SINGAPORE: Two women confronted Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam during his Meet-the-People Session (MPS) on 12 March, causing a commotion outside his Chong Pang branch office.
The incident was captured in a seven-minute video posted on Facebook by Shanmugam himself.
Wearing shirts with the word “Press” on the front and the names of journalists killed in Gaza on the back, the women approached the minister to discuss the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA).
In the video, they are seen questioning him in a confrontational tone, flashing the middle finger, and shouting at him as he walked away.
Shanmugam said the sisters were not residents of his constituency and were part of a small group that had attended multiple People’s Action Party (PAP) MPS events to be “deliberately confrontational, create incidents, try and provoke”.
The PAP identified the group as Monday of Palestine Solidarity, stating it had disrupted more than 10 MPS events, including those hosted by Ministers Desmond Lee and Josephine Teo.
The party said the group disrupted queue systems, raised their voices, heckled volunteers, and filmed residents.
“It is not right that our volunteers are subject to taunts and accusations about their motives and character,” PAP said.
Shanmugam emphasised that MPS events are not venues for protest.
“Hijacking these sessions is unfair to residents. There are appropriate avenues for advocacy – but disrupting sessions meant to help residents who are struggling with everyday challenges crosses a line.”
PAP added that while it empathised with public frustration over Gaza, “Our MPs and volunteers have always taken the time to hear the views of our residents on this issue, which we then relay to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on their behalf.”
In the video, Shanmugam tells the women he only sees residents, after one said she lived in Punggol.
When asked for proof that MPs cannot see non-residents, he replied that he would speak to them after attending to residents if they didn’t mind waiting. They initially agreed, but one later claimed his explanation was “not true”.
In his post, Shanmugam clarified that MPs may use discretion to see non-residents.
“Most people understand this and would not accuse the MP of lying.”
He said the women accused him of lying “more than once” and added, “The antagonistic way in which they spoke, behaved, interrupted, threw accusations of lying, suggested that they wanted to make a scene, get some material to put out, rather than engage in a genuine discussion.”
One woman became agitated after learning the interaction was being recorded, demanding the video be deleted.
Shanmugam said his volunteers had a right to record in public areas and “sometimes… video my interactions, take photos”.
He told the women he would discuss POFMA with them if time allowed, or schedule a follow-up. He also had to attend a Hari Raya light-up event and complete pending office work.
When he turned to go back inside, the women and a man shouted at him and called him a “coward”.
“I went back to them to tell them off for behaving in this way,” said Shanmugam.
“They can’t, as non-residents, come to (Meet-the-People Sessions) and insist that their political discussion take priority over the needs of the waiting residents.”
He later spoke with the women and two others for 30 to 45 minutes.
“I told them that we were recording the discussion – because I know what had happened in other Meet-the-People Sessions.”
He said they claimed not to be recording. “I treat discussions at Meet-the-People Sessions as confidential, so won’t go into what was discussed.”
Public Praise or Coordinated Support?
Over 2,500 comments were posted under Shanmugam’s Facebook video, with thousands more across CNA, Mothership, and The Straits Times’ Facebook pages.
Many commenters praised Shanmugam for handling the situation calmly and professionally, while condemning the actions of the activists.
However, amidst this wave of support, some of the accounts posting such comments appeared to be inactive, empty, or newly created.
One Facebook user, from an apparently inactive account, said the women’s actions were inappropriate and praised Shanmugam for remaining calm.
Another with an empty profile described the activists as disrespectful.
“I don’t know why there’s a need to shout when it’s just a discussion? The ones showing their faces are being called cowards by those who aren’t showing theirs? Don’t know what logic this is.”
A third user, posting from a newly created account, defended the PAP, saying, “Turning every MPS into a staged fight doesn’t make PAP look bad — it only makes the troublemakers look desperate.”
In addition to these accounts, several users were observed copy-pasting identical remarks across multiple platforms, condemning the activists and repeatedly asserting that the Meet-the-People Session (MPS) is not the appropriate venue for such protests.
This recurring pattern of comment behaviour, coupled with the presence of suspicious or inactive accounts, fuelled speculation about the authenticity of some of the support and prompted questions about potential coordinated efforts to shape public discourse.
Was It Staged? Netizens Question Why Minister Was Mic’d Up During MPS
Several netizens questioned the authenticity of the incident, with many suggesting it may have been staged.
One user pointed out that Shanmugam was wearing a hidden microphone on his chest, specifically between the second and third button.
“Usually, this type of scene his bodyguard will intercept and stop the culprit, but in the video the bodyguard enjoy watching using eye power.”
Another user asked whether it was normal for a minister to wear a mic during MPS sessions.
“If not, why only for this particular night? Did he anticipate that something is going to happen?”
One user questioned why Shanmugam’s side was allowed to record the incident while stopping the activists from doing the same.
They noted that when one woman requested the recording be stopped, Shanmugam cited the public nature of the space — but later told the other woman she needed his permission to record.
Some users also questioned how the two women were able to get so close to the minister, with no apparent action from his bodyguard.
“You think Sham will let this type of thing go unattended? So nice that this was filmed? Bodyguards non-responsive. Nice try, but lousy acting.”
Suspicions that the protest was staged stemmed largely from how the two women were allowed to get so close to the minister despite his security detail — in contrast to previous incidents involving threats to ministers. In 2020, a man was investigated and issued a police warning after he threatened to throw an egg at Shanmugam during an MPS.
Another user questioned why the activists focused on POFMA when they primarily talk about Gaza.
“Why do they want to talk to Shanmugam about POFMA? What does POFMA have to do with Gaza? Something is truly off.”
The user suggested the protest may have been staged to portray one side as the hero and the other as the villain.
Activists Issue Rebuttal, Challenge PAP’s Narrative
Following widespread discussion of their confrontation with Shanmugam at his MPS on 12 March, the two activists have issued a detailed rebuttal, disputing the government’s framing of the incident.
They refuted claims that they were there to cause a disruption, stating that they had made their intentions clear to volunteers and were willing to wait until all residents had been attended to.
They also challenged the PAP to provide evidence of their alleged rowdiness at past MPS sessions.
A key point in their rebuttal was their claim of selective filming, where they said they were encircled by security and volunteers recording them, despite not being allowed to record the interaction themselves.
They also questioned why Shanmugam was wearing a microphone, saying they only realised it when he lowered his voice and stood unusually close to them.
“That’s when we realised he had a mic on his shirt,” they said, raising suspicions that the interaction was being deliberately recorded in anticipation of a confrontation.
They also questioned why only seven minutes of the interaction was made public when the full exchange lasted over 1.5 hours, challenging Shanmugam to release the unedited footage.
On POFMA, they criticised Shanmugam’s assertion that it is affordable to challenge a correction order, pointing out that the financial burden of a $50,000 fine is unrealistic for ordinary citizens.
Their statement further questioned why CNA and the Israeli embassy were not issued POFMA orders over their reporting and statements on the Israel-Gaza war.
“We would like to invite Shanmugam to release the full, unedited videos and audio recordings of us. We truly have a clear conscience,” they said in their statement.
The post “Staged?” Netizens question why Minister Shanmugam was mic’d up during dispute at MPS appeared first on The Online Citizen.
