Singapore says no basis to allegations of persecution against Lee Hsien Yang, in response to his UK asylum status

SINGAPORE: Mr Lee Hsien Yang said on Tuesday (Oct 22) that he is now a political refugee in the United Kingdom after seeking asylum protection in 2022.
Citing the Singapore government’s “attacks” against him, Mr Lee, the younger brother of former prime minister Lee Hsien Loong, said he sought asylum protection “as a last resort”.
“I remain a Singapore citizen and hope that some day it will become safe to return home,” he said in a Facebook post.
In response to media queries from The Guardian about Mr Lee’s asylum status, the Singapore government said there is “no basis” to allegations of “a campaign of persecution” against him as well as other claims about political repression in the country.
“Singapore’s judiciary is impartial and makes decisions independently. This is why Singaporeans have a high level of trust in the judiciary,” the government added.
It noted that there are no legal restraints on Mr Lee and his wife Mrs Lee Suet Fern returning to Singapore.
“They are and have always been free to return to Singapore,” it added.
Mr Lee and his wife have been out of Singapore since 2022 after deciding not to attend a scheduled police interview over potential offences of giving false evidence in judicial proceedings regarding the will of his father Lee Kuan Yew, who is Singapore’s founding prime minister.
The will concerned matters on what to do with the family home at 38 Oxley Road – an issue that came into the public spotlight again this month after the death of the Lees’ sister, Dr Lee Wei Ling, who had been living at the property.
Days after her death, Mr Lee Hsien Yang said he would apply to demolish the family home in accordance with his parents’ wishes.
He and the late Dr Lee had alleged that they felt threatened in trying to fulfil their late father’s wish to demolish the house. They also accused Mr Lee Hsien Loong of abusing his influence in government to drive his personal agenda.
The government has stated on several occasions that Mr Lee Hsien Loong had recused himself on all matters relating to 38 Oxley Road.
“He is not involved when the Cabinet discusses these matters. Nor is he consulted by any agency of the government in any decision pertaining to members of his family,” the Singapore government said on Tuesday in its response to The Guardian’s query.
“The government is taking into account Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s views on 38 Oxley Road. While he preferred demolition, he was also willing to consider other options such as refurbishing and redesigning the interior.”
In The Guardian’s email query, which was made public by the Singapore government on Tuesday, the British daily said it was considering reporting that Mr Lee Hsien Yang and his family have been “the victim of a campaign of persecution by the Singaporean government” because of his “outspoken criticism of the PAP (People’s Action Party) and of Lee Hsien Loong”.
The Guardian cited the “baseless criminal prosecution” of Mr Lee and his eldest son Li Shengwu, who was found guilty of contempt of court in 2020.
It also cited the “baseless professional disciplinary proceedings” against Mrs Lee Suet Fern regarding her conduct as a lawyer. In 2020, Mrs Lee was suspended from practice by the Court of Three Judges for 15 months after she was found guilty of misconduct over the handling of Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s last will.
In its response to The Guardian, the Singapore government said the Court of Three Judges, led by the Chief Justice, found that the couple had cut off the late Mr Lee’s own long-time lawyer in preparing the last will. They had procured the execution of the last will with “unseemly haste (that) can only be described as improper and unacceptable”, the judgment read.
The judges also found that Mrs Lee had “acted with complete disregard for the interests” of Mr Lee Kuan Yew, and had “blindly followed the directions of her husband, a significant beneficiary under the very will whose execution she helped to rush through”.
In view of these findings, the police started investigations against the couple for potential offences of giving false evidence in judicial proceedings. Although they initially said they agreed to be interviewed, they did not show up and left the country.
According to information published on the UK government’s website, to stay in the UK as a refugee, applicants must be unable to live safely in any part of their own country because they fear persecution there.
This persecution must be because of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or anything else that puts individuals at risk due to the social, cultural, religious or political situation in their country.
The Guardian’s email query also referenced allegations by human rights groups that the Singapore government uses a “pliant legal system to intimidate their critics”, that Singapore allegedly plays a “major role in facilitating transnational corruption and money laundering”, and that the benefits of the country’s economic growth have been “concentrated in the hands of the PAP leaders and their allies”.
“There is no basis to the … allegations you have conveyed,” the Singapore government said in response.
It noted that Singapore was ranked fifth in the 2023 Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index, and third in the 2023 World Justice Project Index for the absence of corruption in its legal and law enforcement systems. The UK was ranked 20th and 11th respectively in the two indices.
“In Singapore, no one is above the law. Anyone, including the offspring of the founding prime minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, can be investigated and brought before the courts,” it continued.
On money laundering, the government said Singapore has “a robust system” to deter and tackle illicit financial flows, which is consistent with international standards set by the Financial Action Task Force. Singapore ranked fourth in the Global Financial Centres Index 2024, after New York, London and Hong Kong. 
“The assertion that the benefits of Singapore’s economic growth are concentrated in the hands of PAP leaders and their allies is far from the lived experience of Singaporeans,” the government added.
It noted, among other things, that nine in 10 patients pay less than S$500 out of pocket for a subsidised public hospital stay and 90 per cent of public education costs are subsidised.
“We have provided you with the citations for every point in our response. The legal findings are amply supported by well-documented and public findings of an independent judiciary,” the government said in its reply to The Guardian.
Read the Singapore government’s response in full: