Leong Mun Wai

SINGAPORE – For more than an hour on Wednesday (March 22), Parliament witnessed a testy debate over a Facebook post by Non-Constituency Member of Parliament ...

I apologise to you for what I said just now regarding (that) “Minister didn't ask the question, please don't ask the question”. And so I ask that he delete his post, accept that he has misrepresented the position and he should apologise. Mr Tan: If I may, Mr Leong, did you withdraw your allegation on the six members? Mr Shanmugam: I take it that the member does not wish to say whether Mr Lee Hsien Yang will come back and cooperate with the authorities. Mr Leong: Yes, Mr Lee Hsien Yang is a member of the PSP. The member knows Mr Lee Hsien Yang well, he has said on social media that Mr Lee is a valuable member of his party. If the member thought that that was not relevant, I'm happy for a debate. And I repeat, both in this House and I'm prepared to repeat it outside: Mr Lee Hsien Yang has absconded, on the facts. When you bring in a new case, in a way, you are clouding the thinking of people. So I would like to ask Mr Leong, is Mr Leong saying in these chambers that Mr Lee Hsien Yang will come back and cooperate with the authorities? And you don't have the right to say that he's absconded. To assist Mr Leong in better understanding the dictionary meaning of “fugitive”, I'll flash it on the screen and I'll just read two.

Minister for Law and Home Affairs K Shanmugam delivered a ministerial statement in response to NCMP Leong Mun Wai's Facebook post. MCI.

"The essence of his statement is that I used an example which is irrelevant — that it was used to confuse Parliament. Leong had posed a question to Minister for Law and Home Affairs K. In a Facebook post on Wednesday, Shanmugam pointed out that Leong has a pattern of unparliamentary behaviour, where "he has apologised twice before for his behaviour, and he had to apologise again today". In response, Leong maintained that issue at hand was "fairness and equality before the law", and reiterated that the criminal procedure had to be followed since Lee had "absconded". He said that Leong had abused his Parliamentary privileges by not raising a point when he was given the opportunity to do so in the House, but instead went on Facebook to make "improper and untrue" statements. [Facebook post that very night](https://www.facebook.com/leongmwofficial/posts/pfbid02QgSKZA9fnQmH6znPkdVcEbmZi35v88cvfzsbEc62t6BU5uVrdimK5hzZXG7Uhwbol), Leong alleged that Shanmugam's mention of the Parti Liyani case in his answer was an attempt to "muddy the waters", and urged members of the public to "focus on the difference between the Lee Hsien Yang and the Keppel Offshore & Marine cases".

Minister K Shanmugam said that a Facebook post by Mr Leong Mun Wai contained misrepresentations and cast aspersions on himself and SM Teo.

The minister also urged the NCMP to accept that he had made misrepresentations and apologise. In his response, the minister noted that the pair had “essentially absconded from Singapore”. Ms Indranee then asked him to be mindful of it. He referenced another case involving Keppel Offshore & Marine, in which the parties under investigation remained anonymous. However, he failed to do so. On Wednesday (22 Mar), Mr Shanmugam issued a ministerial statement in response to a Facebook post Mr Leong shared on his page on Monday (20 Mar).

Mr Shanmugam had made the comments in response to a parliamentary question filed by Mr Leong and Workers' Party MP Mr Leon Perera on why the couple was named ...

The debate ended with Mr Shanmugam accusing Mr Leong of casting aspersions on him and stating that the issue might be considered further. Ms Indranee Rajah, the Leader of the House, had stepped in before that to warn Members of Parliament to conduct themselves in a parliamentary manner. Mr Leong wrote in his Facebook post that “bringing up the Parti Liyani case is just another attempt to muddy the waters. I have my way of answering,” said Mr Leong. This is a legislative chamber, this is not a legal chamber. He said that he was not going to answer Mr Shanmugam like he was in court and that he had his own way of answering.

The post titled "MR LEE HSIEN YANG ABSCONDED" was uploaded by the Non-Constituency Member of Parliament (NCMP) at around 11:30pm. Shanmugam responded through a ...

The essence of the statement is that I used an example which is irrelevant and that it was used to confuse Parliament." And (Speaker) Sir, through you, I ask that he deletes his post except that he has misrepresented the position, and he should apologise." In my view, he has breached section 31, that's my view, in the context of his post. "I explained why the Parti Liyani case is relevant. "Leong said that my referring to Parti Liyani is an attempt to muddy the waters because the case is irrelevant. Macmillan's definition is someone who has done something illegal and is trying to avoid being caught by the Police." "He himself admits that he is a fugitive. "By that time, they had left the country," Shanmugam emphasised. 7 that he has" been made a fugitive by his own country", and he repeated that he's a fugitive on Instagram on Mar. Shanmugam also said that Lee Hsien Yang mentioned in an interview with a foreign news outlet on Mar. Shanmugam explained that while he had wanted to address Leong's statements in the Facebook post yesterday (Mar. It also stated that the police required Lee Hsien Yang to attend the interview at Police Cantonment Complex voluntarily.

Minister for Home Affairs and Law K Shanmugam said that Leong Mun Wai of the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) has a pattern of "unparliamentary behaviour" while ...

On the other case he referred to (the KOM case), he withdrew the statements that he had made, and said that he had not looked at the facts. In effect, he had made allegations without knowing the actual facts, and based them on impressions he had derived. As of midnight on March 22, the Facebook post is still publicly accessible. In Parliament today, I said that his conduct was cowardly. that contained a number of allegations. Earlier on March 20, Shanmugam responded to parliamentary questions by Leong and Leon Perera of the Workers' Party about the disclosure of Lee Hsien Yang and Lee Suet Fern's names in a police investigation.

Minister for Home Affairs and Law K Shanmugam and Leong Mun Wai of the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) had an interminable and gruelling exchange carried on from ...

Shanmugam said that he had explained in "considerable detail" the differences between the cases. He made the point that statements in Parliament are not evidence, but meant to further discussions and are descriptions of the process. Tan said Leong had mentioned "muddy the waters" in his post and Shanmugam was asking what he meant by it. "Muddying the waters is not something that is an issue. He is in breach of Parliamentary rules and that is why we have to pull it up and ask a number of questions." Shanmugam said when that phrase is used, it means the case is not relevant and was used to confuse Parliament. Leong said he did not say the case was not relevant, instead, he used the phrase "muddy the waters". Tan repeated his question, and said he needed to clarify for himself if Leong was alleging that he wasn't given the space to respond. However, Shanmugam said he was asking something "quite different", specifically a clarification about Leong's own Facebook post, why he said the Parti Liyani case was not relevant. Tan asked if that was a correct description, and Leong said "it was not totally true". In response, Leong said the debate "could have been longer." Shanmugam added he previously explained why the Parti Liyani case is relevant, but Leong was present and did not object.

PSP NCMP Leong Mun Wai apologises for remarks made to Speaker Tan Chuan-Jin, asking him to ask a question Minister Shanmugam had not asked.

At one point, the PSP member sternly suggested that Speaker Tan Chuan-Jin shouldn’t ask him a question that Mr Shanmugam had not asked. On the same evening, Mr Shanmugam took to Facebook to point out that Mr Leong has “a pattern of unparliamentary behaviour” as this was not the first time the PSP member apologised in the House. I sincerely apologise for that. The Speaker also urged Mr Leong to “retain the decorum of this debate” when addressing himself or other members of the House. Later, as the debate ended, Mr Tan reminded Mr Leong that he had been “more than tolerant” and “more than accommodative” on several occasions where the latter had spoken in the House. This led to an interjection by Leader of the House Indranee Rajah, who reminded Mr Leong to be mindful of his tone and conduct in the House.

Mr Leong Mun Wai and Mr K Shanmugam debated in Parliament about a Facebook post Mr Leong made, claiming that ministers 'muddy the waters'.

“We try through the exchange of ideas and debates, try to get to a point. Can I remind you, let’s retain the decorum of this,” Mr Tan later reminded Mr Leong. This is not the first time he has breached the rules.” Will the member withdraw his allegation that Parti Liyani was referred to in order to muddy the waters. Sir, we take a serious view of his conduct. That is in essence what ‘muddy the waters’ means,” he said. And will the member accept that it was quite wrong to suggest motives on a false basis,” he asked. “Sir, we’ve had this exchange today for one reason only. Because you are introducing new things into the discussion.” And what does muddy the waters mean?” That’s why you are swimming in the muddy waters. It’s irrelevant and you’re introducing it.