Singapore dissident went beyond mere insult

YOUR editorial Singapore justice (New York Times, June 5) and William Safire's column The misrule of law (NY Times, June 1) attacked libel suits brought by People's Action Party leaders against Tang Liang Hong.

Mr Tang did not just call Singapore's leaders "liars." He accused the 11 plaintiffs of criminal defamation, conspiracy, corruption, deceit and dishonorable conduct.

An experienced lawyer, Mr. Tang libeled them repeatedly, often to international audiences. Thirteen judgments were entered against him for defamation.

Mr Safire was mistaken that the PAP's leaders labeled Mr. Tang an "anti-English-education, anti-Christian Chinese chauvinist" only after he criticized property purchases by Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew and his son. In 1992, four PAP members of parliament who had known Mr Tang for years opposed his appointment as Nominated Member of Parliament on grounds that he was a Chinese chauvinist. This was long before he criticized the Lee's property purchases in June 1996 or contested the general election in December 1996.

Libel cases have not provided "a tidy source of outside income" to PAP leaders; they have routinely donated the damages to charity. Mr. Safire is candid in admitting that he is bothered by Singapore's practice not out of concern for Singaporeans but because he fears "the Singapore virus ... could infect the global economy with its train of fascism."

Singapore does not present itself as a model for any other country. What Singapore should do is for Singaporeans to decide.