Dow Jones denies any wrongdoing in defamation suit launched by Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong
November 18th, 2009 | 
Author: Written by our Correspondent
Dow Jones and Co, which owns Far Eastern Economic Review, the paper sued for defamation by Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, said in an official statement released yesterday that it disagreed with the verdict and denied any wrongdoing but would settle the damages instead of prolonging the process.
The Singapore High Court had ordered the Review Publishing Company, publisher of the Far Eastern Economic Review (FEER), and editor Hugo Restall to pay 200,000 dollars in damages and 30,000 dollars in legal costs to Premier Lee Hsien Loong.
His father, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, will get 150,000 dollars in damages and 25,000 dollars in legal costs.
The penalties were set after the Court of Appeal last month upheld a 2008 decision finding the defendants guilty of defaming the Lees in a 2006 article based on an interview with Chee Soon Juan, an opposition party leader.
The article at the heart of the case — entitled “Singapore’s ‘Martyr’, Chee Soon Juan” — described the opposition Singapore Democratic Party secretary general’s battle against the ruling People’s Action Party and its leaders.
In a terse statement, Dow Jones expresses its disagreement with the verdict:
“Dow Jones strongly disagrees with the decision of the Singapore Court of Appeal upholding the ruling against the Far Eastern Economic Review in the defamation case brought by Lee Hsien Loong and Lee Kuan Yew.
The Court casts significant doubt as to whether Singapore will ever recognize the fair and honest reporting privilege accorded to responsible journalism — a privilege available in the United Kingdom and other Commonwealth countries with diverse histories and cultures.
“The Court ruled that even if the privilege were to apply in Singapore, it does not apply to the foreign press – based on the misguided notion that non-Singaporeans have no vested interest in Singapore society.
Having waged this battle for press freedom to Singapore’s highest court, we are now resolving this case rather than engaging in a protracted damages process. But make no mistake, Dow Jones does not believe it defamed Lee Hsien Loong or Lee Kuan Yew, and this decision will not deter us from our core mission, which is to provide fair and timely reporting and commentary on matters of importance from around the world, including in Singapore.”
Leaders from the Singapore’s ruling party have won numerous defamation suits against their political opponents back home and foreign publications such as The Economist, Time, Bloomberg, AsiaWeek and the International Herald Tribune.
MM Lee Kuan Yew had never lost a case in a Singapore court. On a rare occasion, his attempt to sue former Singapore President Devan Nair for attacking the “integrity” of the government of Singapore was unsuccessful in a Canadian court.
In an interview with Canadian paper The Globe and Mail in 1999, Devan Nair had described Lee’s technique of suing his opponents into bankruptcy or oblivion as an “abrogation of political rights.” He also remarked that Lee is “an increasingly self-righteous know-all”, surrounded by “department store dummies”.
In response to these remarks, Lee sued Devan Nair in a Canadian court and Nair countersued. Lee then brought a motion to have Nair’s counterclaim thrown out of court.
Lee argued that Nair’s counterclaim disclosed no reasonable cause of action and constituted an inflammatory attack on the integrity of the government of Singapore. However, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice refused to throw out Nair’s counterclaim, holding that Lee had abused the litigating process and therefore Nair has a reasonable cause of action.
[Source: Lee v. Globe and Mail (2001), 6 C.P.C. (5th) 354 (Ont.S.C.J.)]
The litigious action of Singapore’s leaders has brought about international disdain and condemnation especially from free speech proponents, liberals and NGOs.
Two weeks ago, Singapore’s Law Minister Shanmugam tried desperately hard to defend Singapore as a country “ruled by law” to a skeptical audience of 200 or so American lawyers from the New York State Bar Association.
Singapore’s international standing has also been damaged by a White Paper released last week by law firm Amsterdam & Peroff condemning the Singapore government for its political “repression”. It was given extensive publicity by the international media.
Posted in 
Tags: 
Coz it’s true to character of...
Singapore court will the go against the ruler.
Oh Please the PAPies can only win in a Spore Court,the Dow Jones already release a statement that they disagreed with the verdict but in order not to prolong the case they decided to pay the fine.
See if the case will get a hearing if it will to be file in the USA or developed countries, see if they will entertain the PAP and their Nonsense
wow didn’t know that the sued can actually openly disagree with the final court of appeal’s ruling.
Next, sue the Superior Court of Toronto. Wonder why they succeed only in Singapore courts. Our standards of justice are too high?
Well we are going to have pandas to keep the kangaroos company soon
So it aint all that bad
now,for God’s and our own sakes,don;t harp on it!
MM Lee just apologised to the nation? for his CL2 mistake.
that FEER affair was a mistake!
let’s look forward to a new man,will you singapore?!!!
True, can our court judgements take the test of the world courts or since our judicial system was based on the British system, the Privy Council??
kangaroo court in a joke of a country. do they not realized that our international footing (or whatever is left of it) is in shambles? of course not, the government is lining their pockets with millions.
i am a singaporean with a vested interest in singapore society and i say that Dow Jones is right while pappies are wrong
the people deserve to be informed, let information flow freely
TIME FOR CHANGE, VOTE FOR CHANGE, VOTE OPPOSITION
Like they say history is being written by the victors.
Same with conducting a trial involving a cross-border dispute. Isn’t it obvious that cross-border dispute should be conducted through an impartial court, a third party arbitrator ? What good would the outcome be when such court of justice sits in the land of the plaintiff against a defendant that is in another and when the issue of “disparaging comments” were made on a medium (media) that has no sovereign borders (it’s an international audience). What more when the plantiff is fighting the case in the court of the country in which he or it runs its legislative and executive arms. Where is the impartiality of the court when it is already prejudicial by virtue of it sharing the same abode as the plaintiff.
In Singapore, justice is in the eye of the beholder. The same offence (or, as the case may be, civil impeachment) may bear different results under the same court(s) but under different judges, and at different points of time, etc. This have been seen time and again. In the eyes of the law all Singaporeans are equal, but some Singaporeans are more equal than others.
If tourists ask what is wrong with Singapore’s kangaroo, we know what they are talking about …
Apart from this, it is audacity of FEER to imply our kangaroos as corrupted and rule by nepotism because brutal truth and reality have no place in SinCity.
“Singapore will ever recognize the fair and honest reporting privilege accorded to responsible journalism ”
It will only be recognized as long as it is about singing praise ,rhetoric and bootlicking on the incumbent party. Anything negative of the reality is consider unfair and dishonest by PAP’s standard.
Before election, Obama published a book known as ‘Audacity of Hope’, after election, I hope he can publish a new edition known as ‘Audacity of Wayang’ because Obama is what wayang is all about. Fancy talking about human right internationally, but when he came to Singapore, he just ’shut up and sit down’, not a shit from him about human right in Singapore. LaPar-BaMa ?
Mindboggling quotes by Lee Kuan Yew
“If I have to shoot 200,000 students to save China from another 100 years of disorder, so be it.” – Lee Kuan Yew endorsing the Tiananmen massacre, Straits Times, 17 August 2004
“If you are a troublemaker… it’s our job to politically destroy you. Put it this way. As long as JB Jeyaratnam for what he stands for – a thoroughly destructive force – we will knock him. Everybody knows that in my bag I have a hatchet, and a very sharp one. You take me on, I take my hatchet, we meet in the cul-de-sac.” – Lee Kuan Yew, The Man And His Ideas, 1997
“I am often accused of interfering in the private lives of citizens. Yes, if I did not, had I not done that, we wouldn’t be here today. And I say without the slightest remorse, that we wouldn’t be here, we would not have made economic progress, if we had not intervened on very personal matters – who your neighbour is, how you live, the noise you make, how you spit, or what language you use. We decide what is right. Never mind what the people think.” – Lee Kuan Yew, Straits Times, 20 April 1987
“I make no apologies that the PAP is the Government and the Government is the PAP.” – Lee Kuan Yew, 1982, Petir
“If I were in authority in Singapore indefinitely without having to ask those who are governed whether they like what is being done, then I would not have the slightest doubt that I could govern much more effectively in their interests.” – Lee Kuan Yew, 1962
“Repression, Sir is a habit that grows. I am told it is like making love – it is always easier the second time! The first time there may be pangs of conscience, a sense of guilt. But once embarked on this course with constant repetition you get more and more brazen in the attack. All you have to do is to dissolve organizations and societies and banish and detain the key political workers in these societies. Then miraculously everything is tranquil on the surface. Then an intimidated press and the government-controlled radio together can regularly sing your praises, and slowly and steadily the people are made to forget the evil things that have already been done, or if these things are referred to again they’re conveniently distorted and distorted with impunity, because there will be no opposition to contradict.” – Lee Kuan Yew as an opposition PAP member speaking to David Marshall, Singapore Legislative Assembly, Debates, 4 October 1956
“I pointed to an article with bold headlines reporting that the police had refused to allow the PAP to hold a rally at Empress Place, and then to the last paragraph where in small type it added the meeting would take place where we were now. I compared this with a prominent report about an SPA rally. This was flagrant bias.” – Lee Kuan Yew complaining about the Straits Times in 1959.
Why DID OBAMA not voiced a word on human rights and Dr Chee’s plights as well as those detained w/o any trial?
1. Human Rights were not discussed by Obama for 2 reasons – there is no life and death repression in Singapore (i.e. there is no An Sun Su Chi) – there is no benefit for himself (no political points back home) or for the US to raise these issues.
2. Democracy means Different Things to Different People – maybe LKY believes there IS democracy in Singapore (his version). There needs to be a review (by the people and PAP) whether the version 1.1 of Democracy is still valid.
Similarly, LKY himself needs to question himself if he is still relavent in today’s social fabric and democratic needs.
3. I am sad that both 1 and 2 are true to alot of extend and for 2, no one is strong enough to say it to LKY’s face…
so many mistakes that have had horrendous consequences – a whole bunch of students who had struggled with learning mandarin when they could have put that time to better use; 50 billion dollars lost by temasek-a mistake; 50 billion lost by GSIC- a mistake.
we are totally numb to their self revelation of mistakes…wait till we come to those mistakes we are not aware of yet!!!
Singapore has gone to the dogs, kangaroos, swines, wolves, foxes and crocodiles because there is a whole bunch of timid and tamed rabbits running around simply interested in how to search for food and nothing else.
## 坡仔哥哥 on Wed, 18th Nov 2009 11:35 pm
“Similarly, LKY himself needs to question himself if he is still relavent in today’s social fabric and democratic needs.”
GCT was subconsciously talking about our very own Robert Mugabe when he mentioned ‘dinosaurs’ in a recent speech about immigrants.
Looking at the Old Man in the papers these days gives you an eyesore.
God, the sooner he goes, the better for Singapore society.
Future is Bleak
You are absolutely right ! And why are there so many rabbits running around the whole of Singapore ? Because the wolves and the kangaroos have been throwing a lot of carrots everywhere.
It’s because Singaporeans are like this that’s why we’ve got a government that is like that.
This man is not infallible. History will show his warts and all. He will be history soon, he is the history of Singapore soon and history will be as merciless as he is. As with Stalin, Hitler, Kruschev, and the rest.
How much talent and progress has been lost. We are still in the stone age of civilisation inspite of the modern buildings. Do modern structures a civilisation make? Hack, no!
1. The Old Guards should retire and not meddle anymore in New Policies and Initiatives. 2 reasons…
a. Obviously, they cannot possibly understand the new issues facing the young population – e.g. why birth rates are falling
b. During brain storming sessions – the Old Guards will say things which they mean as “comments”, but the younger managers will treat them as “policies” and the outcome will be distorted.
Our Social Issues – should be handled by the new ministers and their teams – not to be meddled by some of the older ministers.
As far as I am concerned, GCT and LKY should not meddle in local policies anymore…despiste their vast experience and good intentions…there cannot be any good outcome.
It doesn’t make a wee bit of difference whether the government leaders are of old guards or from the new order. Singapore has been ruled by the trinity since 1984. We have our equivalent of the divine trinity – ours consists of the “Father, Son and the holy Goh”.
No amount of denials can obfuscate the truth that Singapore has lost its direction in this turbulent maelstrom – economy, immigration etc etc and tired of workable policy options.
WE NEED TO CHANGE AND URGENTLY SO.
Stop wasting singaporean’s money on trivial law suits. Use the money to save the poor and house the homeless, useless politicians.
“Laws that allow the authorities to impose restrictions on freedom of expression together with a pattern of politically motivated defamation suits, have created a climate of political intimidation and self-censorship in Singapore.” said Sam Zarifi, Amnesty International’s Asia Pacific Director. “This ruling further illustrates how press freedom is under threat in Singapore and sets a dangerous precedent for freedom of expression and journalism in the region.”
http://www.amnestyusa.org/document.php?id=ENGNAU2009111914127&lang=e
the “ticket to change” is in all singaporeans’ hand…
vote wisely in the next election…
change for the better is definitely required….
But first… Is it about a famed Mainland China Chinese “Justice Bao”… Or about a former Riau Islands and so now can also be known as FT and famous too… But perhaps a “Justice Bao-Chiak”… in Hookien meaning “Sure Eaten Up”… Thus…
I am so impressed by the QUALITY of their comments. Especially those from “cy on Wed, 18th Nov 2009 9:10 pm” cy wrote and I find it WORTHWHILE TO Repeat of The OPPRESSIVE Nature of LKY in Itemised Format (7 items). Of LKY who ALWAYS THINK IN “Terms of HIS MEANS ALWAYS JUSTIFIES The END He Has in HIS MIND”. So… It’s ALL ABOUT about…
“Mindboggling quotes by Lee Kuan Yew
1. “If I have to shoot 200,000 students to save China from another 100 years of disorder, so be it.” – Lee Kuan Yew endorsing the Tiananmen massacre, Straits Times, 17 August 2004
2. “If you are a troublemaker… it’s our job to politically destroy you. Put it this way. As long as JB Jeyaratnam for what he stands for – a thoroughly destructive force – we will knock him. Everybody knows that in my bag I have a hatchet, and a very sharp one. You take me on, I take my hatchet, we meet in the cul-de-sac.” – Lee Kuan Yew, The Man And His Ideas, 1997
3. “I am often accused of interfering in the private lives of citizens. Yes, if I did not, had I not done that, we wouldn’t be here today. And I say without the slightest remorse, that we wouldn’t be here, we would not have made economic progress, if we had not intervened on very personal matters – who your neighbour is, how you live, the noise you make, how you spit, or what language you use. We decide what is right. Never mind what the people think.” – Lee Kuan Yew, Straits Times, 20 April 1987
4. “I make no apologies that the PAP is the Government and the Government is the PAP.” – Lee Kuan Yew, 1982, Petir
5. “If I were in authority in Singapore indefinitely without having to ask those who are governed whether they like what is being done, then I would not have the slightest doubt that I could govern much more effectively in their interests.” – Lee Kuan Yew, 1962
6. “Repression, Sir is a habit that grows. I am told it is like making love – it is always easier the second time! The first time there may be pangs of conscience, a sense of guilt. But once embarked on this course with constant repetition you get more and more brazen in the attack. All you have to do is to dissolve organizations and societies and banish and detain the key political workers in these societies. Then miraculously everything is tranquil on the surface. Then an intimidated press and the government-controlled radio together can regularly sing your praises, and slowly and steadily the people are made to forget the evil things that have already been done, or if these things are referred to again they’re conveniently distorted and distorted with impunity, because there will be no opposition to contradict.” – Lee Kuan Yew as an opposition PAP member speaking to David Marshall, Singapore Legislative Assembly, Debates, 4 October 1956
7. “I pointed to an article with bold headlines reporting that the police had refused to allow the PAP to hold a rally at Empress Place, and then to the last paragraph where in small type it added the meeting would take place where we were now. I compared this with a prominent report about an SPA rally. This was flagrant bias.” – Lee Kuan Yew complaining about the Straits Times in 1959.”
A talented and successful foreigner in not only financially but morals, ethics and humility said to me… “Singapore success Lee Kuan Yew… and one day Singapore failure WHAT?” with this emphasist! I ask what he meant and he just repeated it As A RESPECTFUL FOREIGNER with to a Singaporean! and beckon me to say it for him! You know the anawers to this “riddle” as well as I do by a true FT who does NOT want to be even a PR here.
Operated Cold Sore on Wed, 18th Nov 2009 9:58 pm
“Why DID OBAMA not voiced a word on human rights and Dr Chee’s plights as well as those detained w/o any trial?”
He was here for less than 24 hrs, sorry no time to talk.