\n<\/p>\n
SINGAPORE – A correction direction has been issued to the chief editor and publisher of The Online Citizen (TOC) over false statements concerning the appointment of the Attorney-General.<\/p>\n
The statements were posted on TOC\u2019s website and social media pages, as well as the website of AI-driven media platform Heidoh.<\/p>\n
In a statement on March 23, the Ministry of Law (MinLaw) said the POFMA Office \u2013 which administers the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) \u2013 was instructed by Law Minister and Second Minister for Home Affairs Edwin Tong\u00a0to issue the correction direction to Mr Terry Xu Yuan Chen and Miao Yi Infotech, a company in Taiwan that publishes TOC, under Singapore\u2019s fake news law.<\/p>\n
Under the order, Mr Xu and Miao Yi Infotech are required to publish correction notices on TOC\u2019s websites, Heidoh\u2019s website, TOC\u2019s Facebook and Instagram pages, and in The Straits Times.<\/p>\n
These notices have to state that the content communicated false statements of fact, and provide a link to the Government\u2019s clarification.<\/p>\n
MinLaw said the false statements were published in an article on the individual websites of TOC and Heidoh on March 9. They were also posted on TOC\u2019s Facebook and Instagram platforms on the same day.<\/p>\n
MinLaw said several falsehoods were published, including that Attorney-General Lucien Wong has not recused himself from acting on matters pertaining to the compulsory acquisition of 38 Oxley Road.<\/p>\n
The ministry said Mr Wong had recused himself from matters pertaining to 38 Oxley Road, and therefore, did not act in those matters, as stated in Parliament in July 2017.<\/p>\n
This includes the compulsory acquisition of 38 Oxley Road, the former home of Singapore\u2019s founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew.<\/p>\n
\u201cAny statement or suggestion that A-G Wong may have acted or is acting in conflict of interest in such matters is entirely without basis,\u201d said MinLaw.<\/p>\n
Another falsehood was that during the debate on MinLaw\u2019s budget on March 2, Workers\u2019 Party chairwoman Sylvia Lim was not permitted to raise any follow-up questions on the Attorney-General\u2019s reappointment process.<\/p>\n
MinLaw said Mr Tong had addressed Ms Lim\u2019s questions about the Attorney-General\u2019s reappointment process.<\/p>\n
\u201cAfter Minister Tong\u2019s response, like five other MPs, Ms Lim was allowed to raise follow-up questions, and Ms Lim, in fact, asked two questions to which Minister Tong responded, as reflected in the public record,\u201d added the ministry.<\/p>\n
The third clarification was that Mr Wong\u2019s reappointment was made in accordance with the Constitution, which permits appointments beyond 60 years old.<\/p>\n
This was in response to the falsehood published by TOC and Heidoh that the Constitution provides for the Attorney-General to retire at the age of 60 without qualification or proviso, but that Prime Minister Lawrence Wong had appointed Attorney-General Wong until he is 75.<\/p>\n
MinLaw also said PM Wong did not reappoint Attorney-General Wong.<\/p>\n
\u201cUnder our Constitution, it is the president, not the PM, that appoints or reappoints the A-G,\u201d the ministry said.<\/p>\n
President Tharman Shanmugaratnam, acting in his discretion and concurring with PM Wong\u2019s advice, and having consulted the Council of Presidential Advisers, had reappointed Attorney-General Wong in October 2025.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n