Singapore invoking foreign interference law against businessman Philip Chan shows readiness to curb meddling despite China ‘backlash’ fears: analysts

A close associate of Chan, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said that the news came to a shock to many in the business community and stressed the need for the authorities to “draw a line” on what actions would constitute promoting the interests of another country.

Is China the ‘Country X’ Singapore’s foreign meddling law dare not name?

Checks by This Week in Asia also revealed that a person with the same name as Chan holds a Hong Kong identification card and is a director of two companies, including China Link Group (HK) Limited, whose registered address belongs to a company in Hong Kong’s Central.

A ground-floor unit in the upscale residential area of Kowloon Tong has also been linked to the name Philip Chan Man Ping.

Analysts who spoke to This Week in Asia said that Singapore had shown its readiness to take action against foreign actors despite potential “backlash” but suggested that Chan is merely one of many others who may be acting under the influence of other states in the financial hub.

“I think the Singapore authorities are mindful – or perhaps fearful – of backlash, so do not explicitly mention the contemporary PRC in this case,” said Chong Ja Ian, a political scientist from the National University of Singapore, referring to the People’s Republic of China.

“In discussions leading up to and surrounding the passage of FICA, there appeared to be less hesitancy in speaking about the United States or Malaysia.”

While Chan appears to be a “one-off case for a FICA notice involving a foreign power directly”, it is hard to detect other foreign actors in Singapore, as there are no public designated entities list or income, assets, donations and lobbying contact disclosure requirements, he added.

Nydia Ngiow, managing director of BowerGroupAsia in Singapore, said Chan’s case is likely to be set as a “precedent in terms of the thresholds being used to determine” what actions qualify as a politically significant person advancing foreign interests.

“There is a sentiment in the business community that some of these things have to be made clearer, also because of all these multilateral ties [between China and Singapore]”, Chan’s associate told This Week in Asia, describing his actions as “not unusual” and “harmless”.

Without clear boundaries, businessmen with links to other countries would feel as though they have to walk on eggshells over fears of running afoul of anti-foreign interference laws, the person said.

“[Singapore] is such an international market and people interact and where do you draw the line? So far, not much has been revealed and so it would bear quite a lot of implications, so people will be paying close attention to how it’s going to turn out.”

When This Week in Asia called Chan on Friday night, he said that he will respond to the authorities and the notice next week, but declined to comment further.

Anyone involved in Singapore’s political processes, parties, officeholders and MPs, can come under the category of defined “politically significant persons”.

Chinese-American academic denies recruiting Singaporean as a spy

‘A swan on a lake’

While this is the first instance of the city state’s anti-foreign interference law being used since its implementation in October 2021, Singapore has detained spies working for other nations.

In 2020, a 39-year-old man who spied on the US for China, was arrested by the Internal Security Department and sentenced to 14 months’ jail in America for espionage.

Chan’s case, which broke on Friday evening, dominated headlines and has spotlighted alleged Chinese political interference in Singapore, analysts said.

“I think it is significant that attention has been drawn explicitly to what looks like alleged PRC political interference in Singapore,” NUS’ Chong said.

“There were obviously relatively recent past incidents, but the case of Philip Chan suggests that the situation persists, which should be unsurprising since other locations in Europe, North America, Oceania and Asia also have indications of such behaviour by individuals and groups aligned with the Chinese Communist Party,” he said.

Bilveer Singh, a political scientist from NUS, said Chan drew significant attention to himself, given that he was seen as advocating for Chinese interests in a very public manner.

“He decided to act like a swan on a lake,” Singh said. “I suspect the government had to act because it is also a warning to others who may be championing [the interests of] the US or other countries. It is also for the credibility of FICA and the entire mechanism.”

“If the government does not do anything, then it would appear as condoning actions like these,” he said, stressing that neutrality has always been a key pillar of Singapore’s foreign policy and the government will seek to maintain that image.

In a video of the event, Chan and about 10 other attendees were seen chanting in Cantonese: “Support Hong Kong police, protect Hong Kong, justice will win,” the report said.

Chan wrote about 30 articles for Lianhe Zaobao, the largest Chinese-language newspaper in Singapore, from 2011 to 2019 primarily within his capacity as the president of the Kowloon Club, a non-profit organisation, Goh Sin Teck, an editor at the daily said.

“Mr Chan’s writings were often his personal reflections, insights gleaned through his real estate profession, as well as immigrant issues, such as assimilation of new immigrants into local society,” Goh said in response to queries.

In an interview with Huaren Toutiao, a Chinese media outlet, Chan, who is also president of the Hong Kong Singapore Business Association, said he had published articles in Lianhe Zaobao but his influence remained “limited” and called for greater unity among overseas Chinese to tell China’s story well.

Singapore reputation fears after citizen admits being Chinese spy in US

He had also been a patron of the Kampong Chai Chee Citizens’ Consultative Committee and the Bukit Timah Community Club management committee, which are run by a government statutory board.

The People’s Association told This Week in Asia that Chan has since stepped down from all grass roots appointments.

A member, who spoke to This Week in Asia on the condition of anonymity, said that many were caught by surprise by the news but were “scared” to speak to the press, fearing that they may be associated with him.

Once designated as a “politically significant person”, Chan must make annual disclosures to the authorities of political donations of S$10,000 (US$7,439) or more that he has received and accepted, on top of declaring his foreign affiliations and any migration benefits.

He has 14 days from February 2 to submit representations to the registrar and can appeal to the minister of home affairs against the decision, if he is designated a “politically significant person”.

Can Beijing leverage overseas Chinese in struggle with US?

Moving forward, Ngiow from BowerGroupAsia, said that it was important that the appeal process remains transparent.

She said: “Given the concerns of overreach expressed in parliament during the tabling of the bill, both from the opposition and party backbenchers, it would be important to see transparency throughout the process should Chan decide to appeal against his designation as a politically significant person.”

Chan said in previous interviews with other news websites that he had moved to Singapore in 1990, just after the city state relaxed its permanent residency rules to attract skilled workers from Hong Kong a year earlier.

He is also the managing director of property firms Wen Way Investments, Mutual Benefits Realty and C&H Properties, as well as the founder of China Link Education Consultancy.

The Hong Kong Singapore Business Association, where Chan is the president, facilitates networking among businessmen from both cities and is a part of 47 other groups in 36 countries.

Additional reporting by Kahon Chan