envious of his older brother, the government said readers can judge what “really prompted” him to launch this “extravagant vendetta” against his brother.
“It has so consumed him that he has extended the vendetta into an international campaign against Singapore itself, as well as the legacy of his parents,” said the government.
“While claiming to fulfil his father’s wish to demolish the house, he doesn’t hesitate to demolish all that his father had built in Singapore."
Continue reading...