AGC: Li Shengwu instructed lawyers to leak copies of his defence affidavit to the media

May 23, 2020 | 🚀 Fathership

Around Sep 29, 2019, Li Shengwu instructed his lawyers to release copies of his defence affidavit to the media before it was admitted into evidence or referred to in any court hearing, said AGC in its latest statement released today (Feb 3).

Li's action was a breach of the Supreme Court Practice Directions, said AGC, and the court subsequently struck out portions of the affidavit "which contained scandalous and irrelevant material".

Li, who is an assistant professor of economics at Harvard University and lives in the United States, is the grandson of the late Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew.

AGC said Li and his lawyers later filed affidavits apologising for the breach, and parties will attend court again as AGC has applied for a declaration that Li and his then-lawyers had abused court process.

Li's former lawyers Abraham Vergis and Aisyah Ahmad of Providence Law confirmed with the media outside the court that they were no longer Li's lawyers, but declined to provide any further comment.

Coincidentally, a few days before the alleged leak, Li hired British lawyer Queen's Counsel David Pannick on Sep 26, 2019 to advise him in his contempt of court case.

Li is currently facing contempt of court charges for a Facebook post he allegedly made in 2017, when he published a private Facebook post that alleged the Singapore government is "very litigious" and has a "pliant court system".

Li announced in a Facebook post on Jan 22 that he would no longer participate in court proceedings.

However, AGC said Li is required to produce the documents referred to in his defence affidavit and answer the questions posed to him on oath within 14 days. He had previously refused to do so.

If Li does not show up in court and is later found to be in contempt when hearings proceed without him, a warrant of arrest can be issued, and he can be arrested if he returns to Singapore.

He can also be acquitted on the arguments and evidence without personally attending court.

Leong Mun Wai pulled a 'Raeesah Khan' in Parliament on Telegram hearsay

Jan 13, 2022 | 🚀 Fathership
On Tuesday (Jan 11), Progress Singapore Party (PSP) member Leong Mun Wai claimed that he received feedback from residents, "that some teachers have already practised vaccination diferentiated safe management measures in schools".

When asked by Education Minister Chan Chun Sing to name the schools and teachers involved, Leong backpedalled and said that the feedback was through Whatsapp and that he would need to ask 'his' residents before making a clarification. He later disclosed that the feedback originated from a Telegram group called SG Concerned Parents.

After a terse exchange between Chan and Speaker of the House Tan Chuan Jin, Leong admitted that the chat group messages did not name any particular schools.



Indranee: When you make allegations against teachers and just cast it out there, you must be able to substantiate it

Leong's response drew a rebuke from Leader of the House Indranee Rajah who admonished Leong for making unsubstantiated claims.

Indranee rose and said: "When you make allegations against teachers and just cast it out there, you must be able to substantiate it. And that is why Minister Chan (had) asked, ‘Please provide me with the details of which school and which teacher so that the Ministry of Education can follow up'.”

She described Leong’s explanation on Tuesday as an attempt to “grandstand” or make broad speeches that have no bearing on the details requested by the Education Minister.

Leong Mun Wai another Raeesah Khan?

In August last year, Raeesah shared an anecdote in Parliament about details of a rape case she alleged was mishandled by the police. She later admitted to lying about the anecdote.

In 2014, Workers' Party MP Faisal Manap also made an unsubstantiated claim alleging that when he was a counsellor, he came across a couple who were having housing issues and advised to file for a divorce by the Housing and Development Board — so that the wife would be eligible to buy a house under the Singles Scheme and she could subsequently remarry her husband.

He later apologised for not verifying the authenticity of his anecdote.