PM's libel hearing adjourned to Nov 30; Leong decides not to take the stand

The hearing for the defamation lawsuit brought by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong against blogger and financial adviser Leong Sze Hian has been adjourned until Nov 30, when the court will hear further oral submissions.

Justice Aedit Abdullah yesterday ended the scheduled four-day hearing at the close of the second day, after Mr Leong's lawyer Lim Tean told the court he had advised his client that it was unnecessary for him to give evidence.

Mr Lim noted that there were nine issues before the court, and said the burden of proof for eight of them lies with PM Lee, who is suing Mr Leong for sharing an article from Malaysian news site The Coverage. The article had falsely linked PM Lee to the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) corruption scandal in Malaysia.

These issues included whether or not the offending words in the post Mr Leong had shared on his Facebook page should be understood to mean that he was suggesting PM Lee was complicit in criminal activity in the 1MDB scandal and helped former Malaysian prime minister Najib Razak to launder money.

Said Mr Lim: "The determination of the meaning of an allegedly defamatory post is not a matter upon which any evidence can be adduced, meaning it's a matter for submissions."

He added that PM Lee also had to prove, among other things, whether Mr Leong's Facebook post constituted substantial publication and republication of these words in Singapore, whether Mr Leong was malicious and aggravated the libel through his subsequent actions, and whether the Prime Minister is entitled to the damages he is claiming.

These are also not matters in which Mr Leong's evidence is material and can be dealt with in submissions, Mr Lim said.

The issues also hinge on whether liability is established and whether damages are awarded, he added.

The one issue in which the burden of proof lies with Mr Leong is whether or not PM Lee's decision to sue him is an abuse of court process, said Mr Lim. This, too, will be dealt with in his submissions, he added.

PM Lee's lawyer, Senior Counsel Davinder Singh, said Mr Lim's reasons were not credible as nothing he had said was new.

"He and his client have always known that, but for the issue of abuse of process, the burden of proof on the issues lies with the plaintiff. Further, he and the defendant have always known what our case was on each issue."

Mr Singh noted that Mr Leong's affidavit had said he would present himself for cross-examination.

"Therefore it is my submission that the defendant has never had any intention of taking the stand to be cross-examined and what is today being said as the reasons for him not doing so are, with the greatest respect, contrived," he added.

Mr Singh also quoted Mr Leong's Facebook post on Dec 24, 2018, announcing his countersuit against PM Lee that the Court of Appeal dismissed in September last year.

"Whilst it may be my name on the case file, this action is bigger than my name, bigger than just the one ordinary Singaporean that I am. It is for every Singaporean today who has ever shared a post on Facebook, for every child who will share a post on Facebook and for the unborn generations to come," Mr Singh quoted Mr Leong as having said.

Mr Leong further wrote: "I am very sad and disappointed at our PM's actions, but I am equally humbled and heartened that the character of our Singaporean people will prevail, and together we can show the PM and his advisers that they cannot use defamation suits to silence ordinary Singaporeans."

Mr Singh said it is ironic that Mr Leong has chosen to silence himself by not taking the witness stand.

"We have a situation where the plaintiff has turned up in court and gone into the stand, unafraid of any questions and ready to defend his position. And yet the person who alleges that he has abused the process of the court has turned tail and fled," he added.

"This is deeply disappointing. (Mr Leong) has not just let himself down, he has let his supporters and Singaporeans down because, after claiming he would stand up, he has done the very opposite and avoided the fight."

Replying, Mr Lim said: "Your Honour, I cannot help but think that what my learned friend has just said was in the nature of a political speech designed for publication in the mainstream media tomorrow to humiliate my client." He also said PM Lee's case is "so frivolous and vexatious as to be laughable and should be laughed out of court".