In the aftermath of a tragic murder at Clementi on 21 October 2024, speculation and false information circulated regarding the identity of the suspect.

The Straits Times inaccurately reported that both the murder suspect and the victim were linked to the grassroots activities of the Trivelis Residents’ Network.

However, this claim was promptly refuted by the People’s Association (PA), which clarified that the suspect was not a grassroots volunteer.

The PA, which falls under the purview of the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY), swiftly issued a statement on 22 October confirming that while the victim had been a grassroots volunteer, the suspect had no affiliation with any PA grassroots organisation.

Despite this clear misreporting, no POFMA (Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act) correction was issued against The Straits Times.

This situation has raised questions about the consistency of POFMA’s application, particularly in light of its use in previous cases involving misinformation by alternative media outlets.

For instance, in October 2023, the Minister for Manpower directed the POFMA Office to issue correction orders to multiple platforms—including Singapore Eye, Gutzy Asia, and The Online Citizen Asia—for spreading unverified claims regarding the nationality of a suicide victim. Both Gutzy Asia and The Online Citizen Asia had relied on a report from Singapore Eye, which had wrongly identified the deceased as a Filipino domestic worker.

In this case, a case of misidentification of a domestic worker led to the immediate use of POFMA by Dr Tan See Leng to correct the error.

In another instance involving Channel News Asia (CNA), the Housing Development Board (HDB) simply alerted the outlet to a factual error, which CNA corrected with an editorial note, without any POFMA direction being issued by Minister for National Development Desmond Lee, who had previously issued four sets of correction directions to individuals and The Online Citizen without any prior alerts.

In the case of The Straits Times’ erroneous report, it is worth noting that a POFMA direction would have been issued to alternative media or individuals making such claims—rather than the People’s Association (PA) issuing a clarification—if it involved a misrepresentation suggesting the suspect was affiliated with grassroots organisations.

The swift action taken against these smaller, alternative media platforms and individuals contrasts with the lack of any POFMA direction against The Straits Times and CNA in similar situations. This raises the question of whether POFMA is being applied exclusively to alternative media, while mainstream outlets receive different treatment.

If the law is to effectively counter misinformation, it must be applied consistently across all media outlets, whether mainstream or alternative, to ensure fairness and maintain public trust.

The National Heritage Board (NHB) has announced that it will begin a new study to determine whether 38 Oxley Road, the home of Singapore’s founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, should be preserved as a national monument.

This comes in response to Lee Kuan Yew’s son, Lee Hsien Yang, applying to the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) on 21 October to demolish the property following the passing of his sister, Dr Lee Wei Ling, on 9 October 2024.

The NHB’s decision, however, raises questions about the necessity of a new study, especially since a thorough assessment was already carried out in 2018.

Additionally, it has led to queries about whether NHB’s CEO, Chang Hwee Nee, has recused herself from this process, given her connection to Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat, her husband.

Chang, who has been CEO of NHB since 1 May 2017, leads the organisation during this critical period.

While there has been no formal statement about whether she is directly involved in decisions concerning 38 Oxley Road, her position naturally brings up questions about potential conflicts of interest.

Heng Swee Keat is a senior figure in the government and Chairman of the People’s Action Party (PAP).

It is publicly known that PAP cabinet members and senior leadership have expressed a desire to preserve Lee Kuan Yew’s house, despite his objection to its preservation.

Given the political sensitivity surrounding the house and how the PAP views 38 Oxley Road as a symbolic site linked to its esteemed late leader, Chang’s role has come under scrutiny.

The NHB has not clarified in its public statement whether Chang has recused herself from involvement in this study or the broader decision-making process.

Why a new study when a 2018 report already exists?

The announcement of a new study has raised eyebrows, particularly as a comprehensive report was produced by the ministerial committee in 2018.

This earlier report, which included an assessment by architects and surveyors Alfred William Lermit and Johannes Westerhout, reviewed the architectural, heritage, and historical significance of 38 Oxley Road.

The committee outlined multiple options, including full demolition, partial preservation (such as retaining the basement dining room), or demolishing the building but designating the site for alternative uses like a park or heritage centre.

The ministerial committee did not make a final recommendation in 2018, instead leaving the decision to future governments, with the understanding that any decision would need to balance public interest with the wishes of the Lee family.

The committee also noted that while Lee Kuan Yew’s preference was for the house to be demolished, he had been open to alternatives, provided the property remained in a habitable state and the family’s privacy was protected.

In light of the 2018 report, NHB’s decision to commission a new study has sparked scepticism.

The NHB press release on 24 October 2024 acknowledged the prior report’s conclusions but stated that the application for immediate demolition by Lee Hsien Yang would “rule out a proper and full consideration of the above options.”

This justification for the new study has led some to question why a fresh review of the house’s national historical, heritage, and architectural significance is needed, as many of the potential options and its significance were already identified in the earlier report.

Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Edwin Tong’s statement further reinforced the government’s cautious approach.

In a Facebook post on 24 October, Tong said that allowing Lee Hsien Yang to proceed with demolition would “rule out options which can be considered” and emphasised that “we do not think that any option should be precluded, or closed off, at this stage.”

However, this statement has raised concerns, as many of these options were explored in the 2018 report. The delay in decision-making and the commissioning of another study could be perceived as indecisiveness or an attempt to avoid confronting a controversial issue in the lead up to the upcoming General Election which must be held by November 2025.

The role of NHB’s CEO and potential conflicts of interest

Another significant question surrounding the process is whether NHB’s decision-making is being conducted independently, given the potential conflicts of interest associated with its leadership.

Chang Hwee Nee’s role as NHB CEO, combined with her marriage to Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat, naturally raises concerns about impartiality, especially on an issue as politically sensitive as 38 Oxley Road.

Heng, a key member of the ruling PAP, was once in line to become Singapore’s Prime Minister, adding further complexity to the situation.

While NHB operates under the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth, led by Edwin Tong, another senior member of the PAP, the board itself is responsible for commissioning and conducting heritage studies.

The board has not provided clarity on whether she has recused herself from involvement in matters related to the house. With no official statement confirming her recusal, public concerns about transparency and independence in the process remain unaddressed and continue to fester.

Lee Hsien Yang’s application for demolition aligns with Lee Kuan Yew’s final wishes, as set out in his will.

However, approval for such demolition must be granted by various regulatory bodies, including the URA and the Building and Construction Authority (BCA).

The application for demolition, aligned with Lee Kuan Yew’s final wishes, has been redirected to NHB due to the potential historical significance of 38 Oxley Road.

However, NHB’s decision to commission a new study raises questions, as the 2018 report had already explored many of the relevant options. If the previous report was insufficient, it leads to concerns about what NHB has been doing in the intervening six years.

This move risks being perceived as a reactive step, possibly aimed at delaying the demolition rather than making a timely decision based on available information.

Furthermore, the lack of clarity about CEO Chang Hwee Nee’s involvement, given her ties to Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat, continues to fuel public concerns about potential conflicts of interest.

Without greater transparency and a clear explanation for the new study, NHB’s actions risk being seen as politically influenced, particularly as this issue grows in prominence in the lead-up to the 2025 General Election.

For many, the core question remains: is NHB genuinely reassessing the site’s heritage value, or merely postponing a difficult and politically charged decision?