Redditor questions validity of POFMA correction issued to WP NCMP Yee Jenn Jong

A Reddit post by user u/PristineBarracuda877 has ignited a discussion surrounding the accuracy of the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) Correction Direction issued to former Workers’ Party Non-Constituency Member of Parliament (NCMP) Yee Jenn Jong.

The Redditor’s post, titled “Yee Jenn Jong POFMA-ed – Does the POFMA Correction Direction Itself Contain Falsehoods, and Other Questions?” critically examines the statements made by the Ministry of National Development (MND) in the correction direction, challenging the government’s version of events.

The post questions the government’s assertion in the official POFMA correction that the termination of the Town Council Management System (TCMS) by Action Information Management Pte Ltd (AIM) did not contribute to the lapses identified at Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC).

Yee Jenn Jong’s Mention of AIM

In the Facebook post that was POFMA-ed, Yee Jenn Jong mentioned AIM, a S$2 paid-up capital company which was helmed by three former People’s Action Party (PAP) members of parliament, which played a controversial role in the Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC) saga.

In 2010, AIM took over the TCMS software used by town councils via a single bid tender, including those run by the Workers’ Party, after the 2011 General Election.

Shortly after the Workers’ Party won Aljunied GRC, AIM terminated the TCMS contract with AHTC on short notice.

This move, Yee suggested, compromised the town council’s ability to maintain accurate records and report to the Ministry of National Development (MND), contributing to AHTC’s lapses in reporting and audits. Yee argued that this, combined with a poor handover from the outgoing PAP-run town council, led to intense external audits and the withholding of grants by MND.

And this post ended up being POFMA-ed by Minister Desmond Lee.

Redditor’s Critique of the POFMA Correction

The Redditor refers to a parliamentary speech by then-Workers’ Party leader Low Thia Khiang, who highlighted that the TCMS software used by Hougang SMC was inadequate for the larger AHTC, making the AIM saga detrimental to AHTC’s operations.

The Redditor notes that this claim went unrebutted during the parliamentary debate, and neither did the Auditor-General Office dispute this claim by AHTC in its report, suggesting that MND’s statement might be misleading.

The Redditor argues, “So, on points of fact, MND is wrong in saying that the AIM saga played zero role in AHTCs lapses, as flagged out by the AGO in 2015.”

As for MND’s assertion that there was “no termination with insufficient notice” by AIM, they argue that it is more of a question of points on material fact.

The Redditor highlights that AIM sent a letter to AHTC on 22 June 2011, terminating the contract effective 1 August 2011, despite AHTC’s request to extend the contract until 31 August 2011.

This discrepancy, the Redditor argues, challenges MND’s claim that AIM did not terminate the contract with insufficient notice.

The Redditor pointed out that the letters cited in the MND review report on the AIM saga, particularly the 10 June 2011 letter from AHTC to AIM, did not explicitly request the termination of AIM’s contract.

Instead, AHTC sought an extension of the contract until 31 August 2011 to ensure the smooth transition to its new system.

However, AIM’s response in a letter dated 22 June 2011 indicated their intention to terminate the contract by early August 2011.

The Redditor argues that these letters contradict the government’s narrative, raising questions about MND’s assertion that AIM was open to extending the contract and that there was no termination with insufficient notice.

The Redditor concludes by questioning whether POFMA is being used as a tool to push the government’s narrative rather than as a neutral mechanism to uphold the truth.

They point out the financial and legal challenges individuals face when contesting a POFMA correction, which can result in their content being labelled as false without a fair opportunity to defend it.

Background on POFMA Issuance

The POFMA Correction Direction was issued on 26 August by Minister for National Development, Desmond Lee, in response to Facebook posts made by Yee Jenn Jong on 25 and 27 July 2024.

MND alleged that Mr Yee made “false and misleading statements” regarding the ministry’s actions during the AHTC saga. The correction direction specifically disputes Mr Yee’s claims about the motivations behind MND’s actions, including the decision to withhold grants, engage external auditors, and appoint an Independent Panel to oversee AHTC’s financial governance.

MND defended its actions, stating they were necessary to safeguard public funds due to the serious deficiencies identified in AHTC’s financial practices.

The ministry also refuted Mr Yee’s suggestions that the termination of AIM’s TCMS was a causative factor in AHTC’s lapses.

Mr Yee has since complied with the POFMA order, although the Reddit post by u/PristineBarracuda877 suggests that the government’s correction may itself contain inaccuracies, fueling ongoing debate about the use and implications of POFMA in Singapore.