World News | Singapore's Indian-origin Ministers Attend Court Hearing Related to Renting of Two Bungalows | LatestLY
Source: LatestLY
Singapore, May 2 (PTI) Singapore's two Indian-origin ministers were in the High Court on Thursday in a damage hearing case related to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's younger brother Lee Hsien Yang, who had made remarks related to renting two separate colonial-built and state-owned bungalows by the duo.
Sibling relations between the prime minister and his younger brother are strained due to matters related to the family house.
Also Read | INR vs USD: Indian Rupee Turns Flat at 83.43 Against US Dollar in Early Trade After American Central Bank Decides To Keep Interest Rate Unchanged.
Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam and Foreign Affairs Minister Vivian Balakrishnan had sued Lee Hsien Yang for defamation over his last year's remarks about their rental of state two black-and-white bungalows at Ridout Road.
The hearing to determine the damages to be paid by Lee Hsien Yang for defaming the two senior cabinet ministers began with both claimants leaving the amount to the court.
Also Read | India on Palestinian Bid To Grant Full Membership: Hope Palestine's Application for United Nations Membership Will Be Reconsidered and Endorsed, Says India's UN Ambassador Ruchira Kamboj (Watch Video).
Both the ministers were present in the court and represented by lawyer Davinder Singh while Lee was absent and unrepresented, Channel News Asia reported.
Singh told the court that his team had reached out to Lee Hsien Yang several times, providing the date, time and venue of hearings, and added that his team was not informed by any counsel that Lee had instructed them.
Lee left the country with his wife, Lee Suet Fern, in 2022 over a matter unrelated to his current defamation suit.
In a Facebook post, Lee wrote that "two ministers have leased state-owned mansions from the agency that one of them controls, felling trees and getting state-sponsored renovations".
According to Shanmugam and Balakrishnan, Lee's post accused them of acting corruptly and for personal gains by having the Singapore Land Authority (SLA) give them preferential treatment and paying for renovations to 26 and 31 Ridout Road.
The remarks came after the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) a month earlier stated that no wrongdoing or preferential treatment was given to the two ministers.
Both the cabinet ministers had sent lawyers' letters to Lee Hsien Yang last July, saying they would sue unless he apologised, withdrew his allegations, and paid damages to be donated to charity.
After Lee Hsien Yang did not comply, the cabinet ministers served papers to him via Facebook Messenger.
Justice Goh Yihan ruled in favour of the two ministers in November last year, ordering that Lee Hsien Yang pay the duo's costs.
Justice Goh also granted injunctions against Lee Hsien Yang, restraining him from making defamatory allegations against the two ministers.
In the ministers' opening statement in Thursday's hearing, they noted that the effect of the judgement issued in November was that Lee Hsien Yang was "not entitled to dispute the liability at the assessment hearing" and that it was only the "amount of damages (and costs) which remains to be determined".
They also noted that the effect of Lee Hsien Yang's failure to file a defence was that the facts in the ministers' statements of claim were to be taken as "admitted" by the defendant.
Both ministers then took the stand consecutively for a few minutes each to confirm that their evidence in documents was true and correct. The judge had no questions for either minister and released them as witnesses.
Shanmugam left shortly after while the hearing was still ongoing and Balakrishnan departed at the close of the hearing.
As the evidence was not contested, Singh gave closing submissions on the claimants' cases, according to the report.
Justice Goh had several queries on the opening statement, including how cited paragraphs from past cases supported the team's arguments on damages. He asked the team to submit further submissions to the court in a week.
The judge then reserved judgment on damages and costs for a later date.