38 Oxley Road WILL be YOURS.

[Narong Wongwan]

Why LHL dun go the full 9 yards?
Convert to museum or even temple or have something like Mao’s mausoleum.
Tear down surrounding buildings too and have a theme park. Make it grander than Buckingham Palace.

 

[bobby]

 

[Willamshakespear]

Thanks, Mr or Mdm CoffeeAhSoh for your contributions to this thread, and for the informative legal arguments brought forth.

However, the final and Last Will of our great Founder, the late Mr. Lee Kuan Yew, had been held in legal dispute, with a court case of allegedly giving false evidence in the proceedings on the final Will of the late Mr. Lee Kuan Yew, by the current owner of the property and his wife, whom had fled to UK and refused to return to assist in police investigations of over such claims.

As the Will is tainted, Parliament will have to refer to the late Mr. Lee Kuan Yew's testaments and letters in Parliament when he was still alive over the issue of his home, with a decision made in Dec 2011, with letters and emails sent to whomever concerned, that should the property be preserved, then it must be refurbished with strong foundations and refurbished.

Such words were not spoken in a coffee shop, BUT were spoken with integrity, truth and honor IN PARLIAMENT by him, as such stances are expected from everyone in such august chambers.

https://www.todayonline.com/singapo...s-about-demolishing-38-oxley-road-home-pm-lee

 

[syed putra]

Why LHL dun go the full 9 yards?
Convert to museum or even temple or have something like Mao’s mausoleum.
Tear down surrounding buildings too and have a theme park. Make it grander than Buckingham Palace.

That will be Next. Biggest lky statue.

 

[syed putra]

However, the final and Last Will of our great Founder, the late Mr. Lee Kuan Yew, had been held in legal dispute, with a court case of allegedly giving false evidence in the proceedings on the final Will of the late Mr. Lee Kuan Yew, by the current owner of the property and his wife, whom had fled to UK and refused to return to assist in police investigations of over such claims

Current owner have final say on his property. Not the state or dead dad.it is obvious there is a sibling dispute with. Older brother manipulating and bullying the younger.

 

[syed putra]

As it turns out, despite sky high property prices, sinkie constitution does not protect the rights of property owners. Unlike in jiu hu.

Singapore's Constitution does not include a specific right to property, as Article 13, which covered this in the original Malaysian Federal Constitution, was intentionally omitted. This was to ensure the constitutionality of the Land Acquisition Act, which allows the government to compulsorily acquire private property. The right to property is not a fundamental liberty in Singapore, though some protections for property rights may be found in other legislation.

• No explicit right: Unlike the original Federal Constitution, Singapore's Constitution does not contain a fundamental right to property.
• Omission of Article 13: Article 13, which dealt with the right to property, was deliberately left out to permit compulsory land acquisition by the government.
• Land Acquisition Act: The 1966 Land Acquisition Act, which allows the government to acquire private property for public use, was made constitutional by this omission.
• Due process protections: While there is no right to property, the Singapore Constitution's Article 9 does provide for due process, stating that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property except according to law.

 

[sbfuncle]

Cb if 38 oxley is mine, can I pee on the grass patch without getting fine?

 

[CoffeeAhSoh]

Ai Generated ,


Here is a detailed “scenario-painting” of three plausible paths for the fate of the property at 38 Oxley Road from the perspective of its legal owner, Lee Hsien Yang, as at November 2025. Each scenario includes likely moves, risks, upside, and what the key players would need to watch. These are not predictions or endorsements, just structured ways to think through the options.

---

Scenario 1: “All-out fight” to wrest full control and carry out demolition per Lee Kuan Yew’s stated wish​

Key elements​

• Lee Hsien Yang uses his status as sole legal owner of the land to press for demolition of the bungalow that his father wished to have torn down.
• He formally applies or re-applies for demolition permission (or continues his earlier application) and attempts to push the Government to allow him to proceed.
• He mobilises public or international attention to emphasise the father’s expressed will (that the house be demolished rather than become a shrine).
• He may make legal challenge(s) or objection(s) to the Government’s move to gazette the site as a national monument — he has until Nov 17 to submit objections.
• If successful, he demolishes the current structure, then possibly builds a smaller private dwelling for his family (as he previously proposed) and retains it privately rather than opening it to public.

Upsides (from his vantage)​

• Honors what he (and his late sister) interpret as the father’s final wish.
• Maintains private control of the site and prevents it being “nationalised” or turned into a public monument.
• Symbolically shows independence from Government/Herd-legacy of the house being used for national heritage.
• He may build something smaller, more efficient, less burdened by legacy issues, perhaps cost-effective for his family.

Risks/downsides​

• The Government appears determined to proceed with gazetting the site. If the site is gazetted and a Preservation Order is made, his ability to demolish may be nullified.
• If the Government acquires the land under the Land Acquisition Act, then although compensation is payable, he loses control of the fate of the property.
• A prolonged legal battle means cost, reputational risk (especially given the family feud), and uncertain outcome.
• Even if demolition is achieved, public or heritage opposition may attach stigma or regulatory constraints.
• The legacy of a landmark site means “private dwelling” may still attract regulatory/heritage oversight or limitations on what can be rebuilt.

Likely sequence of events​

1. Lee Hsien Yang submits objections to gazetting; engages legal advisors to challenge or negotiate the Government’s plan.
2. Government assesses the site (structural safety, heritage value) and issues a Preservation Order (or decides not to).
3. If no preservation order, Lee proceeds with demolition application with Urban Redevelopment Authority and other regulatory approvals.
4. If preservation order accepted, Lee must decide: accept compensation under acquisition (see Scenario 3) or mount challenge (risking higher cost).
5. In either case, parallel to the legal/regulatory path, public relations and political narrative become important: emphasising father’s wish, and arguing Government is overriding it.

---

Scenario 2: “Go with the Government’s development path” as outlined by Acting Minister David Neo — i.e., accept gazetting and work with government for heritage conversion​

Key elements​

• The Government moves to gazette the site as a national monument, citing its historical significance (meetings of the founding party in the house’s basement dining room) and the site’s authenticity.
• Lee Hsien Yang, instead of fighting hard to demolish, chooses a pragmatic path: collaborates (or at least does not obstruct) with the Government’s process, possibly negotiating favourable terms (compensation, involvement in future use, relocation of dwelling etc).
• He gives up, or temporarily sets aside, full demolition, perhaps in exchange for preserving a portion of the value or a private component, or ensuring the new use acknowledges the family’s role.
• He may negotiate the compensation amount, or the terms of transition (e.g., timeline, private replacement dwelling, rights to remainder of land).
• He positions himself as constructive, possibly preserving goodwill with Government and public, and avoiding protracted conflict.

Upsides​

• Much lower regulatory/fight cost and risk of outright rejection.
• He secures compensation and preserves some value, probably faster.
• Government goodwill may open other opportunities (e.g., involvement in heritage or private dwelling negotiations).
• Avoids protracted public feud and reputational risk; may help restore some private peace.
• He maintains some influence/flexibility rather than being forced into a zero-sum fight.

Risks/downsides​

• He compromises the demolition wish (which may be personally important to him) and thus may be seen as “selling out” by some supporters.
• The Government may set the terms largely (e.g., level of compensation, design of heritage site) with limited owner control.
• He may lose ability to build a private dwelling of his choosing or have restricted future use of remainder of the land.
• Public perception: some may claim he conceded too early, or that the Government is winning the narrative.
• The timing and value of compensation may still be uncertain, and any delay may freeze his options while Government assesses the site.

Likely sequence​

1. The Government issues notice of intention to gazette site as national monument (already done) and calls for objections (deadline Nov 17).
2. Lee Hsien Yang and his advisers review the notice, decide not to mount an aggressive objection (or mount a limited one), open negotiation channel with Government/National Heritage Board/Singapore Land Authority over compensation and future arrangements.
3. The Government issues the Preservation Order, begins acquisition process, valuation commences under Land Acquisition Act (market value, etc).
4. Concurrently, discussions about future use (heritage park, partial demolition of building, or other public space) proceed. Government may consider cost/benefit, heritage value vs redevelopment potential.
5. Lee accepts compensation and/or renegotiated arrangement; possibly retains a separate private dwelling on part of site or land rights elsewhere (if negotiated). He avoids long fight, moves on to the next project.

---

Scenario 3: “Do nothing / accept Government acquisition and compensation” – passive path​

Key elements​

• Lee Hsien Yang chooses effectively to stand aside: he does not mount a strong fight, maybe lodges minor objection but accepts that the Government will proceed with gazetting, acquisition, and he will receive compensation under the Land Acquisition Act.
• He may focus on his life outside the property (he and his wife are based overseas) and decide that the battle is not worth it.
• He takes the compensation, relinquishes future control of the land/site, and pivots to other uses of capital or investments.
• He may use the compensation proceeds for family/private investment rather than focusing on this legacy asset.

Upsides​

• Very low regulatory/legal risk and cost.
• Certainty and closure more quickly: once acquisition is done, he can lock in financial value and move on.
• Avoids being dragged into a drawn-out heritage/monument/public dispute.
• Possibly better mental/emotional outcome (less public feud) if he accepts the inevitability.

Risks/downsides​

• Hard emotionally/legally if he feels the father’s wish is being ignored. He may face criticism for being passive.
• He gives up any chance to build a private dwelling on the site or shape the future use of the land.
• Compensation may be less than what he could extract via full control/demolition or negotiation (if such were possible). The valuation under acquisition may discount redevelopment potential or impose heritage restrictions.
• Public perception that he “lost the fight” or conceded under pressure may weaken his position in other public or political matters.

Likely sequence​

1. Notice of intention to gazette comes; Lee receives it and chooses either not to object or objects in minimal way.
2. Government issues Preservation Order and initiates acquisition. Valuation process begins: the site (~1,100 sqm) is assessed for market value considering location, tenure, redevelopment potential.
3. Compensation amount is determined and paid to Lee. Legal formalities of transfer/acquisition completed.
4. Lee shifts focus to other investment or personal projects; site is handed over; Government proceeds to convert site into heritage park or other public use.
5. Possibly Lee will seek to negotiate private rights elsewhere or move his family home to another property, but the Oxley site is now removed from his personal portfolio.

---

Comparative summary of the three scenarios​

Scenario	Degree of control for Lee Hsien Yang	Speed & certainty	Alignment with father’s wish	Risk & cost
1 – All-out fight	High (if successful)	Slow, uncertain	Highest alignment	High regulatory/legal cost & risk
2 – Cooperate with Government	Moderate	Moderate speed, some uncertainty	Medium alignment	Moderate cost, some compromise
3 – Passive / compensation	Low control	Fastest certainty	Lowest alignment	Low cost, but possible value surrender

---

My assessment of likelihood (subjective)​

• Given the Government has already issued notice of intention to gazette the site and is moving fairly decisively, Scenario 1 is possible but difficult: the regulatory head-winds are strong.
• Scenario 2 seems quite plausible: a compromise path that preserves value and avoids protracted conflict.
• Scenario 3 is also a strong candidate if Lee Hsien Yang chooses to cut losses and focus elsewhere.

In short: I’d assess Scenario 2 as the most likely, Scenario 3 as next, and Scenario 1 as the (bravest but riskiest) outcome.

---

Key variables to watch​

• Whether the Government issues a Preservation Order under the monument legislation (which would block demolition).
• The value of the compensation offered under the Land Acquisition Act and what assumptions are used (especially redevelopment potential).
• Whether Lee Hsien Yang pursues legal action or other objections (which could delay everything).
• Public sentiment and political considerations: the Government emphasises this site’s national heritage value.
• Whether any private deal is reached (for example, a partial retention of land or private dwelling rights) in negotiation.
• The condition/structural safety of the house: the Government says they must assess buildings on site and the site rather than the house per se.
• The timeline: how long the Government will allow for objections, how quickly the valuation/acquisition proceed.

---

 

[syed putra]

Lee Hsien Yang, instead of fighting hard to demolish, chooses a pragmatic path: collaborates (or at least does not obstruct) with the Government’s process, possibly negotiating favourable terms (compensation, involvement in future use, relocation of dwelling etc

Relocating the house is best solution to a more appropriate site.
It is considered demolition as house is removed.
And owner still maintain current property.

 

[Willamshakespear]

Thanks yet again, Mr or Mdm CoffeeAhSoh, for your updates, even if it is from AI.

At the least, the AI you used, as there are MANY, have the sense to DEAL in PROBABILITIES than in ACTUAL outcome....a mistake MANY fools made and trusted AI tech TOTALLY with single options and saw horrific results...

No matter how good your AI used is, it still can never match with one or few more others Humans whom work on Quantum wavelengths that even a toilet cleaner posses - possesing such and using such are entirely 2 different issues - that NO current AI is even capable of....afterall, current classical AI algorithms and classical chips are still made by Humans, whom are flawed and none perfect....

One flaw in your AI used is that it does not list the Truth and REALITY of the current owner WHOM had FLED to UK rather than to FACE JUSTICE, to assist in the thrid arm of our Democracy - our Judiciary's enforcement arm - the police - in clearing allegations of giving false evidences and misleading the original owner of the property in a now well known contested and highly tainted Last Will.....

Current forms of AI are just as flawed as any Human, as it is created by Humans. AI knows NO realities that WE Human can experience - hear, see, touch, taste and smell. It may be able to define such, but it has NO ability to experience such, and thus, no mater how good they are, AI at the basic level, is just a bunch of binary numbers.....

It is my hope that you would choose to speak your mind freely with your perceptions instead.....none will be harmed....good or bad, or at least what one had posted is not harmful, as this is probably the last few sites on planet Earth that allows free speech, thanks to Boss Sam....

 

[CoffeeAhSoh]