The Prime Minister (PM) as well as members of his Cabinet have tried to characterise the serious aspersions cast upon him by the PM’s brother and sister as petty sibling squabble. But members of the opposition have pointed out that it is not mere sibling rivalry but that the allegations point to matters of public interest, which raise grave concerns.
Secretary-general of the Singapore First party, in writing an open letter to the President of Singapore, highlighted that two allegations especially must be dealt with by an official enquiry.
“Two key points stand out. Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang have alleged
1. that PM Lee misuses “his position and influence over the government and its agencies to drive his personal agenda” against them and Hsien Yang’s wife Suet Fern, and
2. that even though Ho Ching (wife of PM Lee) does not hold any elected or official position in government, “her influence is pervasive, and extends well beyond her job purview”.
These are serious allegations from senior members of the establishment who have given much of their life to public service. They should not be taken lightly. They hit at Singapore’s core values.”
17 June 2017Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam,President,Republic of Singapore.Dear President,Public Inquiry into Allegations…
Member of Singapore People’s Party (SPP), Ravi Philemon, said that 3 things in particular stand out for him.
“Number 1 – the alleged omnipresence of the state machinery and how they are supposedly misused by our Prime Minister.
Number 2 – This is not just a matter of if Lee Kuan Yew’s house should be destroyed or not. It is a serious question of if the government is above the law, so much so that it has the right to override the legally binding will.
And number 3 – That Lucien Wong who was once the personal lawyer of the Prime Minister, is now the Attorney-General of Singapore.”
Fellow Singaporeans, I am making this video because I became concerned after reading the recent statements by the children of Mr Lee Kuan Yew. The views expressed here are mine alone and do not represent the views of any organisations or persons I may be affiliated with.Our Prime Minister very savvily characterised the serious allegations by his brother and sister as mere sibling squabble. But these allegations are matters of public interest which raise grave concerns.3 things in particular stand out for me.Number 1 – the alleged omnipresence of the state machinery and how they are supposedly misused by our Prime Minister. The son and daughter of Lee Kuan Yew had to release their statements in the wee hours of the morning, when the brother was away on holiday with his wife. Their statement further said that Lee Kuan Yew's younger son is leaving Singapore as he feared the actions by his elder brother.This raises a serious question – "if even the children of Lee Kuan Yew have to fear the alleged misuse of the state machinery, how much more afraid should ordinary Singaporeans be?"Number 2 – This is not just a matter of if Lee Kuan Yew's house should be destroyed or not. It is a serious question of if the government is above the law, so much so that it has the right to override the legally binding will. And that too – as alleged by the brother of the Prime Minister – "motivated by a desire to inherit Lee Kuan Yew's standing and reputation for themselves and their children."And number 3 – That Lucien Wong who was once the personal lawyer of the Prime Minister, is now the Attorney-General of Singapore. A person entrusted with vast prosecutorial discretion must pass the highest degree of public scrutiny, and allegations of "misuse of power at the very top" does not help. I am happy that our Prime Minister has denied the allegations made by his brother and sister. I agree that judgement should be reserved until the allegations raised in the statement of Lee Hsien Yang and Lee Wei Ling are properly and transparently raised and dealt with.I am however disheartened that our Prime Minister has said that he will deal with the matter after he returns from his holiday, this weekend.Any other leader of a country would have cancelled his holiday and returned home immediately to deal with the matter which maligned his administration.I am all for good and competent governance, and I love Singapore. That is my only reason for making this video. Thank you for watching.
Posted by Ravi Philemon on Wednesday, 14 June 2017
Jeannette Chong-Aruldoss, another member of the SPP, described the Ministerial Committee as a “tragic joke”.
“It is like the Boss of a company has a quarrel with Mr Someone. Then the Boss gathers a number of his employees and empowers them to decide who is right: he (the Boss) or Mr Someone. Boss submits a long testimony to this group of his employees giving them his account of the events and his opinion about Mr Someone’s motives.
How on earth can such a group of subordinates, who are otherwise answerable to the Boss, be expected to act independently and to able to make an objective decision? Does such a dubious committee really have the option to decide against their Boss?
It is a rule of natural justice that a man cannot be a judge in his own cause: “Nemo judex in causa sua”. Asking your underlings to determine the outcome of a case in which you have a personal interest in, is to me a breach of that rule.
Tragically, the joke is on us, the citizenry. For it does not bode well for us when we cannot detect, turn a blind eye to or condone conflict of interests and use of state powers for personal benefits.”
MINISTERIAL COMMITTEE: A TRAGIC JOKE?According to LWL and LHY: "in July 2016, Minister Lawrence Wong wrote to inform…
Meanwhile, the Singapore Democratic Party called on the PM to address the specific allegations of public concern in a clear and transparent manner through public hearings. They further urged Mr Lee to state and demonstrate that he will not resort to using State power to deal with his siblings and ordinary citizens of Singapore.
For the sake of our nation's future, PM Lee must address the specific allegations of public concern in a clear and…
Follow us on Social Media
Send in your scoops to email@example.com