MHA says security engagements are generally confidential after WP MP questions meeting with Israeli officials

The Ministry of Home Affairs' (MHA) discussions with foreign counterparts focus on operational and security-related issues and do not extend to broader foreign policy matters, said Senior Minister and Minister for Home Affairs K. Shanmugam.

He was responding to a written parliamentary question raised by Workers' Party MP for Aljunied GRC Fadli Fawzi, who had asked whether Singapore discussed issues relating to illegal settlements and settler violence in the West Bank with Israeli officials during a recent meeting, and if not, why not.

The first-term MP also asked if Singapore had requested that the meeting be kept secret and, if so, why; and if not, why a correction order under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) was not issued against Israeli newspaper Haaretz.

Earlier on Sept 11, MHA rejected claims by the outlet that the death penalty was discussed during a visit by an Israeli delegation in May this year.

The Israeli newspaper had reported on Sept 7 that a delegation comprising representatives from the National Security Ministry and Israel Prison Service made a "secret visit" to Singapore, and that the subject of the death penalty was discussed.

In a media statement, MHA noted that Haaretz correspondent Josh Breiner had asked whether such discussions took place.

“He was categorically told that there had been no such discussions and it would be false to suggest otherwise. It is to be regretted that Haaretz and Mr Breiner have nevertheless put out such falsehoods,” an MHA spokesperson said.

The spokesperson also stated that the officials-level delegation discussed best practices in emergency response, crime prevention and forensics.

“This is part of the Singapore government’s engagement with a wide range of international counterparts in the conduct of foreign relations, economic cooperation, security dialogue, among others, in pursuit of our national interests."

Israel's National Security Ministry similarly told Haaretz that its representatives did not discuss the death penalty with Singaporean officials.

Public interest grounds for POFMA not met

Shanmugam, who is also Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs, said in his written reply that since January 2025, MHA has had 11 officials-level bilateral exchanges with foreign counterparts, including several with partners from the Middle East.

"MHA responded to the Haaretz article because the article’s claims concerning the meeting with Israeli security officials were categorically false," the senior minister said.

He added that at the time of the article's publication, the assessment, based on legal advice, was that the public interest grounds for issuing a POFMA direction were not met.

However, he said this does not preclude the subsequent issuance of a POFMA direction should circumstances materially change and warrant a different assessment.

Foreign policy matters addressed by MFA

Shanmugam also said that Singapore's positions on broader foreign policy matters are addressed through the appropriate foreign policy channels, including the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA).

Referring to the meeting with the Israeli delegation, he said the discussions focused on operational and security-related issues and did not extend to broader foreign policy matters.

"That is the approach MHA takes to discussions with its bilateral counterparts, on matters of shared operational and security concern."

The senior minister said that if Fadli believes MHA should use such engagements to raise broader concerns about the policies or conduct of the country concerned, then he should "say so clearly".

"He should also clarify whether he believes this principle should apply only to Israel, or consistently to all countries with which MHA engages."

Shanmugam further asked whether, when MHA holds operational discussions with other Middle Eastern or Asian countries, Singapore should also raise concerns it may have with those countries' conduct or policies.

At the end of the written response, Shanmugam added: "If that is the Member’s position, the Government would be interested to understand how he proposes that such an approach would serve Singapore’s overall interests."

内政部高级部长兼内政部长尚穆根表示，内政部与外国同行的讨论主要集中在行动和安全相关问题上，并不涉及更广泛的外交政策问题。

他是在回应工人党阿裕尼集选区议员法德利·法齐提出的书面议会质询。法德利·法齐询问新加坡是否在最近的一次会议上与以色列官员讨论了有关西岸非法定居点和定居者暴力的问题，如果没有，为什么。

这位第一任议员还询问新加坡是否要求对此次会议保密，如果是，原因是什么；如果不是，为什么没有根据《防止网络虚假信息和操纵法》（POFMA）对以色列报纸《国土报》发出更正令。

9 月 11 日早些时候，内政部驳斥了某媒体的说法，即今年 5 月以色列代表团访问期间讨论了死刑问题。

以色列报纸9月7日报道称，由国家安全部和以色列监狱管理局代表组成的代表团对新加坡进行了“秘密访问”，并讨论了死刑问题。

MHA 在一份媒体声明中指出，《国土报》记者乔什·布雷纳曾询问是否进行过此类讨论。

“他被明确告知，根本没有进行过此类讨论，任何相反的说法都是不实的。令人遗憾的是，《国土报》和布雷纳先生仍然散布了这样的谎言，”内政部发言人表示。

发言人还表示，官员级代表团讨论了应急响应、犯罪预防和法医鉴定方面的最佳实践。

“这是新加坡政府为追求国家利益，在外交关系、经济合作、安全对话等领域与众多国际伙伴开展广泛合作的一部分。”

以色列国家安全部也向《国土报》表示，其代表没有与新加坡官员讨论死刑问题。

《防止网络虚假信息和网络操纵法案》（POFMA）的公共利益理由不成立。

尚穆根同时也是国家安全统筹部长和内政部长，他在书面答复中表示，自2025年1月以来，内政部已与外国同行进行了11次官员级别的双边交流，其中包括与中东伙伴的几次交流。

“内政部对《国土报》的文章作出回应，是因为该文章中有关与以色列安全官员会面的说法完全是错误的，”这位高级部长说。

他还补充说，在文章发表之时，根据法律建议的评估是，发布《防止网络虚假信息和网络操纵法》(POFMA) 指令的公共利益理由尚未得到满足。

但他表示，这并不排除在情况发生实质性变化并需要进行不同评估时，随后发布《防止网络虚假信息和网络操纵法》(POFMA) 指令的可能性。

外交部处理的外交政策事项

尚穆根还表示，新加坡在更广泛的外交政策问题上的立场是通过适当的外交政策渠道来表达的，包括外交部。

他提到与以色列代表团的会晤时表示，讨论的重点是作战和安全相关问题，并未涉及更广泛的外交政策问题。

“这就是内政部在与双边对口部门讨论共同关心的行动和安全问题时所采取的方式。”

这位高级部长表示，如果法德利认为内政部应该利用此类交流来提出对相关国家政策或行为的更广泛关切，那么他应该“明确地表达出来”。

“他还应该澄清，他认为这一原则是否只适用于以色列，还是应该一视同仁地适用于内政部与之有业务往来的所有国家。”

尚穆根进一步问道，当内政部与其他中东或亚洲国家进行业务讨论时，新加坡是否也应该提出它对这些国家的行为或政策可能存在的担忧。

在书面答复的结尾，尚穆根补充道：“如果这是议员的立场，政府很想了解他如何认为这种做法符合新加坡的整体利益。”