Pritam Singh corrects record on Noor Deros’ WP meeting, insists no promises or deals made

On 4 November 2025, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office Indranee Rajah delivered a surprise ministerial statement, which she said related to comments made by Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh during the October sitting of Parliament.

The statement was not listed in the order paper released the previous day.

In response, Singh reiterated that the Workers’ Party (WP) Malay/Muslim candidates had confirmed that no promises or undertakings were made and that they did not personally know Noor Deros.

While WP vice-chair and then Aljunied MP Faisal Manap may have known of Noor from the Wear White movement, Singh stressed that he and the other WP Malay/Muslim candidates had no personal acquaintance with him.

Background: earlier ministerial exchanges

On 14 October 2025, Singh had responded to a ministerial statement by Coordinating Minister for National Security K Shanmugam on race and religion in politics.

Shanmugam spoke at length about the May general election and the WP’s alleged dealings with foreign actors and self-styled preacher Noor Deros.

On 4 November, Indranee said a later statement by Noor contradicted how Singh had described his meeting with the WP.

Noor, a self-styled religious teacher based in Malaysia, had stated during the run-up to the May general election that he spoke with WP candidates contesting the polls and had urged the opposition party to prioritise Malay/Muslim community issues in Singapore.

His comments were made in a series of Facebook posts on 26 April, prompting several ministers to caution against the mixing of race and religion in politics.

Noor later released a video on 18 October, saying he did not “gatecrash” the meeting, contradicting Singh’s earlier account, Indranee noted.

The interactions between the WP and Noor in the lead-up to the election had been covered extensively in Shanmugam’s ministerial statement the previous month.

Indranee’s challenge and call for clarification

Indranee said Noor had been publicly asked whether he was invited to the meeting and, if so, by whom — suggesting that Faisal Manap, WP’s vice-chair and Tampines GRC candidate, might have known of his attendance.

She stated: “Thus Noor Deros has suggested that Faisal, at least, would have known that he would be attending the meeting.

“On the face of things, it would appear that either one – Faisal has told an untruth which has been repeated by Pritam Singh during the general election and now in Parliament, or two, Noor is lying. This is serious, and so may I seek some clarifications from Singh.”

Indranee then asked three specific questions:

1. Could Singh reconfirm his position that Noor gatecrashed the meeting?

2. Was it also Faisal’s position that Noor gatecrashed the meeting?

3. Had Singh confirmed whether the names of the asatizah attending the meeting were sent to Faisal in advance, and if not, whether Faisal was aware that Noor would attend?

She went on to reference Singh’s previous remark that Noor was a “nobody whom no one really knows”, suggesting that the comment gave the impression Noor was not known to WP members.

However, Indranee noted that Noor had founded the Wear White movement in 2014, a campaign that opposed Pink Dot, and that Faisal had publicly supported the movement. She added that Faisal also attended a Wear White gathering for evening prayers during Ramadan in June 2018.

“In the light of this,” she asked, “does it remain Singh’s position that Noor was not known to Faisal or any other WP candidates before the meeting on 20 April 2025?”

Singh’s clarification and personal explanation

Singh told Speaker of Parliament Seah Kian Peng that he had informed him the previous evening of his wish to correct certain representations he had made in the House, which he now believed to be inaccurate.

He said he had submitted these clarifications in advance and that all questions raised by Indranee would be addressed in his personal explanation, which the Speaker confirmed.

Singh clarified that he did not know Noor would be at the meeting between religious leaders and WP MPs, but that Faisal Manap had later told him he was aware.

About a week after Shanmugam’s statement, Faisal showed Singh a message indicating that Noor would be present at the meeting on 23 April. The message, sent by an ustaz about an hour before the meeting, confirmed Noor’s attendance.

Singh said he had been unaware of this detail in April and also during his earlier parliamentary responses to Shanmugam.

Doubts raised by other MPs

During the clarifications following Shanmugam’s October statement, Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC MP Saktiandi Supaat expressed disbelief that Singh did not know Noor Deros, given Noor’s strong online presence and public advocacy.

Saktiandi remarked that Malay/Muslim MPs from both the PAP and WP would likely have known of Noor.

In response at that time, Singh had recounted the sequence of events around Noor’s association with WP, maintaining that the WP Malay members, including Faisal, were unaware Noor would attend the meeting.

He reiterated, referencing earlier media remarks, that there had been no indication Noor was expected to join.

Sequence of events and context of the meeting

Singh said that after Faisal later showed him the message, he had asked about the meeting’s context, especially in light of Parliament’s consensus that race and religion should not be used for political purposes.

He reiterated that the meeting on 20 April 2025 had been arranged by an ustaz known to Faisal.

Singh reaffirmed that “no promises or undertakings were made by Faisal or the WP Malay/Muslim candidates present in exchange for political support from Noor Deros during the elections”.

He added that this had been reconfirmed to him by Faisal and the WP Malay/Muslim candidates who attended the meeting.

Faisal had also explained that, after the 2011 general election, he sought guidance from an ustaz engaged in interfaith discourse on how best to perform his role as a minority MP. Finding the sessions meaningful, he arranged similar meetings before subsequent elections.

Before the 2025 election, the same ustaz informed Faisal on 12 April that he planned to invite several asatizah, including Noor, to meet the WP Malay candidates.

Singh explained that in using the term “gatecrashed”, he might have unintentionally created the impression that Noor attended without invitation. He clarified that Noor’s presence was, in fact, by invitation of the ustaz delegated by Faisal.

Further exchanges on the “nobody” remark

Indranee pressed Singh further about his description of Noor as a “nobody”, pointing out that Faisal would likely have been aware of Noor’s public reputation through their shared history in the Wear White movement.

Singh repeated that while Faisal “may have known of” Noor, he and the other WP Malay/Muslim candidates did not know him personally. “So Faisal Manap would have known of who Noor Deros was,” he said, hoping this clarified Indranee’s query.

The two continued their exchange, with Indranee arguing that Singh’s earlier phrasing might have understated Faisal’s awareness of Noor.

“In other words,” she said, “the statement that Noor is somebody who nobody really knows is not accurate.”

Singh replied that while Faisal might have known of Noor, he himself did not wish to “import” Faisal’s knowledge and risk making an incorrect representation.

Clarifying the term “gatecrashed”

Indranee asked if Singh agreed that it would be inaccurate to say that Noor had gatecrashed the April meeting.

Singh acknowledged this, saying the word had created the wrong impression that Noor was not invited. He added that it would not be right to let that misunderstanding remain on record and explained that this was why he had taken the initiative to make a personal explanation.

Indranee responded that, if voters during the April election period had known Faisal was aware of Noor’s invitation, it “might have put a different colour on” public perceptions.

Singh affirmed that this was precisely why he was making the clarification, stating: “I think it is important to put on record what the circumstances were with regard to the statements I made on 14 October in Parliament, and to correct the impression that might have logically flowed from the use of that word.”