Correction guidelines have been issued under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) against Bloomberg and other publications by the second Minister of Law, Edwin Tong.
According to a Ministry of Justice press release dated December 23, 2024, the directions were issued in response to articles and messages communicating false factual statements regarding transactions involving Good Class Bungalows (GCBs).
The Justice Department cited a Bloomberg article published on December 12, 2024 and shared on his Facebook and X (formerly known as Twitter) accounts.
This article has also been republished in full by the The Edge Singapore on the same day, and reposted to his Facebook account.
The ministry also cited articles from Independent Singapore And The online citizenboth of which were also published on December 12, 2024 and reposted to their Facebook accounts.
The online citizen also shared the article on his Instagram account.
What do the Correction Guidelines entail?
According to the correction guidelines, Bloomberg, The Edge Singapore, Independent Singapore And The online citizen are respectively required to post correction notices with the original article and posts, or at a specified online location where the article or post has been removed.
These notices state that the articles or messages mentioned contain false statements of fact and provide a link to the government’s clarification.
“This allows readers to read both versions and draw their own conclusions,” the Justice Department said.
What did the Bloomberg article say?
According to the government fact-check website ActuallyBloomberg had “communicated” the falsehood that there are no publicly available government records of GCB sales transactions, if no caveats are provided.
According to the URAA caveat is a legal document filed by a buyer with the Singapore Land Authority to protect his interests after exercising a purchase option or signing a sale and purchase agreement.
Furthermore, the article further communicated the falsehood that the identity of the beneficial owner does not need to be disclosed to the government, and that the government is therefore unaware of the identity of the beneficial owner, in GCB ownership transactions purchased using of a trust agreement or shell. company.
The article also communicated the falsehood that GCB ownership transactions can be conducted without any government checks on the identity of the beneficial owners.
Information on property ownership and transfers is available through the SLA portal
Actually clarifies that property ownership and transfer information, including for all GCBs, is available on the Integrated Land Information Service portal (INLIS), which is operated by the Singapore Land Authority (SLA).
This is regardless of whether a reservation has been made for the sales transaction.
Caveats are also not intended to track real estate transactions or ensure transparency.
The purpose of a caveat is to protect the interests of the buyer, mortgagee or other parties who have a legal right to the property and is voluntarily filed by parties seeking to protect their interest in a property.
The government has clear disclosure requirements regarding the identity/citizenship of purchasers and beneficial owners for all real estate transactions involving land.
The government also has clear disclosure requirements regarding the identity and citizenship of purchasers and beneficial owners for all real estate transactions involving land, including GCB transactions.
This is regardless of whether a contingency is placed on the transaction, and regardless of whether the purchase is made by an individual, an entity or through a vehicle such as a trust or corporation, including a shell company.
SLA also requires that the identity and citizenship of the buyer be declared when submitting the deed of transfer to the land registry, as part of the sales process for landed properties, including GCBs.
Requirements for landed property transactions
In addition, for all landed property transactions concluded through trust agreements, lawyers are required to submit a copy of the trust deed to the SLA. SLA checks and verifies the identity of the ultimate beneficial owner.
For all landed property transactions where the buyer or ultimate owner is a company, the applicant must meet strict requirements before obtaining a clearance certificate to purchase the landed property.
The company must be incorporated in Singapore and all their directors and members must be Singapore citizens or Singapore entities as defined under the RPA.
In addition, companies incorporated in Singapore are required under the Companies Act 1967 to maintain accurate and up-to-date information about their beneficial ownership.
Bloomberg article also wrongly claimed that primary responsibility for combating money laundering in real estate transactions is left to real estate agents
Actually also pointed out that another untruth communicated in the article is that the primary responsibility for combating money laundering is left to real estate agents and other service providers.
Another lie through Bloomberg is that for GCB ownership transactions, there is no publicly available government record of the GCB transaction if no reservation is made, nor is there a requirement to disclose to the government the identity of the beneficial owner in a trust agreement or shell company .
This allows parties (including ministers and wealthy migrants) to trade such property in a way that facilitates money laundering, which is wrong. Actually said.
The government has the primary responsibility to combat money laundering in real estate transactions
In response to this Actually pointed out that the government has the primary responsibility to combat money laundering in real estate transactions, and has introduced an anti-money laundering framework to counter such risks.
This also applies to transactions through trust agreements and companies.
The government also requires regulated private sector ‘gatekeepers’ involved in real estate transactions to comply with the requirements of the anti-money laundering framework to carry out checks to identify and verify the identity of their customers, including beneficial owners.
Where there are higher risks, gatekeepers must also verify the sources of wealth of their clients.
The financial institutions involved must know the customers and the purpose of the transactions and, if necessary, the sources of the funds. The requirements are comparable to the standards in leading financial centers.
Obligations are also imposed on lawyers who handle the transactions, real estate salespeople and real estate agencies. These requirements and obligations are laid down in law.
The government also requires that these gatekeepers, including financial institutions, have processes in place to promptly identify and submit a suspicious transaction report to the Suspicious Transaction Reporting Center of the Singapore Police Force’s Commercial Affairs Department, as soon as there is a suspicious activities are discovered that may be associated with criminal behavior in their interactions with their customers.
The government is responsible for analyzing the reported information and taking enforcement action.
Application letters for Bloomberg
Earlier on December 16, Minister of Home Affairs and Law K. Shanmugam and Minister of Labor Tan See Leng announced via Facebook posts on December 16 that they would be issuing ‘Letters of Demand’ over ‘defamatory statements’ made in the Bloomberg article about alleged real estate transactions.
They said they “take the allegations seriously” and have since “sought legal advice.”
They added that action will be taken against those who published “defamatory statements about these transactions.”
Top images via Ministry of Justice/Facebook and Bloomberg/Facebook