Ministerial Statement on Race and Religion in Parliament on 14 Oct 2025

Steer clear of identity politics, uphold integrity of Singapore’s secular system: Shanmugam

Political parties should not use race and religion in election campaigns, he says

By Linette Lai, The Straits Times, 15 Oct 2025

Resist the destructive temptation to use race and religion in election campaigns for easy political wins, and steer clear of identity politics, Coordinating Minister for National Security K. Shanmugam urged Parliament on Oct 14.

In an hour-long speech that referred to “troubling incidents” during the May general election, he set out the fundamental principles underpinning Singapore’s approach to race and religion, as well as how politicians here should respond to future attempts to provoke such issues.

While people are free to practise their faiths, the Government’s position is that public political debate must be conducted and decided on a secular basis. This approach is central to Singapore’s existence as an independent nation, said Mr Shanmugam, who is also Home Affairs Minister.

In particular, he highlighted the opposition Workers’ Party’s reaction to remarks made during the hustings by self-styled religious teacher Noor Deros and politicians from Malaysia’s Islamist party, Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS), saying that the WP could have acted more quickly and been less ambiguous about its stance.

Political parties should “immediately, clearly and unequivocally” reject any such attempts to interfere in Singapore’s political process in the future, the minister said.

Mr Shanmugam also pointed to how identity politics has split countries around the world, including the US, cautioning the House that such division is hard to contain and impossible to reverse.

Ultimately, it will lead to political parties courting the majority vote and minorities being marginalised, he said in his ministerial statement.

While Singapore looks stable now, it is no more stable than other countries where communal relations have worsened as a result of these pressures, he added.

The minister’s remarks were the latest in a series of statements on identity politics that have been made since the election, when external parties sought to sway voters through online appeals.

Mr Shanmugam said he was bringing the matter up again to remind Singaporeans of the framework and fundamentals that are crucial to the country’s success.

“It is too serious a matter – existential to Singapore – for us to simply let it slide,” he said. “And so I decided to make this statement at the earliest opportunity after the opening of Parliament.”

Mr Shanmugam later fielded questions from eight MPs on both sides of the aisle, including several from WP chief and Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh.

In an exchange lasting more than half an hour, Mr Singh disagreed that the WP took too long to respond and said it was unfair to characterise his party as not taking the issue seriously.

He said the WP agrees that race and religion should not be mixed with politics, and accepted that the party’s statement could have been clearer.

‘Troubling incidents’ during GE2025

In his speech, Mr Shanmugam referenced remarks made during the election campaign by Mr Noor, as well as politicians from PAS.

Mr Noor had posted online about meeting WP representatives, including its Malay candidates, and said the party was the only one taking his demands seriously.

Both Mr Noor and PAS politicians called on voters to throw their weight behind the WP’s Faisal Manap, who led a five-member team contesting Tampines GRC.

The WP team was up against a PAP team led by then Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs Masagos Zulkifli.

“That the Malay/Muslim vote in particular was being targeted was obvious,” Mr Shanmugam said.

He noted that the PAS politicians saw an opening and urged Singaporeans to vote along racial and religious lines.

“Does anyone, whether in here or outside, seriously believe that PAS is supporting the WP’s Malay/Muslim candidates in Singapore because PAS cares for Singaporeans?”

The WP responded to this issue on April 26, the fourth day of the hustings.

Mr Shanmugam said the party should have done so immediately rather than wait several days, and been more definitive about its stance.

Initially, the WP had not clearly rejected foreign influence or the foreign endorsement of its candidates, he noted.

Mr Shanmugam also flagged statements from Singapore Democratic Party candidate Damanhuri Abas, who contested Sembawang GRC as part of a five-member team.

He said Mr Damanhuri had called for Malay voters to vote against the PAP and framed this as an issue of “upholding Malay dignity” – a euphemism, the minister said, for Malay “rights”.

This is a slippery and dangerous path that will invite a strong reaction from other races in future elections, the minister cautioned.

Politicians play a role in setting the right tone for society, Mr Shanmugam said, and should encourage constructive discussion and find solutions to problems faced by different ethnic groups.

He added: “It is possible for politicians to say they subscribe to our multiracial and multi-religious values, but still use veiled rhetoric to work up racial and religious sentiment.”

Singapore’s active role in managing race and religion

Mr Shanmugam recounted how Singapore’s founding leaders took systematic steps to build a multiracial country in the face of “tremendous opposition”, especially from organisations representing the majority Chinese population.

At the time, many newly independent countries officially adopted the language and culture of the majority ethnic group. Had Singapore done so, Mandarin would have been its only official language, the minister said.

Barisan Sosialis, the main opposition party then, had taken an active position on the matter, stoking tensions within the Chinese community.

The PAP’s multiracial approach – which Mr Shanmugam described as “the more difficult, more idealistic course” – was therefore not politically expedient.

“We set out these principles as our ideals, and we swam strongly against the tide, the tide of ethnic identity as the organising principle of society,” he said.

Mr Shanmugam also noted that tensions can escalate quickly. For instance, the 1964 race riots took place just 10 months after Chinese-Malay relations began to spiral downwards following political tensions with Malaysia.

In the present day, culture wars in the United States are fuelled by identity-based political campaigns and the blurring of lines between religion and politics, Mr Shanmugam said.

“Every grievance, every disagreement is framed as an ideological battle. It becomes an all-out war, with no room for compromise,” he said.

If such tactics are used in Singapore, the largest and best-organised groups will get their way and conflict is inevitable, he added.

On Tampines GRC, Mr Shanmugam said if the Malay/Muslim community had responded to appeals based on identity politics, other ethnic groups would have noticed.

“Our sense is that something like that may have started to happen in Tampines,” he noted. “Many Chinese voters in Tampines seem to have observed the communal nature of the appeals to the Malay voters, and they seem to have chosen to take a different direction during this GE.”

He said that today, Singapore has a strong legal framework to protect communal harmony, and the Government actively promotes mixing among the different ethnic groups through various policies and platforms.

“I am not suggesting that racial and religious harmony is perfect in Singapore,” he added.

“But as a system, we have sought to contain and overcome the natural human impulses by overlaying them with a broader sense of national identity.”

At present, the situation in Singapore is broadly stable, in part because the ruling PAP has eschewed identity politics and borne the political cost of fighting against attempts to stir up such sentiments, Mr Shanmugam said.

“It would have been easier to leave all of this unsaid,” he added of his speech. “But this statement has to be made in the country’s interests.”

He also warned that this stability is not to be taken for granted. If future political leaders on all sides see identity politics gain traction here, they will be pressured and tempted to take part themselves, he said.

“You know what will happen then. It is a one-way street to ruin,” he added.

The Government’s position is not that politics is incompatible with race and religion, Mr Shanmugam said.

“All religions provide guidance on important aspects of life. So inevitably, there will be areas where faith and public issues overlap,” he noted.

But even as people are free to practise their faiths and express views on political issues that are motivated by their religious convictions, they must do so in a way that is respectful of other religions, he said.

“All political parties need to be absolutely clear: Religion must not be misused for political purposes. It must never be brought into election campaigns,” Mr Shanmugam said. “Without this shared restraint, destructive competition for power and influence between the different groups can only follow.”

The same logic applies to race, he added.

“We need to think of our Singaporean identity as fundamental, and we each have to give up something to strengthen the shared Singaporean identity,” the minister said.

Mr Shanmugam rounded up his speech with an appeal to MPs on both sides of the aisle.

“We may debate and disagree on many things, but I hope that we can all commit to handle issues of race and religion in a responsible and sensible manner, and to uphold the integrity of Singapore’s secular politics,” he said.

Prime Minister Lawrence Wong and Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong made social media posts on the topic later on Oct 14, in which they reiterated Mr Shanmugam’s points on the dangers of identity politics.

“I’m glad there was a shared understanding in Parliament today that we must handle issues of race and religion with care, responsibility, and respect,” PM Wong said.

Said SM Lee: “We must never mix race and religion with politics. That is the way to prosper as one nation for generations to come.”

Citing GE2025, Shanmugam urges WP to reject racial politics, foreign influence clearly and without delay

By Yan Liang Lim, The Straits Times, 15 Oct 2025

Political parties must come out quickly and clearly to reject the mixing of religion and politics, and rebuff attempts by foreigners to interfere in Singapore’s political process, said Coordinating Minister for National Security K. Shanmugam.

Citing the response by the Workers’ Party to such attempts to influence the Singapore electorate in its favour at the 2025 General Election, Mr Shanmugam told Parliament that any delay and ambiguity could give rise to questions and confusion, especially during a critical time like the campaign period.

In a ministerial statement to Parliament on Oct 14, Mr Shanmugam took issue with the timing and substance of the WP’s response when a self-styled preacher called on Singaporeans to vote along racial and religious lines in the election.

He also questioned the WP’s response when some Malaysian politicians openly endorsed the party’s candidate on social media, and sought agreement on how politicians and political parties here will conduct themselves in future should these issues arise again.

Mr Shanmugam, who is also Minister for Home Affairs, noted that the WP had fielded party vice-chairman Faisal Manap to lead its Tampines team to contest against the PAP team led by Minister for Social and Family Development Masagos Zulkifli at GE2025.

“That the Malay/Muslim vote in particular was being targeted was obvious – not just to Singaporeans, but pertinently also obvious to Malaysian observers,” he said.

On April 23, Singaporean Islamic preacher Noor Deros put up two Facebook posts that, among other things, portrayed Mr Faisal as a more vocal champion of Malay/Muslim issues than Mr Masagos. The Malaysia-based preacher called on Tampines voters to “do the right thing” – which meant voting for Mr Faisal, said Mr Shanmugam.

A day later, Mr Noor made further public statements that reiterated his call to Tampines voters. He said he had spoken to all of the WP’s Malay candidates, and that he would rally votes for any political party that agreed with his demands, which were along racial and religious lines.

On April 25, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and Elections Department (ELD) put out a statement to highlight the dangers of mixing religion and politics, and urged all political parties and their candidates to do their part to safeguard Singapore’s harmony.

Prime Minister Lawrence Wong then called a press conference on April 26, where he called on Singaporeans to reject efforts to bring race and religion into politics. He also asked all political parties to take a clear stand on two principles: that identity politics has no place in the city state, and that Singapore should never mix religion and politics.

On the same day, the WP released its own statement, which said that no promises, commitments or agreements had been made to Mr Noor in exchange for political support.

Mr Shanmugam said that given the fundamentals of the Republic’s multiracial and multi-religious approach to nation-building, the WP should have said more, and should have said it immediately after Mr Noor’s posts.

Its statement on April 26 came more than two days after Mr Noor made public his meetings with the WP, and came after the statement by ELD and MHA.

“This was during the campaign period, when every day made a huge difference,” said the minister. “This delay, on such an important matter, begs many questions.”

For instance, sections of voters might be misled into thinking, during those two days, that the WP was possibly considering Mr Noor’s demands.

The party’s statement also did not categorically reject Mr Noor’s call for Muslims in Singapore to vote along racial and religious lines, nor did it reject his support for Mr Faisal, its anchor candidate in Tampines, said Mr Shanmugam.

“If we accept that identity politics has no place in Singapore, then a clearer and more immediate response was called for... without letting the matter drag,” he said.

Mr Shanmugam noted that WP chief Pritam Singh had said in follow-up interviews on April 26 and 27 that Mr Noor’s endorsement did not mean the party would carry forward his policies, but he hoped that political parties would put out “a more immediate, forthright and unequivocal response” if such incidents occur again.

Reject foreign interference ‘clearly and unequivocally’

Malaysian politicians from Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS) saw the WP’s fielding of Mr Faisal in Tampines as an opening, and urged Singaporeans to vote along racial and religious lines, said Mr Shanmugam.

On April 25, MHA and ELD said the authorities had identified a number of foreigners attempting to influence Singapore’s general election, and moved to block access to several Facebook posts.

The posts were by PAS national treasurer Iskandar Abdul Samad and the Islamist party’s Selangor Youth chief Mohamed Sukri Omar. Among other things, the posts had expressed support for Mr Faisal and stated that PAP’s Malay/Muslim MPs could not be trusted.

The WP’s statement on the matter, issued on April 26, said it does not have control over foreign parties who express support for its candidates.

Mr Shanmugam said the WP should have put out its statement immediately after the posts surfaced, rather than wait till after MHA and ELD had issued the Government’s statement.

The WP statement also did not clearly reject foreign influence or the foreign endorsement of its candidates, he added.

Mr Shanmugam acknowledged that Mr Singh subsequently clarified the WP’s position in his comments to the media on April 26. In a rally speech that evening, the WP chief also categorically rejected the involvement of foreign elements in Singapore’s politics, and said the party does not need the support of foreigners.

“It would have been better if the WP had said this right from the start – responding directly and promptly to what the PAS leaders had said,” said Mr Shanmugam, noting that the WP did so after PM Wong had called on all political parties to make their stance on foreign influence clear.

Mr Shanmugam said he hoped that in future, political parties will immediately reject any attempts to interfere in Singapore’s political process.

“If this is not done immediately, clearly and unequivocally, it will give rise to questions and confusion,” he said.

Race and religion should not mix with politics, WP statement during GE could’ve been clearer: Pritam

By Chin Soo Fang, The Straits Times, 15 Oct 2025

• Pritam Singh agreed race and religion shouldn't mix with politics, affirming WP's stance on foreign interference during GE2025, despite criticism on Noor Deros’ remarks.
• K. Shanmugam questioned the WP's response to Noor Deros' racially charged comments and endorsement of WP candidates, highlighting the need for unequivocal rejection.
• MPs debated foreign interference and racial appeals in politics. Shanmugam stressed upholding Singapore's unity, and for discussions on sensitive matters to be carried out respectfully.

The Workers’ Party agreed that race and religion should not be mixed with politics, and had made clear its views on foreign interference during the 2025 General Election campaign, said Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh on Oct 14.

The WP chief accepted Coordinating Minister for National Security K. Shanmugam’s criticism that his party’s April 26 statement on remarks by self-styled Singaporean preacher Noor Deros could have been clearer, but disagreed that WP took too long to respond to the matter during GE2025.

“We had made our views quite clear on foreign interference,” said Mr Singh. “I understand the minister says that (the) statement on Noor Deros could have been clearer. I accept that, I think we can make certain things very clear.”

Responding to a ministerial statement by Mr Shanmugam, Mr Singh told Parliament that the WP is “not shy” about coming forward to resolve an issue “in the event there is something untoward or awry”, and that it was not fair to say that the party did not take this issue seriously.

He pointed out that the Government had issued its statement – about foreign interference and the dangers of mixing religion and politics – on April 25. The following morning, WP had put out its own statement and also held a media interview that addressed the issue.

Mr Shanmugam, who is also Home Affairs Minister, had delivered a statement to the House on Oct 14 that questioned the timing and substance of the WP’s response after Mr Noor asked Singaporeans to vote along racial and religious lines in the election.

The minister also questioned the WP’s response to the endorsement its candidates received during the campaign period from certain Malaysian politicians, and sought agreement on how politicians and political parties here will conduct themselves in future should these issues arise again.

In a back-and-forth exchange with Mr Singh that lasted more than 30 minutes, Mr Shanmugam said the WP statement did not reject Mr Noor’s position calling for Muslims in Singapore to vote along racial and religious lines, nor did it reject his support for the WP’s anchor in Tampines, party vice-chair Faisal Manap.

“Instead, what it said is that no commitments, promises or agreements had been made to Noor Deros,” said Mr Shanmugam. “That is something that you might find lawyers drafting for each other, you don’t see that in political statements which ought to be clear and unequivocal.”

Mr Shanmugam then asked if the lack of a clear rejection of Mr Noor’s statement could have been an oversight, or “a deliberate choice based on a calculation of interests... that Noor Deros can swing some votes”.

While such a calculation may bring some short-term benefits to a political party, it does long-term damage to Singapore and goes against the Republic’s pledge and multiracial ideals, he said.

“Being true to our pledge has to go beyond citing it during GE rallies – it must mean putting it in practice even when it’s difficult to do so,” he added. “Sincere belief requires acting true to the words of the pledge, even when it may cost some votes.”

Mr Singh replied that the WP did make an assessment, and that his view was that there were a number of factors at play “when a nobody claims that there’s a set of demands that he has of a political party”.

This includes possibly bringing the issue into greater focus by raising the matter in the heat of an election, said Mr Singh. He cited the Streisand effect, which describes a situation when an attempt to censor information instead increases public awareness of the matter.

Information asymmetry

Mr Singh said that while he agreed with the minister on rejecting attempts to use identity politics to win votes, there was “an asymmetry of information, (and) the Government has a perspective which is far broader than a small political party”.

If the matter was serious enough that Prime Minister Lawrence Wong had to hold a press conference midway through the election campaign to address it, it should not be too difficult to reach out to political parties in the national interest to get their clarification, he added.

Mr Shanmugam replied that if there was any asymmetry of information, it was that the WP had all the information, given that neither the Government nor the PAP met with Mr Noor.

He added that the Government is also mindful of being seen to interfere with individual political parties during an election period, which could be politicised.

“Maybe Mr Singh is welcoming of a phone call to say ‘this is not on’, but I can imagine a number of other political parties might say, ‘you are trying to threaten me in the middle of a general election’,” said Mr Shanmugam.

Other MPs who sought clarifications from Mr Shanmugam included Mr Kenneth Tiong (Aljunied GRC), who asked if the PAP government would apply the same standards to Mr Michael Petraeus, a Polish national who runs a media platform known as Critical Spectator.

Mr Tiong said the platform had published “racially charged commentary” on Singapore politics, including a piece that includes in its title “WP abandons Muslim voters, turns to the Chinese”.

Mr Shanmugam said there are a variety of people who run commentaries about Singapore, including The New York Times and the South China Morning Post.

“Michael Petraeus is not the only person who is a foreigner who runs commentaries, sometimes for the Government, sometimes against the Government, sometimes favouring the Workers’ Party,” he said. “That does not amount to interfering with local politics.”

It is not the Government’s business to go around censoring these articles, but if there were specific attempts to interfere in Singapore’s elections, the authorities will look into it, he added.

In reply, Mr Tiong said: “I thank the minister for clarifying that the PAP will not be categorically rejecting Michael Petraeus’ actions.”

Mr Shanmugam told him “not to put words in my mouth”. He then invited the WP to say if its position was to censor and object to every article on politics in Singapore by any foreigner, including in international publications.

Mr Xie Yao Quan (Jurong Central) asked if it would be wrong for political parties to appeal to voters based on what they can offer to any specific community, or for people to demand that the Government do more for a specific community.

Mr Shanmugam responded that it is perfectly acceptable for political parties, candidates and politicians to state that their policies will benefit a specific community and for others to counter that.

For instance, it has been a longstanding commitment of the PAP government to support and uplift the Malay/Muslim community, which is why the Constitution recognises the special position of the Malays, he noted.

While there is nothing wrong with advocating ways to advance a particular community or discussing legitimate community concerns, this advocacy must be done in a responsible manner that upholds Singapore’s unity, he stressed.

This is different from pitting the different racial and religious groups against one another, or calling on Singaporeans to vote along racial and religious lines, he added.

Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim (Chua Chu Kang GRC) said some people may see Mr Shanmugam’s ministerial statement as “suggesting that a particular group or community, in this case, the Malay/Muslim community, should bear some responsibility for allowing such sentiments to take root in the first place”.

To this, Mr Shanmugam said he was not singling out any particular community, and the Chinese community had also been targeted in past elections.

“They didn’t ask for these provocations, nor did they support these tactics. They share the same strong commitment as any other community to Singapore’s multiracial, multi-religious approach,” he said of the Malay/Muslim community.

During the debate, which lasted about 1½ hours, Non-Constituency MP Andre Low also asked if Mr Shanmugam would consider “recalibrating” the Government’s approach to racial and religious harmony.

The WP NCMP cited statistics from the Institute of Policy Studies that show a gap between what the majority Chinese and what minorities feel about the situation in Singapore.

These findings suggested that the current approach may not be working for certain demographics, including younger Singaporeans, who may feel that safe spaces can be more open, said Mr Low.

While the situation in Singapore is not perfect, the answer is not to jump to models that have “failed miserably everywhere else”, said Mr Shanmugam.

He cited examples of societies with “real fora” such as the US, Britain, France and Germany.

When discussions over sensitive topics are allowed without any kind of legal framework, the result is identity politics, said the minister.

“Are we colonised in our mind so much, that we have to continue to hark back to these theories which have failed all around the world?” he asked.

Singapore’s approach is to create safe spaces where people with different views come together and discuss these issues, but with rules in place, said Mr Shanmugam.

“These so-called curated fora, all it means is a safe space is created, different people with different views come together, moderators come in, they discuss,” he said.

“It’s hard-hitting, and on substance nobody pulls their punches, but they are respectful.”

‘Unacceptable’ for foreign entities to tell Singaporeans how to vote: MHA in response to Malaysia party PAS

The Straits Times, 16 Oct 2025

The statements made by leaders of a Malaysian political party before Singapore’s May 3 General Election had “clear intent” to influence Singaporean voters, and that is unacceptable, said the Republic’s Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) on Oct 16.

In a statement, the ministry rebutted the position taken by Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS) secretary general Takiyuddin Hassan on Oct 15, that the party was cast “as a convenient bogeyman to advance domestic political agendas in Singapore”.

MHA said that PAS had contradicted its earlier position, in April, with its Oct 15 statement. The ministry then referred to a statement made by the party on April 28, where it distanced itself from comments made by two of its leaders in relation to PAP and Workers’ Party politicians, ahead of Singapore’s May 3 General Election.

Earlier, on April 24, PAS national treasurer Iskandar Abdul Samad publicly expressed support for the WP’s Mr Faisal Manap.

He praised Mr Faisal for having “the courage to explain to Parliament that in Islam religion must not be separated from politics”, and said he hoped that Mr Faisal “will be successful once again”.

On the same day, PAS Selangor Youth Chief Mohamed Sukri Omar re-posted a social media post which stated that PAP’s Malay-Muslim Members of Parliament cannot be trusted.

MHA pointed out that PAS had, on April 28, said the comments made by the duo “represent their personal views and in no way reflect PAS’s official policy or stance as a political party”.

Referring to PAS’ latest statement on Oct 15, MHA said: “PAS now characterises the April 24 comments by its members as expressions of PAS’s official view. It describes them as ‘ordinary cross-border commentary’, and takes issue with Singapore’s response to such ‘legitimate speech’.

“PAS further claims to be entitled to freely express its views on Singapore politics, so long as this is not accompanied by ‘funding, actions, coordination or directives’.

“What is PAS’ true position?”

MHA added that PAS, as a Malaysian Islamist political party, “cannot have Singapore’s best interests at heart”.

“It is not for foreign entities or individuals to tell Singaporeans how to vote, least of all along racial and religious lines. That is divisive and unacceptable,” the ministry said.

“PAS now also claims that its earlier comments of April 24 were unlikely to influence Singaporeans. If that were true, why make these comments at all?

“Their clear intent was to influence Singaporean voters. That is unacceptable.”

The ministry also said that foreigners are entitled to comment on Singapore’s policies and politics, with foreign media doing so regularly.

“But the Singapore Government will not stand by if a foreign actor attempts to influence Singaporeans for its own purposes, especially by rousing racial and religious sentiments and during elections,” MHA said.

Singapore’s Coordinating Minister for National Security and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam had on Oct 14 delivered a parliamentary statement on the politicisation of race and religion.

Mr Shanmugam said politicians from PAS saw the WP’s fielding of Mr Faisal in Tampines during the 2025 General Election as an opening, and urged Singaporeans to vote along racial and religious lines.

On April 25, MHA and the Elections Department put out a statement to highlight the dangers of mixing religion and politics, and urged all political parties and their candidates to do their part to safeguard Singapore’s harmony.

That statement stated that the Government had blocked access to posts by foreigners who sought to influence the general election, including the posts by the two PAS leaders.

Prime Minister Lawrence Wong then called a press conference on April 26, where he called on Singaporeans to reject efforts to bring race and religion into politics.

*  Pritam Singh clarifies that Noor Deros was invited to WP meeting with religious leaders in April

By Lee Li Ying, The Straits Times, 5 Nov 2025

• Pritam Singh clarified his inaccurate claim that Mr Noor Deros "gatecrashed" an April meeting with that WP had with some Malay/Muslim leaders during the election period.
• Workers' Party vice-chair Faisal Manap was told that Mr Noor would attend the meeting an hour prior, by the religious teacher who invited him.
• Mr Singh said he made a personal statement of his own volition on Nov 4 to clarify the wrong impression given.

WP chief Pritam Singh on Nov 4 clarified he had given the wrong impression that Mr Noor Deros was not invited to an April meeting that the party had with Malay/Muslim religious leaders, when he said the self-styled preacher “gatecrashed” the session.

In his response to a ministerial statement on race and religion on Oct 14, Mr Singh had also said “there was no indication” that Mr Noor would be joining the meeting between the religious leaders and WP’s Malay candidates.

On Nov 4, Mr Singh told the House that a religious teacher had invited Mr Noor to the meeting, and informed WP vice-chair Faisal Manap via a WhatsApp message one hour before it started.

The Leader of the Opposition said he found out about this a week after the ministerial statement, on Oct 21, when Mr Faisal showed him the WhatsApp message.

“I was not aware of this detail in April this year, nor was I aware of it last month during the exchange on the ministerial statement,” said Mr Singh.

His clarification came after Leader of the House Indranee Rajah made a surprise ministerial statement to seek clarity over Mr Singh’s statements on the matter.

The April 20 meeting has been a topic of contention as Mr Noor had said he spoke to WP election candidates and urged the opposition party to prioritise the rights and concerns of the Malay/Muslim community in Singapore.

This prompted concerns about the mixing of race and religion with politics – an issue that Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam addressed at length in his October ministerial statement. The interactions between the WP and Mr Noor in the lead-up to the general election on May 3 were covered extensively in the statement.

Ms Indranee noted that Mr Noor released a YouTube video on Oct 18 saying he had not gatecrashed the meeting, and that Mr Faisal knew he would be at the meeting.

“On the face of things, it would appear that either one – Mr Faisal has told an untruth which has been repeated by Mr Singh during the general election and now in Parliament. Or two, Mr Deros is lying. Sir, this is serious,” said Ms Indranee.

She then sought clarification from Mr Singh on the matter.

Rising to speak, Mr Singh said he informed Speaker of Parliament Seah Kian Peng on the night of Nov 3 that he wished to clarify “certain representations” he had made in the House that were incorrect and had to be clarified for the record.

Mr Singh had joined the sitting while on a lunchtime break during his appeal in the High Court against his conviction and sentence for lying to a parliamentary committee.

“In using the word ‘gatecrash’, I may have created an impression that Mr Noor was not invited by anyone. This would be an incorrect impression,” he said, adding that Mr Noor was invited by the religious teacher who arranged the meeting with WP.

“It would not be right to leave that impression on the record. Hence my decision to make a personal explanation on my own volition today,” he added.

Asked by Ms Indranee what had led him to characterise Mr Noor’s presence at the meeting as gatecrashing, Mr Singh said he drew that conclusion as Mr Noor was not invited by Mr Faisal, and was also not specifically sought out by any WP member.

He reiterated that no promises or undertakings were made by Mr Faisal or WP’s Malay/Muslim candidates at the meeting in exchange for political support.

Ms Indranee also asked about Mr Singh’s portrayal of Mr Noor as a “nobody”, which she said gave the impression that he was not known to the WP, Mr Faisal or any of the other WP candidates who attended the meeting.

She noted that Mr Noor had founded the Wear White movement in 2014 in opposition to Pink Dot, which Mr Faisal publicly backed then.

Mr Faisal had also attended an event where Wear White members gathered for evening prayers during the holy month of Ramadan in June 2018, said Ms Indranee.

In response, Mr Singh conceded that Mr Faisal might have known of Mr Noor, but said he and the other WP candidates did not.

Ms Indranee then asked the WP chief whether Mr Faisal had heard of Mr Noor but did not know him, or if he knew Mr Noor.

“I want to be careful in trying not to import Mr Faisal’s knowledge and make a representation which may not be correct as to the degree of which he knew (Mr Noor),” Mr Singh replied.

Wrapping up the exchange, Ms Indranee pointed out the difference between Mr Singh saying Mr Noor was not specifically sought out, and that Mr Noor had gatecrashed a meeting, which implies he was not even supposed to be there. The facts show that Mr Noor was invited and Mr Faisal was also informed, she said.

“Had this been known in April during the elections and made known to the voters, I think it might have put a different colour on the circumstances then,” said Ms Indranee, adding that “gatecrash” was an odd word to use if that had not been verified.

Replying, Mr Singh said that was why he made the clarification to correct the wrong impression.

In a statement issued after the sitting, Minister of State for Home Affairs Goh Pei Ming noted that Mr Singh’s inaccurate statements – that Mr Noor had gatecrashed the meeting, and no one in the WP really knew who he was – were conveyed to voters during the general election and repeated in Parliament.

The clarifications had taken many months to emerge, and might not have been made if Mr Noor had not publicly refuted Mr Singh, said Mr Goh.

While Mr Goh said he was glad Mr Singh has clarified the matter, “it would have been better if Mr Singh and Mr Faisal Manap had cleared the air much sooner and not allowed Singaporeans to be misled for so long”.

“All parliamentarians, and all political parties, have a responsibility to uphold high standards of integrity in our politics and political discourse,” he added.

Related

Ministerial Statement on Race and Religion – Speech by Mr K Shanmugam, Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs -14 Oct 2025