Local actor Elvin Ng has been dealing with the aftermath of sandfly bites for four months, going through multiple rounds of treatment, including steroid injections, after creams and antihistamines failed to bring relief.

Ng shared on Instagram that he had just gone through another round of localised steroid injections on each bite spot to bring down inflammation and reduce scarring.

He wrote:

"So yes that's me going through another round of steroid injections to each sandfly bite infection/allergic reaction which has refused to go away since 4 months ago. It's actually not that painful (luckily there's ice) but I was just bracing myself for each shot and squeezing any life out of the plushie (luckily I have it) for destress purposes."

How it started

Ng said he had been at his usual suntanning spot at one of the Sentosa beaches, a place he had visited many times before, when the bites happened without him noticing.

He wrote:

"I learnt after that it is by the water between the wet and dry areas which are most likely to have sandflies and they can't even be seen by the naked eye."

The bites only became a problem about a month later, right around the time he was also dealing with an eye operation in late February during Chinese New Year.

He added:

"They started getting inflamed a month (delayed reaction) after I was at the beach suntanning, at about the same time I had to go for my eye operation which was the first few days of CNY in end Feb, so it has been a really tough start to the horse year with a bad eye and super itchy legs until now (and even after my eye has almost fully recovered)."

Why steroid creams didn't work

Ng visited a GP twice and was prescribed antihistamines and steroid creams, but neither made much of a difference. He eventually found that localised steroid injections directly on each bite were more effective, as the wounds had formed scabs that the creams could no longer penetrate.

He said it was his first time getting sandfly bites and that he was likely highly allergic to them.

"They became really inflamed and unbearable," he wrote.

His advice to others

Ng said he was sharing his experience to help others avoid going through the same ordeal, urging beachgoers to always apply insect repellent before heading to the beach, even just to suntan.

He continued:

"Hopefully this helps, and you won't need to go through the same kind of crazy itchiness (scratching till they bleed) I've been tolerating for months, and you can do better to protect yourself from this 'common enemy'."

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by ELVIN NG 黄俊雄 (@elvinngchoonsiong)

The National Trade Union Congress (NTUC) and the Migrant Workers Centre (MWC) will be extending S$100 in cash and S$100 in NTUC vouchers to MWC members affected by unpaid wages.

Affected migrant workers can join as an MWC member to receive the cash and vouchers.

150 job vacancies from 40 construction firms are being offered to the affected workers.

Lodging, transport, and food for them are also being arranged.

This comes after over 100 migrant workers from KPA Engineering and SK Industries went down to the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) services centre on Jun. 22 to seek help for unpaid wages and housing issues.

About 400 migrant workers were affected.

Visit

In a visit to the Tuas View Dormitory on the morning of Jun. 24, NTUC Secretary-General Ng Chee Meng and Ministry of State for Manpower Dinesh Vasu Dash spoke to migrant workers.

They also passed out lunch to the workers.

Speaking to the media, Ng said MOM and NTUC are working to help the migrant workers recover their salaries.

“I think the practice of abandoning the workers and not paying salaries is not something the NTUC will stand without acting upon it. Employers must be responsible, and I am glad that many employers have come forward to assist these migrant workers,” he said.

Ng added that the Tripartite Alliance for Dispute Management (TADM) and its partners are working to contact the employers.

“I understand that they may not be in the country, and the due process will have to take place,” he concluded.

Dinesh also highlighted the experiences the migrant workers are facing as a result of this incident, citing that “some of them really do not have much money in their pockets at this point in time”.

He added that MOM would allow them to have interim special passes for “a couple of weeks until they are connected to a new job”.

“We take a very serious view of the employers who might have caused the migrant workers to be in this situation,” he said.

Workers

Some migrant workers spoke to the media during the visit.

Islam Md Raiful, a 20-year-old Bangladeshi national who has been staying in Singapore for six months, said he was owed more than S$2,400 over three months.

Every month, Islam sends about S$500 to his family in Bangladesh to cover his siblings' school fees and living expenses.

He said that as a result of the unpaid wages, he had to borrow money.

Islam has not told his family about this incident.

“This one’s a very critical situation for us (his family)”, he said.

When asked about the help provided, he expressed gratefulness and said it was “very helpful”.

Another migrant worker, Jayasankar Vinothkumar, a 41-year-old Indian national who has worked in Singapore for about 14 years, also spoke about the implications of the unpaid wages.

He joined KPA Engineering on Aug. 2, 2025 and stated that there were already prior issues with salary payouts.

Jayasankar said his eight-year-old daughter apparently stopped attending school as he was unable to pay for her school fees.

Jayasankar is the sole breadwinner of his family, and he is expecting another child.

The Malaysian woman who mocked locals in China for "smelling bad" in a viral video has been identified as a member of the Malaysian police force.

The Malaysian police has also opened a disciplinary investigation into the incident, Bernama reported.

This was shared on Jun. 23 by Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Mohd Khalid Ismail, who added that the woman will remain on active duty while the investigation is ongoing.

"Apart from disciplinary aspects, appropriate action will also be taken if any breach of the law is established," he said.

He also reminded all police officers and personnel to uphold proper conduct whether in Malaysia or abroad, and even when not in uniform.

Controversy

Nur Asyiqin binti Mohd Dalil, also a social media influencer, was travelling in China in the video in question, which has since been removed from her TikTok.

She was seen queueing with a few other Malaysian tourists while waiting to board a bus.

While some of them covered their noses, one could be heard saying in Malay, "It smells so bad! Did none of you shower?"

The remarks sparked outrage from both Malaysians and Chinese, with many Malaysians calling the group's behaviour embarrassing and disrespectful.

On Jun. 20, Asyiqin apologised in a statement on TikTok, saying she took full responsibility for her behaviour that has "caused discomfort to various parties".

She explained that it was a "spontaneous reaction" without any intention to offend or embarrass.

This apology came days after a previous statement she posted, one from her lawyers stating that she had taken legal action against those who made defamatory statements.

Asyiqin's lawyer also confirmed she was "part of the [police] force", but did not specify her rank, according to South China Morning Post.

Related stories

A car was seen travelling erratically, cutting across lanes, and mounting the centre divider along Tampines Avenue 7, in the direction of Loyang Avenue on Jun. 22.

It then rammed into the back of a stationary taxi, which was pushed into the opposite lane.

The taxi, along with other vehicles, were waiting for the traffic light to turn green at the time.

Another car to the left of the taxi was also hit.

The male taxi driver and his passenger were conscious when they were taken to hospital, the police said, who were alerted to the incident at 5:30pm.

The accident involved two cars and a taxi, the police said.

Investigations are underway.

Two self-radicalised Singaporean men have been issued orders under the Internal Security Act (ISA), the Internal Security Department (ISD) said in a press release on Jun. 24.

Tarmizi bin Mohd Taha, 30, a customer service officer, was issued an Order of Detention (OD), while Cyrus Dzulqarnain Al-Shahriar, 19, a student, was issued a Restriction Order (RO).

Their radicalisation was triggered by the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Both orders were issued in March 2026.

Aspired to join Hamas

Tarmizi's interest in the conflict began after Hamas' attacks on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, after which he joined social media channels discussing the conflict and was exposed to Hamas propaganda.

By 2024, he had come to view Hamas as defenders of the Palestinians and believed armed violence against those deemed responsible for their oppression was justified.

He also frequently posted pro-Hamas content online to garner support for the group.

Tarmizi had also discussed Hamas' Gaza operations with an online foreign contact who claimed to be a Hamas member.

In late 2024, the contact had offered to help him travel to the Palestinian territories to join Hamas.

But Tarmizi only took up the offer after watching a video in August 2025 of a Palestinian being killed, which sparked a strong sense of outrage and re-triggered his earlier intent to join Hamas.

However, he lacked the funds to proceed.

He also indicated he would be willing to carry out armed violence against Israel or attacks in Singapore on Hamas' instruction.

He also intended to use his skills from his previous work experience in administrative and logistic roles, including as a logistics assistant during his National Service in the Singapore Police Force (SPF), to contribute to Hamas, believing that such actions would ultimately lead him to achieving martyrdom.

ISD ultimately assessed Tarmizi to pose an imminent security threat warranting detention.

Online postings inciting violence against others

Cyrus' radicalisation involved Composite Violent Extremism (CoVE), which ISD previously termed "salad bar" extremism, referring to a form of violent extremism in which individuals subscribe to multiple, sometimes conflicting, extremist ideologies.

In 2022, he joined online groups to learn more about Islam, but was also exposed to anti-Western and anti-LGBTQ content.

He subsequently made online posts inciting violence against the LGBTQ community.

After the Oct. 7, 2023 attacks, he was exposed to pro-Hamas narratives and came to support the group's violent actions, including the killing of civilians, which he saw as a form of jihad.

He also considered travelling to Gaza to join Hamas, but did not act on it.

In mid-2024, Cyrus encountered a niche online Islamist extremist group that subscribed to violent accelerationist thinking, and was invited into its private chat group the following year.

The group believed in creating “chaos” through the use of violence if necessary, to establish a future with Islam as the leading global civilisation.

They believed that they needed to destroy the current “world order”, where first world countries, including Singapore, were considered an extension of the United States, and under the control of Zionists.

He went on to support Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), and his support for Hamas deepened.

He also became supportive of attacks targeting Westerners, such as Al-Qaeda's 9/11 attacks and the 2002 Bali Bombings, and glorified them online.

At a group member's request, Cyrus visited the Esplanade area twice to photograph an extremist e-publication against the backdrop of Marina Bay Sands, then posted the photos publicly in November 2025 as a pledge of allegiance to the group.

He subsequently considered himself a member, going on to harass users he saw as anti-Islam, spread fake news to defame them, and incite violence against them.

In early 2025, Cyrus encountered online content about school shooter Elliot Rodger and grew intrigued by his incel views.

After exploring incel forums, he began identifying as one himself, posting online threats to kill or rape women and fantasising about violence against LGBTQ individuals and couples in school settings.

However, these thoughts did not progress beyond ideation.

While Cyrus took no preparatory steps toward violence, his support for terrorist and extremist groups and his online incitement were deemed to be of security concern.

He has been placed on a RO so ISD can monitor him and put him through rehabilitation to address his radical beliefs.

Conflicts abroad continue to drive radicalisation

Tarmizi and Cyrus are the seventh and eighth Singaporeans dealt with under the ISA, whose radicalisation was triggered or accelerated by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict since it re-escalated.

While Singaporeans remain deeply concerned about the conflict's humanitarian toll, ISD stressed that extremist narratives exploiting foreign conflicts must not be allowed to take root locally, and that it will act firmly against anyone who supports, promotes or prepares for armed violence.

Cyrus is also the second person dealt with under the ISA to have been radicalised through CoVE, highlighting the growing diversity of violent extremist ideologies driving self-radicalisation in Singapore, particularly among youths.

Public urged to stay alert

ISD reiterated that anyone is susceptible to radicalisation, and urged the public to stay alert to warning signs and report concerns early.

Possible signs of radicalisation include:

• Displaying symbols of extremist or terrorist groups (eg. using a Hamas flag as a social media photo);
• Frequently visiting radical websites;
• Posting or sharing extremist views online, including support for terrorists or the use of violence;
• Sharing extremist views with friends and family;
• Making remarks that stoke hatred toward other races, religions or communities;
• Expressing intent to take part in violence, locally or abroad; and/or
• Inciting others to violence.

Anyone who knows or suspects a person has been radicalised, or is involved in terrorism-related activities, should contact ISD at 1800-2626-473.

Restriction order

Individuals issued with a restriction order are not permitted to change their residence or employment, or travel out of Singapore without approval from the director of ISD.

They also cannot access the internet or social media, issue public statements, address public meetings or print, distribute or contribute to any publication.

They are not allowed to hold office in, or be a member of, any organisation, association or group without approval from the ISD director.

ISD also announced that 33-year-old Radjev Lal Madan Lal, who was detained in April 2022 after he was self-radicalised and made preparations to engage in armed conflicts overseas, has been released from detention on a RO in April 2026.

Restriction orders for three individuals were also allowed to lapse upon their expiry due to good progress in rehabilitation.

They are Abd Rahim bin Abdul Rahman, 57, Mohamed Faishal bin Mohd Razali, 35, and Husaini bin Ismail, 67.

A woman in her mid-60s who was hit by a falling shop panel after cycling past a grocer in Jurong West has won her negligence suit against the shop owner.

In a judgment published on Jun. 22, District Judge Evans Ng found that the defendant, Loch Grocer, whose sole shareholder and director is Lee Chee Hoon, was "wholly liable for the accident on Mar. 15, 2023".

Lee argued that Aminah had dislodged the panel while she was cycling past.

However, Judge Evans Ng said the claimant, Aminah Mohamed Kassim, "was cycling at a reasonable speed" and did not swerve to avoid any obstacles before the accident.

Fell off bicycle

Aminah was cycling from Jurong West Street 42 towards Jurong Spring Community Club in the late afternoon when the accident happened.

According to court documents, she said as she cycled past the shop unit at Block 507, Jurong West Street 52, "something hard hit her on her left from behind".

Three panels were put up on the day of the accident.

According to the judgment, Lee said the panels were "very light" and "can be picked up by a child".

However, the judge said: "It is unclear what specimen of a child Mr Lee has in mind."

He estimated the thickness of each panel to be at least 3mm and used an estimated density of polycarbonate to conclude that each panel should have weighed at least 10kg.

Defendant owes duty to secure items

The judge added that the defendant owed a duty to take reasonable care to secure items within the shop's control, such as the panels, for the safety of visitors and other parties.

He said that the set-up was "inherently unstable and unreliable" as the height of each panel exceeded the canopy and was compressed into an arch, held between the shop's canopy and the ground.

"A panel with its concave face towards the Shop is likely to fall sharply and abruptly towards the outside if it is unintentionally dislodged."

Footage from a closed-circuit television video (CCTV) camera showed Aminah cycling past the last panel as it "disappeared" from view.

An employee who was deep within the indoor premises did not see or hear the accident.

The judge added that "any passer-by within a metre or so is unlikely to be able to react fast enough to avoid being hit".

Theories on how panel fell

Aminah claimed a strong wind could have dislodged the panel, while Lee alleged that Aminah's bicycle had dislodged the panel.

The judge rejected both Aminah's and Lee's theories on how the last panel dislodged.

He said that the outdoor fabric banners were not shown to be fluttering.

He added that a metal trolley was protruding from the middle of the storefront, which meant Aminah would have approached the panel with a sufficient margin after clearing the trolley.

This meant that she was unlikely to have cycled into the panel either.

The judge noted: "I also find that the way in which the panel dropped out of view in the video was inconsistent with what would have happened had the front wheel or the handlebars of her bicycle hit its vertical edge."

He said Lee was given the chance to explain, but the latter could only "guess".

He added that Lee did not identify the employee who put up the sign or get them to testify.

No contributory negligence

Judge Ng said he found no contributory negligence on Aminah's part, as there was no prohibition against cycling on the pathway.

He added that there was no legal requirement for cyclists to wear a helmet if they were not cycling on a road.

"I have reviewed the photographs taken of the area too, and it does not seem inappropriate for cyclists to travel on the relevant pathway and take the precise route that Mdm Aminah did, provided they proceed at a reasonable speed and keep a proper lookout for others."

Judge Ng noted that the costs of the trial shall be reserved until the assessment of damages, which will be conducted in a separate hearing.

Statistically speaking, most Singaporeans don't speak Teochew.

But when news broke that the Chinese film "Dear You", originally filmed in Teochew, would be dubbed into Mandarin here, there was a sense of general perturbation.

MPs, like the PAP's Cai Yinzhou and WP's Kenneth Tiong, spoke up about the matter. Cai said he'd filed a parliamentary question for debate.

Tickets to the Teochew-dialect version, initially slated for a limited eight screenings, sold out within two hours. Eight more screenings were released due to popular demand; they were promptly sold out again, this time within the hour.

And in the latest news, Golden Village has sought IMDA approval for 50 more screenings of the Teochew-dialect version.

A bit of history

You'd have been hard-pressed to find someone speaking Mandarin in Singapore pre-independence.

Early immigrants came from impoverished parts of China, where they spoke regional dialects like Hokkien, Teochew, and Cantonese. Mandarin, a prestigious Beijing-based dialect associated with government officials and academics, was largely alien to them.

Back then, over 80 per cent of Singapore households spoke Chinese dialects. A 1957 census showed that only 0.1 per cent of Singapore’s population spoke Mandarin most frequently at home.

As of 2020, these numbers have seen a reversal. Just 8.7 per cent reported using dialect as their primary spoken language; Mandarin has ballooned to 29.9 per cent.

How did this happen?

In short: It was led by founding PM Lee Kuan Yew, who launched the Speak Mandarin Campaign in 1979.

Some years earlier, in 1966, the Singapore government had adopted a bilingual education policy. Singaporeans would learn English and a mother tongue language — which, for the Chinese, was Mandarin (a decision in line with the People's Republic of China, which had officially adopted Mandarin as the national language in 1956).

But there was a problem. Chinese Singaporeans continued to speak dialect at home, and students struggled with having to learn two new languages at the same time.

Lee set out on the campaign in a bid to fix this. Dialect programmes on radio and TV were shuttered. Lee himself stopped speaking Hokkien entirely, switching to Mandarin instead.

Slogans like "Speak more Mandarin and less dialects" and "Please speak Mandarin, your children's future is in your hands" were also peddled to the community through the 1970s and 80s.

The campaign was incredibly successful. By the late 1980s, the majority of Chinese Singaporeans spoke Mandarin; today there is no argument about what their mother tongue is.

"If the government had left language habits to evolve undirected, Chinese Singaporeans would be speaking an adulterated Hokkien-Teochew dialect," Lee said. That problematic possibility has now been thoroughly eliminated.

An old policy

Both the Speak Mandarin Campaign and the bilingualism policy still exist today. These days, though, they have to contend with English.

The OG movements were in some ways too successful. Lee wanted Singaporeans to speak English — both as a unifying language among the different ethnic groups, and for the rather more economically pragmatic reason of connecting Singaporeans with the Western world.

He succeeded. As of 2020, English has overtaken Mandarin as the most-spoken primary language in Singaporean households at 48.3 per cent.

It's an achievement that has come with the unfortunate side effect of a rapidly diminishing Mandarin fluency among young Singaporeans. But that's a story for another day.

What was surprising to many Singaporeans, however, is that despite the evolution of the bilingual policy, remnants of its dialect-opposing roots remain.

Namely through the fact that "Dear You" was dubbed for general release in Singapore, with the Teochew version only initially approved for "festival/niche screenings".

As to why, IMDA explained:

"This continues to support the bilingual policy which aims to promote Mandarin as the main language amongst Chinese Singaporeans.”

But in 2026, discouraging dialect is no longer mutually exclusive with encouraging Mandarin. At work or at home, dialect is unlikely to ever reach a level of pervasiveness even close to what it once was.

That said, while it will most likely never be at risk ever again of undermining "your children's future", it could potentially help you connect to your grandparents' past, maybe even spark an interest in Chinese culture.

As my colleague noted: she wouldn't share the same closeness to her grandma if she had never learnt to speak Teochew.

So maybe it's time for a change — to preserve, rather than suppress.

A new frontier

"Dear You" has — quite unintentionally in all likelihood — helped spark this move.

On Jun. 22, MDDI issued a new statement on the film. While promoting Mandarin as one of Singapore's official languages remains a policy goal, dialects "are an important part of Singapore's cultural heritage", the statutory board said.

"We hear the calls for dialect films to be more freely screened in cinemas. Under the current framework, applications have to be made for such screenings.

However, IMDA will take a more flexible approach in considering these applications."

They added that the government "supports the use of dialects in practical ways", and will continue to keep its approach under review to support the appreciation and use of dialects in Singapore.

It's perhaps the clearest acknowledgement to date by the authorities that dialect no longer poses a threat to Singapore's Mandarin-speaking ambitions. Once a problem to be "policy-managed" away, dialect is now priceless cultural heritage that needs to be protected, or risk dying out.

More importantly, it is a green light, albeit a tentative one, for future dialect-promoting activities on our little island.

In future, could Chinese dialects be offered as a third language in schools? Maybe Hokkien- or Teochew-focused extracurriculars, enrichment classes, even tuition centres?

In his 2009 speech, then-Minister Mentor Lee had made a rare erroneous prediction: "The trend is clear. In two generations, Mandarin will become our mother tongue," he said.

Half a generation later, we are already there. The question is what comes next.

A 29-year-old Singaporean man was given a 14-day short detention order on Jun. 23, 2026, after he had been roped into a scheme to deceive tech companies into delivering laptops for free using a PayPal glitch.

Jonathan Wee Jianwei will also have to carry out 70 hours of community service within a year.

Charges

CNA reported that a short detention order is a community sentence that results in no criminal record and serves as a deterrent, as it allows an offender to experience prison life.

Charge sheets and court documents seen by Mothership stated that though Wee recruited four of his friends into the fraudulent scheme, he later lodged a police report out of guilt.

In addition, he made restitution for himself and the friends he recruited.

According to CNA, Wee pleaded guilty to one count of conspiring to deceive Lenovo, with another two charges taken into consideration during sentencing.

2019

Court documents stated that in late 2019, 31-year-old co-accused Calvin Fong Jun Jie contacted 31-year-old Alden Low Yoong Theng whom he knew from primary school.

Fong told Low that he had an opportunity to make money through a scheme that involved purchasing laptops, with the money eventually being returned to Low after the laptops were delivered.

To demonstrate the scheme's legitimacy, the pair met up, and Fong used his PayPal account to pay for laptops.

The payment was then deducted from Low's bank account, and Fong assured Him that the money would be refunded to his account within a week.

After the laptops were delivered to Low's address, Fong collected them and paid Low about 40 per cent of the purchase price as commission.

Upon checking his bank account, Low found that the money he paid to purchase the laptops had indeed been refunded as promised.

2020

Sometime in February 2020, Low introduced the scheme to Wee, as they had served in the army together and were friends.

Explaining the scheme, Low said participants would link their bank account to their PayPal account, empty their bank account, and leave only S$100 in it.

Low would then transfer money to their bank account to buy the laptops online, and Fong would control the participants' laptops remotely to place the order using their PayPal account.

Court documents stated that the laptops would be physically delivered to the participants and collected by Fong afterwards.

Due to a glitch in the PayPal system, payments to the laptop vendor were automatically credited back to the participants' PayPal accounts. They would then return the money to Low and receive a commission for their participation.

Low also told Wee that he could earn more money by recruiting others into the scheme, receiving S$100 for every person he successfully introduced.

Agreed to take part

After Wee agreed to take part, Fong directed Low in March 2020 to transfer about S$6,701 to Wee's account to fund the purchase.

Fong then remotely controlled Wee's laptop and purchased three Lenovo laptops totalling S$6,701.40 using Wee's PayPal account.

Since Wee was serving national service and would not be available to receive deliveries at home, he provided his mother's office address, to which the laptops were delivered a few days later.

After Fong collected the laptops, he paid Wee S$670 in commission, court documents stated, adding that Lenovo suffered wrongful loss due to delivering the laptops but losing both payment and products.

Recruited friends

Wee, who earned S$400 for recruiting four friends to join the scheme, told them to create PayPal accounts and download software.

This saw laptops worth over S$32,000 being delivered because of Wee's friends, except for the fourth man who did not participate in any transactions despite being introduced to the scheme.

Later in May 2020, Wee bought two Microsoft laptops worth over S$3,900 at Fong's request by making use of the same glitch.

After PayPal requested that Wee filed a police report to process a refund, Wee did so electronically, where he lied that two laptops worth about S$4,000 were missing from his delivery package.

Genuine remorse

Subsequently, in February 2021, Wee lodged a police report, admitting to having been part of the fraudulent scheme, and said he lodged the report as he felt guilty.

He later made full restitution of S$6,701.40 to Lenovo in March 2026, and S$3,938.40 to Microsoft in April 2026.

In seeking a 14-day short detention order, the deputy public prosecutor asked for a report to assess Wee's suitability for a community service order.

Noting that there was a delay in prosecution of about five years that could not be attributed to Wee, she said he demonstrated genuine remorse by voluntarily lodging a police report incriminating himself.

The offences would otherwise not have come to light, she added.

She also said Wee had made restitution for his offences, amounting to about S$9,739.36, representing the outstanding sum that remained unpaid by his recruits.

In total, Wee made restitution of S$20,379.16, such that Microsoft and Lenovo did not suffer financial loss as a result of the offences.

CNA reported that for conspiring to cheat, he could have been jailed for up to three years, fined, or both.

In July 2026, Fong is set to plead guilty, while Low, who has pleaded guilty, is set to be sentenced then.

Two teenagers, aged 15 and 16, are slated to be charged in court on Jun. 24 after they allegedly tried to evade a roadblock.

One of the incidents left a Traffic Police (TP) officer and a Land Transport Authority (LTA) enforcement officer severely injured, during the joint roadblock.

Rode at high speed

On Mar. 21, TP and LTA conducted a joint roadblock along Commonwealth Avenue West, towards Commonwealth Avenue.

The police said in a statement that a 16-year-old male youth was riding an unregistered vehicle at high speed when he approached the roadblock.

The teen allegedly collided with two officers, injuring them both.

The officers and the teenager were subsequently conveyed conscious to the hospital.

The 28-year-old TP officer sustained injuries including a head haematoma, abrasions, and hip pain.

The 44-year-old LTA officer sustained severe injuries, including a brain injury, knee fracture, muscle tear, and a sprained ligament.

The teenager will be charged with evading a police roadblock under the Police Force Act.

He also faces charges under the Road Traffic Act for reckless driving causing grievous hurt, reckless driving causing hurt, underage driving, using a motor vehicle without insurance coverage, and using an unregistered vehicle.

Fled on foot

In a separate incident at the same roadblock, a 15-year-old male teen was spotted riding an unregistered personal mobility device (PMD) on the road.

Upon seeing the roadblock, the teenager allegedly mounted the pavement, abandoned the device, and fled on foot alongside his pillion rider.

Both individuals were subsequently detained by TP officers.

The teenager will be charged for evading a police roadblock under the Police Force Act, riding a PMD on public road under the Road Traffic Act, and riding an unregistered PMD on footpath under the Active Mobility Act.

The authorities reminded the public that they take a tough stance against anyone who evades roadblocks and endangers the safety of officers and members of the public.

The police also said they would like to remind the public that PMDs are not permitted on public roads, and enforcement action will be taken against those found flouting the laws.

Passengers setting sail on Genting Dream, Star Navigator, or Star Voyager cruises from Singapore will no longer need to pay a fuel surcharge for trips from Jun. 26 onwards.

The full waiver of the fee was announced on Jun. 23 by StarDream Cruises, which operates the StarCruises and Dream Cruises lines.

Previously in March, the company introduced a fuel surcharge of S$15 per person per night for bookings made from Mar. 20, citing rising fuel costs due to the Middle East conflict.

It applied to Genting Dream sailings from Singapore and nearby homeports, and Star Voyager sailings departing from Singapore and Port Klang, Malaysia.

In the Jun. 23 press release, the president of StarDream Cruises, Michael Goh, shared that the operator reviews fuel surcharges regularly.

"As fuel prices have continued to stabilise, we are pleased to reduce and, where possible, fully waive the fuel surcharge across our deployments," he said.

This reduction was decided after taking into account the gradual improvement in fuel market conditions.

StarDream Cruises will continue to monitor global fuel price movements and review their surcharge arrangements as appropriate.

Besides Singapore, those on cruises departing from Malaysia from Jun. 26 onwards will also have the fuel surcharge fully waived.

However, those sailing from Taiwan and Hong Kong will still need to pay half of the fee.

In March, Star Navigator sailings from Keelung, Taiwan, and Star Voyager sailings from Hong Kong were also hit with a fuel surcharge of NT600 (S$24.60) and HK$200 (S$33).