JB Jeyaretnam's Blog

Enlarge View

A class action lawsuit is filed by Mr. JBJ of Reform Party taking famiLEE LEEgime to court for refusing to hold By-Election in Jurong GRC's Bukit Batok seat from which MP Ong died. Reform Party went to Bukit Batok to collect signatures and the responds was so great it was hard to believe - all these signatures were collected spending not exceeding 1 and half hours from only not more than 3 block of HDB flats in Bukit Batok. No further efforts were necessary. In the view of this, the people's desire to have By-Election is very strong, and I can assure any one that thousand signatures can be collected if more home visits were done. I can further assure that there will be NO WALK-OVER ABSOLUTELY. :-)

Please click on the URL above to view the large and detailed messages from Reform Party's Sec Gen Mr. JB Jeyaretnam. This is the very first challenge to famiLEE LEEgime of Lee Kuan Yew since the formation of the Reform Party. Mr. JBJ challenged Lee Kuan Yew's son to hold by-election for Bukit Batok under Jurong GRC where the MP Ong Chit Chung died last week.

Enlarge View

Enlarge View

THE REFORM PARTY 18A Smith Street, Singapore 058932

We are hoping the registration of the Party will be approved by the end of May. We are planning an inaugural dinner to announce the inauguration of the Party in the second half of June. We plan to keep the cost per head at $30.00 to enable as many of our supporters to attend as possible. Please let us know whether you will be able to join us. The actual date and venue will be announced on this website: http://jbjeya.org. If you are able to join us please let us have your telephone number or email address. Or you can telephone us on number 91179350 or 65349641

The REFORM PARTY is your Party dedicated to capturing power for you, the citizens of this country.

JB Jeyaretnam
For the Pro-Tem Commitee

Mr. JBJ & Mr Ng Teck Siong announced that they are planning to hold inaugural dinner in the second half of June 2008, as they expect the Reform Party's registration to be approved by then. The diner is also the very first fund raising campaign for the party. I call the supporters to support this event by first registering online.

Details are published on my news blog today:

Press Release of J.B Jeyaretnam
Secretary-General of Pro-tem committee for Reform Party

The Prime Minister's speech in Parliament defending his Minister is full of platitudes. His argument appear to be that because the minister was not personally at fault he should not be held responsible. This flies in the face of vicarious liability and the doctrine of responsibility.

It is quite clear Mas Selamat's escape was facilitated by sheer negligence and incompetence. For the Minister to say the escape was the result of a human error is to cover up the negligence and incompetency. Any calamity can be be attributed to human error only if it is the result of an error of judgment on the part of the person whose act resulted in the calamity. That is clearly not the case here.

The Minister should accept responsibility for the negligence and incompetency of those under him. That is clearly the law.

The Minister should of course resign. A case can also be made out for the entire cabinet to resign under the doctrine of collective responsibility if the escape posed a very grave threat to the security of the country which the government seems to think otherwise.

The only decent thing to do is for the Minister to offer his resignation. The cabinet can then decide to accept or reject. The Minister should resign and a by-election held for his constituency at which the Minister can submit to the judgment of the voters by seeking re-election along with the other members of his team. If the Minister does not at least offer to resign he will be seen as more interested in keeping his $2 million yearly salary than in doing the right thing.

J.B Jeyaretnam
Secretary-General
Pro-tem committee for Reform Party

Mr Edmond Ng put this on the web yesterday, and I re-confirmed with Mr. Ng Teck Siong:

Press Release:

--------------------------------------

There will be a press conference on Friday, 18 Apr 2008 at 2.00pm at the Quality Hotel at Balestier Road to announce the submission to The Registrar of Societies the application to register The Reform party. The Pro-tem Secretary General will outline the objects and Goals of The Party.

J.B. Jeyaretnam
Pro-tem Sec. Gen

Blog New URL

Speech of Mr. JBJ on 20.Jan.2008 at Allson Hotel where Public Forum on Reform of Electoral System was held.

Near complete videos of entire forum had been posted on UncleYap News Blog, please click to view.

To avoid any suggestion that the Singapore Government's stand with along other Asean countries on the brutal repression by the military Junta in Myanmar is false will the Government now say quite unequivocally-

1. Whether Singapore has exported Arms and Ammunition to the
military Junta and still continues to do so.
2. What is the full extent of Singapore's investment in Myanmar
particularly by GLC.

If the Government is sincere in its condemnation of the killings in Myanmar by the military Junta, the Government should match its words with action.

http://jbjeya.org/pc_503576_2008.pdf

To reach Mr. JB Jeyaretnam:

Jeyaretnam J B

18A, Smith Street

China Town

Singapore 058932

Tel: (65)6534-9641

Fax: (65)6534-9640

jbj@jbjeya.org

http://uncleyap-news.blogspot.com/2007/09/mr-jbj-won-case-on-his-practice-cert.html

This morning at the High Court Mr. JBJ won his case regarding AG's objection to his legal Practice Certificate! It is a great day!

I got the news near noon from Mr. Ng Teck Siong who attended the court with Mr. JBJ this morning. Mr. JBJ treated Mr. Ng & myself with a lunch at South Bridge Road restaurant for celebration at about 1330hr.

The hearing was brief, only about 30 mins.

Coincidentally the judge happened to be V K Rajah (son of famous activist Rajah) and AGC was represented by Jeffery Chan. Both VK Rajah & Chan were the same judge and lawyer for our OM39/2005 case when we took Wong Kan Seng & mata chief Khoo Boon Hwee to court for CPFB protest. :-)

VK Rajah ruled against AGC's objection after Jeffery Chan submitted a thick pile of authorities, order was also made for AGC to refund to Mr. JBJ S$500+ worth of stamp fee previously paid.

Mr. JBJ held a press conference at his office about 1400hr after our lunch celebration. A dozen of 154th photographers & reporters turned up.

Congratulation to Mr JBJ & he is now the most senior person in Singapore in legal service. His profound background exceeds both Yong Pang How & Chan Sek Keong, since he had since the longest time been lawyer; judge; Registrar of Supreme Court; Parliamentarian law maker as well as a well known victim of law. Mr. JBJ was already lawyer way before Singapore became a republic.

Mr JBJ said he would be only practicing as a council to argue in court, and he won't be doing paper works such as wills or agreements. He said his fee won't be very high and will help Singaporeans suffering injustice regardless weather rich or poor.

10am tomorrow 24.Aug.2007, at the High Courts, there will be a chamber hearing for a case taken up by Mr. JBJ against Attorney General's Chamber, for the AGC's posing obstructions against Singapore Law Society to issue a Certificate Of Practise at the bar. In simple layman language, Mr. JBJ is suing Singapore Government's State Lawyer (AGC) for preventing him to get his Lawyer's License.

There are many political cases includingy my own pending defense by Mr. JBJ. I had been through many trials and appeals and Criminal Motions without a qualified legal council. And both Sub-Court & High Court and the AGC suing me had denied my applications to allow time for me to await for Mr. JBJ to get his practise license.

It turned out so clearly now that, the AGC is the culprit playing behind Singapore Law Society, to obstruct Mr. JBJ from getting his Certificate Of Practise at the Singapore Bar. There are so many other political cases similarly awaiting for Mr. JBJ, including famiLEE's defemation suits, and Judiciary Review against the unfair Kangaroo Court itself.

The filthy famiLEE LEEgime kept denying that there are no political motive behind their moves. But how come it became so obviously clear that they are full of political motives with these cases? :-)

The elder son of Mr. JBJ happen to be the out-going President of Singapore Law Society to add the irony here.

1. I visited Mr JBJ's office again today, it is furnished already, we had been moving the furniture around today. New PC and printers are being setup this week.
2. It is not true that Mr JBJ have already got his legal practice certificate from Singapore Law Society. Not Yet! As of today. As hurdles had been cleared, more new hurdles had been put in for Mr. JBJ! By you know who.
3. Constitution of Reform Party had been completed, there will be a final committee meeting at the end of this week to pass it, and submission for registration of political party will follow soon.
4. Mr. JBJ & Mr. Ng Teck Siong will be attending SDP's dinner gathering this coming Saturday.
5. SDP leaders are expected to pay Mr. JBJ's new office a visit may be next week.
6. Reform party still open for more members, and there had been people requesting for the membership forms. So far I think there is still some lack of female Singaporeans to join. I hope to see more equal participation among male and female citizens.

Believe it or not?

Mr. JBJ had been discharged from bankruptcy for months, and while he is clearing Singapore Law Society's obstacles to get his long delayed certificate of practice renewed, the famiLEE LEEgime's Official Assignee suddenly crawl out of their hell holes to put in another stoppage to block Mr JBJ from practicing law!

I was told 3 days ago that LEEgime's OA now wants Mr JBJ to pay them yet another S$2500, after he all the millions he paid up to these XXXs in the past, before they would let him get another step nearer to his legal practice certificate. This came months after Mr. JBJ paid the full sum ordered by the highest court of appeal within the deadline.

LEEgime can still add yet another S$2500 now, with their First World Calculations!

Mr. JBJ is furnishing his new office with supporters helps. I urged Mr. Ng & Mr. JBJ to complete the party constitution ASAP without the fine details and perfections, to have it filed on 8th Aug 2007, just before National Day. That way is to make the National Day also the party's anniversary day for Reform Party. :-)

Quite obviously Mr. JBJ's legal practice cert isn't looking like it would be in time to allow him to defend the Election Speech Trial of 7 charges each to Dr. CSJ & myself. Do you wonder why? :-)

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sammyboymod/messages?msg=147740.1

On 22.Jun.2007 (Friday) after dinner, Mr. JBJ & Mr. Ng Teck Siong held with founder members of Democratic Reform Party, their first Organizing Meeting. As planed the office of Mr. JBJ will be setup in July, at Smith Street within the China Town district. The registration of party form is to be submitted to Registry of Societies in July.

On the other hand, Mr. JBJ is facing red tape at Law Society, where his son Philip Jeyaretnam is near ending of his term as president, in renewing his practice certificate in order to return to the Singapore bar. Singapore had many scandals in the recent years that lawyers and fled with huge sum of clients' funds, or went bankrupt with unaccounted funds of clients. The Law Society is very nervous about this, so the result is they are asking lots of financial details a proofs about clients' funds.

Mr. JBJ had ceased operation of his law firm Jeyaretnam & Co, in 1997 after being sued by old XXX theif LKy etc. Same year as Battle of ChengSan with Mr. Tang Liang Hong. It had been about 10 years since. However, now the Law Society of Singapore is demanding Mr. JBJ to show proof of accounts & have him to take oath etc and demanded old bank statement etc in a very paranoid way, to check on Mr JBJ's past clients' accounts.

This is interestingly going on under the heavy shadow of NKF & other charity fund abuse scandals, still on going in Singapore. I won't be surprised if the next scandal to be the PAp kindergarten accountant running away with huge funds!

:-)

Democratic Reform Party had gained several new members & politically profound members since the last press conference by Mr. JBJ & Mr. Ng. There are members who had been active in politics as past members of existing parties and had taken parts in many previous elections. I am calling for Singaporean citizens who are not so experienced, to also come forward to take a part. The time has already arrived to REFORM Singapore.

The new party found by Mr. JBJ had gained friendship and supports from various fellow opposition parties, Mr. Gandhi Abalam the new chairman of SDP had personally attended the founding press conference and congratulated Mr. JBJ on 20.May.2007.

I had personally helped to make arrangements for interest members to get in touch with Mr. JBJ for joining the new party. I had also received offers of supports and volunteers to assist in e.g. party's website.

Do our parts because the Republic of Singapore belong to us and not the famiLEE LEEgime, it is time to take our republic back from the famiLEE and undo the wrongs they had done to Singapore. As a Singaporean you can get involved, and please don't hesitate to come forward.

u.y.

On the news today there were only 3 lawyers in Singapore willing to act in defence for Far East Economic Review. I had however, spoken to Mr. JBJ about this, and got the positive answer from Mr. JBJ that he would be willing and happy to act for FEER if he was approached by FEER regarding this.

Mr. JBJ is renewing his legal practice certificate, and the process should be done in another 2 weeks accordingly. At the moment Mr. JBJ is traveling with his family, I am not able to get his immediate respond regarding this matter yet.

:-)

I will initiate a contest to seek inspirations from cyber talents to create a new party logo for Mr. JBJ's Democratic Reform Party. The party's constitution is now being drafted, and an office rental arrangement had been made. Before I can help to put up the party website, one thing I think I need is a meaningful party logo, however I think the participation of supporters will get this done better. The registration of party may also need a logo to be documented.

I will show all the presented designs to Mr. JBJ & Mr Ng etc, and these founders will decide on the logo. Participants may post their entries online on the SBF forum URL here, so you may participate anonymously, or enter your name, it is up to you. :-)

This contest is immediately opened till end of June 2007, there may not any price at all, put it as a devotion & talent showing contribution event.

:-)

Mr. JBJ is awaiting for Singapore Law Society to renew his practice certificate, and he believe it should be ready in the next 1 or 2 weeks. He is going to be practicing criminal law & civil cases like defamation, in both areas Mr. JBJ have profound background topping Singapore and exceed any Singaporean lawyer or judges in seniority. I believe Mr. JBJ will take on high profile cases such as murder & death penalty cases.

A rental arrangement had been made for half of a 2nd floor above downtown shop house, to be Mr. JBJ's office as well as registered office of his new party to reform Singapore. The office is expected to be operational in July 2007. I call for supporters to contribute in furnitures and office appliances to the new political party. :-)

I will help the new party to setup Internet domain & website. Many other resources and helps are needed and lacking. I also call on those inspired to take part to join as members of the new political party.

At the moment the founders are working on the party's constitution clauses, this is necessary before the registration forms can be completed and returned to Registry of Societies. The rental of permises is part of the necessary formality to complete this registration paper.

From mid July onwards, Singaporeans who have legal cases that require to seek Mr. JBJ can find him at the new office. Media reporters & Singaporeans who have political matters to discuss with the party can also visit the office. Address telephone number will be published on Internet including Mr. JBJ's blog & new party's website.

My New Release Blog Post URL with YouTube Videos embedded.

Mr. JBJ collected registration form for new party

This afternoon, 1630hr,25.May.2007 I went with Mr. JBJ & Mr. Ng to the famiLEE LEEgime's Registry of Societies to collect registration form to register the new political party - Democratic Reform Party.

Over the counter, the staff explained that the form requires at least 10 members inclusive of Chairman, Secretary General, Treasurer all Singaporean citizens, and a one time fee of S$450 to be paid. It takes not more than 2 months to get approval upon submission of form and the staff confirmed that it will have to go through the MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS for the approval!

How much clearer can it be that in this POLICE STATE you will require the approval of famiLEE LEEgime minister to form a political party in order to conduct political reform against the famiLEE LEEgime! If any works here how efficiently and UNIQUELY SINGAPORE!

Mr. JBJ will be going to famiLEE LEEgime's Registry of Societies tomorrow to get a registration form for his new political party. He had 2 days ago also wrote to Law Society of Singapore to renew his certificate for legal practice. As a super senior lawyer, Mr. JBJ is expected to have to pay thousands of dollars a year for this certificate which bears a fee according to seniority of the lawyer.

Registry of Societies used to be located at the ICA building, where Mr. JBJ & Mr Ng had regularly been selling their books the past few years to raise fund to discharge Mr. JBJ's bankruptcy, I am not sure if registry is still located there.

http://jbjeya.org/JBJ_press_conf.20.May.2007.amr

Size of the above file is approx. 8.5MB and playback length is over 1 hr. It is the voice recording of Mr. JBJ at press conference on 20.May.2007. Please download and save this file, which may take 5 mins on broadband connections.

You may also need Sony Erricson's AMR audio file codec for Windows users. example1 example2.

In this recording Mr. JBJ detailed his bankruptcy lawsuits and injustices committed by LKy famiLEE LEEgime; their OA & Kangaroo Courts. That include how the OA is reluctant to collect debts due to Mr. JBJ, and had been consistently wanting to keep him bankrupted and out of the politics.

At the last part of recording I think it included Mr. JBJ's announcement regarding forming of new political party, and it is thus historical recording if so.

Regarding his discharge from bankruptcy, Mr. JBJ scheduled his press conference as follow:

Hotel Royal @ Queens

Sunday 20.May.2007

11:00am to 14:00pm

All press journalists and bloggers and supporter please be informed.

Refer to blog:

http://uncleyap-news.blogspot.com/2007/05/mr-jbj-scheduled-press-conference.html

http://uncleyap-news.blogspot.com/2007/05/congratuation-mr-jbj-dogs-fatter-by.html

Congratuation Mr. JBJ, XXXS fatter by S$233K
The famiLEE LEEgime's fat xxxs are getting fatter today by another S$233K. This added to the huge amount of injustice; plundering; oppression and bully crimes committed by LKy famiLEE LEEgime. We have to liquidate and punish these bastards ASAP to show the world.

Mr. Ng Teck Siong called me this morning, asking me to go to High Court to attend the Far East Economics defamation suit hearing, he was surprised to be the only audience at court today. I had not slept at all last night, was on my Linux and PCs busy until 7:30am, I told Mr. Ng that I need to get some sleep. :-)

After the High Court Mr. Ng will proceed to Official Assignee to hand them a S$233+K Casher Order to discharge Mr. JBJ from bankruptcy. Congratulate Mr. JBJ! :-) Thank you very much supporters who helped Mr. JBJ to raise this S$233K. The helps came in gradually and in time of the 3 weeks deadline.

It is years of hard work of Mr. JBJ & Mr. Ng Teck Siong working at their old age so hard to pay these good money to worthless bastard xxxs of LKy famiLEE LEEgime. The legal cost and other expenses adds another S$200K-S$300K on to the amount that is being paid today.

While thanking the supporters, I remind all Singaporeans to remove famiLEE LEEgime and bring justice and accountability on to these criminals. They must not die without being made to pay back sufficiently for their crimes and sin as well as atrocities.

Since the message is out, we have received more supporter's helps for Mr. JBJ, and now the gap of $33K had reduced to a smaller amount.

However time is short and there is still a gap not fully closed. If too late, then it may not be finally fruitful.

I urge those who wish to help to act immediately.

k.h.

http://uncleyap-news.blogspot.com/2007/05/mr-jbj-shorts-s33k-to-pay-million.html

Mr JBJ shorts S$33K to pay $$$million$$$ famiLEE LEEgime
The famiLEE LEEgime's Kangaroo Court ruled Mr. JBJ conditional discharge from bankruptcy by paying the $$$million$$$ bastards S$233,000 with in 3 weeks.

I had a coffee with Mr. Ng Teck Siong this afternoon, and had been asked to carry message to the public that Mr. JBJ managed to only raised S$200 so far, until today and the deadline is running up.

While I am not for feeding the LEEgime bastards a single cent, I convey the news hereby that Mr. JBJ needs S$33K in the form of loan, he will come back to the Singapore legal bar and practice law again in order to repay his financial backer for these loans.

Mr. JBJ is a very senior lawyer in Singapore and his background exceeds the CJ Chan Sek Keong by much. He would be the very authoritative lawyer to represent defamation suits and bankruptcy matters, would be extra interesting to see him represent say the FEER which famiLEE sued for defamation. :-)

No other lawyer in Singapore would have Mr. JBJ's background or even come close.

The time is urgent, and if you know of a possible source of help, please contact me to reach Mr. JBJ ASAP.

Please put aside one cent a day in your money-box, if you have one, for our poor Ministers who say they have sacrifieced themselves so much for you when you, the workers, have made no sacrifices at all and lived off the fat of the land.

[JB Jeyaretnam]

27th March 2007
Dictated but not signed

http://jbjeya.org/JBJ_Press_Statement_Mar_2007.pdf

PRESS RELEASE

The Minister Mentor never spoke a truer word than when he said that the PAP government had engineered the principle of the electorate voting out the government peacefully so carefully that the electorate in Singapore always voted for the government (S.T. 7 Mar).

Here was the patriarch of Singapore openly admitting that the elections in Singapore are so carefully engineered to produce only one result return of the PAP to power. Elections are so managed by the Prime Minister to deny the opposition any fair chances of winning by frequent change of rules, boundaries are altered just before elections are announced and the electorate intimidated with dire consequences should they vote for the opposition as was brazenly done in the Cheng San GRC in the 1997 elections.

And this the Minister Mentor boasts as the Singapore brand of democracy, not found in any other county that practices democracy. UNIQUELY SINGAPORE.

J.B. JEYARETNAM

7 March 2007

OCR by UncleYap using Linux Kooka

http://jbjeya.org/jbj_press_statement_JBJ_AG_Jan2007.pdf

Following press statement is a letter to the Republic of Singapore Attorney General which had been released to public today by Mr. J B Jeyaretnam. This is the matter concerning the ridiculous speech he made which is same speech refuted on Singapore Democratic Party website on 12.Jan.2007.

[OCR TEXT]

J.B Jeyaretnam
No. 50A Jalan Abdul Salmad,
80100 Johor Bahru

15th January 2007

The Attorney General
The Adelphi, l Coleman Street,
Singapore.

I feel compelled to write to you after reading the excerpts of your speech at the opening of the Legal Year reported in the Straits Times for the 10th of January. Your speech has been given great publicity to persuade our citizens that our system "ensures equal access to justice fur all" as the caption proclaims.

You have made a number of claims which I feel should be questioned and defended in a public debate in the pursuit of truth if one values such pursuit as a desirable goal of our society.

I can not honestly agree with several of the claims you have made. Two in particular that of "commitment to the rule of law" as being one of the fundamentals in our society and secondly that our citizens' fundamental rights are adequately protected" are plainly questionable not only by 'trouble makers' but by right thinking citizen. The claims have to be demonstrably proved for our citizens to have faith in the claims. The claims you have made have been made 'ad nauseam' by the Minsters of the PAP Government and you echo them. Your speech only reinforces the view that you spoke as a member of the Executive which of course you are.

If you really believe that the rule of law obtains in Singapore at all levels and that our fundamental rights are protected by the law you should be ready to defend them in open dialogue.

Would you therefore agree to an open debate with me on these two claim you have made and given great publicity. It will not be possible o cover all your claims in one debate but th two claims are the bedrock of any democratic society and should be given immediate priority.

I shall be glad to hear from you within 14 days. I shall release this letter to the Press and post it on the Internet if I do not hear from you and equally if I hear om you but with your reply as well.

JB Jeyaretnam

cc. The Honorable Chief Justice

The Law Society of Singapore

This blog is facing flood comment SPAM attacks, which cause hundreds of annoying advertisments to appear in the comments area. We will suspend comments for some time, and also disable online registration as temp measure. When we are sure that screening can work properly, we will open for registered users to enter comments. Please excuse this inconvience for the time being. Thanks for your supports to Mr. JBJ. :-) k.h.yap
Suspension Lifted Feb 2007, comments have been resumed!

It is now almost 2 months since a NEW PARLIMENT was elected.Yet it has not been convened.

This delay is the clearest demonstration of the government's contempt of parliament. In any other country, which practises parliament democracy, the government will not take office before parliament has approved its composition.In Singapore, the executive(government)has been governing for two months and taking decisions WITHOUT parliament being able to question any decision of the executive.

THIS IS THE UNIQUELY SINGAPORE DEMOCRACY -A SHAM OF DEMOCRACY

(J B JEYARETNAM)
4TH JULY 2006

PRESS STATEMENT

I see MM Lee Kuan Yew has said the younger generation should not be intimidated by him (New Paper 12th April).

Will he please tell us whether he has thrown away his hatchet which he said publicly he carried in his bag and never hesitated to use if anyone should dare to stand in his way.

(J B Jeyaretnam)
13th April 2006

Is the Prime Minister play-acting when he calls upon the Opposition to stop evading serious issues (ST 29 April)?

The most compelling question facing our people in Singapore today is whether the present system of government, which has been in place for 47 years, is capable of producing a dynamic and progressive society, promoting the happiness of ALL its people. The present system now brought to light by the disclosure of the system which ran the NKF (the NKF system) has divided Singapore into a country of two nations - one a nation of the rich and the other a nation of the poor - something which Disraeli said of Britain at the beginning of the 20th century. The gap between the rich and the poor has continued to widen and is now reaching alarming proportions.

Under the system our workers are no better than the serfs in the middle ages. We have become a beggar society - a people without any rights. The Rule of Law does not run in Singapore. Elections are programmed by the ruling party to produce determined results. The civil service and the police are subject to political control. The system has spurned falsehoods about Singapore. Truth and justice do not matter in the system. How is this country any better than Belarus or North Korea? The people of Nepal have rejected one-man rule after four (4) years. In Singapore the one-man rule still prevails after 47 years.

Both the PAP, who have put in place this system, and the Opposition Parties, the Workers’ Party now under its present leaders, and the SDA accept the system. Is it any wonder that the Prime Minister taunts Chiam and Low that they have had nothing to offer despite having been in Parliament for well over 15 years except to raise trivialities?

I have said from the time I entered Parliament in 1981 that the system under which Singapore is governed is bad for Singapore and has to go if our people’s lives are to improve. It is for this reason that the PAP have gone all out to keep me out of Parliament, removing me from Parliament in 1986 on false convictions, bringing forward elections in 1991 to two months before I became eligible again to stand for Parliament and now keeping me a bankrupt to prevent me from challenging them in this election. The Inter-Parliamentary Union has said my bankruptcy is politically motivated.

If the Prime Minister is really in earnest when he laments the lack of debate on the issues facing our people, he knows what he can do. I have in my statement released on 12th April 2006 invited him to debate with me. It is no good calling on the WP and SDA because as I said both parties accept the system – the NKF system.

It is still not too late, Mr Lee, for a public debate that is if you sincerely want to know what issues are uppermost in our people’s minds.

Do not dismiss my call as a publicity stunt which I am sure your obedient press will make it out to be. I am deadly serious for the future of our people. If you feel you cannot debate what system is best for Singapore, ask your father. It is he who after all put the system in place.

J B Jeyaretnam

1st May 2006

I see the Prime Minister was rubbing his hands in glee at his press conference on Sunday that his henchmen had succeeded in keeping me out of the elections (Sunday Times 7th May).

He is, without any questionm right when he says that it is better for his government to have Chiam and Low as the Opposition in Parliament because, in his own words (ST 29th April), Chiam and Low have had nothing to offer for their fifteen years (more inChiam's case) in Parliament. And he said it again in the elections that he would like an Opposition on whom he did not have to spend any time but get on with whatever he wanted to do. So it is understandable that he should shout for joy for having got what he wanted.

As for his snipping at me from his protected position, let it be said that when I led the Party in the 1997 elections, my first return to the hustings after I was falsely removed from Parliament in 1986, my team in Cheng San was only kept out of Parliament by the then Prime Minister nakedly threatening the voters with dire consequences if they voted for the WOrkers' Party and following up on the threats with him and the present Prime Minister unlawfully invading the voting centres and even booths to remind the voters of the threats. This is something that only happens in mafia-run countries. And in spite of their blatant intimidation (an offence under the Parliamentary Elections Act) we only narrowly missed being elected.

How are the present results of the Workers' Party an improvement brought about after I stepped down from the Party?

The Prime Minister talks as though it was an achievement for the Workers' Party to capture Hougang. Hougang was won for the Workers' Party in 1991 when I was leading the Party. In every election after the 1972 elections, when I first led the Party, the Workers' Party has done better than the others.

What I have said are not surmises and guesses but true facts.

Finally, unless the Prime Minister displays that he has a sense of fairness and tells his press to give me my right of reply, this release will never be published in the Singapore press, Will he?

Signed,
J B Jeyaretnam
8th May 2006

LETTER TO ST

13th April 2006

The Editor
Straits Times
Singapore

Sir,

To be expected from your paper, your report on the statement I issued yesterday turns it into an attack on the opposition parties instead of an attack on the PAP, as my statement was intended to be.

My statement was not an outburst. It was a response to the Prime Minister. You chose to call it an outburst. It is totally mischievous.

I challenged Lee Hsien Loong to set out what future he sees for Singapore and also asked him if he cared enough about Singapore’s future, would he agree to a debate with me on Singapore’s future. ALL THIS YOU DELIBERATELY OMIT.

In saying that the opposition parties accept the PAP system, I am not saying anything new. Lee Kuan Yew has said this more than once that Chiam and Low were acceptable because they do not challenge the system but I am not acceptable because I do not accept the system and want to change it.

As a responsible paper, which you must claim to be, will you publish this letter to present my statement in its true perspective.

You should have published my statement in full rather than have Aaron Low edit it for me.

Yours faithfully,

(J B Jeyaretnam)
c.c. local and foreign press

PRESS STATEMENT

I see the Prime Minister wants the election to focus on the future of Singapore and the direction it should take. What is his future for Singapore? For those who can, to make more money and for those, who are not able to make money, to fend for themselves? Is that the future for Singapore that he has? Will he spell it out?

I see he complains that the political parties are not saying anything about the direction. It is because they accept the PAP system - even the present leaders of the political party which I led. I have been talking against the PAP system since 1981 as a system which is detrimental for the future of Singapore. It is the system in Belarus, North Korea and other countries where the Great Leader rules.

If the Prime Minister would like to debate the future of Singapore he has only got to call me. I am ready. But hold your breath. He will NOT.

(J B Jeyaretnam)
12th April 2006

Elections are closing in. Very little time left for JBJ to qualify to take part. If you care about Singapore’s future (not JBJ’s) it is now or never.

If you care about what JBJ is saying for the future of Singapore and wish to help, you can catch him at the following places:-

Monday, 10-04-2006
11.30 a.m. to 1.30 p.m. - Outside ICA (Lavender MRT)
5 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. - Raffles City (opposite Starbucks)

Tuesday
11.30 a.m. to 1.30 p.m - Outside ICA
5 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. - Centrepoint – Orchard Road

Wednesday
11.30 a.m. to 1.30 p.m - Telok Ayer Hawker Centre
5 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. - Far East Plaza – Scotts Road

Thursday
11.30 a.m. to 1.30 p.m. - Raffles City (opposite Starbucks)

Act now and show the PAP that you can beat them in their determination to keep JBJ out.

PRESS RELEASE
=============

My appeal against the dismissal by Assistant Registrar David Lee of my application for annulment for non-payment of the costs on the 24th of last month came up for hearing before Justice Judith Prakash this morning.

Her Honor has set aside the Order of dismissal and directed, as I had asked, that the application be stayed until the cost of $6500-00, order to be paid, were paid. Her Honour ordered that if the costs were NOT paid by the 3rd of July my application for annualment should stand dismissed.

I had also applied to the Judge for an order that the Official Assignee be directed to say on oath what amount is now due from me to totally discharge all the debts and costs. The Official Assignee has failed to take any steps, even after my application was filed on the 24th January 2006, to determine the amount payable by me for annulment. The Official Assignee maintained again bore her Honour that it will take about seventy to eighty days to determine the amount as a number of procedures have to be carried out. The judge, although not making an order for him to file an affidavit, as requested by me, told the OA's representative, Mr. Chan Wang Ho, to begin his process to determine the amount immediately without waiting any further.

(J B Jeyeretnam)

3rd April 2006

hi guys, I have read the entries where people have asked where Mr Jeyaretnam's books may be bought.

Generally, Mr Jeyaretnam moves around in the afternoon for his book selling sessions (so his location is not fixed), but for the evenings, here is where you may be able to find him:

Mondays - 5pm to 7pm
Raffles City, in front of Starbucks

Tuesdays - 5pm to 7pm
Centrepoint - Orchard Point

thanks for your support!
the Webmaster

http://www.jbjeya.org/Inter_parliamentary_union_OA.pdf

Above is Statement by Inter Parliamentary Union regarding Mr. JBJ's discharge from bankruptcy case brought against the OA.

PRESS STATEMENT

When my application for annulment of the Bankruptcy Order came up for hearing this morning, I applied for a further adjournment for two weeks, to the 28th of this month, for the application to be heard. My reason was that I still not have all the monies that were necessary and I also wanted the Official Assignee to file an affidavit, setting out his complutation of the debts owed and the costs and expenses, which he had not done.

The application was resisted by all parties but strenuously by the Official Assignee. After not having done anything for five (5) years, the Official Assignee's representative told the court that there were several things that had to be done by the Official Assignee before my application could be heard. He told the court that in his view it should take at least three (3) months before my application for annulment could be heard. He wanted a stay of my application.

The court, however, has ordered that I pay all outstanding costs due to the Official Assignee and the Solicitors, Messrs Drew & Napier and Messrs Allen & Gledhill, amounting in all to S$6,500-00 by the 24th of this month and, failing payment, my application for annulment would not be heard.

The court also refused my application that the Official Assignee be ordered to file an affidavit setting out his computation of the debts proved, the monies so far paid by me and the amount required to settled all debts and expenses in full.

JB Jeyaretnam
14 March 2006

text re-entered by UncleYap

PRESS STATEMENT

The lollipops that have been given to the lower income members of our society have been blown out of all proportion by the obedient media. No attention has been paid to what has been given to the those earning more than $320,000-00 a year by the cut in their income tax rate by one percent (1%)
Why don’t the ministers tell us now how much they will save by this reduction in the income tax they are paying.
Someone earning a million dollars a year in salaries this year will get a saving of $6,800-00 next year. Will all the ministers – Minister Mentor, Senior Minister, Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Ministers and the other Ministers – all tell us how much they have been given. That should make a revealing comparison between how the PAP government cares for the rich and the poor.

(J B Jeyaretnam)
21st February 2006

PRESS STATEMENT

The report on Lai Kew Chai’s retirement as a Judge of the High Court (S T 7 Feb) omitted to mention one other landmark judgment of Lai Kew Chai besides his judgment on the Pertamina case.

In 1986 hearing my appeal from a sentence passed in the District Court, he passed an illegal sentence in Open Court in my presence. Later, in the afternoon in the privacy of his Chambers and without my presence before him, he alters the sentence to one that is legal despite and contrary to the specific provision in the Criminal Procedure Code that all sentences must be passed in Open Court in the presence of the accused.

The sentence passed in Open Court was a nullity and therefore was no sentence.

The sentence passed in Chambers was a new sentence and required by the law to be passed in Open Court.

All this was later up-held by the Court of Appeal.

Should not this classify as a landmark judgment where the court overrides a specific enactment of the law.

Lai made history by his decision and that should have been noted in the report on his retirement.

The result of all this was to take me out of Parliament, something which helped the PAP cause.

(J B Jeyaretnam)
8th February 2006

135 Middle Road
#02-08A Bylands Building
Singapore 188975

Tel: 6 337 2371
Fax: 6 337 2035

3rd February 2006

The Editor
The Economist

Dear Sir,

I write on the apology you tendered to Singapore’s Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew over certain statements contained in your obituary on the former President of Singapore, the late Mr Devan Nair. I am only concerned over your apologizing, including in the statements attributed to Lee, for his reported statement to Devan Nair on the day following my election to Parliament on the 31st October 1981 that he would make me “crawl on his bended knees and beg for mercy” .

This statement of Lee was first published in the Sydney Morning Herald on the 5th April 1999. I am not aware that Lee had disputed the statement attributed to him.

This statement has also appeared in my book - “The Hatchet Man of Singapore” – first published in 2003.

Even if Lee’s attention had not been drawn to the article in the Sydney Morning Herald, I find it difficult to believe that he was not told of the statement appearing in my book which has been on sale since 2003 and of which 10,700 copies have been sold. I have never heard from Lee at all denying the statement attributed to him.

Was the Economist, in publishing the apology, bending over backwards to placate Lee. Is it your fear that your paper might be restricted in its sale in Singapore. Your paper may be restricted if it was meddling in domestic politics. I do not see how your obituary was.

Yours faithfully,

(J B Jeyaretnam)

STATEMENT

PAP distortion of Privy Council Judgment

The Straits Times report (17 Dec/H5) adds yet another lie to the swirl of lies uttered by the Ministry of Law in attempting to correct the version in the Discovery documentary on Singapore of the Privy Council judgment on my “convictions”.

Zakir Hussain obviously has not bothered to read my statement of the 12th December when I said a court of three judges had disqualified me from continuing to practice as a lawyer. More so Zakir Hussain seems to be ignorant of the procedure in Singapore under which lawyers are disciplined despite his paper reporting punishments on lawyers.

The Straits Times report suggests that it was a Law Society decision. The Law Society was not the complainant. It was the government’s then Attorney-General and his complaint went straight to the Disciplinary Committee chaired by an ex-judge of the High Court.

Mr Gibbons seems to find the dispute between me and the government “a complex issue of law”. There is nothing complex. The question is a simple one. It is whether the Privy Council judgment declared I had been wrongly convicted by the Singapore courts. That it did must be clear even to a Primary Six student reading the judgment of the Privy Council. Shouldn’t Discovery Asia have asked Jayakumar, PAP Minister for Law, or Chan Sek Keong, the Attorney-General, to respond to my statement of the 12th December before agreeing to amend the version.

Neither Jayakumar nor Chan Sek Keong would appear to have the moral integrity that
would require of them, as the government’s highest legal officers, to answer the questions in my statement of the 12th December which was sent to them.

In Singapore the government’s pronouncement on any subject must be accepted as the truth and its servile media will not allow any statement challenging the government’s pronouncement to be published. Is it any wonder that Singapore rates very low , almost at the bottom, in press freedom ranking.

(J B Jeyaretnam)
19th December 2005

STATEMENT

PAP distortion of Privy Council Judgment

I see that the PAP government is resorting to chicanery to hide the
truth from Singaporeans about the Privy Council's verdict on the
"convictions" I suffered at the hands of the Singapore courts (ST
Friday Dec 9). It is not the first time. It is completely dishonest in
the way it is presented.

Jayakumar, the Minister for Law, or Chan Sek Keong, the Attorney-
General, should have pointed out any "inaccuracy" in interpreting
the judgment of then Singapore's highest court of appeal. Instead,
they hide behind the skirt of a civil servant. The PAP forces civil
servants to make political capital for them. It is thoroughly
unworthy of a government that claims to be creditable.

To put the record straight and to nail the lie once and for all that the
Privy Council did not condemn the judgments of the Singapore
courts, will Jayakumar or the Attorney-General honestly and
truthfully, as though on oath, answer the following questions:-

1. Is it true or not true that in 1987 the Singapore court of three
judges ordered that I be struck off the Roll of Advocates and
Solicitors on the ground that I had been correctly convicted on four
criminal charges, a ground specified in the Legal Profession Act for
striking out an Advocate and Solicitor;

2. Is it true or not true that in my appeal to the Privy Council I had
challenged the validity or correctness of the criminal convictions
against me;

3. Is it true or not true that the Privy Council in October 1988
overturned the Order of the Singapore court holding that I was not
guilty of any of the offences, the convictions were all wrong and
that "by a series of misjudgment' in the Singapore courts I had
suffered a "grievous injustice". (See Judgment of the Privy Council
(1989) A C 1);

4. Is it true or not true that I was restored to the Roll of Advocates
sad Solicitors following the decision by the Privy Council to overturn
the Singapore high Court decision to strike me off the Rolls;

5. Is it true or not true that I was thwarted by the Singapore courts
in three attempts I made to make it possible for me to appeal to
the. Privy Council and which the Privy Council noted in their
Judgment and regretted the actions of the Singapore courts.

It is completely dishonest to say that "Mr Jeyaretnam did not appeal
to the Privy Council against his convictions" deliberately hiding the
fact that the then Singapore laws gave no automatic right of appeal
to the Privy council from any convictions in the Singapore courts.

It is again completely dishonest for the PAP government to say,
through Its civil servant that the validity of my criminal convictions
were not before the Privy Council. How dishonest can this
government get. I do not want a civil servant to answer the
questions. They must be answered by the government's highest
legal officers.

If either Jayakumar or the Attorney-General do not answer these
questions, Singaporeans will be entitled to assume that the
government's protest about the programme is totally unfounded
and only worthy of a government that distorts the truth.

JB Jeyaretnam

OCR from fax by UncleYap

STATEMENT

INTER-PARLIAMENTARY UNION (IPU), a union for Members of Parliaments all over the world, has closely followed the bankruptcy proceedings taken against me in 2001 whilst I was still a Member of Parliament.

The governing Council of IPU at its 170th session at Marrakech on the 23rd March 2002 made public by a resolution its view that the bankruptcy proceedings had been brought against me to remove me from Parliament.

The Council has now issued its resolution, passed at its meeting on the 19th October 2005 at Geneva to make public its views on the rejection by the courts in Singapore of my applications for discharge from bankruptcy made in 2004 and 2005. The Council passed both resolutions after considering reports placed before it by the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians.

In his letter to me sending me the latest resolution, i.e. 19th October 2005, the Secretary General says :-

“ The Committee regrets that its views, to which
no convincing counter-arguments have ever been raised, have not been taken into consideration by the Singaporean authorities. It hopes that a discharge from bankruptcy will be granted to you in time for you to participate in the next legislative elections, should you wish to do so.”

The resolution of the Council on the 23rd March 2002 concerning the bankruptcy proceedings and the resolution of the 19th October 2005 on the refusal of the courts to grant me a discharge are faxed herewith.

(J B Jeyaretnam)
8th November 2005

Note: Only the resolution of 19th October 2005 is reproduced

Resolution adopted by consensus by the IPU Governing Council at its 177th session
(Geneva, 19 October 2005)

The Governing Council of the Inter-Parliamentary Union.

Having before it the case of Mr Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam, a former opposition member of the Parliament of Singapore, which has been the subject of a study and report of the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians in accordance with the “Procedure for the examination and treatment, by the Inter-Parliamentary Union, of communications concerning violations of human rights of parliamentarians”,

Taking note of the report of the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians (CL/177/11(a)-R.1), which contains a detailed outline of the case,

Referring also to the resolution it adopted on this case at its 170th session (March 2002) a copy of which is attached to the present resolution,

Taking account of a letter dated 27 September 2005 from the Speaker of the Parliament of Singapore,

Recalling that Mr Jeyaretnam, having become in 1981 the first opposition candidate in Singapore to be elected to parliament since the country attained independence in 1965, faced a series of defamation charges brought against him in 1995 and 1997 by, among others, the then Prime Minister and the then Minister for Law and Foreign Affairs; Mr Jeyaretnam was declared a bankrupt in January 2001, and lost his parliamentary seat and was barred from practicing as a lawyer, recalling also that the concerns it expressed in its previous resolution on this case relate in particular to the sequence and timing of the defamation and bankruptcy proceedings brought against Mr Jeyaretnam, which, in its view, suggested a clear intention to target him for the purpose of making him a bankrupt and thereby removing him from Parliament, and the fact that, although Mr Jeyaretnam is jointly liable with other defendants in the cases in question and that at least one of them was more likely to be able to pay the sum owed to the creditors, the latter have never made any attempt to recover the moneys from them,

Considering the following new information on file:

- In March 2004 Mr Jeyaretnam filed an application for discharge from bankruptcy. The creditors, including Mr Goh Chok Tong, now Senior Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office, and Professor Jayakumar, now Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Law, opposed the discharge. In April 2004 the High Court refused Mr Jeyaretnam a discharge from bankruptcy, and this ruling was upheld by the Appeal Court in November 2004;

- The Appeal Court rejected the discharge on the grounds that the
administration of Mr Jeyaretnam’s estate had not been completed, and that Mr Jeyaretnam had not been cooperative and had concealed assets, which he denies, for which reason it was not even possible to grant him a conditional discharge. The main issue raised by Mr Jeyaretnam, namely that the creditors’ real reason for opposing his discharge was to prevent him from taking part in the next parliamentary elections, which are scheduled for 2007, a purpose which would amount to abuse of the court’s process, was found by the courts to be an irrelevant, extraneous factor in this case;

- Mr Jeyaretnam subsequently lodged a new application for discharge from
bankruptcy, as some previously outstanding matters, which the court had considered were blocking it from granting discharge, had in the interim been treated. He offered to pay the creditors 40 per cent of the debts due to them, instead of the one third that he had offered in his first application. The creditors refused the offer, without providing any reasons. On 23 June 2005
the court dismissed his application, and Mr Jeyaretnam filed an appeal, the consideration of which was stayed until payment of legal costs that had arisen out of the first discharge from bankruptcy proceedings, a sum that Mr Jeyaretnam considered exorbitant;

After payment of the creditors’ costs, the Court of Appeal rejected Mr Jeyaretnam’s second appeal for discharge from bankruptcy on 1 September 2005, according to Mr Jeyaretnam, had his offer been accepted, Mr Jayakumar would have recovered 93.33 per cent of the debt and Mr Goh Chok Tong 83.5 per cent.

Noting that the Bankruptcy Act gives the court broad discretion as to the granting of discharge, including on conditions with respect to any property devolving to the bankrupt or acquired by him after his discharge (subsections 3 and 4 of the Bankruptcy Act cited in the judgment of the Court of Appeal),

Noting that the Speaker of Parliament has stated that it was clearly erroneous to suggest that the rejection of Mr Jeyaretnam’s discharge from bankruptcy could be justified on other than legal grounds, and has rejected the view that any political considerations were involved,

1. Thanks the Speaker for his letter and consistent cooperation in this case;

2. Deeply regrets that Mr Jeyaretnam, who is now 75 years old, was not granted a discharge, despite his offer to pay 40 per cent of the damages still due and the possibility for the Court to grant conditional discharge, so that he remains debarred from practising as a lawyer and may be debarred from standing in the next elections;

3. Cannot share the Speaker’s view that this case involves purely private interests without any political connotation, when important authorities, among them the former Prime Minister, at present Senior Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office, and the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Law, are judgment creditors and have driven a staunch opponent, Mr Jeyaretnam, into bankruptcy;

4. Acknowledges that Mr Jeyaretnan us jointly liable with other defendants for paying the damages, nevertheless can but consider that, has the purpose of the creditors been to recover the damages awarded to them, they would not have driven Mr Jeyaretnam into bankruptcy and would have attempted to recover the sum from the other defendants as well; strongly believes therefore that their actions were based on other than legal considerations;

5. Deeply regrets having to conclude, as it did in 2002, that the state of affairs in the bankruptcy proceedings clearly suggests that Mr Jeyaretnam was targeted for the purpose of making and keeping him bankrupt, thereby debarring him from politics;

6. Requests the Secretary General to convey this resolution to the authorities and to the source.

PRESS STATEMENT

I see that Mr Raymond Lim has been speaking his mind on how to make Singapore special (ST Review Oct 31).

He should not worry. Singapore is already recognized as being very special.

Goh Chok Tong claimed this “special” position for Singapore when cross-examined by George Carman, Q.C., in court back in 1997. He said “We (the PAP) run Singapore our own way.” They were not going to be persuaded by how other countries are run. Singapore was unique.

In which other country in the world do ministers have a nanny paid a huge salary, besides the Prime Minister, to see how the other Ministers do their work.

Singapore is also special, along with a few other countries in that the Head of State is not elected by the people, appointed by the nanny, but nevertheless referred to as the “elected President”. One of the many lies about Singapore.

Again, perhaps along with one or two other countries, where its citizens can be thrown into prison with no recourse to the courts. A county where the rule of law is non-existent.

A country where elections to Parliament are controlled and manipulated by the executive so that the citizens have no say whatsoever in decisions made for them.

And the real special thing about Singapore is that all this is done under the guise of democracy leaving countries around the world to marvel, perhaps with a tinge of envy, at how the “elected leaders” of Singapore have been able to bring about this special state of Singapore. Comparable to North Korea under its supreme leader.

(J B Jeyaretnam)
2nd November 2005

PRESS STATEMENT

It is a pity that the Prime Minister did not set out the model that his Party has for Singapore (ST Oct 7th). He talks of transparency and openness in Singapore. Did he really think that the foreign correspondents would be so gullible as to swallow that.

Where is the transparency when we do not know where our monies are invested.

Where is the transparency when we have no explanation when our monies are lost in wrong investments. The debacle in Suchou seems to have been forgotten. Will Singaporeans ever be given an account of the investment in Suchou.

This government is one of the most closed governments anywhere in the world. All decisions are made behind closed doors and the people are told to like them or lump them. The Executive rides roughshod over the people.

What is the Party’s model. It would appear that the Party’s model is a model where the core executive, which in actual fact boils down to two /three persons, making all the decisions without any checks whatsoever from a Parliament dominated by its own members and the judiciary undermined by its jurisdiction chipped and the judges appointed by the executive. The people living in fear of arrest and incarceration at the pleasure of the executive if they voice anything that displeases the executive. This model has been in place for the last fifty years and the Prime Minister has said quite clearly he does not see any need to change the model.

Some kind of democracy! But, of course, we have heard ad nauseam the PAP runs Singapore its own way and no one should question it.. Goh Chok Tong said this in court in 1997 when he was questioned by Queen’s Counsel George Carman about Singapore’s democratic process.

(J B Jeyaretnam)
12th October 2005

Hi Supporters of Mr. JBJ

This is UncleYap currently the domain's webmaster.

I have setup this blog to facilitate the regular function of publishing press statements of Mr. JBJ, which I had been on Mr. JBJ's behalf for about a year as PDF and html.

I think a blog is more suitable for this purpose, and I had long wanted to convert this whole thing into a blog. This is finally done today on 22.Sept.2005

After this I will handover this blog to a new blog manager to handle it, he / she would be a person who have more time to deal with this blog, and would regularly publish Mr. JBJ's press statements. I would not expect myself to have to do this after this person takes over this blog. :=)

I call for more volunteers to come forward to help Mr. JBJ, who had really done alot for Singaporeans. Thanks & regards

k.h.yap