S'pore Minister Tan See Leng claims parts of Bloomberg article on GCB were 'false & baseless'

In his lawsuit against Bloomberg and one of its writers, Manpower Minister Tan See Leng claimed that several sections of the article were defamatory as the offending statements were "false and baseless and were and are calculated to disparage and impugn Tan."

According to CNA, who saw Tan's statement of claim, Tan had pointed out the sections of the article that were defamatory.

The statement noted that the words in the article suggested he "took advantage of there being no checks and balances or disclosure requirements in purchasing a property in a non-transparent manner."

Bloomberg ran an article on Dec. 12, 2024, titled "Singapore Mansion Deals Are Increasingly Shrouded in Secrecy".

The article by Low De Wei dealt with Good Class Bungalow (GCB) transactions in Singapore. It also mentioned private properties purchased by Law Minister K Shanmugam and Tan.

On Feb. 26, it was reported that Tan and Minister for Home Affairs and Law K Shanmugam filed defamation lawsuits against Bloomberg and the journalist.

Tan's claims

Tan claimed that the words in the article meant or were understood to falsely mean that he wanted to "hide his transaction and avoid scrutiny, including about the possibility of money laundering".

CNA reported that Tan's suit will also rely on reactions to the article on platforms like Reddit and HardwareZone and how it was shared.

Tan is reportedly seeking unspecified damages and costs, said CNA.

He also seeks an injunction that Bloomberg and Low would be "restrained" from "publishing or disseminating the said false and defamatory allegations or any words to the same effect by any means whatsoever".

Bloomberg's defence

Bloomberg and Low filed separate but similar defences, reiterating that the words in the article were not defamatory.

Bloomberg stated in its defence that it has "no interest nor reason to, and did not in fact impugn the reputation of ministers of the Singapore government," CNA wrote.

The media outlet highlighted that its article focuses on purchasing GCBs, which are not caveated, bring some privacy benefits and typically have a higher transaction price. It also noted that those who buy GCBs and do not want their identities to be publicly discoverable use trust structures to buy their GCBs.

Bloomberg refuted Tan's claims of defamation, pointing out that it was not defamatory to state that a purchaser of a property could make use of the relative privacy that a non-caveated transaction, nor was it defamatory to state that a buyer wishes to keep his transaction private.

Bloomberg also argued that the offending words Tan highlighted in his statement of claim were "a selective and incomplete reproduction of the article", CNA stated.

The media outlet denied casting aspersions on Tan, stating he was known as a "man of means".

"Any suggestion that (Tan) purchased his property in a non-transparent manner to hide his transaction and avoid scrutiny about the possibility of money laundering would not be plausible."

Bloomberg also defended its journalist, stating that Low had exercised responsible journalism when preparing the article.

According to CNA, Low ensured the reference to Tan's GCB purchase was factually accurate, short, and presented in neutral terms.

In addition, Low had emailed Tan's press secretary twice, on Oct. 25 and Dec. 4, 2024, to seek Tan's comment on the article. The press secretary replied that Tan would not comment on the issue.

Low had also contacted the Singapore Land Authority, Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA), and real estate specialist and relied on data from reputable databases.

Tan and Shanmugam suits are set for case conferences at the High Court on Mar. 11, said CNA.

POFMA

According to Factually, the government's fact-checking website, Bloomberg made false statements that "attack the transparency of property transactions in Singapore":

"Together, these falsehoods give the impression that Singapore does not have a robust legal framework to require disclosure of information to the government in GCB transactions, which may allow wrongdoing to take place undetected.

It is in the public interest that these falsehoods are addressed so that public confidence in the government is not undermined."

The Edge Singapore then reproduced Bloomberg's article in full on its website.

The Independent Singapore and The Online Citizen then published pieces commenting on the original Bloomberg piece.

All four news sites subsequently received Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) correction orders.

The Edge Singapore took down the article and later apologised to Shanmugam and Tan. The Independent Singapore removed its article and posted the correction notice on its website and Facebook.

The Online Citizen posted the correction notice to its story but kept the story available online.

Bloomberg posted the correction notice on its article and its social media posts. Bloomberg, however, stated that it disagrees with the correction direction, writing:

Under Singapore’s Prevention of Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act, Bloomberg is required under threat of sanction to publish this Correction Direction. Bloomberg respectfully disagrees with it, and reserves its right to appeal and challenge the Correction Direction. We stand by our reporting.

The article is still up on Bloomberg's website as of Mar. 5, 2025.

Top photo via MDDI/YouTube