Serious Cause of the rift between LWlL, LHY and LHL

A little bird told me this is the reason for the rift between the sister Lee Wei Ling on the one hand and Lee Hsien Loong and wife Ho Ching on the other hand.

After Old man died in March 2015, it was discovered that he had brought back many govt papers, some of which were potentially of a sensitive nature, and as well, among his private papers were matters relating to his assets in relation to his estates. Because no one could trusted to go through all the paper work and documents other then a family member, it was decided at the funeral that Ho Ching would take a 3 month sabbatical to go through all of it. Wei Ling was too busy with her practice and Hsien Yang was not too interested, so it came down to Ho Ching. That is why Ho Ching's sabbatical started in April 2015.

During the search of Old Man's documents, Ho Ching discovered the transcripts of Old Man's interviews and without consulting anyone assumed that they were state documents, among the many other state documents that were at the house. She handed the transcripts over to the cabinet secretary Tan Kee Yong, as his office is also located in the PMO. And he was some one she was familiar with as she sees him where ever she goes to the PMO. The transcripts were then turn over to the govt's care by Mr Tan and so she thought that was the end of it. It was only later when she mentioned that she had turned in the transcripts, that she was informed by Lee Wei Ling that those transcripts were the property of the Estate and not the govt. Ho Ching had a different opinion (which I agree with), and that is that since those interviews were made in LKY's capacity as PM, they cannot belong to him privately and has to belong to the state. While serving as Prime Minister, anything he says formally as in the interviews, should and has to be on public record. Nothing that a govt official puts into an official transcript can belong to that govt official.

As such, Ho Ching refused to retrieve the transcripts from Tan Kee Yong, and in fact on principal, it was determined by her that they were state property. As a result, LHL was put in a hard position. His sister wanted him to order the transcripts returned to the estate. But his wife told him that they belong to the state and hence, should not be returned. What was he supposed to do, caught between a rock and a hard place? In the end, he had no choice but to side with the wife or face matrimonial discord.

As a result, Lee Wei Ling, who had by this time pressured a reluctant LHY to back her up, launched the lawsuit against the state to get the transcripts back. The unnamed family member in the lawsuit that turn over the transcripts is Ho Ching. Of course, the judge already knew how it was going to play out and denied their legal action. Hence, the war of words erupted between LWL and Ho Ching and LHY. You have the monkey with the middle finger instagram by Madam Ho, and remarks such as "dishonourable son" by LWL. I think the rift is possibly irreparable now between LWL and LHL/Ho Ching.

Just my 2 cents. Please see next post for actual article.

[h=1]Lee Kuan Yew's estate withdraws application to appeal[/h]
The estate of the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew has withdrawn its application for permission to appeal against a judge's decision.

Earlier this month, Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang - in their role as executors of Mr Lee's estate - had applied for leave to appeal against a High Court decision that prevented them from submitting to court an account of how their father's interview transcripts ended up with the Government after his death.

The Supreme Court confirmed that the application was withdrawn yesterday at a hearing in chambers in the High Court.

The executors of Mr Lee's estate had initially applied to court last year to clarify an agreement their father had made with the Government over the control and use of the interviews he gave in the 1980s as prime minister.
As part of the case, they wanted to file an affidavit setting out a detailed account of how the Cabinet Secretary came to possess the transcripts after Mr Lee's death in March last year.


But in his judgment on Sept 28, High Court Judge Tay Yong Kwang did not allow it, saying "the details were unnecessary and quite irrelevant" to the case.
The judgment had set out background facts on the transcripts - that they were found in Mr Lee's home at 38 Oxley Road by a family member shortly after he died on March 23 last year.
Between March 23 and May 5 last year, an unnamed member of Mr Lee's family, thinking that the transcripts were official government documents, handed them to the Cabinet Secretary without the knowledge or consent of Mr Lee's estate.
Following the judgment, lawyers for the estate said the estate was looking to reverse Justice Tay's decision "to seal or expunge certain affidavits, portions of affidavits, and other court documents, from the court file".
The estate then filed an application in the High Court for permission to appeal against the decision, but withdrew it yesterday.
Lawyers for the estate did not respond to a request for comment yesterday.

It's a good thing that while Ah Gong was still alive, no one discovered he brought state papers home. Imagine what would have happened. Would PM Lee dare to charge Ah Gong under the OSA? Grassroots leaders like myself would protest.

JohnTan said:

It's a good thing that while Ah Gong was still alive, no one discovered he brought state papers home. Imagine what would have happened. Would PM Lee dare to charge Ah Gong under the OSA? Grassroots leaders like myself would protest.

Click to expand...

Can't we charge Ah Gong posthumously now that every sinkie knows about it?

kryonlight said:

Can't we charge Ah Gong posthumously now that every sinkie knows about it?

Click to expand...

many here would also insist that a 16% interest rate be awarded for their cpf savings, posthumously
p/s - the 16% is based on the rate of returns that temasick previously made on its investments.

Its quite likely, that LWL, being like the bull in the china shop barged into Ho Ching and berated her for giving the transcripts to the govt. Its a simple procedure to get Hsien Loong to get it back. But after the scolding from LWL, I think Ho Ching just simply decided to screw her and told the husband not to give the transcripts back. And hence, the state of the relationship is where it is today.

important and more relevant question is...."what's in the transcripts?"

anything to do with lwl washing daddy's underwear and removing stains with oxiclean?

eatshitndie said:

important and more relevant question is...."what's in the transcripts?"

anything to do with lwl washing daddy's underwear and removing stains with oxiclean?

Click to expand...

The transcripts were meant to put down old man's opinions and pearls of wisdoms on a range of issues. among the questions and comments he made to in the interviews were his personal opinions of the foreign leaders and govts. they were meant to provide future leaders like incoming Wooden, some intelligence on how to deal with them. Almost like a coaching lesson on tape.

if dead fart kept those transcripts must concern his guilt jailed good comrades in the 60s ....

who lese care of what he thought of other leaders who also dead too.

Maybe transcript of he humming to gekco..

Papsmearer said:

The transcripts were meant to put down old man's opinions and pearls of wisdoms on a range of issues. among the questions and comments he made to in the interviews were his personal opinions of the foreign leaders and govts. they were meant to provide future leaders like incoming Wooden, some intelligence on how to deal with them. Almost like a coaching lesson on tape.

Click to expand...

aiyah...........must be Pinky got 80% of the assets lah............

Papsmearer said:

The transcripts were meant to put down old man's opinions and pearls of wisdoms on a range of issues. among the questions and comments he made to in the interviews were his personal opinions of the foreign leaders and govts. they were meant to provide future leaders like incoming Wooden, some intelligence on how to deal with them. Almost like a coaching lesson on tape.

Click to expand...

So after spending 6 months studying the dead man scrolls I mean scripts
AssHo finally interpreted and compiled her latest edition of the HoLee bible for the Lee Dynasty.

Judging from the recent SCS fiasco, AssLoong must have been using AssHo latest edition of the HoLee bible as his guide during his
recent World Wide Tour.

tanwahtiu said:

if dead fart kept those transcripts must concern his guilt jailed good comrades in the 60s ....

who lese care of what he thought of other leaders who also dead too.

Maybe transcript of he humming to gekco..

Click to expand...

In 4 years time, the transcripts are supposed to be given to the National Archives for all to see. But till then, they are covered under the OSA. How fucking bad is it that OSA has to be used on it?

Here is a more detailed explanation and admission that Hsien Yang breached the OSA by asking to see the transcripts and someone in the govt also breached it by allowing him to view it. However, because LHY is Familee, he is not touchable. Anyone else will be in jail now.

SINGAPORE: The High Court on Wednesday (Sep 28) dismissed the application by founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew’s children, Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang, for rights and access to transcripts relating to a series of interviews given by the late Mr Lee to the Government’s Oral History Department between July 1981 and July 1982.


In the court ruling, published on the Supreme Court’s website, Judge of Appeal Tay Yong Kwang ruled that the interview transcripts come under the purview of the Official Secrets Act (OSA). "In my view, the excerpts above support the Government's position that the Transcripts were not created as a personal enterprise by Lee Kuan Yew to record his observations for his own benefit.


"Instead, they were one of a series of similar recordings that were created as part of the Government's project to document the history of Singapore, then a city-state with shallow historical roots."


Due to the political sensitivity of its contents, the late Mr Lee and the Government put in place a "two key" system to control its custody and usage. To achieve this, he signed an agreement with the Cabinet Secretary and the Director of Archives in 1983, with specific terms governing the use and administration of the transcripts. All three signatories are now deceased.


Judge Tay also said that as the OSA applies to the transcripts, the estate cannot grant access, supply of copies of or use of the transcripts without the Government's authorisation. "Viewed in that light, the contractual rights that accrue to the Lee Kuan Yew estate under the interview agreement are curtailed by the OSA."


He wrote that the Lee Kuan Yew estate has the copyright to the interview transcripts, but only for the purpose of ensuring the Government’s compliance with the terms of an agreement signed related to the interviews.


"In my view, this copyright was vested in the Lee Kuan Yew estate only for the limited purpose of safeguarding the confidentiality of the transcripts, in that ensuring that the Government abides by the interview agreement," he wrote.


"Since no one thus far appeared to have been given express written express permission by Lee Kuan Yew to deal with the transcripts, the five-year moratorium as argued by the Government would result. This is in line with Lee Kuan Yew's undisputed intent not to have his politically sensitive comments quoted after his death."


As provided for in the agreement, the Government may hand the transcripts to the Director of Archives after a five-year moratorium following Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s death.


TECHNICAL BREACH OF AGREEMENT 'MINOR'


The judge also noted that the Government had technically breached the terms of agreement when it allowed Mr Lee Hsien Yang to view the transcripts at the Ministry of Home Affairs.


According to background to the case cited by Judge Tay, the interview transcripts were at the late Mr Lee's Oxley Road home when he died on Mar 23, 2015. Sometime between Mar 23 and May 5 last year, a family member, thinking that the transcripts were official Government documents, handed them over to the Cabinet Secretary, Mr Tan Kee Yong, without the knowledge or consent of the Lee Kuan Yew estate.

The estate first knew of the transcripts when told by the family member on May 10 that there was an acknowledgement of receipt from the Cabinet Secretary. Later that month, Mr Lee Hsien Yang requested to see the transcripts, and the Government agreed to this request on the condition that it was done at the MHA and sign an undertaking to secrecy under the OSA.


Mr Lee, on understanding the transcripts were covered by the OSA and told by his family member that the documents were marked "Secret", complied. However, after looking through the transcripts, he found out that they were not marked "Secret".


Judge Tay said he viewed the breach in allowing Mr Lee to view the transcripts as “minor” as it was done out of a request from the estate, and by the founding Prime Minister’s children.

"However, I accept the explanation that it was done because of the request made by the Lee Kuan Yew estate, and as mentioned before, the executors are Lee Kuan Yew's daughter and younger son. The technical breach was therefore minor and does not change my belief that this Government will act honourably and in accordance with the spirit of the interview agreement."
The transcripts are to remain in the custody of the current Cabinet Secretary according to the original agreement, added Judge Tay.

He said the fact that the transcripts were specified to be kept by the Cabinet Secretary, instead of the late Mr Lee, indicates that the agreement "was not the usual copyright agreement".
The Government is also to inform the estate’s lawyers whether the late Mr Lee had “given written permission to anyone for access to, supply of copies of or use of the transcripts” during his lifetime. This is to be done within two weeks from Sep 28, unless the Government requests a longer period for compliance, the judge added.

Dr Lee and Mr Lee’s application on costs of the proceedings will also be decided after they have filed their written submissions within two weeks of the judgement, Judge Tay ruled.

The lawsuit was first filed by Mr Lee Kuan Yew's children last September.
ESTATE CONSIDERING APPEALS AGAINST COURT'S DECISION: SOLICITORS

Rajah & Tann, the estate's solicitors, said in a statement that the estate welcomed the High Court's decision that the estate had the copyright to the transcripts and tape recordings of the interviews.
"This resolves a key point on which the Government disagreed with the estate. The estate also awaits the Government's compliance with the Court's direction to inform the estate within two weeks whether the late Mr Lee had given his express written permission to anyone for access to, supply of copies or use of the tape recordings and transcripts."
However, the law firm also said it was considering the possibility of appealing parts of the Court's decision.

"The estate is reviewing the Court's ruling that the copyright vested in the estate is limited to ensuring the Government's compliance with the interview agreement, and does not include a right to use or make copies of the tape recordings and transcripts. The estate believes that such an interpretation of the interview agreement runs contrary to the context, language and purpose of the interview agreement, and is considering an appeal against this ruling. The estate is also considering seeking leave to appeal against the Court's decision to expunge parts of affidavits and documents filed for the purpose of the hearing," it stated.

The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) on Friday issued a clarification on an assertion in the statement from the estate of Mr Lee.
"The statement is incorrect in saying that the High Court decision that the estate holds a limited copyright to the oral history transcripts was a 'key point' that the Government had 'disagreed with' the estate on," said the AGC.

"On the contrary, the Government agreed that the estate had a limited copyright to the transcript under the interview agreement between Mr Lee Kuan Yew and the Government. In fact, the High Court’s finding that the estate held a copyright, 'but only for the purpose of ensuring the Government’s compliance with the terms' of the agreement, is identical with the argument that the Attorney-General submitted to the court on behalf of the Government on Jul 14, 2016," it said.

Article mentioned LHY by name and not HC. Duh.

Papsmearer said:

In 4 years time, the transcripts are supposed to be given to the National Archives for all to see. But till then, they are covered under the OSA. How fucking bad is it that OSA has to be used on it?

Click to expand...

in due time , these transcripts would become invaluable and be accorded a status like the old testaments.

McDonaldsKid said:

Article mentioned LHY by name and not HC. Duh.

Click to expand...

Where? The unnamed family member is still unnamed. But I believe it is Whore Jinx.

numero uno said:

in due time , these transcripts would become invaluable and be accorded a status like the old testaments.

Click to expand...

Better for them to roll it up and stuff in into a shuttlecock holder and bury it somewhere in singapore. 2000 years from now, some poor peasant can dig it up and accord it Dead Lee Scrolls status.

eatshitndie said:

important and more relevant question is...."what's in the transcripts?"

anything to do with lwl washing daddy's underwear and removing stains with oxiclean?

Click to expand...

erh//////////// HC was regarded by ole man as unsuitable to be CEO Temasick???

Leckmichamarsch said:

erh//////////// HC was regarded by ole man as unsuitable to be CEO Temasick???

Click to expand...

The transcripts mentioned his mistress and second family in Taiwan?

Papsmearer said:

Where? The unnamed family member is still unnamed. But I believe it is Whore Jinx.

Click to expand...

Should be AssLoong based on character, personality and past track records of LHL going through classified documents of Dr Tony Tan and Dhanabalan without permission in their office.
LHL saw the potential political values in those documents, quickly and stealthily act to retain them within his control.