J B Jeyaretnam was the target of a vicious PAP smear campaign in 1997, with DPMs Lee Hsien Loong and Tony Tan playing key roles
By Chong Wee Kiat
Contributor
The year was 1997. Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong, having been dealt a black eye by the voters at his first general election six years ago, was eager to prevent any further losses of seats. Things were looking up for him, as the main opposition party – the Singapore Democratic Party – had apparently imploded, with its founder and icon Chiam See Tong having been ousted from the party following a series of internal disagreements. The new party leader, Dr Chee Soon Juan, had done himself no favours with an ill-conceived hunger strike to protest his sacking from the National University of Singapore.
However, the Workers’ Party apparently had other ideas. Led by the rambunctious and indefatigable J B Jeyaretnam – who became the first man to defeat the PAP since Singapore’s independence at the Anson by-election of 1981 – the WP was gunning for a Group Representation Constituency. Mr Jeyaretnam’s team for Cheng San GRC included prominent Chinese grassroots leader and lawyer Tang Liang Hong. They were up against the incumbent PAP team, led by Education Minister Lee Yock Suan, and a close contest was expected. After all, this election would mark Mr Jeyaretnam’s return to politics after a decade-long absence – twice elected as MP for Anson, he was expelled from Parliament in 1986 following a conviction which he claimed was politically motivated.
Mr Goh and his cadre of PAP leaders – including Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew, whose disdain for Mr Jeyaretnam was by now well-known – were dreading the thought of having five additional MPs from the WP. A decision was made in Cabinet to keep the WP candidates out of Parliament.
They pored through Mr Tang’s past speeches and singled out one that he had made way back in 1994 at a National Day celebration dinner. In the speech, Mr Tang said that he would like to see more members from the “silent majority of Chinese-educated” Singaporean stepping forward and playing a more active role in society. The then-Minister for the Environment, Teo Chee Hean, was present at the event – and he later informed his Cabinet colleagues that Mr Tang had “worked people up” over issues of language and religion, and that it was his duty to “expose” such “dangerous” people.
One by one, senior PAP leaders came out to lambast Mr Tang, claiming that he was an anti-Christian, anti-English educated Chinese chauvinist during the heat of a hotly-contested election campaign. The mainstream media was used to cast repeated attacks on Mr Tang’s character, with Senior Minister Lee leading the chorus by saying that saying that “if he’s (Tang’s) against the English-educated, he must be against the Malay-educated even more. If he is against Christianity, he must be against Islam even more because Islam represents even a deeper exclusiveness. So this approach must be destructive.”
Mr Tang responded by claiming that the remarks from the PAP leaders were lies. Immediately, he was sued for defamation by some 13 PAP MPs. Amongst them was the then Deputy Prime Minister, Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam.
Together with Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, Dr Tan and Prime Minister Goh led the charge in Cheng San, making it a “personal” battleground and claiming that a vote for the WP team was a vote against them. Of course, none of them were actually candidates in that particular constituency; they all all enjoyed walkovers in their respective wards.
Tang Liang Hong was bankrupted and had his property seized following the 1997 election. He entered into self-imposed exile in Australia.
Angered by their tactics of heavy bombardment, Mr Tang lodged a police report, accusing the PAP leaders of criminal defamation.
Mr Jeyaretnam was handed a copy of the report during an election rally midway through his speech, and he announced to the 80,000 strong crowd that he had in his hands a police report made by Tang against “you know, Mr Goh Chok Tong and his people”.
Those fateful words would later become the basis for a flurry of lawsuits by the same PAP leaders against Mr Jeyaretnam, alleging that he had, by conveying the news to the crowd, implied via innuendo that the PAP MPs were all guilty of criminal acts and were therefore unfit for office. Having already sued Mr Tang for a total of $8,075,000, the PAP leaders were still baying for Mr Jeyaretnam’s blood, even though he had done nothing more than convey a simple fact to the audience.
The WP lost the election by 53,553 votes to 44,132.
******
A Mareva Injuction was soon granted against Mr Tang, freezing all of his assets including his property in Bukit Timah and all his bank accounts – as well as those of his wife. Fearing the worst, he left into self-imposed exile in Australia. He has not returned to Singapore since.
Mr Jeyaretnam was returned to Parliament as a Non-Constituency MP. He was made a bankrupt in 2001 after being unable to pay the more than $600,000 in libel damages awarded to the PAP leaders. As a result, he lost his seat in Parliament. To make a living, the former judge and senior lawyer was reduced to hawking his self-published books on the streets. He was discharged from his bankruptcy in 2008 and founded the Reform Party soon after, but died before he could make a final push to win back his Parliamentary seat.
******
What is the point of bringing up all this now?
The two Deputy Prime Ministers who were so instrumental to the battle for Cheng San and the subsequent moves to demolish Mr Tang and Mr Jeyaretnam are back in the public eye.
Mr Lee Hsien Loong is now the Prime Minister.
Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam is the odds-on favourite to be elected the next President of Singapore.
The front page of The New Paper on the eve of Polling Day (1997)
Both men have re-invented themselves as politicians with a “softer” touch. Prime Minister Lee made an unprecedented apology for the failings of his administration during the general election campaign in May this year. He urged civil servants and MPs to remember that they were “servants, not masters” of the people. He said that the PAP needed to transform itself and become a more compassionate party, distancing himself from the hardline approach used under his father and then Mr Goh.
However, that still could not prevent the WP from fulfilling Mr Jeyaretnam’s unfinished dream of winning a GRC. The party won six seats in the election, deposing two cabinet ministers in the process. In addition, they won another two NCMP seats, giving them their strongest Parliamentary presence in history.
As for Dr Tan, he adopted a lower profile following the events of 1997, going on to serve another ten years as Deputy Prime Minister before retiring from politics in 2006.
He went on to become Chairman of the government-owned Singapore Press Holdings – a position reserved for PAP stalwarts and loyalists – as well as Deputy Chairman and Executive Director of the Government Investment Corporation (GIC), serving under Lee Kuan Yew.
Yesterday, he resigned from these two positions and re-emerged to announce his candidacy for the office of President – the highest office in the country. He is currently regarded as a gentlemanly, dignified politician, and the outgoing President has given a ringing endorsement of his “qualities to lead the country”.
Lee Hsien Loong and Tony Tan were key players in what was possibly the PAP’s darkest hour. Cheng San, and the events that followed it, represented a highly-calibrated operation to smear, discredit and demolish the PAP’s most vocal dissidents and to intimidate the voters into rejecting an alternative voice.
Dr Tony Tan: odds-on favourite to become President
Not long after, both Mr Lee and Dr Tan were plaintiffs in an expertly-cheoreographed series of lawsuits designed to stifle and bankrupt their two antagonists. The case was roundly criticised by international lawyers and jurists as an abuse of the legal process, and not long after, Queen’s Counsel were barred from appearing in Singapore courts.
With Mr Lee and Dr Tan holding the two highest offices in the land, all power and authority – both legal and moral – will be vested in their hands. Though it may appear as though the leadership of Singapore has gone through a “sea change” following the watershed 2011 general election, in reality, little will have changed if Dr Tan is elected.
What about the possibility that Dr Tan may have mellowed and softened his stance? At yesterday’s press conference to announce his candidacy, he appeared to have no regrets at all about the lawsuits which he initiated, justifying them on the basis that “everyone should have the right to clear his name” after being slandered.
Though it is not likely that Dr Tan – or any other senior political figure – would want to attempt similar actions in today’s political climate, it is notable that he was a key figure behind PAP smear campaigns in the past.
Whether or not this damages his moral authority is up to the voters to decide, but seeing as the mainstream media is likely to whitewash the truth, it is important that those who are too young to remember the events of 1997 are made aware of his past track record – especially since it is a track record that he continues to stand by, up until today.
–
The author is a contributor who enjoys discussing politics and history with his friends at the kopitiam and office canteen. He was a resident of Cheng San GRC during the 1997 General Election and describes himself as a “hardcore” Workers’ Party supporter. He moved to Hougang in 2003.
GE 2011 has obviously created a hairline crack on the PAP fortress. This threatens to reveal the secrets to what they have done to our CPF monies and our reserves. The president has to be someone who is able to safeguard our reserves…….. from the scrutiny of the daft citizens. GY is too ethical a man to do this. Therefore, TT has to come out of retirement. LKY, GCT and WKS will be too obvious.
How bad can it get. What choice do we have? If they can’t get us through the general elections they will fix us with the Presidentail Elections. Replacing one ISD man with another. Well fellow Singaporeans we are all in it to be plastered by a very calculating team. On one hand the man is not publically endorsed by the PAP on the other hand he is a stalward from the the heydays of lawsuits and bankcrupcies. Think what is happening behind the scenes, we are only getting their propaganda who knows what their intentions are. No one other than they themselves. The non-endorsement is a strategic move on the part of the PAP as they suddenly seem to fear that they just might not get their way on this election as well.
What a deception? I am actually impressed by the quality of the deception. The PAP has dug deep to get Tony out of the closet but they are very sure of his loyalty. It might be hard to beleive but I can see no difference between his contribution and that of Mr S R Nathan as they have come out of the same mill.
Singapore has a long way to go before it has more than the trappings of democracy and fairness, but it surely is on the path. Do not expect the leopards to change overnight. Change of this sort takes a generation not one or two election terms. MM Lee has conditioned the bulk of Singaporeans to be passive, fearful and made enough examples by distructive use of the legal system to stifle the growth of any credible oppostion for a very long time. This will take some time to unravel. If and when it happens we will all have a mature and upright nation that we can all be very proud of. It is values that make a great people not material wealth.
Moving from third world to first world in the economic sense was a great achievement, now for the moral leap forward which will take some doing and the economics might even get in the way.
DO NOT WASTE TIME ON THIS STUPID COPY-CAT WEB SITE WITH THESE
FRUSTRATING CHAPS.
NANI – ALL THESE WP’S OR OPPOSITIONS, LIKE MANY COUNTRIES ARE
THE 30 TO 40%, WHO ALWAYS COMPLAIN, GOOD OR BAD. WHAT DO YOU
EXPECT FROM FAILURES, JEALOUS AND FRUSTRATING CHAPS?
Thanks. Good to see that there are some sensible people on the internet.
Unfortunately, the internet has been radicalised. Many netizens blindly hate the PAP. Some have no good reason. They just do it because it’s cool to be anti-PAP. Fortunately, the sentiments on the internet are different from the sentiments on the ground. 60% of Singapore still believes in constructive, enlightened government. 60% of Singapore still wants prosperity and stability. As for the other 40%, I am not really sure what they want. Perhaps they would like political gridlock, demonstrations, strikes, fights in Parliament, a President who deliberately tries to block government policies, and MPs who advance their own political agenda rather than the national interest.
["Many netizens blindly hate the PAP. Some have no good reason. They just do it because it’s cool to be anti-PAP."]
…and you blindly follow the PAP despite all the drawbacks of their policies because its cool to be part of the PAP brigade.
As I have said before, I do not agree 100% with every single PAP policy. However, as a whole, I think that the PAP has done a good job, and I would much rather have the PAP in power than any of the venal, sly, insidious opposition parties who think nothing of destroying Singapore just to further their own political ambitions. Their ill-conceived policies are highly destructive and dangerous. I suspect that they know this, yet they continue to champion these policies (such as minimum wage, welfare, unemployment benefits, banning FTs, raiding the reserves to lower the costs of HDB flats, abolishing GRCs). Why are they doing this? It’s simple. They just want to win votes by pandering to the emotional and illogical masses.
I do not agree 100% with the PAP, so I hardly qualify as being “blind”. However, the level of PAP bashing on the internet has reached epic proportions and it is quite clear to me that many people have just conveniently decided to blame the PAP for everything that is wrong in their lives. PAP has become an easy scape goat. The best example would be what happened in Aljunied. Please tell me logically and rationally what George Yeo did wrong and what mistakes he made to deserve getting voted out. He did nothing wrong, he was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. People got riled up and emotional and an innocent, good man had to pay the price.
Regardless, you blindly take a ride on the PAP band wagon despite all the drawbacks of their policies because its cool for you to do so.
PAP has always said that when you vote, you vote for the party, not the individual. Ergo, the GRC. The people of Aljunied has rejected the PAP due to it being disconnected from the citizens. They reject the PAP for its elitist policies, not in the interest of the citizens, but in their own elite circle interest. That’s why they tie their pay to GDP and salaries of top earners but not the median income of Singaporeans. The residents of Aljunied reject the self-serving policies of the PAP. But you are one of the elites, aren’t you?
What happened in 1997 and DR. Tony Tan announcing his intention to run for president smells the work of an old man behind the scenes.
PAP Has absolute power(100%) in SG. They are so KIASU that they now want to hold 50% of the power and render any other Govt who might accidentally win the mandate to be ineffective, even if 99% of Singaporeans voted against them.
Maybe give them enough time to run away with all the money and leave Singapore to sink.
All this thanks to the blind and daft 60% of Singaporean.
The 60% is “blind and daft”? That is a very arrogant statement. Just because they want stability and prosperity, they are blind and daft? Are you saying that the majority of your countrymen and women are blind and daft?
On the other hand, I would argue that 60% of Singaporeans are wise, logical, rational and sensible people. It is the 40% who have impaired judgment, thanks to their blind hatred of the PAP. They have allowed emotional factors to cloud their own logic. On the whole, PAP has done a very good job. Kindly tell me which other government in the world has managed to bring a third world country to the forefront of the world economy?
How about a large portion of the 60% being a fearful lot. Fearful of losing the value of their HDB flats, fearing that they would be detained without trial if they voted logically, fearful of losing their jobs because their votes are supposedly ‘tracked’.
South Korea. Hong Kong. Taiwan.
And not forgetting the biggest miracle of all, Japan.
History is not done with its judgement of the Singapore story. Man does not live by economics alone. Neither can the economic achievement of a nation in one generation be regarded as a success. The fear mongering, the monopoly of ideas, the non-tolerance of alternatives, the complete destruction of political and ideological competition, albeit in the midst of economic success brought about by the tireless sacrifice of a daft, compliant and scared population is just now beginning to unravel and to exact its toll. History is in the making.
Shame on you Tony, you and your PAP’s colleagues evil deed to stay in power.
You sow what you reap into your next generation
This article is completely biased. No wonder, as the author is a self-confessed “die-hard” WP supporter. Can we expect such a person to provide a balanced perspective? The entire article seems to be demonizing Dr Tony Tan and lamenting the grave personal consequences suffered by Tang and JBJ. However, precisely what did Dr Tony Tan do wrong? All he did was to take out a lawsuit to clear his name against scandalous allegations made against him. So, are we to believe that he should just have ignored the slander and kept quiet? It was the court that awarded the damages, not Dr Tan. Also, it’s not Dr Tan’s fault that they could not pay. He did not make them bankrupt. Rather, they were made bankrupt because they could not pay the amount which the court ordered them to pay.
If I set fire to your house and you report me to the police, and subsequently the court decides to put me in jail for 20 years and give me 10 strokes of the cane, are you at fault for my “sorry” predictament? Can I say, oh, please pity me, I have a wife and 4 kids to feed and now I can’t see them for 20 years because I was cruelly sentenced to jail? If I want to lament the consequences, then I shouldn’t have committed the act in the first place. So why the double standards for Tang and Jeyaretnam who merely received their just punishment for their wrongdoing?
Huh, what wrongdoing? What’s with all this talk of setting fires and what not? You really do take the greatest pains to fit in a contrarian argument don’t you?
Its the same old story. When international jurists condemned the abuse of the legal process for political gain, consequently Queen’s Counsel were barred from appearing in Singapore courts.
Agreed, and when the Privy council reversed the local court’s judgement in favour of JBJ, all appeals to the PC were abolished. That’s how the MIWs play the game.
Only Nani is perpetually here to defend his masters even if the injustices are as plain as white l
I have said it before, and I will say it again.
Nani…Nani… you don’t seem to understand justice, fairness, righteousness and mercy. All you see is the ‘perfection’ in Singapore’s ‘system’.
Who cares what the Privy Council and international bar association have got to say? Do they understand Singapore law? Singapore law is different from UK law. I thought we were not a British colony anymore. Or do we have a few closet colonialists lurking around here? The fact is, under Singapore law, Tang and JBJ were liable to pay damages. This was judged by an independent court, not by the PAP. Is it right to say that Dr Tony Tan was wrong because he tried to vindicate his reputation after being defamed? That is the same as saying that if you steal my wallet, and you end up in jail as a result, I should be blamed for being heartless and reporting you to the police. You do something, you have to face the consequences. Please tell me what Dr Tony Tan did wrong?
You do realise that this sort of reasoning can justify just about anything right?
One constant here is there’s always a straw man: first burning a house, now stealing wallets…
Hey Nani, guess what….. just substitute this article with The Straits Times, Today, TNP, BH, Zhao Bao, MediaCorp (take your pick) and your argument about being biased stands as strong as ever.
Since the author mentioned the 1997 Cheng San elections, we should take a look at this statement by Chan Sek Keong, reproduced in TR. The issue is whether election laws are being broken by the PAP ministers waiting in the polling stations.
http://www.temasekreview.com/2009/10/28/ag-chan-sek-keongs-letter-to-law-minister-jayakumar-on-the-presence-of-unauthorised-persons-inside-polling-stations-in-1997/
“… a person inside a polling station cannot be said to be within a radius of 200 metres of a polling station.”
Don’t vote him and Dr.Tan. Vote only for independent candidate. Don’t want to repent for the next 5 yrs.
Where is the INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE?? Where is he?? Can you mention some names?? Can you persuade him to step forward for EP election???
Many Singaporeans are not aware of what happened to some politicians in the 60′s. To have a better understanding, go to youtube and search the following name: said zahari
Dr Tony Tan may have the capabilities of becoming SG President. But i hope he will not be elected, because he is “too PAP”. SG President must be neutral, fair and brave. No point having a yes-man President or a President who is pro-PAP (or any political party for that matter).
That was the event that change my whole perception of the ruling party and the media. I was 18 years old then… and among all the fellow 18 years old that I know, no one give a hoot about this disgraceful event at all.
14 years on… I have seen young people still in their school uniforms attending rallies. Time has changed indeed… a little bit belated… but it is coming… finally.
Looks like nathan is the safest choice after all! Quiet & obedience.
Knowing too much of how the PAP government runs their businesses may not be the best credentials to ‘stop or prevent’ the PAP from doing whatever & however they want with the monies of the country.
Knowing how things worked within these businesses may in fact be a liability.
Empathy may be a weakness in favour of the government & against the interests of the people. ‘I know how it is, so I understand’ may leads to situations where the interests of the country are compromised.
The people of singapore know what we want. We hold the second key, not the EP.
Quiet and obedient is just as good or even better at doing NOTHING. It’s probably ok if you are not paid the highest, absurd and obscene political salary of this elected office. The ultimate power is with the Citizenry. We must do the right voting in unison to remedy this acute wayang political situation. Vote for the candidate that is least politically beholden to the incumbents that has to date illustrated his independence of mind of fairness, justice and equality and has uttered that half of such salary is to be donated to charity. In short, we must do another DE JA VUE like the “Aljunied” tsunami political swing. MAJULLAH SINGAPURA.
Dr Tony Tan’s been described elsewhere as a smiling tiger. It’s easy to see why…
The general Singapore electorate will never realise their folly despite the situation we are now facing. There must be political reform if we are ever to see the light of day of a level playing field.
The politcal swing for immediate reform has already started with the Political Salaries Review Committee. Accompanying such incredible corrective action is the judicious retirement of major figures in the last Cabinet. Is this cosmetic??? We will monitior assidously. Walk the talk or walk the walk in the next GE 2016.
Pingback: Daily SG: 24 Jun 2011 « The Singapore Daily
Absolutely disgusting conduct, and worst of all both LHL and Tony Tan are still trying to appear to be nice, benevolent guys. You know the saying, leopards never change their spots. If they were capable of such acts in 1997 as DPMs, imagine how they will combine their powers to “fix” anyone who opposes them as a “dream team” of President and Prime Minister.