Kenneth Jeyaretnam given sixth POFMA order over Ridout Road comments

Regarding 26 Ridout Road, Mr Shanmugam had recused himself from the rental transaction and no matter had been raised by SLA to the Ministry of Law during the entire rental process.

The professional valuer also did not know the identity of the prospective tenant at the time, according to the Factually article.

Mr Jeyaretnam “makes an inappropriate and erroneous comparison” for the rentals of 26 and 31 Ridout Road, with the recent rental bids for 41 Malcolm Road.

“It is misleading for Mr Jeyaretnam to suggest that the properties are directly comparable, without making any attempt to refer to the established facts relating to the rentals of 26 and 31 Ridout Road, or to account for the fact that property market conditions do not remain static,” according to the article.

“Market conditions today are stronger than they were when the Ridout Road properties were initially rented out and subsequently renewed.”

The tenancies for the Ridout Road properties were also kept within the 3+3+3 tenancy period.

“The ministers had incurred substantial costs to improve the state properties, the benefit of which will accrue to the State when the tenancies eventually come to an end.”

Despite knowing these facts, Mr Jeyaretnam states that the tenancy durations for the two Ridout Road properties were “exceptionally generous” compared with the duration for 41 Malcolm Road.

Mr Jeyaretnam, Gutzy Asia and The Online Citizen Asia are required to post correction notices stating that the said articles or posts contain a false statement of fact and provide a link to the government’s clarification.

Checks by CNA on Sunday night found that Mr Jeyaretnam posted the correction notice on a separate post on The Ricebowl Singapore’s website.