Ong Ye Kung Must Step Down. The Government Must Answer.

To the People of Singapore

It has been five years since the pandemic. Around the world, regulators, courts, parliaments and scientists are now examining what the COVID-19 vaccines did. Here, the Ministry of Health says nothing. Is MOH ignoring the real data emerging around the world?

We call on Mr Ong Ye Kung to step down as Minister for Health, because he is ignoring a new normal of excess deaths since the COVID-19 vaccine rollout, and his Ministry is ignoring the growing evidence from around the world of mRNA vaccine harms.

We address this petition to you, the people, not to the Cabinet. For five years, the questions in this petition have been put to Ministers, to agencies and to Parliament. They have not been answered. In a democracy, accountability starts with citizens who refuse to stop asking.

This is not a personal attack. It is about the duty of the Minister responsible for our health. Under his watch, his Ministry appears to ignore evidence it does not want to see, silence the people who raise it, and escape every consequence, while gaining more power. That is not what we expect of a public health authority.

Each point below comes with its source, so you can check it for yourself.

Eight reasons he must step down

1. Under his watch: S$148 million in undeclared savings, and a police report

The Auditor-General’s report for 2025/26, published on 15 July 2026, examined the building of the National Cancer Centre Singapore by MOH and MOH Holdings. It found:

Finding	Amount
Items the Development Planning Committee had rejected or reduced, approved anyway (S$31.26 million reinstated one month after the committee said no)	S$35.34 million
Tenders called or awarded before approval	S$30.83 million
Savings never declared to the Ministry of Finance, still undeclared as of March 2026 (17% of the approved budget)	S$147.96 million
Undeclared savings used without Finance Ministry approval, including a link bridge to Outram Park MRT	S$11.95 million
Consultancy fees overpaid using an unapproved formula (20% too much)	S$1.88 million
Quotations for 76 items with possible irregularities, reported to the police by MOH Holdings	S$2.62 million

MOH’s answer was that the project team “acted in good faith, with no indication of deliberate wrongdoing.” Overpayments are to be recovered by December 2026, and an internal audit completed by March 2027. We are not aware of anyone being publicly held to account.

This happened under his nose. And two months later, Parliament gave his Ministry’s regulator more power, with fewer checks.

We ask: Where did the undeclared savings go, and how much was overpaid in total? Who approved spending that a committee had rejected?

2. Rewarded with more power: the HSA Act and the four warnings of SARS

In September 2003, three months after Singapore was declared free of SARS, the virus came back out of a laboratory here. A review panel set up by MOH and the WHO gave four warnings, four things that must never be missing again:

1. Complete records, with national law behind biosafety standards.
2. A documented chain of custody, tracking dangerous agents in and out of Singapore and between laboratories.
3. Independent audit, with laboratories certified every year by “experienced and accredited external auditors”.
4. The freedom to speak up: staff who “can openly communicate any of their concerns without discrimination”.

On 9 September 2026, Parliament passed the Health Sciences Authority (Amendment) and Other Matters Bill, moved by the Ministry of Health. It moves control of the Biological Agents and Toxins Act, the law over anthrax, plague, botulinum toxin, Ebola, Nipah and SARS, from the Director-General of Health to HSA’s Chief Executive, in 35 separate provisions. It also moves MOH’s regulation of healthcare services, biomedical research and biosafety into HSA.

Five years after COVID-19, and 23 years after SARS, measure the new law against those four warnings:

The 2003 warning	What the new law provides
Complete records	The Chief Executive must consult the Director-General before the gravest decisions, but nothing requires that consultation, or the reasons, to be recorded.
Chain of custody	Transfer powers move to the Chief Executive. No public source shows whether the tracking system the panel asked for was ever built, and the Bill does not require one.
Independent audit	None is created. No external audit requirement. In 66 pages, the word “appeal” does not appear once.
Freedom to speak up	The Bill says nothing at all.

During the debate on the HSA (Amendment) Bill, the Speaker of Parliament, Mr Seah Kian Peng, was seen on camera dozing off in the chair. He later apologised: “This should not have happened, and I take full responsibility.” A law giving one office control over anthrax, plague and Ebola was debated while the man presiding over the House slept. That is how seriously our health laws are being scrutinised.

The debate took place in a near-empty chamber, and the Bill passed that same day with no amendment moved. I recorded what I saw in Parliament:

This is not the first time the four warnings have been ignored. During COVID-19, the same gaps appeared. Singapore’s official review of the pandemic, Singapore’s Response to COVID-19: Lessons for the Next Pandemic (2023), was commissioned by the Government itself, not by an independent inquiry. Detailed vaccine injury data has not been published. And when twelve doctors publicly questioned the policy in 2021, eleven withdrew their names within a day.

We ask the Minister: Have the protections the 2003 SARS panel called for been put in place: complete records, a documented chain of custody, independent audit, and protection for staff who speak up? If they have, show the public where. If they have not, how can the public be sure there will be checks and balances on one office that now controls the most dangerous organisms on earth?

3. No one checks the regulator

During the pandemic, celebrities were used to promote vaccination, although HSA’s own rules restrict endorsements of health products. In June 2024, we asked the High Court to compel HSA to act on its advertising rules. On 19 September 2024, the application was struck out.

The State argued, and the court accepted, that HSA “may” order a corrective measure but is under no duty to enforce and no duty to prosecute, and that we had no standing to ask, because a citizen with a general concern that the law be observed is, in law, a busybody. HSA told the court it had investigated, but what it found, and why it went no further, was never published. Costs of S$12,000 were ordered against us.

The 2003 SARS panel asked for independent audit. Today there is no internal watchdog, and no citizen can make the regulator answer. A complaint goes back into the same chain of institutions it is about.

We ask: Who checks HSA? Will the Government give HSA a legal duty to act on its own rules, and publish the findings of its investigations?

4. The freedom to speak up, broken during COVID

In May 2021, twelve Singapore doctors wrote an open letter to a parents’ group. They questioned giving the new mRNA vaccines to children, and asked that proven killed-virus vaccines be offered instead.

• MOH called their concerns “misleading”. Senior Minister of State for Health Dr Koh Poh Koon said he was “aghast and disappointed”.
• A former Nominated MP called them “quacks” and urged the authorities to strip them of their licences.
• Within a day, eleven of the twelve withdrew their names. The letter’s author told Mothership its content was “accurate factually”. Only Dr Khoo Boo Kian refused to retract.
• To its credit, MOH then did what the doctors had asked. The killed-virus vaccines Sinovac and Sinopharm became available in Singapore from June and July 2021.

The same pattern followed ivermectin. HSA warned the public not to self-medicate with it, and warned that illegal sale can bring a fine of up to S$50,000 or two years’ jail. In October 2021, MOH used POFMA against a website that promoted it. In Malaysia, meanwhile, doctors spoke openly, and in 2025 the health ministry dropped its case against a doctor charged for dispensing ivermectin.

Compliance was secured by pressure. From October 2021, the unvaccinated were barred from malls and from dining in at hawker centres. On 8 November 2021, Mr Ong announced that COVID-19 patients “unvaccinated by choice” would pay their own medical bills. From 1 January 2022, unvaccinated employees could not return to their workplaces.

It was the same playbook used in America, where Dr Fauci and NIH director Francis Collins privately called for a “quick and devastating published take down” of the scientists behind the Great Barrington Declaration. In America, those silenced scientists now lead its health agencies, and the questions are being asked. In Singapore, they are not.

But the atmosphere of fear, and the loss of the freedom to ask questions and speak up, remain. This is exactly what the 2003 SARS review panel warned against. It said staff must be able to “openly communicate any of their concerns without discrimination”. Eighteen years later, twelve doctors who did exactly that were publicly shamed into silence. Science grows through questions. When a Ministry shames its own doctors into silence, patients can never know whether what they hear is conviction, or fear.

Since I started Healing the Divide, people have told me they were gaslighted by doctors who would not record their injuries after vaccination. One man was told to see a psychiatrist for his symptoms, instead of being given proper blood tests. These accounts are not isolated.

Around the world, Canada’s Allison Inquiry and a US Senate roundtable on COVID-19 hospital protocols, both in September 2026, have heard testimony of disturbing practices in how patients were treated.

We ask the Minister: Will he guarantee that doctors can raise safety concerns without losing their careers? In this atmosphere of fear, can doctors properly investigate injuries and other possible side effects after vaccination? And is his Ministry investigating whether the practices heard in Canada and the US also happened in Singapore?

4a. Children: “families will be better protected”

On 16 December 2021, as vaccination opened to children aged 5 to 11, Mr Ong wrote on Facebook: “Superheroes await our first group of children for their COVID-19 vaccination… Some 300,000 children aged 5 to 11 years can benefit from greater protection, after clinical trials showed that vaccination is safe and effective… When children are also vaccinated, families will be better protected.” MOH’s own child vaccination page told parents that vaccination makes children “less likely to infect others, including you and vulnerable family members like older relatives.”

Yet Pfizer’s trial was never designed to show that the vaccine stopped transmission. A Pfizer executive confirmed this to the European Parliament in October 2022, and fact-checkers noted that Pfizer had never claimed otherwise. The promise made to Singapore’s families rested on assumption, not on the trial.

On 1 October 2026, Florida’s Attorney General sued Pfizer and its chief executive under the state’s consumer protection law. Among its allegations: that Pfizer promoted vaccination to protect others while lacking data on transmission, and concealed risks such as heart inflammation. These are allegations, and Pfizer says its statements about the vaccine “have been accurate”. But a US state is now asking a court to test the very claim our Minister made to Singapore’s parents (WHBL, 1 October 2026).

A 10-year-old boy felt harassed by this message. In the claim he filed with his mother, he wrote:

“I am worried of getting jabbed. I am also worried that my friends will be hurt by the jab. I am worried that since I choose not to jab, I may not be allowed to go to school. I am worried that I cannot go to the mall and join in my track and field CCA. I am worried that other people will call me selfish. I do not want to be bullied/pressured by others for not taking the jab.”

He also brought the claim to protect his younger siblings, who he feared would face the same pressure. His mother asked that parents “be properly informed about the benefit and risks, and be shown publicly all the proper data and literature.” Together they asked the Protection from Harassment Court to test the Minister’s claim. The Attorney-General’s Chambers, acting for the Minister, called the claim “frivolous and an abuse of process” and argued that:

• the harassment law does not apply to Government officers acting on behalf of the Government;
• under the Government Proceedings Act, no court may make an order that would, in effect, declare the Government’s child vaccination policy false;
• the policy itself cannot be reviewed by the courts at all.

In short, because of the Government Proceedings Act, a Minister could not be sued for harassment over words he published as Minister. To show the Minister’s words were true, the Government pointed to the fact that the US, Canada, the European Union and Australia were vaccinating children too. The family had to stop the action and pay S$2,339.90 in costs.

The Government told the court that officers of the Government are held accountable “in the usual forum like in Parliament”. This petition takes the Government at its word. Nearly four years later, the Minister has still not shown parents the evidence behind his promise to families, and has not addressed the evidence of harm that has emerged since. That is why we ask him to step down.

We ask: What evidence did MOH hold, in December 2021, that vaccinating children would protect their families from infection? If it existed, publish it. If it did not, why were parents told so?

4b. Pregnant women: told it was safe

In January 2021, before most countries opened vaccination to pregnant women, America’s top health officials privately worried. Texts from Dr Fauci’s phone, released by Senator Ron Johnson in August 2026, show Dr Fauci writing:

“Since many people have significant cytokines storm and fever after the 2nd dose, this theoretically could be associated with miscarriage in the 1st trimester.”

The head of the US Centers for Disease Control replied: “Definitely a good point, esp after dose two.” The US Surgeon General added that he had heard concerns about “the mRNA causing mutations in the developing fetus”.

In Singapore, pregnant women could book vaccination from 4 June 2021. MOH said there was “no evidence to suggest” harm to pregnant women or their babies, while admitting the data on pregnant women was “still much smaller” than for the general population. By October 2021, KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital was advising pregnant women “to seek COVID-19 vaccination early”, at “any stage of their pregnancy”, noting that “Singapore has joined the United Kingdom (UK) and United States (US) to advise pregnant women to receive COVID-19 vaccination.” In the same advice, it admitted: “there are as yet no double-blind COVID-19 vaccination clinical trials in pregnant women.”

We ask: Why did MOH encourage pregnant women to be vaccinated, when it admitted the data was limited?

4c. The Expert Committee: evaluation, or following the US?

Singapore’s vaccine decisions rested on the Expert Committee on COVID-19 Vaccination. It declared the Pfizer vaccine “safe and effective” for children aged 12 to 15. We now know how much the officials whose data it relied on did not know, and did not say.

“Safe and effective” was declared before it could be known. When the US FDA authorised the Pfizer vaccine for 12- to 15-year-olds in May 2021, only 1,131 children in that age group had received it in the trial, and just over half had been followed for safety for at least two months after the second dose. Nobody could know the long-term effects on children, or on babies exposed in the womb. Singaporean parents and pregnant women were given certainty that the evidence could not yet support. That must now be accounted for, openly, as a matter of public health.

Compare the dates:

Decision	United States	Singapore
Pfizer authorised for adults	FDA, 11 December 2020	HSA, 14 December 2020
Pfizer for ages 12 to 15	FDA, 10 May 2021	18 May 2021
Pfizer for ages 5 to 11	FDA, 29 October 2021	HSA, 10 December 2021
Pregnant women encouraged	CDC, April 2021	June 2021

Singapore ran no trial of its own. Three days is enough time to read another regulator’s review, not to re-examine a trial. When the Committee endorsed the Pfizer vaccine on 14 December 2020, MOH said only that it had reviewed “safety and efficacy data” and been briefed by HSA. It has never published its deliberations, the data it examined, or any independent analysis of its own.

When the Minister was taken to court in 2022, the Government described its child vaccination policy as “the product of rigorous scientific assessment”. Yet to show it was right, it pointed to what the US, Canada, the EU and Australia had done. Singapore did make some calls of its own: it held back the Sinovac vaccine, and it lengthened the gap between doses. On the mRNA vaccines, the record shows a Committee that followed.

We ask:

1. What independent checks did the Expert Committee do? Did it examine raw trial data, or rely on manufacturers’ and foreign regulators’ summaries?
2. Did every Expert Committee member declare their research funding and ties to vaccine makers, and will those declarations be published?

5. The world is examining the evidence of harm. MOH and HSA are silent.

While MOH stays silent, the evidence of harm from mRNA vaccines keeps growing, much of it from regulators and scientists who once championed them.

Date	Who	What they found
February 2024	Global Vaccine Data Network, in the journal Vaccine	The largest vaccine safety study to date, of 99 million vaccinated people in eight countries, confirmed safety signals including myocarditis and pericarditis after mRNA vaccines.
October 2023	Health Canada	Confirmed that Pfizer had not flagged an SV40 DNA sequence in its vaccine’s manufacturing plasmid in its regulatory submissions.
May 2025	US Food and Drug Administration	Required Pfizer and Moderna to expand their myocarditis warning, naming young men aged 16 to 25.
May 2025	US Health Secretary	Removed the CDC’s recommendation of COVID-19 vaccination for healthy pregnant women and children. (The recommendation for young children was reinstated in September 2026, amid a lawsuit.)
August 2026	Dr Fauci’s texts	Showed he privately warned in January 2021 that post-vaccine “cytokines storm” could theoretically be linked to first-trimester miscarriage.

Singapore’s Ministry of Health has not publicly addressed any of these findings, or said what they mean for the millions of Singaporeans who took these vaccines, many under pressure to keep their jobs.

We ask: Which of these studies and regulatory actions has MOH reviewed, what did it conclude, and why has it not told Singaporeans?

5a. The world is investigating. Singapore is not.

Across the world, governments, courts and legislators are now examining COVID-19 vaccine safety and pandemic decisions. In Singapore, MOH has announced no inquiry.

Where	What is happening
United States: military	On 4 September 2026, the Pentagon and the Department of Health opened an investigation into whether COVID-19 vaccines contributed to deaths of service members. An Army physician is reviewing 2,544 death reports.
United States: Senate	Senate hearings have examined safety signals missed by health officials. In late September 2026, a Senate roundtable heard families’ accounts of COVID-19 hospital protocols.
Canada	The Allison Inquiry, led by Member of Parliament Dean Allison, began public hearings into vaccine injuries on 8 September 2026.
Germany	In March 2026, the Regional Court of Aurich ordered BioNTech to disclose information relevant to a claimant’s alleged vaccine injury. The Higher Regional Court of Oldenburg rejected BioNTech’s appeal.
Netherlands	In November 2025, the District Court of Leeuwarden ordered Bill Gates and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla to appear in person, in a case brought by seven people injured after vaccination.
New Zealand	Former Health NZ employee Barry Young is being prosecuted for releasing vaccine rollout data he says showed clusters of deaths. His case continues into 2026.
Pfizer’s own documents	Pfizer’s regulatory documents, released under a US court order, have been analysed by thousands of volunteer experts and published as The Pfizer Papers.
United States: Florida	On 1 October 2026, Florida’s Attorney General sued Pfizer and its CEO under state consumer protection law, alleging the company misrepresented the vaccine’s safety, concealed risks such as heart inflammation, and promoted it to protect others without transmission data. Pfizer disputes the claims.

None of these proceedings has yet proven that a vaccine caused a particular death. That is the point: they are asking the question. More than 90% of Singaporeans were vaccinated, and vaccination status decided access to work and daily life. Our people deserve the same questions to be asked here.

We ask: Why has the Minister for Health not ordered an independent review, when other nations are doing so?

5b. The deadly question: the cytokine storm

Recall Dr Fauci’s private message of January 2021 (section 4b). He wrote that “many people have significant cytokines storm and fever after the 2nd dose”.

He wrote it in passing, as something already known. A cytokine storm is an immune reaction in which the body floods the blood with inflammatory proteins; at its most severe, it can damage organs and kill.

Singaporeans were given a second dose, then a third, and more. In 2022, boosters were required to stay “fully vaccinated”, and so to keep working and living normally. MOH told Singaporeans that fever and aches were common, mild side effects. It never told them what Dr Fauci told his colleagues.

We ask the Minister:

1. Did MOH know, in 2021, that many people had strong inflammatory reactions after the second dose? If it did, why were Singaporeans not told? If it did not, why not?
2. How many Singaporeans were hospitalised, and how many died, within 28 days of each dose? Publish the figures by dose, age and sex.
3. Were deaths after vaccination examined for inflammation of the heart, brain and other organs, especially since May 2023, when Coroner’s Inquiries into deaths after medical treatment stopped being automatic?
4. Why were third and fourth doses pressed on Singaporeans, including the young and healthy, without this data being published?

6. No full records: deaths are rising, and no one is looking

Singapore’s own vital statistics show a nation that has not returned to where it was before the vaccine rollout. An independent analysis by SuperSally888 of Singapore’s official vital statistics for January to June 2026, published on 2 September 2026, found:

• Registered births fell 8.8%, and deaths rose 0.8%, compared with the first half of 2025 (ICA provisional figures).
• Singapore’s average monthly natural increase (births minus deaths) fell from 1,486 in 2019 to about 50 in 2026, a drop of 97%.
• April 2026 was the first month in the analysis in which deaths exceeded births, by 15.
• From 2019 to 2025, community hospital admissions rose 52.4% and psychiatric admissions rose 11.8%.

These figures alone do not show what caused the change. An ageing population explains part of this. That is exactly why it must be studied properly, by cause of death, by age and by vaccination status. Other countries are doing this work. We are not.

At the same time, Singapore made such deaths less likely to be examined. From 2 May 2023, deaths that occurred “directly or indirectly, as a result of any medical treatment or care” no longer automatically lead to a Coroner’s Inquiry. Whether to hold one is now at the Coroner’s discretion.

We ask: Has MOH studied the rise in deaths since 2021? If it has, publish the study. If it has not, why not? And since May 2023, how many deaths after medical treatment or care have not had a Coroner’s Inquiry?

7. The Fauci files: Singapore’s grant numbers

In July 2026, the US Senate released 5,107 pages of Dr Anthony Fauci’s files. Two Singapore grant numbers appear in them. My investigative report, Combating Weapons of Mass Destruction: A Singapore Story, traces them from primary documents.

• Our Ministry of Health and National Research Foundation. Their grant numbers appear in the funding line of a paper co-authored with scientists from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
• Our Ministry of Defence. Following those numbers led to a third funder never announced in Singapore: MINDEF’s Defence Innovative Research Programme funded bat virus research at Duke-NUS across at least six published papers.
• Bat coronaviruses in our parks. One of those papers, published four months before the outbreak, hunted coronaviruses in Singapore’s parks, with three Wuhan Institute of Virology scientists as co-authors.
• The Pentagon. The US Defense Threat Reduction Agency made four awards to the National University of Singapore under a fund called “Combating Weapons of Mass Destruction”.

The report alleges no wrongdoing, and none of this shows how COVID-19 began. What it shows is that no single authority appears to have seen all of it. We can say what the Pentagon paid, to the cent. We cannot say what Singapore paid, at all.

We ask: How much has Singapore spent on bat virus and dangerous pathogen research, through which ministries, and with which foreign partners? Read the full report free at healingthedivide.cc/disclosure.

8. Still moving ahead: the Ebola vaccine

Singapore is now at the centre of a new Ebola vaccine. The public has been told very little about it.

• Hilleman Laboratories, a Singapore-based joint venture of drug maker MSD and the charity Wellcome, will develop and produce an rVSV vaccine against Bundibugyo Ebola, with up to US$8.5 million from CEPI (announced 30 July 2026).
• Singapore pledged US$12 million to CEPI in May 2026, and US$2 million to the Bundibugyo Ebola outbreak response in the DRC and Uganda in July 2026 (MOH, 14 July 2026).
• On 24 September 2026, Minister Ong co-hosted an event with Hilleman Laboratories at the United Nations General Assembly in New York (MOH speech).

In his speech, Mr Ong confirmed that Hilleman “will commence production of a vaccine candidate against Bundibugyo ebolavirus, for purposes of clinical trials”, using the rVSV platform, “the same platform used for the existing licensed Zaire ebolavirus vaccine”. Hilleman’s Singapore facility is “adapting manufacturing know-how from MSD’s Zaire ebolavirus vaccine, ERVEBO”. The first batch is due by the end of 2026, with capacity for up to 12 million doses a year. He also said “perhaps mRNA offers the greatest flexibility in development and time to market”, and that Singapore is planning to support an mRNA influenza vaccine pilot here. Yet in Parliament on 9 September 2026, MOH assessed the risk of Ebola reaching Singapore to be low (MOH answer to Parliament).

Senator Rand Paul has released Dr Fauci’s own notes about an earlier rVSV Ebola vaccine. On 9 March 2016, Dr Fauci wrote that US Army scientists had exposed monkeys to aerosolised Ebola to see if the VSV vaccine protected them. “Obviously, it did not,” he wrote. The vaccinated animals had “necrosis, inflammation and fibrin in the lungs”; the two unvaccinated animals did not. Dr Fauci said the experiment should have been classified, because “the idea that the vaccine can do harm is now causing people a great deal of concern.”

Dr Fauci also wrote that this finding had “little to do with naturally emerging Ebola outbreaks”. Singaporeans deserve to weigh that for themselves, before any such vaccine is offered here.

Dr Fauci’s diary also records that “almost all the aerosol-challenged animals died”, vaccinated or not, but that the vaccinated animals “had more inflammation” in the lungs. His concern, reported from the released entries, was that the results would undermine confidence in vaccination during the outbreak in West Africa (Just the News).

One commentator who examined the released records, and who says plainly that they do not show vaccines are bad, put it this way: “Confidence in medicine should not be something we manufacture by deciding which facts are emotionally convenient enough for people to hear.” (Dr Gator, 1 October 2026)

We ask: The new vaccine is built on the same rVSV platform as the one in Dr Fauci’s notes. Where will its clinical trials be held, and will any take place in Singapore? Will all animal and human safety data, including aerosol challenge results, be published before it is used on anyone here? And with the safety data on the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines still not published, why is MOH backing a new mRNA vaccine programme now?

In the same speech, Mr Ong said: “Public health surveillance must be professional, timely and transparent. Science needs to take precedence.” A country may worry “about reputational or economic consequences”, he said, but “the answer is not to delay reporting”. We agree. We ask him to apply that standard at home, and publish Singapore’s vaccine injury data.

8a. Whose interests? The WEF, CEPI and conflicts of interest

Singapore’s health decisions must be made for Singaporeans, in Singapore, and debated in our Parliament. Increasingly, they are shaped by global bodies funded by private foundations.

• The World Economic Forum. On 24 September 2026, Mr Ong stood at the signing of a Letter of Intent between NUS Medicine and the World Economic Forum to host a new Centre for Women’s Health Innovation, “as part of the World Economic Forum’s Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) Network”. He is Co-chair of the Board of the WEF’s Global Alliance for Women’s Health, alongside the President of the Gates Foundation’s Gender Equality Division (NUS Medicine, 29 September 2026).
• CEPI, the vaccine coalition Singapore now funds, was launched at the World Economic Forum in Davos in 2017, with the Gates Foundation and Wellcome among its founding funders.
• On 25 September 2026, at the United Nations, Singapore declared its support for CEPI’s “100-day mission” to develop vaccines within 100 days of a new pandemic threat.
• Wellcome co-owns Hilleman Laboratories, which is producing the Ebola vaccine for clinical trials here.
• Madam Ho Ching, wife of Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong and former CEO of Temasek, served on the board of Wellcome Leap, an organisation founded and funded by the Wellcome Trust, from 2021 to 2024.
• The WHO Pandemic Agreement was adopted in May 2025. Singapore has called it a “common framework”, but its commitments have not been debated in our Parliament.

None of this proves that anyone acted improperly. It does mean Singaporeans cannot see where national interest ends and private interest begins. A 100-day vaccine cannot finish long-term safety studies. A private foundation’s priorities are not a nation’s.

We ask: Will the Government publish a register of interests for Ministers and senior health officials, covering the WEF, WHO, CEPI, the Gates Foundation and Wellcome? Will any international health commitment be debated in Parliament before Singapore is bound by it?

8b. Bill Gates, the WHO and Singapore

Bill Gates is not an elected official anywhere. Yet his foundation is one of the largest funders of the World Health Organization, a founding funder of the vaccine coalition CEPI, and since 2025 it has had an office in Singapore, set up with support from our Economic Development Board.

On 31 July 2026, US Senator Rand Paul released 1,375 pages of records about Mr Gates. They show:

• A top secret “Q” clearance. The US Department of Energy confirmed that Mr Gates held a Q clearance from 11 June 2014 to 6 December 2021, including the first two years of the pandemic. A Q clearance gives access to top secret nuclear information. No reason was given.
• A private military briefing. On 3 May 2022, the Pentagon’s research agency DARPA gave Gates Foundation representatives a 90-minute briefing on military biology programmes, including self-spreading vaccines for Lassa and Ebola.
• Editing access to Dr Fauci. Mr Gates sent Dr Fauci his pandemic plans and a book manuscript, and received tracked edits in return.

Meanwhile, in the Netherlands, a court has ordered Mr Gates to appear in person in a case brought by people injured after vaccination.

We do not know whether Mr Gates, or anyone from his foundation, has been given access to restricted programmes in Singapore. There is no public record either way. That is exactly the problem.

We ask: Has any Gates Foundation representative been given access to restricted Singapore government information, including defence or biodefence research? What did Singapore agree to when the Foundation’s office was set up here?

The courts are closed to us. So we are asking Parliament.

Citizens have tried the courts. When a 10-year-old boy asked the court to test Mr Ong’s claim that “when children are also vaccinated, families will be better protected”, the Government replied that, under the Government Proceedings Act, its policy could not be challenged, and that Ministers are held accountable “in the usual forum like in Parliament”. When we asked the court to make HSA enforce its own advertising rules, we were told HSA has no duty to act, and that we had no standing to ask.

The courts are closed to us. So we are asking Parliament. At best, what this petition sets out is gross neglect of duty. Whether it is anything more is for an independent inquiry to decide.

The entire Cabinet has failed us

The Minister for Health does not stand alone. Every decision in this petition was made, approved or left unchallenged by people who still hold high office. We call on each of them to answer, in public and in Parliament.

Who	Their role in COVID-19	What they must answer
Mr Lawrence Wong, Prime Minister	Co-chair of the Multi-Ministry Taskforce from January 2020; Prime Minister since May 2024	Why has his Government never held an independent inquiry into the pandemic response, vaccine injuries and excess deaths?
The Multi-Ministry Taskforce	Co-chaired by Mr Wong with Mr Gan Kim Yong, and from May 2021 with Mr Ong Ye Kung; decided the vaccination-differentiated measures	On what evidence were Singaporeans shut out of workplaces and public life by vaccination status, and was that evidence ever reviewed?
Prof Kenneth Mak, Director-General of Health	Director of Medical Services throughout the pandemic; the first Director-General of Health since May 2023	What did MOH know about post-vaccine inflammatory reactions, pregnancy risks and excess deaths, and when?
The Expert Committee on COVID-19 Vaccination	14 members, chaired by A/Prof Benjamin Ong, Senior Advisor to the Director of Medical Services	How independent was a committee chaired by MOH’s own adviser? What data did it check, and what interests did its members declare?
Mr Pritam Singh, Leader of the Opposition	Called in June 2020 for “a Commission of Inquiry or some other independent body” to review the Government’s response	The inquiry he asked for never happened. What has the Opposition done since to make sure it does?

In a crisis, the people are asked to trust. After a crisis, those in power must account for that trust. Five years on, not one of them has. At best, this was gross neglect of duty. Whether it was anything more is exactly what an independent inquiry, with the power to compel evidence, must decide.

We ask: Will each of them answer these questions in Parliament, and will Parliament appoint the independent Commission of Inquiry that should have been held years ago?

What we ask for

1. Mr Ong Ye Kung to step down as Minister for Health.
2. A full public accounting of the S$148 million in undeclared savings and of every finding of the Auditor-General, and the outcome of the police report.
3. The HSA Act’s new powers suspended until the 2003 SARS panel’s four safeguards are written into law: complete records, a documented chain of custody, annual independent audit, and protection for anyone who raises a concern, with recorded reasons for every decision on dangerous agents and a right of appeal.
4. A legal duty on HSA to act on its own rules, so that citizens are not told the regulator has no duty to enforce them.
5. Protection in law for doctors who raise safety concerns in good faith.
6. The Expert Committee’s records published: the data it reviewed, its members’ declared interests, and the basis for its advice on pregnant women and children.
7. An independent Commission of Inquiry into COVID-19 vaccine injuries and excess deaths since 2021, with power to compel documents and witnesses, and with the injured and bereaved heard in public.
8. Publication of hospitalisations and deaths within 28 days of each vaccine dose, by dose, age and sex, and of any examination of those deaths for inflammatory injury.
9. Coroner’s Inquiries restored as mandatory for deaths that follow medical treatment or care.
10. Full disclosure of research funding: every grant from MOH, the National Research Foundation, MINDEF and other agencies for bat virus, coronavirus and dangerous pathogen research since 2010, and every foreign defence award to Singapore institutions.
11. A full public account of the Ebola vaccine being developed in Singapore: its platform, its trial sites, who will receive it, and whether any foreign regulator has refused, restricted or halted it, with all animal and human safety data published before it, or any new outbreak vaccine, is used on anyone in Singapore.
12. Full disclosure of agreements with the Gates Foundation, CEPI and Hilleman Laboratories, and of any access to restricted government information given to their representatives.
13. A public register of interests for Ministers and senior health officials, and a Parliamentary debate before Singapore is bound by any international health agreement.
14. Answers in Parliament from the Prime Minister, the Director-General of Health, the members of the Multi-Ministry Taskforce and the Expert Committee on COVID-19 Vaccination, to every question in this petition.

Support the Heard at Last Citizen Review Panel

If the Government will not investigate, citizens will. Healing the Divide is forming the Heard at Last Citizen Review Panel, an independent, citizen-led review of Singapore’s untold COVID-19 harms and anomalies: the rise in deaths, vaccine injuries, and the decisions behind them.

We are looking for:

• Panel members: doctors, nurses, scientists, statisticians, lawyers, and retired judges or civil servants willing to weigh evidence independently.
• Auditors and accountants, to check the Panel’s accounts and data so that every figure can be trusted.
• Funders, to support the Panel’s work, with every dollar received and spent published.
• Volunteers, to help gather, verify and record the accounts of patients, families and healthcare workers.

If you can help, join the Heard at Last list and tell us how. The Panel moves to its next phase once 500 people have joined.

We have asked these questions for five years, without a single government dollar. See our track record and support the work.

Sign this petition. Share it with one person who needs to read it.

Iris Koh Founder, Healing the Divide

This petition makes no allegation of criminal wrongdoing against any individual. It asks questions of public office, and calls for accountability and disclosure.

Sources

• Vital statistics, January to June 2026: SuperSally888, 2 September 2026, analysing Singapore’s official releases
• Coroners Act changes from 2 May 2023: Ministry of Law
• Global Vaccine Data Network study of 99 million people: University of Copenhagen record; Medical Xpress, February 2024
• Health Canada and the SV40 sequence: The Epoch Times, October 2023
• FDA myocarditis warning, 2025: US FDA; CBS News
• CDC recommendation for pregnant women removed, May 2025: AJMC
• Pentagon and HHS investigation, 4 September 2026: American Greatness
• US Senate hearings: Senate Homeland Security Committee; Senator Ron Johnson’s roundtable
• Allison Inquiry, Canada: CBC News
• BioNTech disclosure ruling, Germany: TrialSite News
• Leeuwarden court order on Gates and Bourla: The Defender
• Barry Young case: NZDSOS, 15 December 2025
• Auditor-General’s findings on MOH, 15 July 2026: Ministry of Health
• Singapore grant numbers in the Fauci files: Combating Weapons of Mass Destruction: A Singapore Story, Chapter 3
• Bill Gates Q clearance, DARPA briefing and Fauci edits: Senator Rand Paul on X; The Reading Room; RedState, 31 July 2026
• Gates Foundation office in Singapore: Mothership, May 2025
• Hilleman Laboratories Ebola vaccine and Singapore’s CEPI pledge: CEPI, 30 July 2026
• Dr Fauci’s notes on the aerosol Ebola experiment, 9 March 2016: released by Senator Rand Paul
• The 2003 SARS review panel and the HSA Bill’s clauses: They Warned Us in 2003. Why Does It Matter Now?, Healing the Divide
• HSA (Amendment) and Other Matters Bill passed, 9 September 2026: The Online Citizen; Ministry of Health
• Speaker’s apology for dozing off during the debate, 9 September 2026: Mothership; The Star
• Salary review announced 8 September 2026: AsiaOne; Mothership
• Singapore’s statement at the UN, 25 September 2026: Ministry of Health
• Ho Ching on the Wellcome Leap board: Wellcome Leap
• WHO Pandemic Agreement adopted, May 2025: UN News
• Dr Fauci’s texts on pregnancy, released August 2026: The Daily Caller
• Pregnant women eligible for vaccination from 4 June 2021: Malay Mail
• KKH advice on vaccination in pregnancy, 25 October 2021: KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital
• FDA authorisation for ages 12 to 15, May 2021: Clinical Lab Products, quoting the FDA
• Pritam Singh on the Workers’ Party’s role during COVID-19: Leader of the Opposition, 20 March 2023
• Kenneth Mak re-designated Director-General of Health, 1 May 2023: Ministry of Health
• Expert Committee on COVID-19 Vaccination and its chairman: Ministry of Health
• The twelve doctors: Iris Koh, The Silent Roar, Chapter 7, “The 12 Doctors: Apostles of Science and the Cross of Silence”
• Ivermectin: HSA advisory; MOH POFMA correction direction, 24 October 2021
• Malaysia drops case against doctor for dispensing ivermectin: Free Malaysia Today, 31 July 2025
• Mr Ong Ye Kung’s Facebook post on child vaccination, 16 December 2021, and the Attorney-General’s Chambers’ Response to the Claim, 28 January 2022: court record held by Healing the Divide
• Transmission was not tested in Pfizer’s trial: ABC News fact check, 21 October 2022
• Expert Committee endorses the Pfizer vaccine, 14 December 2020: Ministry of Health

• Speech by Mr Ong Ye Kung at the UNGA side event with Hilleman Laboratories, 24 September 2026: Ministry of Health
• Risk of cross-border transmission of Ebola to Singapore assessed to be low, Parliamentary answer, 9 September 2026: Ministry of Health
• Singapore contributes US$2 million to the Bundibugyo Ebola outbreak response, 14 July 2026: Ministry of Health
• Precautionary measures for the Ebola outbreak (“no approved therapeutics or vaccines” for Bundibugyo), 19 May 2026: Communicable Diseases Agency
• Fauci’s Ebola diary entries: Just the News; commentary: Dr Gator, 1 October 2026