By The Straits Times
Published: January 17, 2026
President Donald Trump’s recent pardon of former Puerto Rico Governor Wanda Vázquez Garced has sent ripples through the international anti-corruption community, raising questions about the erosion of accountability standards that could affect even nations with robust governance frameworks like Singapore.
The Pardon in Context
Vázquez, who served as Puerto Rico’s governor from August 2019 to January 2021, was arrested in August 2022 on federal bribery charges related to the financing of her 2020 gubernatorial campaign. After initially facing serious corruption charges, she pleaded guilty in August 2025 to a reduced charge involving campaign finance violations. Trump pardoned her on Thursday, along with her co-defendants, former FBI agent Mark Rossini and Venezuelan-Italian banker Julio Herrera Velutini.
The White House characterized the prosecution as politically motivated, noting that the investigation began shortly after Vázquez endorsed Trump in 2020. “This entire case is an example of political prosecution,” a White House official stated, framing the pardon as a correction of prosecutorial overreach rather than an abdication of justice.
The pardon fits into a broader pattern of clemency grants by Trump since returning to office in January 2025. According to multiple analyses, Trump has pardoned numerous corrupt elected officials, white-collar criminals, and political allies, with critics arguing this represents an unprecedented normalization of public corruption.
A Systematic Dismantling of Anti-Corruption Enforcement
Legal experts and former Justice Department officials have expressed alarm at what they describe as a systematic weakening of anti-corruption enforcement in the United States. Trump administration changes have included forcing out lawyers from the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, disbanding an FBI squad investigating congressional misconduct, and issuing pardons to Republican members of Congress convicted of felonies.
“He’s dismantling not just the means of prosecuting public corruption, but he’s also dismantling all the means of oversight of public corruption,” said Paul Rosenzweig, a George Washington University law professor and former senior homeland security official. “The law is only for his enemies now.”
The Justice Department under Attorney General Pam Bondi has issued guidance warning prosecutors against actions that burden U.S. businesses, advising them to avoid what it terms overreach in white-collar enforcement. This shift represents a marked departure from traditional bipartisan consensus on the importance of prosecuting corruption regardless of political affiliation.
Singapore’s Anti-Corruption Model Under Scrutiny
Singapore has long been held up as a global exemplar of effective anti-corruption governance. Ranked third globally in Transparency International’s 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index with a score of 84, Singapore’s success stems from what authorities describe as four key pillars: strict laws, independent enforcement, tough judicial punishment, and strong political will.
The city-state’s Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau operates with a mandate to investigate corruption “without fear or favour” across both public and private sectors, reporting directly to the Prime Minister’s Office. Singapore’s Prevention of Corruption Act applies broadly to anyone who gives or receives bribes, with the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes Act enabling the confiscation of ill-gotten gains.
“Singapore’s anti-corruption approach stands shoulder to shoulder with the best international standards both locally and in terms of international co-operation with other anti-corruption agencies,” according to legal experts familiar with the city-state’s framework.
This reputation has been built over decades, beginning with founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew’s determination to establish “a culture of zero tolerance against corruption” that has become “ingrained into the Singapore psyche and way of life.”
The U.S.-Singapore Partnership and Shared Values
The U.S. and Singapore have maintained a strong bilateral relationship for nearly 60 years, founded on mutual economic interests, robust security cooperation, and shared values including rule of law and good governance. The two nations engage in ongoing law enforcement cooperation, with an annual Law Enforcement and Homeland Security and Safety Cooperation Dialogue established in 2014.
Singapore is a committed participant in international anti-corruption efforts, including the United Nations Convention Against Corruption, the APEC Anti-Corruption Task Force, and a regional Memorandum of Understanding among ASEAN anti-corruption agencies. The CPIB regularly hosts study visits from foreign officials attracted by Singapore’s international reputation for effectiveness in controlling corruption.
However, the erosion of anti-corruption standards in the United States poses challenges to this partnership and to global efforts more broadly.
Implications for Singapore’s Anti-Corruption Framework
While Singapore’s domestic anti-corruption infrastructure remains robust, the weakening of U.S. standards creates several concerns for the city-state:
Undermining International Cooperation
Cross-border corruption cases often require mutual legal assistance and cooperation between enforcement agencies. Singapore’s Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act was recently amended in March 2025 to enhance the framework for international assistance. However, this cooperation depends on reciprocity and shared commitment to enforcement.
As one Singaporean official noted, some of Singapore’s mutual legal assistance requests made over five years have received “no response” from certain jurisdictions. If the U.S. Justice Department continues to deprioritize corruption cases, Singapore may find it increasingly difficult to obtain the cooperation needed for investigations involving American individuals or entities.
Weakening the Global Anti-Corruption Consensus
Singapore has invested heavily in regional anti-corruption leadership, including chairing the APEC Anti-Corruption Task Force and hosting major international forums. The city-state’s approach depends on a global consensus that corruption is unacceptable and must be prosecuted regardless of political considerations.
When a major democracy like the United States begins treating corruption prosecutions as potentially political rather than criminal matters, it undermines this consensus. “Trump’s highly personal and arbitrary use of pardons undercuts perceptions of U.S. rule of law and credibility, which in turn corrodes trust, coordination and leverage, especially with our democratic allies,” according to policy analysts.
Emboldening Corrupt Actors
Singapore faces its own corruption challenges, particularly in cases involving international dimensions. The Keppel Corporation scandal, in which the company paid US$422 million to settle charges of bribing Brazilian officials, required cooperation between Singaporean and American enforcement agencies. Investigations into six former Keppel O&M employees ultimately had to be closed in 2023 due to insufficient evidence and inability to summon key witnesses from other countries.
If corrupt individuals come to believe that political connections or large donations might shield them from accountability, as appears to be happening in the United States, it could embolden those who might otherwise be deterred by Singapore’s strict enforcement reputation.
Impact on Financial Services and Business Environment
As a major international financial center with more than 5,200 U.S. companies registered and approximately $309 billion in U.S. direct investment, Singapore’s business environment depends on maintaining the highest standards of integrity. The city-state’s reputation attracts investment precisely because businesses know “no one is above the law” and that organizations will face “the full brunt of the law” if caught engaging in corrupt practices.
If standards erode in the United States, Singapore may face pressure from businesses seeking more lenient enforcement or arguing that international norms have shifted. This could create competitive pressures on Singapore to moderate its strict approach, even as maintaining that approach remains essential to the city-state’s economic model.
Recent Cryptocurrency-Related Pardons Raise Additional Concerns
Trump’s pardon in October 2025 of Binance founder Changpeng Zhao, who pleaded guilty to failing to maintain effective anti-money-laundering controls, has particular relevance for Singapore. Zhao’s successor as Binance CEO, Richard Teng, is a former financial regulator in Singapore, and was installed specifically to signal the company’s commitment to compliance.
The pardon came amid extensive business dealings between Binance and Trump family ventures, raising ethics concerns. For Singapore, which is working to establish itself as a responsible hub for digital finance, the signal sent by pardoning someone who admitted to anti-money-laundering violations is troubling. It suggests that political connections may trump accountability even for systemic compliance failures.
Maintaining Standards Amid Global Headwinds
Despite these challenges, Singaporean officials have emphasized their commitment to maintaining rigorous anti-corruption standards. The city-state’s approach has always been based on domestic political will rather than international pressure, and senior leaders have consistently affirmed that “corruption in any form will not be tolerated.”
Singapore weathered its own corruption scandals in 2023, including the arrest of Transport Minister S. Iswaran and the resignation of the Speaker of Parliament. These cases demonstrated that the system continues to function without political interference, even when high-profile officials are involved.
The Ministry of Defence, for instance, maintains a comprehensive anti-corruption framework including mandatory training, regular audits, job rotation requirements, and a zero-tolerance policy that results in dismissal for any servicemember convicted of bribery or corruption.
Looking Ahead
As the United States continues to reshape its approach to corruption enforcement under the Trump administration, Singapore faces a choice: maintain its strict standards even as international partners weaken theirs, or risk gradual erosion of the framework that has underpinned its success.
The city-state’s leadership appears committed to the former path. As Prime Minister Wong Hsien Loong stated in April 2025 regarding global developments, “We are entering a new phase in global affairs—one that is more arbitrary, protectionist and dangerous.” This observation, made in the context of trade policy, applies equally to governance standards.
For Singapore, maintaining its reputation as a clean, transparent, and accountable jurisdiction is not merely a matter of international prestige but an essential element of its economic model and social compact. The weakening of anti-corruption standards elsewhere makes Singapore’s commitment more valuable, not less.
However, the city-state cannot ignore the broader implications of eroding international standards. Effective anti-corruption enforcement requires cooperation, mutual legal assistance, and shared norms. As these weaken globally, Singapore will need to work harder to maintain the international cooperation its own enforcement efforts depend upon.
The Trump administration’s approach to pardons and corruption enforcement represents a test for the international anti-corruption architecture that Singapore has helped to build. How the city-state navigates this challenge while maintaining its own standards will shape not only its domestic governance but its role as a regional leader on anti-corruption issues.
This analysis draws on public statements from U.S. and Singaporean officials, legal experts, and international organizations including Transparency International and the OECD Anti-Corruption Initiative for Asia-Pacific.