Singapore’s Ministry of Law refutes allegations regarding rental and construction works at 26 Ridout Road
Singapore’s Ministry of Law (MinLaw) has issued a correction order under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) to The Online Citizen (TOC) and YouTube channel Twenty Two Thirty. Both platforms are accused of spreading false claims about rental agreements and construction at 26 Ridout Road, a state property leased to Minister for Home Affairs and Law K Shanmugam. The correction order requires them to update their content with accurate government clarifications.
On February 25, 2025, MinLaw refuted claims made by TOC and Twenty Two Thirty regarding 26 Ridout Road. They alleged that the Singapore Land Authority (SLA) had assured Minister Shanmugam of a lease extension beyond 2027, that approvals for construction were not obtained, and that public funds were used for renovations. MinLaw stated these claims were false, distorting publicly available information.
TOC published an article on February 14, 2025, and shared it on social media. Similarly, Twenty Two Thirty uploaded a YouTube video on February 16, making the same allegations. They claimed Minister Shanmugam received unfair privileges in his tenancy agreement and that taxpayers’ money was used for private renovations. The government denied these allegations, stating that all tenancy agreements follow standard policies and that improvements were privately funded.
MinLaw clarified that SLA did not provide any assurance of a lease extension beyond 2027. State property tenancies run on fixed two- or three-year terms, with renewals capped at nine years. The current lease for 26 Ridout Road was renewed in June 2024, valid until June 2027, following SLA guidelines. Future extensions will depend on market conditions, tenant history, and government land use plans.
Claims that URA and BCA failed to approve construction at 26 Ridout Road were also dismissed. The government confirmed that all necessary permits were obtained for renovations, including pool installation and structural repairs. Tenants must comply with regulations, and the government labeled allegations of oversight as “factually incorrect.”
Another false claim was that public funds were used for construction at 26 Ridout Road. The government stated that all renovation costs were borne by the tenant, and no state funding was involved. Despite this, TOC and Twenty Two Thirty continued to assert that taxpayer money was misused. MinLaw called these accusations “deliberate distortions” meant to mislead the public.
Following the POFMA order, TOC and Twenty Two Thirty must now include correction notices in their original content. These notices will direct readers to the government’s Factually website for accurate information. This case highlights ongoing tensions between alternative media and the Singaporean government regarding misinformation and public accountability.
This POFMA directive reflects Singapore’s strict stance on countering misinformation, especially involving senior government officials. While independent media plays a crucial role in scrutinizing power, the government insists that reporting must be fact-based. The incident raises broader concerns about media credibility and the line between investigative journalism and misleading narratives.
Sources: Mothership (2025), CNA (2025)
Keywords: Singapore Law, Online Falsehoods, POFMA Order, Ministry Of Law, 26 Ridout Road
