Shanmugam, Tan See Leng each awarded $210,000 in defamation suits against TOC’s Terry Xu
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox
Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam (left) and Manpower Minister Tan See Leng (centre) were each awarded $210,000 in damages in defamation suits filed against The Online Citizen chief editor Terry Xu (right).
PHOTOS: LIANHE ZAOBAO FILE, LIM YAOHUI, KELVIN CHNG
- Terry Xu must pay $210,000 each in damages to ministers K. Shanmugam and Tan See Leng for defamation. The TOC article had suggested the ministers acted improperly regarding property transactions.
- Justice Lim highlighted the gravity of Xu's allegations, extensive publication, and his malicious actions. Mr Xu was notified of the falsehoods, but maintained the article’s truth.
- The judge deemed the defamation graver than a 2021 case between Mr Xu and then Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong over 38 Oxley Rd.
AI generated
SINGAPORE - The High Court on March 31 granted $210,000 in damages to Minister for Home Affairs K. Shanmugam and Minister for Manpower Tan See Leng in defamation suits filed against The Online Citizen (TOC) chief editor Terry Xu.
The claims are related to a December 2024 TOC article titled “Bloomberg: Nearly half of 2024 GCB transactions lack public record, raising transparency concerns”. The TOC article referred to a Dec 12, 2024, Bloomberg article on property transactions by the two ministers.
In her 28-page written judgment, Justice Audrey Lim set out several factors that pointed towards the award of higher damages. The damages awarded to each minister included $50,000 in aggravated damages.
The judge’s findings followed an Aug 26, 2025, hearing where she had granted default judgment in favour of Mr Shanmugam and Dr Tan as Mr Xu failed to show up in court.
She said the TOC article’s allegations attacked the ministers’ character by portraying them as individuals who are part of an opaque system and who circumvented transparency requirements to avoid scrutiny of their conduct, and therefore suggesting that they had done something improper.
“As Cabinet ministers, these allegations disparage not only the claimants’ personal (reputation) but professional reputation as well,” she added. “This is therefore a factor that points towards the award of higher damages.”
Justice Lim said Mr Xu’s defamatory allegations were very grave as they directly impugned the claimants’ personal integrity, character and professional reputation.
The extent of publication and republication of the article was substantial, she noted. Besides being accessible on TOC’s website, the article was also published on TOC’s social media platforms.
Mr Xu also amplified the defamatory content by publishing four additional articles between Dec 23, 2024, and Jan 3, 2025, that referred to or contained links to the original article. Each of these subsequent articles was also promoted on TOC’s social media accounts.
The judge also found that Mr Xu had acted in malice. Mr Xu was put on notice to the falsehoods in the article by Dr Tan and Mr Shanmugam’s lawyers on Dec 19, 2024, and an article on the Government’s fact-checking website Factually on Dec 23, 2024.
He responded by saying that the article was “based on factual and verifiable public records”, and maintained that its contents were true and entirely justified, the judge noted.
Mr Xu also breached an Aug 26, 2025, injunction order that restrained him from disseminating the defamatory allegations.
In their lawsuits, Mr Shanmugam and Dr Tan had each sought damages in excess of the awards made in two other defamation cases.
These are a 2021 case when then Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong was awarded $210,000 against Mr Xu for a TOC article over 38 Oxley Road; and a 2024 case where Mr Shanmugam was awarded $200,000 against Mr Lee Hsien Yang for defaming him over his rental of a state property in Ridout Road.
Justice Lim said the nature of the defamation in the present case was, in her view, graver than the case involving Senior Minister Lee.
In that case, Mr Xu’s allegations impugned SM Lee’s reputation and character by alleging that he was dishonest, but the allegations related primarily to a family feud and not, say, to misconduct in his capacity as a public officer pertaining to public funds or to serious criminal conduct, she added.
The extent of publication and republication in the present case was highly substantial, said the judge – much larger than the case involving Mr Shanmugam and Mr Lee Hsien Yang, and comparable to the case involving SM Lee.
Justice Lim also observed that in both the 2021 suit and the present one, Mr Xu’s conduct had been similar. “The defendant in both proceedings acted maliciously and failed to apologise when given the opportunity to do so,” she said.
A subsequent hearing will be fixed to determine legal costs.
Separately, Mr Shanmugam and Dr Tan’s defamation suit against Bloomberg for its Dec 12, 2024, article has been set for eight days between April 7 and 16, according to court records.
