SINGAPORE — Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam on Tuesday (March 1) hit out at sociopolitical site The Online Citizen (TOC) for going on a “planned, orchestrated campaign using falsehoods” surrounding the case of 14-year-old Benjamin Lim.

He also chided Senior Counsel Thio Shen Yi, president of the Law Society of Singapore (LawSoc), for practically implying, in a commentary published last month in LawSoc’s monthly newsletter, that Benjamin killed himself because of police intimidation. Adding that it was “surprising” that even a lawyer such as Mr Thio made “some comments which should never have been made”, Mr Shanmugam said: “Mr Thio has a duty to be fair to the police officers.”

Mr Shanmugam saved his harshest criticism for TOC, which published about 20 articles “as part of its campaign”. The overall narrative and impression conveyed by these articles were that the police were lying, the police intimidated Benjamin and they put pressure on him to confess to a crime that he did not commit, Mr Shanmugan said. These are allegations and implications that are false and the public had been led to conclude that, as a result, Benjamin committed suicide, he noted. It is sad to see the level of dishonesty and politicisation of this matter, he said. “Where the police are wrong — we must and will take action. But we should not allow deliberate, dishonest attacks.” 

Despite a pending Coroner’s Inquiry into Benjamin’s death, he noted TOC continued to make accusations, insinuations and speculations. 

Pointing to the “tactics” used by TOC to try to get the police to comment on the case, Mr Shanmugam said the website had tried to assert that since the police and the ministry were not responding, the police must be guilty of the various allegations and assertions that have been made.

When contacted, TOC editor Terry Xu denied that the website had embarked on a campaign over the case.  Asking Mr Shanmugam to specify the articles in question, Mr Xu also claimed that the stories that TOC ran on the case were “submitted on the fly” and spontaneous, “rather than (being) orchestrated”.

Turning his attention to Mr Thio, Mr Shanmugam noted that the lawyer’s commentary claimed that five police officers spoke to Benjamin and the police should have behaved in a less intimidating way. These are false, Mr Shanmugam said. He added that Mr Thio “seemed to make the assertion of intimidation, based on his other statements, which are themselves false”. Without knowing anything about Benjamin, his mental make-up or his family background, one cannot reach the conclusions that the boy was intimidated and as a result, took his life, Mr Shanmugam pointed out. 

A lawyer should know that it would be useful to get some expert evidence, such as psychologists’ assessments, to look at Benjamin’s mental state, among other issues, Mr Shanmugam added. 

Responding to TODAY’s queries, Mr Thio said the focus of his Law Gazette message was that the criminal justice system “should provide quick access to counsel especially for the more vulnerable members of the public”. “This continues to be a key concern for the legal profession,” he said. 

He added: “There was no intention to imply that Benjamin’s tragic death was caused by police intimidation. In fact, the article specifically states that we will never know why Benjamin took his life that day.”