Singapore’s Minister for Law and Home Affairs, K Shanmugam, and Minister for Manpower, Tan See Leng, have remained silent over their threat of legal action after Bloomberg and Terry Xu, the chief editor of The Online Citizen (TOC), declined to comply with their demands for an apology, the removal of articles, and damages over alleged defamatory statements.
On 16 December 2024, the two ministers announced that they had initiated legal proceedings against parties that had reproduced a Bloomberg article published on 12 December.
On 19 December 2024, it is understood that Bloomberg, The Edge Singapore, and Xu were issued letters of demand from the two ministers, requiring the removal of the article and the publication of apologies by 24 December 2024.
On 23 December 2024, Singapore’s Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) Office, under the instruction of Edwin Tong, Minister for Culture, Community & Youth and Second Minister for Law, issued correction directions to Bloomberg, The Edge Singapore, and TOC regarding the same articles. All three complied with these directions by appending the required correction notices.
While The Edge Singapore complied with the ministers’ demands by issuing an apology and removing its article on 24 December, Bloomberg has not removed its article or issued an apology.
Instead, it included a statement under the POFMA correction notice asserting that it stands by its reporting, indicating that it will not issue the apology demanded by the ministers in their letters of demand.
The apologies sought by the ministers required the parties to state that the content in their articles was “false and completely without foundation.”
As for Xu, he issued a public statement on 25 December 2024, refusing to apologize or remove the articles in question.
He revealed that he had provided the ministers with an address in Taiwan where they could service their writs.
This raises a potential complication for the ministers in pursuing legal action against Xu, as any failure to secure permission from Taiwan could delay or block the proceedings entirely.
TOC has written to the two ministers inquiring whether they had initiated legal proceedings as promised. However, no response has been received thus far.
As of 3 January 2025, there has been no public confirmation that a writ of summons has been filed or served against Bloomberg, nor that the ministers have sought permission to serve their writs out of jurisdiction on Terry Xu in Taiwan.
Bloomberg and TOC Articles Focus on GCB Transactions
Both Bloomberg and TOC’s articles scrutinized transactions in Singapore’s Good Class Bungalow (GCB) market, highlighting concerns over transparency.
The articles reported that some GCB transactions were conducted using trusts, which do not disclose the ultimate beneficiaries in public records accessible through the Singapore Land Authority.
Bloomberg cited significant transactions involving both ministers:
- Minister Shanmugam’s sale of a GCB in Queen Astrid Park for S$88 million in 2023.
- Minister Tan’s purchase of a GCB in Brizay Park for S$27.3 million, also in 2023.
The ministers have not denied the transactions but, in their letters of demand, alleged that the articles falsely implied that they:
- Exploited legal mechanisms for privacy to avoid scrutiny.
- Acted improperly by participating in an opaque system with no safeguards or disclosure requirements.
The Singapore government has defended the use of trusts in GCB transactions, stating that it knows the identities of the ultimate beneficiaries even when trusts are used and that there was no lack of transparency in GCB transactions.
Delays and Public Scrutiny
Many are watching to see whether the ministers will proceed with formal legal action or reconsider their approach in light of the defiance from Bloomberg and Xu.
Given Bloomberg’s presence in Singapore, the ministers could have served the writ on the next working day, 26 December 2024, similar to how Terry Xu was served with a writ from former Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in 2019 after he refused to apologize and remove an article.
The delay raises questions about how far the ministers will pursue their claims in court, especially as they navigate the complexities of non-compliance in an election year—a context that inevitably adds political weight to their decision.
Their choice now lies between suing an international news outlet with significant resources or risking rejection by Taiwanese courts and scrutiny from its media by applying to serve Xu there.
