|
The
Lees' objections to Francis Seow's affidavit
Singapore
Democrats
25 Feb 08
Affidavit
of Mr Francis Seow
I,
Francis T Seow, do hereby make oath and say as follows:
1.
I am a witness for the defendants in this suit.
2.
I was the former Solicitor-General of Singapore and the former
President of the
Law Society of Singapore.
3.
As the former Solicitor-General, I have some knowledge of how the
Government works under the Lee Kuan Yew (LKY). From my
interactions with him, there is no doubt that LKY is bent on the
total control of the Singaporean society.
4.
The use of the Internal Security Act (ISA) to quarantine and
rehabilitate his political opponents, the wholesale subjugation
of the print and broadcast media, the prohibition of public
protests, and ironically the use of defamation laws have all had
one effect: To silence opposing views in Singapore.
5.
I was one of his victims. I was arrested and detained without
trial under the ISA for opposing LKY's ways and his autocratic
policies. My experience under detention is recounted in my book
To Catch A Tartar: A Dissident in Lee Kuan Yew's Prison
published by the prestigious Yale University Southeast Asia
Studies. Pertinently, no one, not even the ever-litigious Lee
Kuan Yew, has challenged the accuracy of what I had related in my
book.
6.
During my imprisonment I was told during my interrogators that
they were going to neutralize me and that I should give up my
idea of going into politics:
"So, you think, you can
take on and bully the second-generation leaders? Well, our job is
to make sure that you do not succeed. We are here to neutralize
you. You know, to neutralize you! For your infomatioon, Lee Kuan
Yew is running for another term. And you will be locked up here
for at least two years, if not more. So, where will you be? You
can give up all your ideas of going into politics." (Francis
T Seow, To Catch A Tartar: A Dissident in Lee Kuan Yew's Prison
published, Yale University Southeast Asia Studies, 1994).
7.
If the State can treat the country's former solicitor-general in
such a contemptible manner, how much more can it intimidate the
ordinary citizen – such is the persecution of dissenters
and opponents of the PAP Government?
8. When his political
opponents and dissidents are persecuted few would dare join the
ranks of the opposition, much less stand for elections. Given
such an arrangement it is no wonder that the PAP is repeatedly
returned to power.
9.
When such an undemocratic practice is in place, how does the
plaintiff claim that he is the duly elected leader of Singapore?
And yet, Lee Hsien Loong (LHL) pretends that he operates in a
democracy and claims that his position in the Government is a
mandate given by Singaporeans. He has inherited the system put in
place by his father.
10. The effulgence with which the
media speaks of the plaintiff is not without contrivance.
Journalists and editors who have been critical of LKY and the
system he devised have been detained without trial, and
newspapers that have demonstrated an independent streak have been
closed.
11.
Legislation has been passed to prohibit news organizations
without Government control from being established. The Singapore
Press Holdings which publishers all of Singapore's newspapers is
chaired by Tony Tan, LKY's protégé and former
deputy prime minister. Dr Tan's predecessor is Lim Kim San, a
former cabinet minister and loyal friend of LKY.
12. With
the media in the hands of LKY and those close to him, it is not
possible for a balanced view of LHL to emerge.
13. There
is no getting away from the fact that the political system that
the PAP has devised in Singapore is not a democratic one. In fact
the PAP Government thrives on fear. LKY himself boasted that: "If
nobody is afraid of me, I'm meaningless."
(Lee Kuan Yew, The
Singapore Story: The Man and His Ideas, 1998).
14.
Only those operating within the PAP system will agree that the
system is not designed to inflate the plaintiff's reputation and
to curtail opposing views.
Objections
to para 3 to 14: Inadmissible/Irrelevant/Hearsay/Scandalous/Abuse
of Process/Opinion.
15.
Given such a climate of fear and intimidation, there can be only
be praise of the plaintiff. His critics, especially the prominent
ones, have all been silenced. Given such a scenario, LHL's
reputation is based on his own opinion and those of his minions.
This is no way to assess a plaintiff's reputation especially in a
court of law.
16. To obtain a reliable and valid
assessment, a broader spectrum of views and opinions must be
sought especially from persons/groups who are not within the
control of the Singapore Government.
Objections
to para 15 to 16:
Inadmissible/Irrelevant/Hearsay/Scandalous/Abuse of
Process/Opinion/Submissions.
|
