Defamation suit by K Shanmugam and Vivian Balakrishnan against Lee Hsien Yang
Lee Hsien Yang, the son of Singapore’s founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, was ordered to pay S$619,335.53 in damages and legal costs to Ministers K Shanmugam and Vivian Balakrishnan following a defamation lawsuit.
The case stemmed from a Facebook post by Lee Hsien Yang on the ministers’ rental of state-owned properties.
The case had raised broader questions about defamation laws in Singapore.
Background of the Ridout Road controversy
Main article: Ridout Road rentals
The controversy began in May 2023, when questions were raised about the leases of two state-owned properties, 26 and 31 Ridout Road, rented by Ministers Shanmugam and Balakrishnan.
The ministers maintained that their leases adhered to legal procedures and market rates. Shanmugam had also said that he had recused himself from any oversight decisions related to the properties in his capacity as Minister for Law.
During a parliamentary session on 3 July 2023, both ministers explained the circumstances of their leases.
Following this, Lee Hsien Yang posted on Facebook on 23 July 2023, stating that two ministers leased state-owned mansions from an agency overseen by one of them, involving tree-felling and state-funded renovations.
Defamation lawsuit
July 2023: POFMA correction and lawsuit threat
On 25 July 2023, Lee Hsien Yang’s Facebook post was issued a Correction Direction by Second Minister for Law, Edwin Tong under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA).
Two days later, the ministers demanded that Lee Hsien Yang retract his statements, issue an apology, and pay damages, warning of legal action if he did not comply.
According to Lee Hsien Yang, he was asked to issue the following statement as an apology: “I recognise that the post meant, and was understood to mean, that Mr K Shanmugam/Dr Vivian Balakrishnan acted corruptly and for personal gain by having the Singapore Land Authority give them preferential treatment, including felling trees without approval and illegally, and having it pay for renovations to 31 Ridout Road.”
Lee Hsien Yang refused, arguing that his comments were based on publicly available information and Ministers Shanmugam and Balakrishnan were pressuring him to issue a false apology for statements he never made, adding, “No Singaporean should have to lie to avoid lawsuits.”
In a Facebook post on 29 July 2023, Lee Hsien Yang addressed the controversy, stating: “My post did not assert that Shanmugam and V Balakrishnan acted corruptly or for personal gain by having the Singapore Land Authority (SLA) give them preferential treatment by illegally felling trees without approval and also having SLA pay for renovations for them. My post simply stated facts that were already widely published in the Singapore and international media.”
He further clarified that his post was made in the UK and challenged the ministers to sue him there if they believed they had a substantial case.
In response, Shanmugam countered Lee Hsien Yang’s challenge to sue in a UK court, stating that Lee Hsien Yang should seize the opportunity to defend himself in “full view of the Singapore public” if he believes the defamation claims are baseless.
Shanmugam argued that Lee Hsien Yang’s statements concerned events in Singapore and were primarily intended for a Singaporean audience, not an international one. “We have sued Mr Lee for a libel that was published to the people in Singapore, which concerns Singaporeans, and which is based on the laws of Singapore,” he stated.
The minister also suggested that Lee Hsien Yang was seeking special treatment.
“He wants to be treated differently from Singaporeans (and even foreigners) who are sued in Singapore for defamation. Mr Lee should explain why he is entitled to make libellous statements, and yet be exempt from the rules that apply to the rest of us,” Shanmugam added.
August 2023: Legal proceedings begin
Despite his public clarification, the ministers still proceeded to sue him in August.
In mid-September, the two ministers successfully served[1] legal documents to Lee Hsien Yang through Facebook Messenger.
They opted for this unconventional method with court approval, citing the difficulties of serving him in the United Kingdom, where he presently resides.
After Lee Hsien Yang failed to file a Notice of Intention to contest the lawsuit, the Singapore High Court issued a default judgment in November 2023.
Justice Goh Yihan ruled in favour of the ministers, finding that their claims would likely have succeeded on their merits.
Lee Hsien Yang was barred from republishing the statements, and damages were awarded.
Court ruling
Damages and legal costs
Each minister was awarded S$150,000 in general damages, S$50,000 in aggravated damages, and S$51,000 in legal costs. Lee Hsien Yang was also required to pay costs and legal fees for the ministers’ lawyer, Davinder Singh, amounting to S$219,335. In total, Lee Hsien Yang paid S$619,335.
Lee Hsien Yang’s statement on why he paid the damages
On 29 September 2024, Lee Hsien Yang announced[2] that he had paid the required sum to protect his Singapore assets, including the family home at 38 Oxley Road.
He reiterated his desire to honour his late father’s wish to demolish the house and to ensure his sister, Dr Lee Wei Ling, could continue living there.
Tax savings for the ministers
The ministers pledged to donate the damages awarded in the lawsuit to charity.
Under Singapore’s tax laws[3], charitable donations qualify for a 2.5 times tax deduction.
This means that Shanmugam and Balakrishnan, each earning an estimated S$1.76 million annually at the MR1 ministerial grade, could receive a tax saving of around S$120,000 each.
- ↑ https://gutzy.asia/2023/09/16/singapore-ministers-serve-defamation-suit-via-facebook-messenger-amid-nations-lky-centennial-celebration/
- ↑ https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2024/09/29/lee-hsien-yang-pays-s619335-to-ministers-shanmugam-and-balakrishnan-in-defamation-suit-to-protect-family-home/
- ↑ https://www.iras.gov.sg/taxes/other-taxes/charities/donations-tax-deductions