Eight public officers have been referred to the police after a government review of property purchases near locations that were later announced as MRT stations.
Coordinating Minister for Public Services Chan Chun Sing told Parliament on Tuesday, 6 October, that the eight cases were among transactions involving 191 officers reviewed by the Public Service Division.
He stressed that the referral does not mean that any wrongdoing has been established.
In other words, this is not a finding that the officers used confidential information. It means the cases need further examination, and the police will look into the facts independently.
PSD Reviewed 191 Officers’ Property Transactions
The review came after an academic working paper alleged that civil servants had bought homes near planned MRT stations before the station locations were publicly announced.
According to Mr Chan, PSD used administrative records to identify officers who had worked in agencies involved in rail planning and who had bought properties between 2007 and 2014 near locations that were later announced as MRT stations.
For each transaction, PSD looked at available records, including the officer’s role at the time, whether the officer had access to relevant non-public information, the timing of the purchase, the circumstances of the transaction and other relevant information.
Based on information available so far, PSD identified eight officers whose cases warranted further examination. Mr Chan said this could be because of the specific circumstances of the purchases, or because PSD did not currently have enough information to exclude the cases from further review.
Further checks are still ongoing.
Why This Review Happened
The issue began with a working paper published by the US-based National Bureau of Economic Research, or NBER.
The paper, titled “Do Social Norms Substitute for Enforcement? Evidence from Public Officials’ Home Purchases in Singapore”, alleged that civil servants disproportionately bought homes near planned but not-yet-announced MRT stations.
The authors said the effect was concentrated one to two years before public announcements. They also said the pattern was concentrated among mid-level officials and agencies linked to rail planning.
Importantly, the paper is a working paper, not a concluded official investigation. CNA previously reported that it had not been peer-reviewed.
PSD had said in September that the statistical patterns were concerning, but did not by themselves establish whether any individual officer had access to non-public station-location information, or whether such information influenced a purchase.
That is why the police referral matters. The question now is not just whether a statistical pattern exists, but whether there is evidence in specific cases.
Chan Chun Sing Says Rules Already Exist, But Safeguards Will Be Reviewed
Mr Chan also addressed questions about safeguards against public officers using non-public government information for private gain.
He said the principle is clear: public officers must not use information obtained through their work to benefit themselves or others.
According to PSD’s parliamentary reply, officers’ access to sensitive information is controlled on a need-to-know basis. Such information may also be subject to security classification, handling requirements, access controls and audit or monitoring measures.
Public officers have also been required since the 1990s to declare private property purchases and, annually, any non-owner-occupied properties they hold.
The rules have tightened over time. Today, if an officer has non-public information relevant to a transaction they want to make, they must seek approval from the head of agency before proceeding.
These requirements also extend to transactions involving an officer’s spouse and financially dependent children.
Mr Chan said agencies handling especially sensitive information may also impose additional rules based on the risks involved. Contractors, consultants and others given access to sensitive government information are also subject to confidentiality, conflict-of-interest and information-handling requirements.
The government will study what the review shows about possible gaps in existing safeguards.
For now, the key point is this: eight cases have been sent to the police, but no finding of wrongdoing has been made.
