>> His decision to sue Leong was one that he had arrived at after consultation with his lawyer
> That speaks volumes. "I am probably corrupt, but definitely too lazy to chase the original source, because a) it will cost more, and b) I'm corrupt probably corrupt and the article is speaks the truth". I believe that the "b)" is more likely (let's see if he will sue me!!)
The Singapore government has set multiple precendents about ministers having to sue to protect their integrity [1]:
> But if they've defamed us, we have to sue them -- because if we don't, our own integrity will be suspect. We have an understanding that if a minister is defamed and he does not sue, he must leave cabinet.
> That speaks volumes. "I am probably corrupt, but definitely too lazy to chase the original source, because a) it will cost more, and b) I'm corrupt probably corrupt and the article is speaks the truth". I believe that the "b)" is more likely (let's see if he will sue me!!)
The Singapore government has set multiple precendents about ministers having to sue to protect their integrity [1]:
> But if they've defamed us, we have to sue them -- because if we don't, our own integrity will be suspect. We have an understanding that if a minister is defamed and he does not sue, he must leave cabinet.
[1] http://edition.cnn.com/ASIANOW/asiaweek/interview/goh.chok.t...