Yang's remarks over rental of state-owned bungalows were meant for Singaporeans: Ministers on lawsuit against PM’s brother

Singapore: Singapore's Indian-origin ministers K Shanmugam and Vivian Balakrishnan have said they are suing Lee Hsien Yang, the younger brother of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, for libel as his comments about their rental of state-owned bungalows were “meant for Singaporeans”.

Explaining why the ministers decided to take legal action in Singapore instead of in Britain, where Lee Hsien Yang was located when he made the comments in question, Home and Law Minister Shanmugam said Lee’s statements were “related to events in Singapore and were meant primarily for a Singaporean audience”.

Lee Hsien Yang’s relationship is strained over a family property dispute with the prime minister. Both are sons of former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew.

Shanmugam and Balakrishnan are both senior ministers in the prime minister’s cabinet and are from the ruling People’s Action Party.

“We have sued Yang for a libel that was published to the people in Singapore, which concerns Singaporeans, and which is based on the laws of Singapore,” said Shanmugam in a Facebook post on Thursday night.

Yang’s primary audience was not in Britain, stressed Shanmugam, elaborating, “What Yang really wants is special treatment. He wants to be treated differently from Singaporeans (and even foreigners) who are sued in Singapore for defamation.”

“Yang should explain why he is entitled to make libellous statements and yet be exempt from the rules that apply to the rest of us,” The Straits Times newspaper quoted Shanmugam as saying.

The comments in question were made in a public post on Yang’s Facebook page on July 23, and concern the rental of two colonial-built heritage bungalows in Ridout Road, a suburb of Singapore.

Yang had written that the “two ministers have leased state-owned mansions from the agency that one of them controls, felling trees and getting state-sponsored renovations”, among other claims.

He had said on Facebook earlier on Thursday that the two ministers declined his suggestion to have the case heard in London.

“I have since responded to suggest the following means of resolution: that we mutually agree to an independent arbitration, where we each choose an arbitrator of high international standing,” Yang said.

The two arbitrators could in turn appoint a third arbitrator. The proceedings would be conducted privately, but the decision would be made public, with it being final and binding on all parties, said Yang, who has left Singapore along with his wife fearing arrests relating to a case over his father’s will.

Shanmugam and Balakrishnan, who is the Foreign Minister, had filed separate defamation suits in the High Court against Yang on August 2.

They are seeking damages and an injunction to restrain Lee from publishing or disseminating the allegations he made, which they assert are false and defamatory.

According to court documents, their lawyers had sent Yang a letter on July 27, demanding the removal of the offending post and all related comments. It also demanded that a public apology be put up on his Facebook page for four weeks.

In the letter, the ministers had also sought damages of SGD 25,000 each, which they said they would donate to charity.

However, two days later Yang said he was simply stating the facts, adding that the ministers should sue him in Britain, where he is located.

Eventually, an application to serve court papers to him via Facebook Messenger was made, owing to the impracticality of serving them in person.

Shanmugam said, “For decades now, countless Singaporeans have sued in the Singapore Courts for defamation that is published to people in Singapore. These cases are decided by our impartial judiciary, which applies the law.”

“If Yang thinks that there is no basis for the legal action, he should welcome the opportunity to defend himself in open court, where he can cross-examine us, and we can cross-examine him in the full view of the Singapore public.”