A woman in eastern China fractured four of her mother-in-law's ribs after accusing the older woman of neglecting her grandchildren to pursue a relationship of her own.

Her husband has also been criticised online for defending the attack instead of condemning it.

The case, which took place in Jiaxing, Zhejiang province, was first aired on Zhejiang Television's mediation programme "Qiantang Uncle Mediator" and has since fuelled heated debate on mainland social media over childcare obligations and family violence.

What triggered the confrontation

After losing their father, a man named Jiao and his elder brother remained in their hometown, while their mother, surnamed Shen, moved to Jiaxing with their elder sister, according to the South China Morning Post (SCMP), citing a local television report.

As Jiao and his wife held jobs in separate cities and had two young children between them, they eventually turned to Shen to look after the kids.

Trouble began when the couple's son used the household's home surveillance system to tell his mother he wasn't feeling well, adding that his grandmother had refused to check his temperature despite this.

Worried, Jiao's wife boarded a high-speed train, reaching Shen's home roughly an hour later.

Shen explained that the boy had been acting up and was hard to manage, and mentioned she was also nursing a toothache.

When her daughter-in-law suggested a hospital visit, Shen turned the offer down, saying she would rather go see her boyfriend instead — allegedly declaring:

"I would rather die than look after the grandchildren."

The exchange eventually escalated into physical violence.

Jiao's wife assaulted Shen, leaving her with a bruised face and four fractured ribs, a medical diagnosis later found.

According to reports, this was not an isolated incident. Shen had allegedly been assaulted by her daughter-in-law on previous occasions over the same childcare grievance.

Husband blames mother

Rather than condemning his wife, Jiao defended her conduct.

He did not dispute that his wife had done wrong but instead pinned the blame squarely on his mother.

Jiao called his own mother "immoral" and insisted she "deserved" the beating, according to SCMP, accusing her of valuing her romantic relationship over her grandchildren.

He added that, given his own financial strain, Shen owed him either hands-on childcare or a monthly allowance.

Sister says mother deserves her own happiness

However, Jiao's elder sister publicly disagreed with her brother on the television programme, arguing that their mother, a low-paid sanitation worker who had endured years of hardship, deserved the chance to find companionship in her later years.

She said, as quoted by Sing Tao Daily:

"My mother toiled hard her whole life. Now that she can find a considerate companion in her later years, as her child I feel very supportive of it."

She added that despite her limited income, Shen had transferred more than 100,000 yuan (S$19,070) to her two sons over the years.

For her part, Shen insisted she had no wish to take on her grandchildren's upbringing, and said the assault left her unable to work or keep supporting Jiao financially.

Legal experts weigh in

A lawyer cited by SCMP noted that Jiao's wife could be charged with intentional injury causing minor bodily harm, an offence carrying a jail term of up to three years.

Ma added that the duty to raise and educate children rests legally with the parents rather than grandparents.

This meant that, since both Jiao and his wife were able-bodied and employed, Shen was under no legal obligation to look after the children.

The incident has drawn fierce criticism on mainland social media, largely directed at Jiao and his wife rather than Shen.

One commenter wrote:

"Jiao has failed both as a son and as a father. If he cannot raise his own children, why did he have them?"

Another said: "However aggrieved you may feel, violence solves nothing. The moment you strike someone, the law is no longer on your side."

Singapore comedian Abigail Chay, 67, held an "afterlife farewell ceremony" on Jul. 10 as a celebration of life, friendship and the importance of planning for the inevitable.

The event, held at Centre 42 Black Box Theatre, was attended by friends, fellow entertainers and well-wishers.

More commonly known as a "living funeral", such ceremonies allow family and friends to celebrate someone's life while they are still alive.

They are often held by people nearing the end of life, though Chay told Mothership her health was perfectly fine, apart from some digestive issues.

One of Singapore's most prominent transgender entertainers, Chay first gained popularity after appearing in the local sitcom "Under One Roof" in 1995.

A celebration of life

Speaking to Mothership, Chay said the idea for the ceremony came about spontaneously during a conversation with a fellow actress and friend, Joey Swee.

Rather than celebrating only milestones such as birthdays and weddings, Chay said she also wanted to commemorate her eventual passing.

Saying that death can approach anyone suddenly, Chay expressed how she wanted to be able to experience celebrating her life with her loved ones before that moment comes.

Chay later approached funeral services provider Nirvana Memorial Garden, which embraced the idea and organised and sponsored the ceremony.

While some people were initially sceptical of the concept, Chay said those closest to her understood why it was meaningful.

During the ceremony, well-wishers first paid their respects to a flower altar with Chay's photography, while Chay waited behind the curtains to watch.

Then eulogies were delivered by longtime friend and director Garrick Wong, talk show host Ah Hao and other friends, who shared heartfelt memories and paid tribute to Chay's impact on their lives.

At the end, Chay came out from behind to give her own speech.

"It is a privilege to witness my own farewell ceremony," Chay said.

"I got to see people talking about me in their eulogy, and it was so heartwarming that people actually feel that way about me positively."

Encouraging conversations about afterlife planning

Beyond celebrating her life, Chay said she hoped the ceremony would encourage people to make arrangements for their end-of-life wishes and to have open conversations about death.

"The idea is to encourage people not to be afraid of death," she said.

“There is nothing taboo about afterlife planning. Only when you can deal with death, will you know how to properly live your life.”

She added that preparing for death, both physically and mentally, allows people to appreciate life more fully and live with fewer regrets.

After experiencing her own farewell ceremony, Chay said she now hopes to "live my life like it's my last day", embracing every moment and making the most of the time she has left.

Chay has also recently performed in a Chinese-language talk show, 人生终点站 (The Final Station of Life), which explored themes of life and death.

She also hosts a Facebook Live talk show on ghost stories, with one taking place this Thursday (Jul. 16).

A 26-year-old man was arrested in connection with a case of voluntarily causing hurt by a dangerous weapon.

The arrest occurred on Jul. 13 at about 6:15pm at Block 508 Ang Mo Kio Avenue 8.

According to Shin Min Daily News, the man was suspected to have used a knife to cause injury in Ang Mo Kio about two weeks ago.

About seven or eight police officers were seen escorting the man from the scene.

The man was seen with tattoos on his face and neck.

He was subsequently taken away in a police vehicle.

A second-floor resident, who wanted to remain anonymous, told Shin Min that she saw multiple police vehicles arrive in the evening, but did not hear any commotion in the block.

She claimed that the man lived with his family and that she had not previously heard any quarrels.

Stepfather of man speaks to media

When Shin Min visited the man’s unit, his stepfather said he only found out that the police had arrested his stepson after returning home from work.

He refused to disclose further information.

In response to queries from Mothership, police officers conducted follow-up investigations into a case of voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapon at Block 508 Ang Mo Kio Avenue 8 and arrested the man.

Police investigations are ongoing.

In 2025, a Singaporean couple in their mid-30s packed up their belongings, relocated to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, and sold their Housing and Development Block (HDB) flat in Yishun.

In a YouTube video posted on Jul. 5, 2026, Rachell Tan, 36, and her husband Sean Lee, 37, shared why they decided to make the move.

The couple, who co-run an e-commerce business, had lived in their four-room flat in Yishun for around six years.

However, they revealed that relocating was not their first choice initially.

But as curveballs go, they now live in Desa ParkCity in KL, a gated township.

Home is a 135 sq m (1,453 sq ft) three-bedroom condominium apartment that they bought for around RM1.7 million (S$539,000), reported The Straits Times.

Considerations

Even before fulfilling the five-year Minimum Occupation Period (MOP) for their flat, the couple had already started discussing what to do next.

They considered several options, including staying put, selling the flat to upgrade to another property, or relocating overseas.

Their goal was to be able to retire in their 40s, reported ST.

Lee and Tan had only envisioned relocating to Kuala Lumpur in about 20 years or so when they were in their 50s, for a slower pace of life.

Initial plans

One of their initial plans was to sell their flat and buy a condominium unit.

In this scenario, they would rent out the purchased condominium while renting an HDB flat to live in themselves, allowing them to "enjoy the capital appreciation" of the private property.

Realistically, however, Tan admitted that she was unsure how many people could follow through with such a plan, as many would naturally want to live in the property they had bought.

At the time, the couple were also deciding between renting another place or moving into the home of Lee's mother, where there were spare rooms available.

They eventually leaned towards staying with Lee's mum for a few months before finding a new place to live.

Mum's place

Rather than spending around S$36,000 a year on rent elsewhere, the couple thought they could use that money to renovate Lee's mum's house instead.

Once they moved out, the renovated rooms could be rented out to generate passive income for her.

However, towards the end of the renovation works, Lee's mum lost her job and no longer had a source of income, changing the couple's plans.

They decided not to move into her house so that she could rent out the spare rooms instead.

As a result, the couple postponed their move and continued living in their own HDB flat.

Around the same time, they viewed several potential homes in Singapore but could not find one they liked.

Just for fun

That was when they decided to look at properties in Malaysia.

"'Just for fun... Just for fun,'" Lee recalled.

To their surprise, they found homes they genuinely liked, and what began as a casual idea, gradually turned into a serious plan.

After moving to KL

After deciding to relocate, the couple had to choose whether to sell or rent out their Singapore home.

The couple had initially bought the 900 sq ft resale flat, which was around 30 years old, for about S$268,000, which they considered affordable because of its age.

They ultimately decided to sell the flat due to lease decay and concerns over potential maintenance issues that could come with renting out an older property.

They sold the Yishun flat for S$520,000, almost double the price they bought it for, reported ST.

How has it been?

In the video, Tan said they have enjoyed the move thus far, describing it as an opportunity to experience a new environment and constantly discover new things.

The estimated monthly expenditure has decreased by at least 30 per cent, ST reported.

"Sometimes you can plan all you want in life, but life can just turn 180 degrees," Tan said. "Then you just have to adapt and go with the flow."

A fitness corner in Fernvale, near Jalan Kayu, was turned into a public laundry rack.

Shirts, shorts, towels and even underwear, were spotted hanging on multiple exercise equipment from hangers, preventing residents from using the public facilities.

The fitness corner is near Block 414A Fernvale Link.

The incident came to light after photos were posted to the Facebook group Complaint Singapore.

The caption on Facebook read: "I came across this scene at the public fitness corner near Block 414A Fernvale Link and couldn't help but wonder if I had missed an announcement. Since when did outdoor exercise equipment become a communal clothes drying rack?"

The post added: "These fitness stations are installed for everyone in the neighbourhood to exercise and stay healthy, not to dry personal laundry. If one person starts doing this, what's stopping others from following? Before long, will the entire fitness corner become an open-air laundry area instead of a place for residents to work out?"

Reactions online

One commenter urged the town council to install clear "No Drying of Laundry" signs, issue written warnings to first-time offenders, and take enforcement action against repeat offenders where permitted under the applicable by-laws.

Another commenter, however, saw the lighter side, joking that having a towel readily available after a workout was actually quite convenient.

Town council responds

In a statement to Mothership, an Ang Mo Kio Town Council (AMKTC) spokesperson said the town council was aware of the incident.

It has since deployed its team to put up advisory notices at the fitness corner to remind residents not to dry laundry on the equipment as it inconveniences others and blocks access to the shared facilities.

The spokesperson added: "We seek the co-operation of all residents to use our shared community facilities responsibly and with consideration for others, so that these amenities remain accessible, clean and enjoyable for everyone in the neighbourhood."

A man who financed a criminal syndicate that sold anonymised WhatsApp and WeChat accounts to scammers has been jailed four years and fined S$52,000.

Ronnie Low (Liu Luoli), 50, was sentenced on Jul. 14 after pleading guilty to three charges, including being a member of a locally-linked organised crime group (OCG) and engaging in a criminal conspiracy to acquire benefits of criminal conduct, reported CNA.

Two further charges were taken into consideration for sentencing. If Low cannot pay the fine, he will serve an additional five months in jail.

The SIM cards seized from the syndicate's premises were linked to 2,393 police reports and a total of S$51 million in losses across a range of scams, according to court documents seen by Mothership.

How the syndicate began

The operation traced back to mid-2022, when Alvin Kok Jun Keat, then 31, was looking for ways to earn fast cash and came across an "SMS modem".

This is a device capable of receiving multiple SMS messages sent to pre-registered SIM cards, with the messages retrievable through a connected computer, court documents showed.

Kok devised a business plan around the device: setting up anonymous WhatsApp and WeChat accounts using pre-registered SIM cards, then activating them using one-time passwords (OTPs) received through the modem.

Customers who bought these accounts could conceal their identities while using them for criminal purposes, including scams.

He imported an SMS modem from China and sourced pre-registered SIM cards through Telegram, hiring an unidentified person to advertise the service on the platform.

He then charged US$30 (S$38.50) for 30 days' use of a WhatsApp account, or US$10 (S$12.80) for a WeChat account, with all payments made to a cryptocurrency wallet.

Low's role as financier

Low was introduced to Kok in October 2023 by his friend, 47-year-old Tan Shay Howe, after Kok went looking for investors, according to court documents.

Kok told Low the business was profitable and guaranteed him S$15,000 to S$20,000 a month in returns.

He had asked Low for S$100,000, but Low invested only S$40,000, as he did not have the full sum in cash. Tan separately invested S$25,000 for a cut of the profits.

Low received roughly half of the syndicate's monthly net profits after operating costs, salaries, SIM card top-ups and rental, were deducted.

In total, he made about S$92,651 from the syndicate's illegal activities over the roughly seven months he was involved, of which at least S$6,000 went towards personal expenses such as food and drinks.

Court documents stated that Low knew the business was illegal and that customers were likely using the accounts to carry out scams, and that he was aware payments were made in untraceable cryptocurrency.

The raid and scale of losses

The syndicate's operations shifted twice more — first to a private property on Meng Suan Road in November 2023, then to an empty office space above a car repair workshop on Toh Guan Road in March 2024, after Tan took over the business from Kok when their relationship soured.

On May 29 2024, the police's Anti-Scam Command raided the Toh Guan Road premises and seized 24,000 SIM cards, 27 SMS modem devices, seven monitor screens, seven mobile phones and seven central processing units.

Between November 2023 and May 2024, the syndicate generated S$887,477 in sales profits.

The seized SIM cards were linked to 2,393 police reports made between January and May 2024, with investment scams accounting for the single largest share of losses at S$24.1 million from 392 reports, closely followed by job scams at S$23.2 million from 1,173 reports.

The syndicate's customers were based mostly overseas, including in Malaysia, Myanmar and Cambodia.

Prosecution and defence arguments

Deputy Public Prosecutor Jordon Li sought at least 52 months and two weeks' jail, along with the S$52,000 fine, arguing that Low was a financier of "an elaborate and highly successful illegal business" who had knowingly participated in the syndicate for around seven months.

Li told the court, according to CNA, that Low took "the lion's share" of the profits despite limited day-to-day involvement, which reflected his position at the top of the group's hierarchy.

Li cited the Singapore Police Force's Annual Scams and Cybercrime Brief 2024, noting that scam and cybercrime cases rose 10.8 per cent to 55,810 in 2024, with victims losing at least S$1.1 billion.

Low's defence lawyers sought a lighter sentence of 39 months' jail and the same fine, arguing that Low's role never went beyond that of a "passive financier", unlike Tan, who progressed from investor to owner and operator of the business.

One of the lawyers told the court, as cited by CNA: "If not, everyone is a key player. If everyone is special, no one is."

He added that Low had been in Dubai for most of the period and had no involvement in the syndicate's operations.

The judge acknowledged that Low was not involved in running the syndicate, but noted that his financing had allowed the group to scale up its operations.

Rosmah Mansor, wife of former Malaysia prime minister Najib Razak, is suing Malaysian comedian Harith Iskander for defamation over a stand-up comedy routine she claims mocked and insulted her.

According to The Star, the writ of summons was filed at the High Court on Jun. 9 by Rosmah.

What the routine allegedly involved

The alleged defamation stemmed from Harith's performance at the Swiss-Garden Hotel in Melaka on Jan. 17, titled "Harith Iskander: The Outspoken Comedy Tour".

According to Rosmah's statement of claim, Harith showed images of frightening mythological creatures well known in Malaysia, including the toyol, pontianak and pocong, before showing the audience an image of Rosmah as part of the joke.

The statement of claim read:

"During the performance, the defendant displayed images of scary mythological creatures from Malaysian folklore, including but not limited to the 'toyol', 'pontianak', and 'pocong', before subsequently displaying the plaintiff's image to the audience as part of the joke's narrative."

The statement of claim also alleged that Harith joked about drivers spotting a terrifying figure in their rearview mirror on a dark road, with her image appearing on screen at that moment.

Rosmah, 75, said this was a deliberate attempt to portray her as frightening, damage her reputation, and subject her to public ridicule and body shaming.

She is seeking an unconditional apology along with unspecified general, aggravated and exemplary damages from Harith.

A toyol is a mythical, goblin-like creature, a pontianak is a female ghost, while a pocong is the spirit of a deceased person trapped in its white burial shroud.

Harith's defence

In his statement of defence, Harith denied that the performance was malicious or defamatory.

He added that the routine had to be seen in the full context of a comedy show.

Harith pointed out that Rosmah's case leaned heavily on two clips from a TikTok account @mayychan0303 he said he had no connection to, and argued that the footage did not capture his full 90-minute set, per The Star.

He also said recording and uploading the clips without permission went against the event's house rules.

On the specific moment involving Rosmah's image, Harith said it lasted less than five seconds out of the entire hour-and-a-half performance and was never the focus of the show.

His defence stated that the display was momentary and could not be taken out of the broader context of the performance.

He also said that before the show started, disclaimers and house rules were read out in both Bahasa Malaysia and English, and that his legal team would be relying on these during the trial.

Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam and Manpower Minister Tan See Leng were awarded S$230,000 in damages each for defamation by Bloomberg and its reporter, Low De Wei.

The Singaporean ministers sued the news outlet and the reporter over an article it ran on Dec. 12, 2024, titled, "Singapore Mansion Deals Are Increasingly Shrouded in Secrecy".

The article discussed the sale of Good Class Bungalows (GCBs) in Singapore and claimed there was a lack of public records regarding GCB transactions.

It mentioned private properties purchased by Shanmugam and Tan.

Article found to have defamed the ministers

In a judgment released on Jul. 14, Judge Audrey Lim found that the article had indeed defamed the ministers.

She ruled that it linked the duo's property transactions to secrecy, opacity and money laundering, creating a defamatory impression.

“An allegation that a person has deliberately structured his property dealings to escape examination for possible money laundering plainly tends to lower him in the estimation of right-thinking members of society,” she wrote.

Lim also found that the "natural and ordinary meaning" of the article is that the claimants "took advantage of the absence of checks and balances or disclosure requirements to conduct their property transactions in a non- transparent manner" and that they did so to "hide their transactions and avoid scrutiny that might extend to the possibility of money laundering".

"These are grave assertions that directly impugn the claimants’ personal integrity, character and professional reputation. This is therefore a factor that points towards the award of higher damages," Lim said.

Bloomberg, as the publisher, and Low, as the author, are found to be jointly and severally liable for the defamation, meaning they are jointly responsible for paying the full amount owed.

Purpose was to publish a story about ministers

Justice Lim said that internal correspondence from Bloomberg reveals that the dominant motive behind the article was to publish a story about the ministers, particularly Shanmugam and their GCB transactions.

"The genesis of the Article lay not in a story about trends in the GCB market (as the defendants claim), but in an interest in the claimants," Lim noted.

"The broader narrative of how wealthy individuals in Singapore use non-caveated transactions and trust structures to keep their dealings secret or 'off-radar' was the cover devised to carry that story," said Lim.

Defendants acted with malice

In assessing the amount of damages to be awarded to Shanmugam and Tan, the judge said the defendants had acted with malice.

She said Low knew it was untrue that non-caveated transactions were hidden from the Government, and that the article conveyed a false view that there was a regulatory gap which buyers can exploit.

The judge also found that Bloomberg’s conduct in removing the paywall pertaining to the article also demonstrates malice.

She did not accept that the paywall was removed to comply with the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (Pofma) direction; rather it was done to make the article accessible to the broader public.

Related

A man took the company that employed him to court recently, claiming wrongful dismissal for terminating his employment about three months after he turned 63, without notice or payment in lieu.

The company contended that the termination was lawful as it was "retiring" the man, and no notice or salary in lieu was required in such circumstances, according to a judgement dated Jul. 13.

It also argued that it offered re-employment to the man, but he had turned the offer down, which meant that it was not required to give him an employment assistance payment.

The man sought S$11,600 (about his two months' basic salary) in damages, and an employment assistance payment of S$14,750.

The full sum was ultimately granted to him by the judge at the Employment Claims Tribunals, who ruled that the company was lawfully required to give the man two months' notice or salary in lieu, and that it did not reasonably engage or consult him regarding re-employment.

Wrongful dismissal

The man was let go on Jun. 18, 2025, when the statutory retirement age was 63 years old.

In the notice of termination, the company informed him that it would "process [his] retirement" on Jun. 18, 2025, as his last working day, and his "retirement" would take effect from the following day.

It added that because this "retirement marks the natural end of [the] employment", it could let him go without giving the two months’ notice or salary in lieu as stated in his employment contract.

The judge said that the company breached the employment contract.

Under the Employment Act, a company was required to give two months’ notice or salary in lieu if it were to terminate the contract after the employee attained the statutory retirement age.

The judge also noted that the man was seeking only S$11,600 in damages, a sum less than two months of his gross salary, which was S$6,428 a month.

Thus, this claim fell within what he was "properly entitled to recover", the judge said.

The re-employment offer

The man argued that the company did not fulfil its obligations to offer re-employment to him, and thus it was required to compensate him with an employment assistance payment.

The judge pointed out that the company did not make any offer of re-employment to the man before he turned 63.

Re-employment discussions were initiated by the man himself over email on Jun. 8, 2025, and the company replied with an offer two days later.

In this offer, the man's salary would be cut from S$6,428 to S$4,000, and he would be under a six-month fixed-term contract.

His role would also be adjusted from area manager to training executive, due to a restructuring exercise that would render the man's original role redundant, according to the company.

The company gave him a firm deadline to decide and accept the offer by Jun. 17, 2025 — about a week after it was first made.

His request for a short extension, also because he was on medical leave, was declined.

The man ultimately rejected the offer, saying that it was drastically different in scope from his existing role, offered little employment stability, and involved a substantial reduction in salary.

The day after receiving this rejection, the company sent the notice of termination.

Was it 'unreasonable'?

The man contended that the terms of the proposed re-employment and the manner the company offered it were unreasonable.

Under the Retirement and Re-employment Act, the employer must offer re-employment for at least one year unless otherwise agreed by both parties.

The man highlighted this in his claim, and the judge acknowledged it as well.

He argued that since the company gave an offer confined to six months, which was not accepted by the man, the offer did not suffice to discharge the company's re-employment obligations.

On the points about the change in job role and reduction in salary, the judge said that these factors alone do not render a re-employment offer unreasonable.

However, he believed the company did not engage with the man early on the offer — a process that would have allowed "meaningful discussion" about salary, possible re-employment arrangements, and more.

"Where engagement is perfunctory or opaque, employees may feel that their past contributions have been overlooked, or that the terms proposed are imposed rather than fairly negotiated," the judge said.

He noted that the Tripartite Guidelines on the Re-Employment of Older Employees recommends that consultations on re-employment should ordinarily begin at least six months before retirement.

On why the company began discussions only three months after the man turned 63, the human resources executive who had liaised with him accepted that these requirements had been overlooked and expressed regret that the matter had not been addressed earlier.

She also explained she declined the man's request for a deadline extension due to "her own disposition and a desire to conclude the matter expeditiously".

Judgement

The judge believed it was "unsurprising" that the man came to view the re-employment offer process as unfair.

The way it was conducted "fell short of the standard of reasonableness", and thus the judge ruled that the company was required to pay an employment assistance payment.

He allowed the man's total claims for S$26,350 in full, and also ordered that the company pay S$250 in costs and S$70 in disbursements.

Singapore Minister for Foreign Affairs Vivian Balakrishnan paid his respects to Princess Bajrakitiyabha Mahidol, the eldest daughter of Thai King Maha Vajiralongkorn, on Jul. 14 while on a working visit to Bangkok.

Paying respects

Bajrakitiyabha passed away on Jun. 11 after being in a coma for almost three years, after being hospitalised for a cardiac condition in 2022.

Vivian, accompanied by MFA officials, presented a wreath to the late princess, and in a social media post, paid tribute to her.

He called her a steadfast champion of the vulnerable and disadvantaged, noting her initiatives to uplift underprivileged children and support female inmates.

He also credited her as an accomplished diplomat, saying she had represented Thailand on the international stage with distinction and grace, citing her advocacy for justice, the rule of law, and women's rights, which had earned her recognition from the United Nations and the international community.

Vivian said that Singapore extended its deepest condolences to the King, the royal family and the people of Thailand, as well as a book of condolence.

Highest honors

Bajrakitiyabha was hospitalised in December 2022 after experiencing heart problems while training her pet dogs for the Thailand Working Dog Championship.

Her condition worsened, and she eventually fell into a coma.

On Jun. 11, 2026, the Bureau of the Royal Household reported that she had passed away, after her condition had worsened.

Her father issued a royal command ordering the Bureau of the Royal Household to arrange royal funeral rites with the highest honours according to royal traditions, as well as to enshrine her at the Phiman Rattaya Hall in the Grand Palace.

Informal Myanmar meeting

Vivian was in Bangkok to attend the Informal Meeting of Asean Foreign Ministers with Myanmar and the Extended Informal Consultation on Myanmar.

There he received a briefing by a senior representative of the Myanmar authorities, Tin Maung Swe, on developments in Myanmar.

Myanmar has been fighting a civil war between the military-backed government, sometimes referred to as the Junta, and a number of Ethnic Armed Organisations (EAOs) as well the the People's Defence Force (PDF), ever since the military seized power in February 2021.

The Junta had initialled agreed with Asean to conform to the Five-Point Consensus, which included the cessation of hostilities and giving the bloc access to political prisoners, amongst other things, but has thus far failed to comply, instead holding elections in December 2025 in attempt to legitimise the government.

Speaking to the press after the meeting, Vivian stressed that all Asean countries reaffirmed the central importance of the Five-Point Consensus, saying that it was and it remains valid.

Three areas for progress

Vivian then said that Asean wanted to see demonstrable progress in three specific areas. First, an end to violence, especially against civilians. Second, the release of political detainees, including Aung San Suu Kyi.

And finally, for the Asean Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance on Disaster Management to be able to deliver assistance across Myanmar, regardless of political allegiance.

Replying to a question about inviting Myanmar back to Asean before progress had been shown, Vivian said that Asean was trying to engage with all stakeholders, including military authorities .

He said that they were also engaging with a wide variety of EAOs and the PDF, who were opposed to the Myanmar junta.

"The key point is Asean wants to engage across the board, widely and in an inclusive manner."

While in Bangkok, Vivian was also hosted to lunch by Thai prime minister Anutin Charnvirakul.

Vivian said that both countries had enjoyed a "close and enduring friendship", and said he looked forward to working with Anutin to "further strengthen the Singapore-Thailand partnership and advance Asean's shared interests."