SINGAPORE - A heated exchange in Parliament between Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam and Non-Constituency MP (NCMP) Leong Mun Wai ended with Mr Leong withdrawing an allegation over a bribery case linked to Keppel Offshore & Marine (Keppel O&M).

He also apologised to Speaker Tan Chuan-Jin.

The next steps are now being considered in response to Mr Leong breaching parliamentary procedures and rules, Mr Shanmugam said on Wednesday.

In a ministerial statement, Mr Shanmugam said that Mr Leong had acted in a “really unparliamentary and not acceptable” manner by putting out a Facebook post that contained improper and untrue statements following a parliamentary debate on Monday.

In the earlier debate, Mr Shanmugam had addressed a question filed by Mr Leong on why the Ministry of Home Affairs had named and disclosed that Mr Lee Hsien Yang and his wife, Mrs Lee Suet Fern, were being investigated, when police did not name the six former management staff of Keppel Offshore & Marine (Keppel O&M) who were being investigated for corruption.

Mr Shanmugam said on Wednesday that after he gave his response, Mr Leong had the chance to raise further questions in Parliament. Instead, the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) NCMP later put up a Facebook post that made serious allegations.

These included the claim that the Law Minister was trying to “muddy the waters” by bringing up the case of former domestic worker Parti Liyani, where police had disclosed that they were investigating her employer’s son Karl Liew for giving false evidence.

Mr Shanmugam said the Facebook post had cast aspersions on him as well as Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean.

Mr Leong’s statements that the Keppel O&M staff were “actually guilty” were also unsubstantiated, said Mr Shanmugam, who asked Mr Leong to delete his Facebook post, withdraw his statements and make an apology.

“One cannot, under the cloak of parliamentary privilege, make these sorts of statements about people,” he said to Speaker Tan. “And if he does not withdraw, then, sir, we will consider what else needs to be done.”

Mr Leong replied that his post had asked people to concentrate on the differences in the way the authorities had treated Mr Lee’s case and the Keppel O&M case.

“That is what I mean – I am not casting aspersions on the minister at all,” he said. “So that case (Parti Liyani) will actually cloud the judgment of other people, so let’s concentrate on the differences between the Lee Hsien Yang and the Keppel O&M cases.”

In response, Mr Shanmugam said he took it that Mr Leong was not withdrawing his statements.

“We will then proceed to consider what the next steps ought to be,” he said. “If at any time Member (Mr Leong) changes his mind before a decision is reached, he can let us know.”

Addressing the House, Mr Shanmugam said he was happy for there to be rigorous debate in Parliament, but that it was unacceptable to stay silent and then make untrue statements and allegations outside of its Chambers.

Mr Shanmugam said: “I’m not saying everyone has got to agree with what I said – hardly.

“Disagree, explain, debate... so that the public can have a better understanding... but don’t be a coward, keep quiet here, go out and say oh, it’s an attempt to muddy the waters – that’s casting aspersions on me.”

NCMP withdraws statement that Keppel O&M executives are guilty

In his Facebook post on Monday evening, Mr Leong said the PSP took issue with the authorities’ disclosure that Mr and Mrs Lee were being investigated, when the Keppel O&M executives who had been investigated were not named.

The post came after Mr Leong had asked in Parliament if this was a case of double standards as the Keppel O&M case “actually is a more serious case and of deep public interest” – a point he repeated in the House on Wednesday.

“I would think the Keppel O&M case is just as significant in terms of public interest, if not even more than the Lee Hsien Yang case,” he said. “So isn’t that a condition that the Keppel O&M individuals should be disclosed?”

And while Mr Shanmugam had gone “to great lengths” to show that there was no prejudice in Mr Lee’s case, public perception was otherwise and had to be dealt with by Parliament, said Mr Leong.

Mr Shanmugam said he had explained in some detail the differences between the two cases on Monday, though the crux of it was whether a person being investigated should be named when they had not been charged in court.

“Let’s be clear: Are we saying that if a case cannot be made, we ought to release the names simply because some of their names had been in the media... or in some other place?” he asked.

Mr Shanmugam noted that some of the Keppel O&M executives had been named in Brazilian court documents, but they were not defendants in that case, and that only one person subsequently pleaded guilty in the United States.

He then asked if Mr Leong was arguing for the principle that in all such cases, the names of individuals should be released as long as they had been mentioned by someone, and even after agencies concluded that there was no case.

Mr Leong initially declined to answer the question but, upon being pressed, said: “That’s not a principle I’m asking for.”

He also said he would withdraw his statement if Mr Shanmugam said the executives had not been found guilty overseas.

Mr Shanmugam replied: “For the record, one person pleaded guilty in the US, to the best of my knowledge. No one else has been found guilty.”

Not prejudging guilt by saying someone has absconded: Shanmugam

Mr Shanmugam also responded to a point in the Facebook post that his use of the word “absconded” imputed improper motives and a presumption of guilt to Mr and Mrs Lee.

The Law Minister noted that the couple had left Singapore and said they would not return to the island, after initially agreeing to aid police investigations.

He reiterated that police had liaised with Mr Lee, and they had agreed on a suitable date for the interview. But on the appointed day, the couple sent an e-mail to say they would not be attending the interview, and by then, they were already overseas.

“He himself admits that he is a fugitive... This is how Mr Lee describes himself, he says that he has run away to avoid the police,” said Mr Shanmugam, who cited two of Mr Lee’s social media posts.

Noting that Mr Leong had called Mr Lee a valuable member of the PSP on social media, Mr Shanmugam asked the NCMP if Mr Lee would return to Singapore and cooperate with the authorities.

Mr Leong’s reply was that Mr Lee remains a member of the PSP.

Mr Shanmugam said the facts as laid out showed that it was entirely in order to describe Mr Lee as having absconded. Doing so and saying that the couple had lied on oath – as found by a disciplinary tribunal and the Court of Three Judges in 2020 – did not prejudge their guilt, he added.

“When you have run away and you describe yourself as a fugitive, I don’t think there’s anything wrong in calling you an abscondee – particularly when you have said you will cooperate and then run away without cooperating,” he said.

“I didn’t say that they’ve been charged and found guilty. So let’s drop these pretences.”

‘Unparliamentary pattern of behaviour’

During their exchanges, Speaker Tan interjected to ask Mr Leong to clarify if he had withdrawn his allegations against the six Keppel O&M executives that they were “actually guilty”.

Mr Leong replied: “If minister didn’t ask me, I suggest you don’t ask me.”

This prompted Leader of the House Indranee Rajah to raise a point of order, whereupon she reminded Mr Leong and other MPs to conduct themselves in a parliamentary manner and be mindful of the tone they use to address fellow MPs.

Mr Leong later apologised to Mr Tan for his remark.

In closing his ministerial statement, Mr Shanmugam said a serious view had to be taken of Mr Leong’s conduct, as this was not the first time he had breached the rules of parliamentary procedure.

He cited three previous instances – on Feb 25, 2021; May 10, 2021; and March 8, 2022 – where Mr Leong had breached the rules, such as with misrepresentations and improper remarks for which he had to apologise in the House.

“This has unfortunately become a pattern with Mr Leong,” said Mr Shanmugam.