Prof Koh: Was it wise for LKY to sue & bankrupt opposition leaders?
Speaking at a conference organized by the LKY School of Public Policy to mark the 90th birthday celebration of Mr Lee Kuan Yew on Monday (16 Sep), Ambassordor-At-Large Tommy Koh asked if it was a wise thing for Mr Lee to sue opposition leaders for defamation and bankrupt them?
Professor Koh asked, “When he was Prime Minister, he had a practice of launching defamation suits against opposition leaders after each general election…was this practice by Mr Lee to sue opposition leaders for defamation a wise thing to do?
“When you look at other advanced democracies, I know of no other country in the world where after a general election, the victor will sue the opponent for defamation.”
“In an advanced democracy, when an election is over, the vanquished will have the grace to congratulate the victor and the victor will have the magnanimity to forgive his opponent for all the unkind things the opponent has said. My question…is not that Mr Lee was not within the law in suing opponents for defamation – he bankrupted some of them – but was it a wise thing for him to do?”
After Professor Koh asked the question, former cabinet minister, Professor S Jayakumar, immediately defended, “There were defamation suits against politicians but it would be wrong to think he sued only politicians and it’s wrong to think he sued politicians after every general election to drive home a point that he (the opposition politician) should have not stood for the elections…”
“Whether it was an opposition politician, whether it was the Far Eastern Economic Review or even a publication, say in Malaysia – he issued a defamation action against The Star publication and was prepared to have it tested in the courts in Kuala Lumpur.”
Professor Jayakumar then further spoke on Mr Lee’s behalf saying that Mr Lee’s red line was not to be criticised on his reputation and integrity.
Professor Jayakumar said, “What is the point he wanted to make? He is prepared for a robust criticism of his policies. He can be criticised for foolishness, maybe even for incompetence, for arrogance, but his red line was – not on reputation and integrity.”
“So, whether it’s opposition politician or any other source, if you allege his integrity, say, corruption, for example, he would want to demonstrate that that is a red line, you justify it. He’s prepared to justify his record.”
“I know in other jurisdictions, in the cut and thrust of politics, all sorts of accusations are hurled but the threshold is different. But he wanted to establish a threshold here that you have people of integrity, including himself, in government, in Cabinet and they are prepared to defend the integrity,” Professor Jayakumar added.
Professor Jayakumar, who served in the Cabinet for 27 years, also praised Mr Lee for him being “intellectually honest”
“If you can come up with a contrary view and argue your case, he will listen and prepare to change,” said Professor Jayakumar.
He cited the institution of the Elected Presidency and said that the final shape of that reflected the views of Cabinet ministers.
Former President S R Nathan was also at the conference.
He recalled an incident which he fondly remembers, “In 1967, I was sent as a junior officer to take notes of his meeting with the visiting Thai Foreign Minister. I hurriedly put on a tie and jacket and rushed to the assignment.”
“On my arrival at the door, the prime minister came close to me, adjusted my necktie and said, with almost paternal touch, these words, ‘Nathan, you must remember, you are no longer in the labour movement’. I was moved beyond words. I had grown up without a father or an elder brother. Here was the prime minister himself coming down to my level, to do what they would have done for me. That instance of his caring nature, I experienced many times in life, something most people do not attribute to him.”
The conference was organized to discuss the thinking behind Mr Lee’s strategies in bringing Singapore from Third World to First. It was attended by some 600 thought leaders who included former politicians, academics and diplomats.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ain't surprised at all cos both of them were running dogs serving the Kempeitai during the Japanese occupation of Singapore.
Speaking at a conference organized by the LKY School of Public Policy to mark the 90th birthday celebration of Mr Lee Kuan Yew on Monday (16 Sep), Ambassordor-At-Large Tommy Koh asked if it was a wise thing for Mr Lee to sue opposition leaders for defamation and bankrupt them?
Professor Koh asked, “When he was Prime Minister, he had a practice of launching defamation suits against opposition leaders after each general election…was this practice by Mr Lee to sue opposition leaders for defamation a wise thing to do?
“When you look at other advanced democracies, I know of no other country in the world where after a general election, the victor will sue the opponent for defamation.”
“In an advanced democracy, when an election is over, the vanquished will have the grace to congratulate the victor and the victor will have the magnanimity to forgive his opponent for all the unkind things the opponent has said. My question…is not that Mr Lee was not within the law in suing opponents for defamation – he bankrupted some of them – but was it a wise thing for him to do?”
After Professor Koh asked the question, former cabinet minister, Professor S Jayakumar, immediately defended, “There were defamation suits against politicians but it would be wrong to think he sued only politicians and it’s wrong to think he sued politicians after every general election to drive home a point that he (the opposition politician) should have not stood for the elections…”
“Whether it was an opposition politician, whether it was the Far Eastern Economic Review or even a publication, say in Malaysia – he issued a defamation action against The Star publication and was prepared to have it tested in the courts in Kuala Lumpur.”
Professor Jayakumar then further spoke on Mr Lee’s behalf saying that Mr Lee’s red line was not to be criticised on his reputation and integrity.
Professor Jayakumar said, “What is the point he wanted to make? He is prepared for a robust criticism of his policies. He can be criticised for foolishness, maybe even for incompetence, for arrogance, but his red line was – not on reputation and integrity.”
“So, whether it’s opposition politician or any other source, if you allege his integrity, say, corruption, for example, he would want to demonstrate that that is a red line, you justify it. He’s prepared to justify his record.”
“I know in other jurisdictions, in the cut and thrust of politics, all sorts of accusations are hurled but the threshold is different. But he wanted to establish a threshold here that you have people of integrity, including himself, in government, in Cabinet and they are prepared to defend the integrity,” Professor Jayakumar added.
Professor Jayakumar, who served in the Cabinet for 27 years, also praised Mr Lee for him being “intellectually honest”
“If you can come up with a contrary view and argue your case, he will listen and prepare to change,” said Professor Jayakumar.
He cited the institution of the Elected Presidency and said that the final shape of that reflected the views of Cabinet ministers.
Former President S R Nathan was also at the conference.
He recalled an incident which he fondly remembers, “In 1967, I was sent as a junior officer to take notes of his meeting with the visiting Thai Foreign Minister. I hurriedly put on a tie and jacket and rushed to the assignment.”
“On my arrival at the door, the prime minister came close to me, adjusted my necktie and said, with almost paternal touch, these words, ‘Nathan, you must remember, you are no longer in the labour movement’. I was moved beyond words. I had grown up without a father or an elder brother. Here was the prime minister himself coming down to my level, to do what they would have done for me. That instance of his caring nature, I experienced many times in life, something most people do not attribute to him.”
The conference was organized to discuss the thinking behind Mr Lee’s strategies in bringing Singapore from Third World to First. It was attended by some 600 thought leaders who included former politicians, academics and diplomats.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ain't surprised at all cos both of them were running dogs serving the Kempeitai during the Japanese occupation of Singapore.
