Singapore Democratic Party secretary general Chee Soon Juan was not in court for a hearing called to set the amount of damages for remarks he made during the campaign for the November 2001 general election.

Lawyers advising Chee, who was found guilty of defamation in 2002 and lost an appeal, have estimated he would likely have to pay at least US$500,000 in damages, a figure which Goh and Lee's lawyer agreed with.

"We are saying we are entitled to substantial damages and that figure is about right," Davinder Singh, representing both former leaders, told reporters after an expected three-day court hearing ended two days ahead of schedule.

The two former prime ministers made a brief appearance at the High Court to testify that their affidavits were accurate.

Chee, a US-trained psychologist who has been a thorn in the side of the ruling People's Action Party, was last known to be in the United States where he was on a fellowship from the privately-run National Endowment for Democracy.

His request for a postponement of the hearing was rejected.

"The money is not important," Lee, 80, told reporters after his appearance.

"What's important is that it tells everybody and not just him that we play by the rules. That is important," said Lee, now an adviser in the cabinet led by his son Lee Hsien Loong, who was sworn in as prime minister last month.

Goh is now serving as senior minister, the elder Lee's previous title.

Singapore leaders have been criticised for using using defamation suits to silence critics. One former opposition politician was bankrupted, another is in voluntary exile and another was declared bankrupt in his absence.

The leaders maintain that it is important to protect their reputations.

Chee taunted then-prime minister Goh during a street campaign and asked him to account for a US$10 billion loan offered by the government to Indonesian president Suharto during the Asian financial crisis in 1997-98.

Goh and Lee have pointed out that the loan was never disbursed and claimed that Lee's statement implied they were dishonest.

Foreign publications have also been sued or threatened with legal action.

Last week the London-based Economist newspaper apologised "unreservedly" to Lee and his son for an article implying corruption and nepotism in the family.

The publication also agreed to pay an unspecified sum in damages.


                                                      Home