u/Founders_Mem_90210

https://preview.redd.it/v3z4rgjzudih1.png?width=1280&format=png&auto=webp&s=d146d3c516e4cd83d28c843cdbdf0dfda81b7654

Anthony Bourdain's Parts Unknown (2017): Singapore

Not sure what the age demographic of this sub is, but if you're a Millennial/Gen Z/Gen Alpha and have never heard of Anthony Bourdain nor this particular Singapore-focused episode of his "Parts Unknown" documentary series, and you want a palate cleanser from the absolute trainwreck that is NDP61...

Then watch this, and think how well (or not) this has held up to the passage of time about SG today.

https://preview.redd.it/zd1p3gtmnbih1.png?width=747&format=png&auto=webp&s=eb51461e8de61397874bbaa408be5bb17e15fff3

Halimah: Stay in Singapore, celebrate together over long National Day weekend.

Published by CNA: 15 Mar 2015 

SINGAPORE — Speaker of Parliament Halimah Yacob has urged Singaporeans to stay home over the long National Day weekend from August 7-10. She hopes Singaporeans would take the time to celebrate together.

7 August was declared a public holiday by President Tony Tan Keng Yam, as part of Singapore’s 50th birthday celebrations.

Madam Halimah said: “I understand that Singaporeans take the opportunity during periods of long weekends to chill out with their families overseas. On other occasions, that’s all right but on this occasion I hope that they will stay in Singapore and really celebrate together as a nation. It will be very sad if a quarter of Singapore goes overseas to celebrate.” 

https://preview.redd.it/ertxoopoobih1.png?width=621&format=png&auto=webp&s=90b3c6be26ff2e37f4dd621f6ff25495e26941bc

https://preview.redd.it/e4k2nh82nleh1.png?width=679&format=png&auto=webp&s=541cce5051db3b28bbdb0723ef931f1e0a730943

Article Link: https://www.asiasentinel.com/p/obituary-kenneth-jeyaretnam-1959-2026 (Archive Link: https://archive.is/bCCM7 )

Kenneth Jeyaretnam, a trained economist who gave up a career in finance to take over his father’s opposition Reform Party as secretary-general to tilt at unassailable Singaporean political windmills, died in London on July 18 at age 67, leaving a fragmented and cowed opposition with one less voice.

Mr. Jeyaretnam’s wife, Amanda, announced his death after a lingering illness in a Facebook post on July 19. She said her husband had “died peacefully in his sleep surrounded by family.” Funeral details for a small family service are still being finalized, she told local media, and that a memorial to celebrate his life will be arranged at a later date.

“Kenneth was inured to the prospect of personal or political hardship and failures from watching his father’s dogged perseverance and political persecution as Singapore’s first elected opposition MP since its independence in 1965,” Amanda Jeyaretnam told Asia Sentinel. “Both father and son viewed political pluralism and civic participation as principles worth advancing regardless of personal electoral success. They believed that Singaporeans should have meaningful electoral choices and opportunities to exercise their democratic rights, even in a political landscape dominated by the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) and their unbroken supermajority in Parliament.”

The opposition figure, his wife said, had been anxious to return to Singapore to face charges brought against him by the Singapore government and to return to the political fray, a wish he also expressed in conversations with Asia Sentinel, but as his illness progressed, he was never able to do so.

Although the Reform Party found little success at the polls, Mr. Jeyaretnam remained a tenacious critic of the Singapore government, and paid for it with numerous correction demands under the country’s controversial false news statute, the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act, which gives individual ministers the power to decide what constitutes a “falsehood” and issue correction directions, rather than submitting the issues to a test by impartial legal bodies when evaluating criticisms.

He was under constant investigation by the police and the POFMA office for possible offences as well as possible contempt of court. Officials issued at least 10 such POFMA demands between 2023 and 2025 regarding government spending, lucrative property rentals by cabinet ministers, the National Investment Returns Contribution (NIRC), and auxiliary police hiring, many of his criticisms issued from his bed in London, where he suffered from deep vein thrombosis and bilateral pulmonary embolism that ultimately contributed to ending his life.

Mr Jeyaretnam never managed to secure a full-time career in Singapore despite his double first-class honors in economics from Cambridge, facing multiple rejections from various government agencies and civil service departments, according to recently disclosed details online, which said he lost his first and only full-time job working as an assistant manager in HSBC’s merchant banking arm, Wardley, in 1987. Mr Jeyaretnam was reportedly compelled to resign after only weeks in his job following political pressure applied through one of Lee Kuan Yew’s permanent secretaries, according to the report.

“I admired Kenneth for his convictions — for his belief in fighting for the underprivileged and for those on the margins of society,” said Lim Tean, Secretary-General, People’s Alliance for Reform, another splinter opposition party. “When he believed in something, he never wavered, no matter how unpopular that cause might be. That was the measure of the man, and it was his father’s spirit living on in him. On behalf of the People’s Alliance for Reform, I extend our deepest condolences to his wife Amanda and his son Jared. Our thoughts and prayers are with them at this most difficult time.

Other opposition leaders issued similar accolades.

Mr. Jeyaretnam was the eldest son of the late opposition icon J.B. Jeyaretnam – popularly known as JBJ –the first opposition politician elected to the post-independence Singapore Parliament in 1981. JBJ established the Reform Party in 2008 after Singapore government officials repeatedly sued him, harassed him with legal actions, bankrupted his original Worker Party, and sought to put him in jail. The father was a mortal foe of Singapore’s modern founder Lee Kuan Yew and jousted with him on the floor of parliament repeatedly. After his father’s death, Mr. Jeyaretnam contested three general elections against then Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s team but was unsuccessful.

He didn’t contest in the 2025 election, explaining that he decided against doing so after “the advice of doctors over some recent health issues,” which he didn’t specify. Deep vein thrombosis, which often occurs during long-haul international flights, involves the formation of a blood clot that forms in a deep vein, usually in the calf, thigh, or pelvis. It is dangerous because the clot can break loose, travel through the bloodstream to the lungs, and block an artery—a life-threatening emergency known as a pulmonary embolism.

Jeyaretnam studied at the United World College of South-East Asia and the Charterhouse School in England. In 1983, he graduated from Cambridge and went on to pursue a career in finance, first as a credit analyst at Wardley, HSBC’s merchant banking subsidiary, before moving to Continental Bank, Banque Indosuez, Lehman Brothers, and Nomura International.

In a letter to members and supporters posted on Facebook late on July 19, Reform Party chairman Mahaboob Batcha said RP was “deeply saddened” by Jeyaretnam’s passing. “Throughout his political career, he fiercely championed democracy and consistently put the needs of Singapore above his own political ambitions,” he said.

Besides his wife Amanda, Mr. Jeyaretnam is survived by their son Jared and his younger brother, High Court judge Philip Jeyaretnam.

South Beach Residences

Article Link: https://archive.is/xdguX

SINGAPORE - A conveyancing lawyer was charged with forgery on July 16, with court documents linking her alleged actions to an associate of one of the 10 foreigners convicted in the $3 billion money laundering case.

Chan I-Fei Julia, 61, is said to have abetted one Lim Lai Hong to create a false document that was signed by a person named Chen Lingling sometime around Dec 14, 2023.

The document was related to Chen’s purchase of a property at South Beach Residences at 28 Beach Road.

Court documents did not provide any information about Lim and Chen.

Checks by The Straits Times showed that Chen was previously identified by authorities as one of the associates of the 10 foreigners convicted in the money laundering case.

She was named as a shareholder in several firms that held commercial real estate, including a four-storey shophouse on North Bridge Road that fetched $42 million in a high-profile property sale.

The case against Chan, a director at Sterling Law, will be mentioned again on Aug 13.

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

Asia Sentinel, September 2023: Chinese Dirty Money and Singaporean Luxury Properties

Article Link: https://www.asiasentinel.com/p/china-dirty-money-singapore-luxury-properties (Archive: https://archive.is/sM3Vy )

Some of the at-large suspects involved with Singapore’s money-laundering bust announced by authorities on August 16 are speculated to be the ultimate beneficiary owners of 23 units at South Beach Residences, one of the country’s most luxurious condominium developments, sources have told Asia Sentinel. One of these unnamed suspects on the run is described as directly owning two of the most expensive units. All of the property transactions are said to have been completed via shell companies registered in principalities such as Malaysia, Hong Kong, and the British Virgin Islands.

Opening sales at South Beach Residences were so highly anticipated in September 2018 that an unnamed buyer reportedly offered S$26 million (US$19.2 million) pre-launch for a single penthouse. According to sources with knowledge of the sale, the buyer was a Chinese national who offered to pay the full sum in cash without bank financing. Three months later, some 25 units were sold to predominantly Chinese nationals, each commanding more than S$3,000 per square foot at prices starting from S$6 million up to S$8 million. In October 2021, one three-bedroom penthouse apartment sold for a record S$18.5 million to an unnamed Chinese ultra-high-net-worth (UHNW) individual.

https://preview.redd.it/usqfntddw93h1.png?width=830&format=png&auto=webp&s=1a8fbdc1c82a64c4d3c168c413c4820cdd3dfccf

Article Link: https://www.asiasentinel.com/p/singapore-court-rule-bloomberg-defamation-suit [Archive Link: https://archive.is/GTQCy ]

A Singapore High Court is due to rule shortly on a landmark defamation suit with implications for the island state’s relationship with international media. On May 22, the Court heard concluding arguments in the suit, in which Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam and Manpower Minister Tan See Leng are suing Bloomberg, the world’s premier business reporting service, for a December 2024 article about the increasingly secretive nature of Singapore’s ultra-luxury Good Class Bungalow (GCB) property market. The presiding High Court Justice Audrey Lim has reserved her verdict for an as-yet undetermined date.

The case also bears watching because Singapore officials, and particularly the Lee family dynasty, have used the courts in defamation and contempt cases to pursue journalists, including many international news organizations and opposition politicians, to tamp down dissenting voices. No official has ever lost a defamation case in the Singapore courts. If in this case Justice Lim were to rule against Shanmugam and Tan, observers say, it could be the harbinger of a new direction for the government and the courts under Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, who took power almost exactly a year ago, succeeding Lee Hsien Loong, who stepped down after two decades in office.

The ire of the two cabinet ministers was triggered by a story citing their lucrative property transactions by Bloomberg journalist Dexter Low De Wei, titled “Singapore Mansion Deals Are Increasingly Shrouded in Secrecy”. Tan in 2023 purchased a S$27.3 million (US$21.3 million) GCB located within the Brizay Park enclave, while Shanmugam had sold his Astrid Hill GCB in August 2023 for a whopping S$88 million (US$68.7 million).

The property transactions were cited as examples to illustrate the booming yet increasingly secretive nature of Singapore’s GCB property market, which saw half of its 2024 transactions, including those of both government ministers, without publicly declared and accessible caveats. The Bloomberg article noted Singapore’s attractiveness to rich foreigners as a politically stable tax and wealth haven to purchase and own luxury properties as part of their asset portfolios. However, this is tempered by concerns about the increasing usage of shell companies and anonymous trusts to purchase multimillion-dollar GCBs, with potential negative ramifications for Singapore’s global reputation for clean and accountable financial management.

Singapore analysts say this is very much Shanmugam’s personal vendetta against Bloomberg, with Tan See Leng strung along as cover. Shanmugam’s Astrid Hill ownership status was a major sore point for him in 2023 when he, along with Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan, faced intense public and political scrutiny for their renting of state-owned colonial bungalows at allegedly below market rates and maintained on taxpayer dollars.

Shanmugam’s Astrid Hill GCB sale in August 2024 came almost three years after it was first put on sale in November 2021, and one month after his parliamentary grilling which ultimately saw no wrongdoing declared on both ministers’ part. The Online Citizen’s Terry Xu first broke the news of Shanmugam’s secretive offloading of the home in September 2024, with subsequently-leaked property sale documents confirming the S$88 million price tag footed by an anonymous buyer acting via a trust managed by UBS Trustees (Singapore) Ltd.

In its legal defense, Bloomberg argued that its reporting concerned matters of public interest, including rising GCB prices, the use of trust structures in property purchases, and transparency in property ownership increasingly held by newly naturalized Singapore citizens. Invoking the principle of “responsible journalism”, Senior Counsel Sreenivasan Narayanan maintained that Bloomberg’s article did not accuse the ministers of wrongdoing, money laundering, or dishonesty.

Bloomberg also argued that the article’s language was qualified and that readers would not interpret it as defamatory, given the factual truth of both ministers’ GCB property transactions, lacking publicly-declared and accessible caveats. Shanmugam had also confirmed under cross-examination that he, along with his lawyers and bankers, had no idea as to the identity of the anonymous buyer who had netted him ten times’ profit on his GCB’s original value.

That was immediately countered by Tan and Shanmugam’s lawyer, senior counsel Davinder Singh, who argued that Bloomberg’s article had implied inadequate anti-money laundering safeguards in Singapore’s property market and portrayed the ministers negatively. Singh charged that Bloomberg had selectively framed facts, with Dexter Low inserting “political fodder” into the narrative and deliberately linking the ministers to suspicious property dealings with a pen “dipped in gall”.

Citing internal Bloomberg communications which suggested the ministers’ intentional targeting in the offending article, Singh also claimed that Bloomberg had attempted to suppress communications from being used as evidence on top of demonstrating “unprecedented” malice and determination to harm the two government ministers.

The attribution of “unprecedented malice and determination to hurt” supposedly stemmed from Bloomberg’s refusal to comply with a POFMA “Fake News” Correction Notice issued by Shanmugam’s then-second in command Edwin Tong at the Ministry of Law in December 2024 over Low’s article. Bloomberg chose to publish the demanded correction notice in the spirit of “right to reply,” but robustly stood by it. In an ironic demonstration of the Barbara Streisand effect, the Correction Notice publication requirements, as well as Shanmugam’s excoriations on social media resulted in Bloomberg making an originally-paywalled article free to read for a global audience.

Critics note that none of the facts in the article are in dispute. They say the entire premise of the suit hinges in large part on the plaintiffs’ selective reading and interpretation of the Bloomberg article as offensive. In effect, Singapore’s High Court is being asked to pass judgment on whether the subjective reading of factual circumstances as a cited example should be given “beyond reasonable doubt” legal weight in defamation claims. Yet one can only take offence and not give it, as crystallized in the idiom of “seeing a bow reflected as a snake in a water cup (杯弓蛇影)” invoked by Dexter Low in court to illustrate his having no hidden agenda of malice against Shanmugam.

If the court rules in favour of the ministers, it could set a significant precedent affecting how media organizations report on high-profile individuals in Singapore, particularly where financial transparency and political figures intersect. It may also influence how future disputes between public officials and the press are interpreted under defamation law in a tightening regulatory environment.

This is exemplified by Singapore’s recently enacted Online Safety (Relief and Accountability) Act, with the newly formed Online Safety Commission and its commissioner being directly subjugated under the Ministry of Law. Among the 13 categories of “online harms” under its oversight and enforcement is a particular one defined as “publication of statement harmful to reputation”. It enables, with trivial ease, the ability of government ministers in Singapore to wield the full weight of the state against any critical media reportage or even anonymous online criticisms they deem as harmful to their reputation.