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).

A Singaporean man, 27, witnessed a brutal assault occur in broad daylight in Johor, Malaysia, on Jun. 7, 2026, and managed to capture the incident on his vehicle's dashcam.

However, when he extracted the footage in Singapore and tried to make a police report to Malaysian authorities, he said he was unable to do so as he learned that foreigners apparently had to lodge a report in person and could not do so online.

He also said he was given inaccurate information by the Malaysian police, who had purportedly told him that he could make a police report in Singapore, and the information could be relayed to the Malaysian police.

Footage of the incident has since been shared with Mothership.

What he saw

The Singaporean man said the assault occurred on a Sunday at around 6:40pm along Jalan Tampoi.

He was approaching a traffic light junction when the altercation started, he recalled.

One man was on a bicycle, and the other was on foot.

They apparently exchanged words before they started to brawl a few seconds later.

"Initially I didn’t think too much of it, thinking they’d just break it off after a few strikes, especially since it was still light out and there were people in the nearby shops, cars driving around and even a motorcycle a few meters ahead of them stopped at the traffic light," he added.

But "within seconds, one guy was on the floor getting his head bashed against the concrete multiple times", the Singaporean said.

The entire assault was caught on the man's dashcam.

"He was unconscious after this point as seen in the video," the eyewitness continued.

The Singaporean man added:

"I didn’t know what to do at this point and kind of froze. The traffic light was still red. I considered for a short moment if I should get out and help but was honestly too scared as the assailant didn’t seem in his right mind and was still kicking and stomping away at the victims head and body."

"The traffic light then turned green and I decided to get out of the situation and drove off. As I was driving off, a lady was running up to them from the shops with a worried look on her face to stop the guy from doing any more hurt. This gave me a little more reassurance as I drove off."

Assailant stomped on unconscious' man's head & groin

As seen in the clip, the assailant allegedly held the other man's head and smashed it on the surface of the road.

The assailant then got up and threw numerous kicks to the downed man's head and stomped on his groin area.

Tried to make police report

The Singaporean man subsequently extracted footage of the incident and searched for an online portal to file a police report with the Malaysian police.

He then realised he could not do so as he was not Malaysian.

He proceeded to call a police station in Malaysia, which directed him to a police station in Tampoi, a satellite town about 8km from Johor Bahru.

He recalled: "They told me they don’t accept non-physical reporting from non-Malaysians and suggested I report it to the Singapore police, and tell them to liaise with the JB police."

He said this procedure "sounded strange", but he complied and filed a police report with the Singapore police.

A copy of the report was seen by Mothership.

The Singaporean man said the Singapore police then called him to inform him that "that’s not how this works", which was what he suspected in the first place.

In his initial tip-off, the Singaporean man wrote that he had tried but failed to report the incident to the Malaysian authorities, which was why his "best shot would be to report it here".

My grandmother is a second-generation Teochew Singaporean.

Her family hailed from Jieyang, one of three major Teochew cities in China's Eastern Guangdong Province.

Like many her age, being a girl in pre-war Singapore meant not having much of an education, if any at all.

We speak exclusively in dialect – her in her native Teochew and me in my half-baked imitation, but we get by.

Lost in translation

To my grandma, Teochew forms a huge part of her identity.

I often hear about her early life in Singapore – how kampungs sorted themselves by dialect groups, how they supported each other in a language only they knew.

Things get lost in translation, though. Since the 1979 Speak Mandarin Campaign, which restricted the use of dialects in favour of Mandarin, communicating with younger generations of Singaporeans became limited to her tiny arsenal of about 10 Mandarin words.

And so when Chinese Indie film "Dear You" landed in Singapore's cinemas on Jun. 18 to much fanfare, I found the plot all too familiar.

The story centres around a Chinese man's search for his "billionaire grandfather" in Thailand, before discovering that the one who has been corresponding with his grandmother for years is not her husband.

Like the male protagonist, my grandmother's father was among the influx of Chinese immigrants who moved to Southeast Asia in the 1930s to find work amidst social and political turmoil back home.

"Teochews must look out for each other" is frequently mentioned by characters in the film. Like them, my great-grandfather relied heavily on those who arrived before him to build a life in a foreign land.

According to my grandma, he would send letters and money to relatives back home, relying on a handful of neighbours who could read and write in Mandarin.

The Teochew community banded together through their common dialect, much like how some Singaporeans abroad might find familiarity in hearing Singlish.

Dubbing a dialect movie

Despite its modest budget of 14 million yuan (S$2.66 million) and a largely unknown cast, the film was a sleeper hit, poised to become the third Chinese film to break a million dollars at the box office this year.

But it wasn't just the heartfelt dialogue or nostalgic scenes of 1950s Siam, or Thailand, that sparked conversation, but the fact that, except for limited screenings, the Teochew film was dubbed over in Mandarin here.

Calls were made by members of the public, filmmakers and even members of parliament to reconsider the restriction.

In a Facebook post, Workers' Party's Hougang MP Dennis Tan called for the preservation of the nation's dialect heritage, citing dialects like Teochew and Hokkien as the language of communication among many of his residents at Hougang.

"I have come to believe that our dialect group heritage is as much a part of our Singaporean Chinese cultural heritage as any of the customs we more readily celebrate."

PAP's Bishan-Toa Payoh MP Cai Yinzhou wrote in a Facebook post that, in light of many residents' disappointment about the dubbing choice, he had filed parliamentary questions to the Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI) to clarify the decision.

"I ask this as language carries culture. Dialects and language nuances are part of how stories are told and remembered," he said.

In a Straits Times forum, local filmmakers Eric Khoo and Jack Neo called for a relaxation of the policy altogether, calling it "outdated".

MDDI attributed the decision to dub the movie on Jun. 22 as part of the government's longstanding policy to promote Mandarin as one of the nation's four official languages.

"This has helped to strengthen Mandarin proficiency across generations and facilitate communication among Chinese Singaporeans from different dialect backgrounds," the statement said.

That is very true.

But 'facilitating communication' takes on different meanings depending on who you ask. For my grandma, who was much too poor to have an education and much too old to learn a new language in 1979, restricting her dialect meant taking away her ability to use the only form of communication she knew.

This continues even today.

A Teochew watching a Teochew film...in Mandarin

My grandma watched the Mandarin-dubbed version of "Dear You" on its opening day on Jun. 18 after failing to secure tickets from the first slate of Teochew releases.

When I asked for her thoughts on it, it was not to my surprise that she said she failed to understand a majority of the dialogue.

The most memorable parts of the film to her were its visual aspects, including the architecture of the share house where the protagonist lived and the streets of Siam.

It dawned on me that without her familiar language, images became the only way she could form an emotional connection with the story, much like the characters' practice of sending photographs alongside letters they couldn't read.

Asked what would have made the film better, my grandma's response was: "I think the Teochew version would have been much clearer."

Nuances and sentiments

The irony was not lost on me that a film intended to celebrate the contributions of early Chinese settlers in Southeast Asia had excluded that very group, all because of a language barrier.

It was not just words that had been lost in translation, but the sentiments that came with them.

Being fortunate enough to catch both versions of the film, I found an unassuming 30-second scene in the second half of the film that best illustrated this imbalance.

As the male protagonist set off on sea in his new fishing business alongside other Teochews, the group began reciting a once-famous Chinese nursery rhyme.

It loosely translates as such:

One whorl sits neatly.

Two whorls walk on foot.

Three whorls have rice to cook.

Four whorls no rice to cook.

Five whorls have five fields.

Six whorls split their hearts,

Seven whorls bring seven benefits.

Eight whorls bring begging.

Nine whorls, nine peace and safety.

Ten whorls can make you a high-ranking official.

The rhyme was a superstition that a person's whorls (fingerprints) can determine their fates.

Originating in Chaoshan, Guangdong, it also captured a familiarity with the hardship faced by immigrants in that generation, like the protagonist, my grandma and her father.

Yet it flew over my grandma's head when recited in Mandarin, arguably for sounding too literal.

To me, it was also much less poetic.

A policy that needs an update?

As Cai said, dialects and language nuances are part of how stories are told and remembered. It might also capture emotions that mainstream languages cannot convey.

Take for example Manpower Minister Tan See Leng's quotation of a Cantonese movie phrase during a parliamentary Committee of Supply debate on Mar. 7, 2025:

@mothershipsg Manpower minister Tan See Leng used a Cantonese movie quote to describe his interactions with NCMP Leong Mun Wai in Parliament #singapore #sgnews #tiktoksg #fypsg #parliament ♬ original sound - Mothership

The moment became a debated point about the use of dialects in parliament, but it remains arguably true that there was no more transparent way to convey Tan's message.

Much like how "delicious" doesn't begin to capture the essence of "shiok", or how I wouldn't share the same closeness to my grandma if I had never learnt to speak in Teochew.

The Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) announced on Jun. 22 that it would take a "more flexible approach" to the screening of dialect films in Singapore in light of recent calls from the onset of "Dear You".

Judging from the two slates of Teochew ticket sell-outs so far, that flexibility will hopefully bear fruit.

I, for one, say go for it.

Or as my grandmother would say, "Ga Ga Kia".