Lee Kuan Yew v Chee Soon Juan

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: MPH Rubin J
• Judgment Date: 04 April 2003
• Neutral Citation: [2003] SGHC 78
• Plaintiff Counsel: Davinder Singh SC, Hri Kumar and Nicolas Tang (Drew & Napier LLC)
• Published date: 07 October 2003
• Court: High Court (Singapore)
• Defendant Counsel: Defendant/appellant in person
• Subject Matter: Civil Procedure,Pleadings,Defence,Particulars of defence of duress not pleaded,Effect on defendant's case,Summary judgment,Whether to set aside summary judgment and grant defendant leave to defend claim,Whether defendant had real or bona fide defence,Contract,Discharge,Breach,Whether intimidation a defence to breach of contract of compromise,Duress,Illegitimate pressure,Whether threat to enforce one's legal rights could amount to duress,Tort,Defamation,Defamatory statements,Republication,Words republished by mass media,Whether defendant liable for republication,Whether defamatory in natural and ordinary meaning or by way of innuendo

1 This was an appeal by Dr Chee Soon Juan to judge-in-chambers from the decision of Senior Assistant Registrar Mr Toh Han Li (‘the SAR’) granting interlocutory judgment with damages (including aggravated damages) to be assessed in a defamation action brought by the respondent, Mr Lee Kuan Yew. Mr Lee is, and was at all material times, the Senior Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office, a Cabinet Minister of the Government of Singapore and the former Prime Minister of Singapore. On 25 October 2001, Mr Lee, as a candidate of the People’s Action Party (‘PAP’), was returned unopposed as a Member of Parliament for Tanjong Pagar Group Representation Constituency (‘GRC’) in the 2001 General Elections. Dr Chee is, and was at all material times, the Secretary-General of the Singapore Democratic Party (‘SDP’). Dr Chee was a candidate, along with four others, for Jurong GRC in the 2001 General Elections.

2 On 28 October 2001, in the course of campaigning for the 2001 General Elections, Dr Chee reportedly spoke and published certain words in public and in the presence of, inter alia, various members of the print and broadcast media at an election rally at Nee Soon Central (‘the Words’), which Mr Lee alleged to be defamatory of him.

3 On 19 November 2001, the present suit was commenced by Mr Lee against Dr Chee. On 8 December 2001, Mr Lee filed an amended Statement of Claim seeking to enforce a contract of compromise arising from the publication of an apology by Dr Chee or alternatively, claiming against him for defamation. In Suit No 1460 of 2001, Mr Goh Chok Tong, the Prime Minister of the Republic of Singapore, commenced a similar suit against Dr Chee for allegedly defamatory words spoken by him at Hong Kah West hawker centre and at the election rally at Nee Soon on 28 October 2001.

4 In both cases, Mr Lee and Mr Goh took out a summons in chambers application praying for interlocutory judgment with damages (including aggravated damages) to be assessed; and costs of the action, including the assessment of damages, to be taxed on an indemnity basis. Both applications were heard at the same time by the SAR, who granted the applications for interlocutory judgment.

The Facts

The Words

5 On 28 October 2001, at an election rally held at Nee Soon Central, Dr Chee spoke the following words in the presence of members of the public and the print and broadcast media:

Yesterday, Mr Lee Kuan Yew was at his best. When he’s at his best, names, bad names have no problem rolling out of his tongue. He called me all sorts of names. How do I react? I say no problem. No problem. Because the more names you call me, I know the more it is that the PAP has to worry. I challenge the PAP to stop calling me names and talk about the issues…

And so I challenged Mr Lee Kuan Yew yesterday to answer this one question, why is he not addressing this very important issue that the SDP is campaigning on this election….

…So when we met … when we met Goh Chok Tong this morning during our walkabout, he was there just about 3 or 4 feet away, I asked him, “Mr Goh, what happened to our money? What happened to this $17 billion?” He wouldn’t answer. He just waved us on. I am very serious about this. My friends, it is your money, this is your money, no, not the Government’s money, not Goh Chok Tong’s money. It is your money. And when I asked him and he waved us on, it hit me, it hit me very clearly, that the Government will not answer you. The Government can say, “No, I am not interested in answering you, because you are not in Parliament … But if you get Mr Ling How Doong from the SDP into Parliament, this guarantee I give you, the first question that he will ask is what has happened to our $17 billion?

You must be very careful that you don’t give the entire government this free rein to take your money and use it without any opposition keeping it in check. And this is that same question that I want to ask Mr Lee Kuan Yew today. Address this point. I want to ask the media to publish this point. And you see for yourselves tomorrow my friends, see for yourself whether the media is going to publish it or not.

Because this is one very important point in this election. If it will define this campaign for the SDP it is this issue. We want the media, whether it is your broadcast media or your press media to report on this what we’ve just said tonight. Because it makes all the difference. And if they report it, then I want to challenge Mr Lee Kuan Yew, please don’t live in the past, my dear Senior Minister, this is not 1961. He has said that he wants to demolish me. You can’t. Yes, can’t. This is 2001, when we don’t want to talk about demolishing anymore. We want to talk about creativity. We want to talk about innovation. We want to talk about debate. That is very important. So Mr Lee Kuan Yew, I challenge you, tell us about this $17 billion you loaned to Suharto.

6 The Words and/or their gist were prominently republished by the print and broadcast media.

The first apology

7 On 29 October 2001, the defendant wrote a letter addressed to Mr Goh as follows:

Dear Sir,

With reference to the incident at the Hawker Centre at Jurong East on the morning of 28 October 2001, I wish to reiterate my position that politics should not be conducted at the personal level.

As such I wish to let you know that if I have offended you in a personal manner during our meeting I would like to extend to you my sincerest apologies.

At the political level, however, I stand by the issues that I have been raising in this election.

8 On 30 October 2001, Dr Chee issued a Media Release as follows:

The only reason why we brought up the issue about the $17b loan to Indonesia was to compare it with the $2.1b the SDP has proposed to help retrenched workers in Singapore. There was never any intention to cast any aspersion on anyone, least of all Mr Goh Chok Tong. I therefore withdraw my allegation that Mr Goh was dishonest and not fit to be the Prime Minister. I offer to him my apologies.

9 Before the SAR, Dr Chee took no issue with the first apology and confirmed that it was made voluntarily.

Mr Lee’s letter of demand

10 On 30 October 2001, Mr Lee’s solicitors, Drew & Napier LLC, wrote to Dr Chee as follows:

Dear Sir

Defamation

1. We act for Mr Lee Kuan Yew.

2. Since 1997, the question of Singapore's financial assistance to Indonesia has been discussed, inter alia, in Parliament. In particular, and in response to questions raised by Members of Parliament, including opposition MPs, the Prime Minister, and other Ministers on his behalf, have given detailed explanations, inter alia, on the form of the said financial assistance extended by Singapore to Indonesia.

3. It has been explained in Parliament (and widely reported), as is the fact, that Singapore’s rescue package to Indonesia was in two parts: a standby loan facility of US$5 billion to Indonesia and the purchase of the Rupiah in the foreign exchange markets to support the Indonesian currency.

4. In particular, the following facts have been explained in Parliament, and equally widely reported:-

(a) with regard to the standby loan facility, Singapore’s offer of financial assistance to Indonesia was not made alone, but was part of a programme formulated with the assistance of the IMF, the World Bank and ADB. The programme included US$23 billion of financing from these agencies as well as Indonesia’s own foreign exchange reserves. Singapore was one of a number of countries, including Japan, the United States, Malaysia, Australia and Brunei, which agreed to provide supplementary financing to support the programme. Singapore’s offer of a standby loan facility was intended only as a “second line of defence” to be drawn down if the said US$23 billion financing from the IMF, the World Bank and the ADB was found to be inadequate;

(b) on 31st March 1998, our client wrote to President Suharto informing him of Singapore’s decision to establish a Singapore-Indonesia Bilateral Trade Finance Guarantee Scheme (“the BTFG Scheme”). The BTFG Scheme was intended to provide export credit insurance initially for Singapore’s domestic exports to Indonesia, and later retained imports from Indonesia and eventually, exports to Indonesia through Singapore by Indonesia’s trading partners who do not have their own bilateral export credit schemes;

(c) the BTFG Scheme was to have replaced the said standby loan facility of US$5 billion; and

(d) no funds were ever disbursed by Singapore under the US$5 billion standby loan facility.

5. As a candidate for election to Parliament, and as the leader of the Singapore Democratic Party, you must be taken to be fully aware of the above matters.

6. We are instructed that, in the course of campaigning on 28 October 2001, you spoke the following words, inter alia, in the presence of various members of the print and broadcast media:

Yesterday, Mr Lee Kuan Yew was at his best. When he’s at his best, bad names have no problem rolling off his tongue. He calls me all sorts of names. How do I react? I say no problem. Because the more names you call me, I know the more it is that the PAP has to worry. I challenge the PAP to stop calling me names and start talking about the issues…

And so I challenged Mr Lee Kuan Yew yesterday, why is he not addressing this very important issue that the SDP is campaigning on this election….

…So when we met … when we met Goh Chok Tong this morning during our walkabout, he was there just about 3 or 4 feet away, I asked him, “Mr Goh, what happened to our money? What happened to this $17 billion?” He wouldn’t answer. He just waved us on. I am very serious about this. My friends, it is your money, this is your money, no, not the Government’s money, not Goh Chok Tong’s money. It is your money. And when I asked him and he waved us on, it hit me, it hit me very clearly, that the Government will not answer you. The Government can say, “No, I am not interested in answering you, because you are not...