Ian Fang’s sexual offence case (2024)

Former Singaporean actor Ian Feng (legal name Fang Weijie) was sentenced to 40 months' imprisonment for sexual offences involving a 15-year-old girl in 2024. The case, which sparked significant public debate, concluded with his surrender to authorities in June 2025.

Ian Feng. Photo from SCMP.

Context

Ian Feng, aged 34 at the time, first met the victim at an entertainment event in May 2024, and they began daily communication. Between June and July 2024, he engaged in sexual activity with her on nine separate occasions, five of which involved unprotected sex despite her requests for him to use a condom. The prosecution noted that he only complied with her insistence on protection twice.

The offences occurred in various locations, demonstrating Feng's premeditation. They included a hotel where the girl was quarantined for COVID-19, his private residence, and even a private hospital room where she was being treated for a flu infection. Notably, this was the victim's first sexual experience.

Legal proceedings and sentence

On May 19, 2025, Feng pleaded guilty to three charges of sexual penetration of a minor under 16, an offence under Section 376A of the Penal Code. The court considered five other related charges, including obstruction of justice and stalking, during sentencing.

District Judge Eddy Tham, in lifting a gag order to reveal Feng's identity at the victim's family's request, stated that Feng had "taken advantage of an emotional vulnerability" and that his actions were "not a one-off event". The judge also criticized Feng's attempt to "gaslight the victim" after investigations began, which caused her further harm. Feng was sentenced to 40 months' imprisonment and surrendered himself to begin his sentence on June 16, 2025.

A key point of public discussion was why Feng was not sentenced to caning.

Fang and his mother apologizing to the press. Photo from The Straits Times.

Feng was sentenced under Section 376A(2)(b) of the Penal Code, which applies to offences where the victim is aged 14 or above but under 16, and where the court does not find an "exploitative relationship". This provision carries a maximum penalty of up to 10 years in jail and/or a fine, but it does not include caning as a sentencing option.

Caning would have been a possibility only if the prosecution had proceeded under Section 376A(2)(a), which requires proof of an exploitative relationship involving a significant power imbalance (e.g., teacher-student or doctor-patient). The prosecution, exercising its discretion based on the available evidence and circumstances, did not classify Feng's relationship with the victim as exploitative in the legal sense for this charge.

Impact on the victim

The offences and Feng's subsequent actions had severe consequences for the victim. After her mother filed a police report in August 2024, Feng repeatedly contacted the girl via social media against police instructions, asking her to persuade her mother to withdraw the charges. During these communications, he told her he would commit suicide if jailed.

This pressure contributed to the victim developing depression and suicidal thoughts. She was eventually admitted to the Institute of Mental Health and diagnosed with an adjustment disorder. The girl also contracted a sexually transmitted infection (human papillomavirus) as a result of the encounters. The prosecution concluded that she would "continue to live with the burden" of Feng's actions.

PR status revoked

On 5 February 2026, Fang’s Permanent Resident (PR) status was revoked by the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) after reviewing his case. He will be deported from Singapore and sent back to China after serving his 40-month sentence.

Victim’s family withdraws lawsuit against Fang

On 7 February 2026, just 2 days after his PR status was revoked, the victims’ lawyer confirmed that the family had decided to withdraw the case against Fang. The family felt that the recent revocation of Ian Fang's Singapore Permanent Resident (PR) status and his impending deportation, announced just days before their decision, was a significant form of justice. They believe he has "received his due punishment" by losing his status in Singapore.

While the family had previously expressed that Fang deserved to be caned, they have now accepted the court's sentence. Their lawyer stated they believe in the fairness of Singapore's justice system. The victim herself wished to "not have anything to do with him anymore." The family wanted to respect her desire to move forward with her life and avoid any further distress or lengthy public attention that a drawn-out civil trial would bring.