Su Haijin Dinnergate

Su Haijin Dinnergate

Su Haijin Dinnergate refers to a 2025 political controversy in Singapore arising from private dinners attended by senior government figures and Su Haijin, a Cypriot national later convicted in a high-profile money laundering case. In early May 2025, photos circulated online showing Transport Minister Chee Hong Tat, Health Minister Ong Ye Kung, and former Education Minister (and then-NTUC leader) Ng Chee Meng dining with Su Haijin . (Businessman Sam Goi, who organized the dinners, and former Manpower Minister Lim Swee Say also appeared in related photos .) The images – originally taken in 2020–2022 drew intense public scrutiny because Su Haijin had since been convicted in a billion-dollar “Fujian gang” money-laundering scandal . The ministers and their officeholders responded by saying they had not known Su’s identity or criminal background at the time, and that they had no dealings with him outside those occasions . The affair reignited discussion about political integrity in Singapore, where the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) emphasizes a reputation for clean governance .

Background and Money-Laundering Case

The dinners involved Su Haijin, a businessman of Chinese (Fujian) origin holding a Cypriot passport. Su was one of 10 people arrested in August 2023 in connection with a massive money-laundering case that authorities said involved roughly S$3 billion (US$2.2 billion) in assets. At the time of his arrest, Su infamously tried to evade police by jumping from a balcony during a raid. In April 2024, Su was convicted and sentenced to 14 months’ jail for money laundering. He was reported to be part of an organized crime syndicate known as the “Fujian gang,” based in Fujian province, China . (The other nine suspects in the case were also arrested, convicted, and later deported .) The case – one of Singapore’s largest money-laundering scandals featured prominently in national news in 2023–24.

Sam Goi, a prominent Singapore businessman and PAP donor, hosted the dinners where Su appeared. Goi is the executive chairman of a food manufacturing company and is known to have connections with senior PAP figures . He later stated that he organized and paid for three private dinners in late 2020 through 2022 which included the ministers and Su .

Dinner Meetings

Beginning in early May 2025, social media posts (originating from fugitive former politician Charles Yeo) showed the ministers and Ng Chee Meng sitting around dinner tables with Su Haijin. In particular, images depicted Transport Minister Chee Hong Tat, Health Minister Ong Ye Kung, and NTUC chief Ng Chee Meng at separate gatherings in the company of Su Haijin . Former minister Lim Swee Say also appeared in one photo alongside Ong and Su . Businessman Sam Goi was present in the group in some pictures and later confirmed he was the host.

In response, Sam Goi provided dates and details for each dinner. He said the first dinner, attended by Chee Hong Tat, was held on 19 November 2020 with five people present (within the government’s 5-person limit at the time). The second, with Ng Chee Meng, took place on 1 May 2021; only Ng and Su are visible in that photo (within the 8-person limit then). The third, involving Ong Ye Kung, was on 10 May 2022 with 14 attendees (at that time there was no group-size limit). Sam Goi stated that all three gatherings were “in full compliance with the applicable COVID safe management measures” at the time .

Lim Swee Say described the May 2022 dinner as “a social gathering among old friends” that he had been invited to. He said he “saw an unfamiliar face” (Su Haijin) there, and that Su “was the only person he did not recognize”. Lim said he had “no idea why [Su] was included by the host,” and that he had no further contact with Su after that dinner .

Details of Alleged Dinners

According to local media reports, Singaporean businessman Sam Goi organized three private dinners attended by ministers and Su Haijin. In a statement reported by CNA, Mr. Goi said he had “organised and paid for” the dinners and provided their dates. He noted that each gathering was in compliance with the Covid-19 safe-distancing rules then in force . Asia Sentinel likewise reported that the dinners were privately hosted by Sam Goi . In all cases the convicted money launderer Su Haijin was present alongside one of the ministers (or former ministers) and a small number of others. The known details of each dinner are as follows:

• 19 November 2020 (Dinner with Chee Hong Tat) Transport Minister Chee Hong Tat attended this dinner, which was held under a five-person limit on gatherings. Sam Goi gave this date and said five people appear in the photo of that dinner . The image shows Chee and Su Haijin, along with Mr. Goi, Sam’s son Kenneth Goi, and former Chinese Ambassador Hong Xiaoyong . (All five people in the photograph match the Covid rule at that time.)
• 1 May 2021 (Dinner with Ng Chee Meng) Labour chief and NTUC Secretary-General Ng Chee Meng attended a dinner on this date. Sam Goi said the dinner took place on 1 May 2021. In the circulated photo of this event only Ng and Su are visible. (Singapore’s limit then was eight people.) Sam Goi stated he arranged and paid for the dinner , although only two attendees appear in the published image.
• 10 May 2022 (Dinner with Ong Ye Kung) Health Minister Ong Ye Kung attended this dinner, which Sam Goi dated to 10 May 2022. The photo shows 14 people (at that time there was no gathering-size limit) . Identifiable participants include Ong and Su, as well as Sam Goi and former NTUC leader Lim Swee Say . (Other attendees were not publicly identified.)

In summary, each of the three dinners was a private meeting hosted by Sam Goi. Sam Goi’s statement confirmed the dates and attendance, and asserted that all gatherings “complied with the applicable Covid safe management measures at the material time” . The ministers involved (Chee, Ng, Ong) have stated they did not know Su Haijin personally and had only attended at a friend’s invitation .

Revelation of the Photographs

The photos of these dinners first came to light in early May 2025, when ex-Reform Party chairman Charles Yeo posted them online. On 5 May 2025, Mr. Yeo shared the images on his Instagram account (known as “toxicstatenarrativeinsg”) . The posts, which showed Su Haijin seated with the ministers at the tables, quickly spread on social media . News agencies noted that the pictures were “shared widely on social media” and soon attracted media attention .

Within a day of the leak, Singapore’s mainstream media and the ministers’ offices began responding. On 6 May 2025, Health Minister Ong Ye Kung and Transport Minister Chee Hong Tat issued a joint statement saying they had been invited to private dinners as “a diverse range of people [met] at various events” and that Su Haijin “happened to be there” . They emphasised that they did not know Su personally and had no contact with him outside those occasions. Ng Chee Meng issued a similar statement, noting that the photo was from a past NTUC engagement and that he had “no further interactions” with Su after learning of the investigation .

Traditional media picked up the story immediately. Reuters and local outlets (CNA, Malay Mail, SCMP, etc.) reported on 6–7 May that the photos showed the ministers at dinners with Su and covered their denials . For example, Malay Mail noted that the images were “posted on the Instagram account of former Reform Party president Charles Yeo” . The Singapore Democratic Party also reacted, calling for a “full and transparent investigation” into the matter . On 9 May, Sam Goi released a formal statement (reported in the media) confirming the dates of the dinners and reiterating that all gatherings complied with Covid-19 rules . These developments were widely covered in both social media discussions and traditional news outlets in the days following the leak.

Official Statements

On 6 May 2025, the press offices of Ministers Ong and Chee issued a joint statement addressing the photos. They said that “as ministers, they meet a diverse range of people at various events and gatherings,” and that both attended the dinners “at the invitation of a friend, and Su happened to be there”. The statement emphasized that neither minister knew Su personally, and that they “had no contact or dealings with him, before or since these occasions”. It also reaffirmed the PAP’s commitment to high ethical standards: even if officials may “inadvertently come into contact with people who are later established to be unsavoury,” the statement said, “maintaining this standard is non-negotiable” .

On the same day, Ng Chee Meng issued his own statement. He said he had met Su at the aforementioned “dinner engagement” as part of his union-related duties, but that he “had no further interactions” with Su after learning of the investigations . Ng noted that as NTUC secretary-general he routinely engages with business leaders to understand industry concerns, and that the chance photo was simply one such encounter. Afterward he learned of Su’s charges and “thereafter, I had no further interactions with him” .

Sam Goi, the host of the dinners, released his own statement on 9 May. He said he had checked his records and provided exact dates for each gathering, and reiterated that “group size on each occasion was in full compliance” with Singapore’s COVID-19 rules at the time. He confirmed he organized the dinners and invited the ministers as guests, explaining that Su “happened to be at those dinners” as a private individual known to him . Goi declined to explain why he had invited Su; his statement focused on clarifying the dates and compliance details.

Prime Minister Lawrence Wong and other senior officials did not make public comments beyond these statements. (Reuters reported that the Prime Minister’s office and the PAP “did not immediately respond” to inquiries about the photos.) The timing of the revelations, just after Singapore’s 2025 general election, drew attention: PAP candidates had campaigned on an anti-corruption platform, dressing in white symbolizing purity. Nonetheless, the PAP won the election in another landslide .

Public Reaction and Discourse

The incident generated lively public discussion online and in the media. Singaporeans on social media questioned how sitting ministers could have dined with a person later convicted of major crimes. Reuters noted that Reddit threads and other online forums were active with comments “questioning how the ministers could have met Su, and others calling for the graft agency to investigate whether there was a relationship between him and the officials” . Some commentators pointed out that the photos were old and taken before Su’s arrest, while others were concerned about optics. One overseas media outlet reported that locals had started calling the scandal “Dinnergate,” noting it as an embarrassment to the PAP’s reputation for incorruptibility .

On 11 May 2025, former Temasek Holdings CEO Ho Ching (wife of ex-Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong) wrote on Facebook defending the ministers, arguing they could not have known Su’s criminal activities in advance. Her post drew a mixed reaction: some readers agreed, while others criticized her for downplaying the incident. (Media reports cited netizens challenging Ho’s defense, saying ministers should exercise caution in their associations .)

There were also instances of misinformation and legal action. A Facebook user named Rich Sng (Sng Chia Huat) posted allegations that the ministers had knowingly condoned Su’s illegal acts. Lawyers for Ong Ye Kung, Chee Hong Tat, and Ng Chee Meng sent Sng a letter demanding a retraction and damages. On 16 May, Sng publicly apologized and removed his posts. He admitted his claims were false that he had alleged the officials “were aware that [Su] had broken laws but chose to condone it” and expressed remorse. Sng offered community service in lieu of damages, noting personal financial hardship .

Local media and fact-checkers corrected some online errors. For example, one news outlet had initially misidentified a man in the photos as a high-profile businessman; it later retracted that mistake after the error was pointed out (the man was wrongly said to be Wilmar’s chairman ).

Aftermath and Implications

While the “Dinnergate” affair did not alter the immediate electoral outcome, it had some politicalrepercussions. On 6 May, Ng Chee Meng who had won his new parliamentary seat in the election announced that he had asked Prime Minister Lawrence Wong not to assign him any ministerial portfolio. Ng said he would focus on his duties as an MP and as NTUC secretary-general, and that Mr. Wong had agreed to consider his request . Analysts interpreted this move as a preemptive step to avoid potential conflicts in light of the controversy, although Ng did not explicitly link his request to the Su Haijin incident.

The PAP government reiterated that it takes integrity seriously. In their statement, the ministers’ offices stressed that the party “upholds a high standard of integrity” and maintains it as “non-negotiable” . After the incident, some commentators suggested that public officials should be more transparent about their social engagements to prevent similar scandals. The term “Dinnergate” itself underscored the sensitivity of such optics in Singapore’s political culture.

The affair also occurred against a backdrop of other recent governance issues. The Reuters account noted that Singapore’s ruling party had faced scrutiny in the preceding years over unrelated scandals for instance, the conviction of former Minister S. Iswaran in 2023, and resignations of parliamentary leaders over personal misconduct . These cases had already put Singapore’s reputation for clean governance in the spotlight. The Su Haijin dinners episode further highlighted how even accidental contacts with a disreputable individual can spark concerns about propriety.

In sum, the Su Haijin Dinnergate became a flashpoint for discussions of political accountability in Singapore. Official sources maintained that no rules were broken and that the ministers were innocent of any knowledge of Su’s crimes , but the controversy underscored the high public expectations for transparency and integrity in the city-state’s leadership.