357
edits
Ridout Road rentals: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
SGPolitico (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
SGPolitico (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 164: | Line 164: | ||
|Ministerial statements issued by Ministers Shanmugam, Balakrishnan, Edwin Tong and Teo Chee Hean in Parliament. Questions filed by Members of Parliament. | |Ministerial statements issued by Ministers Shanmugam, Balakrishnan, Edwin Tong and Teo Chee Hean in Parliament. Questions filed by Members of Parliament. | ||
|} | |} | ||
== '''POFMA directions issued over Ridout Road rentals''' == | |||
The Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) Office issued directions to address falsehoods circulating about the Ridout Road rentals. | |||
The government clarified that the rental arrangements involving Ministers K Shanmugam and Vivian Balakrishnan adhered to proper processes and were consistent with market valuations. | |||
== Defamation suit against Lee Hsien Yang over Ridout Road == | |||
{{Main|Defamation suit by K Shanmugam and Vivian Balakrishnan against Lee Hsien Yang}} | |||
Ministers K Shanmugam and Vivian Balakrishnan accused Lee Hsien Yang (LHY) of making defamatory statements in a Facebook post in July 2022 regarding their rental of Ridout Road properties. | |||
They alleged that LHY’s post suggested they received preferential treatment from the Singapore Land Authority (SLA) and implied corrupt practices. | |||
When LHY refused to retract his statements, apologise, or make a donation to charity as demanded by the ministers, they filed a defamation suit against him. LHY declined to enter an appearance or defend the suit, leading to a default judgment in November 2022. | |||
Justice Goh Yihan later ruled that the statements were false and defamatory, targeting the ministers’ integrity, professional reputation, and honour. The court found that LHY acted with malice, displaying a reckless disregard for the truth. | |||
On 2 May 2023, the court awarded S$400,000 in damages—S$200,000 to each minister, including S$50,000 in aggravated damages due to malice. The court also issued injunctions preventing LHY from repeating the defamatory statements. | |||
Justice Goh highlighted the severity of the allegations, the prominence of the claimants, and the defendant’s conduct as factors justifying the substantial damages. Additionally, the ministers sought costs and disbursements exceeding S$219,000 from LHY, who resides in the UK. | |||
In September 2024, LHY paid S$619,335.53 to the ministers after losing the defamation suit. He stated that making the payment was necessary to protect his family home at 38 Oxley Road. | |||
Despite the judgment, LHY continues to deny wrongdoing and maintains his criticism of the ministers’ actions. | |||