Has Mufti Menk faced controversies or sanctions and when did they occur?

1. The formal sanction: Singapore’s 2017 entry ban

Singapore’s Ministry of Home Affairs publicly rejected Menk’s short-term work pass application and barred him from entering the city-state in October 2017, explicitly saying the decision was driven by concerns that his views “promote religious discord” and were “segregationist and divisive” ^[1]. Regional reporting reproduced the ministry’s language and framed the move as a rare state-level restriction on a high-profile preacher who otherwise travels widely ^[6].

2. The Dubai iftar and the “breaking fast” controversy

In April 2022 a video circulated showing Menk seated at an iftar that included Rabbi Levi Duchman, labelled in coverage as an Israeli-linked or “Zionist” figure; the footage ignited anger among many Muslims who saw the meeting as legitimising normalisation with Israeli representatives ^[2]. Media and opinion pieces documented criticism from academics and activists who argued Menk should have been more circumspect about the UAE’s geopolitical context, while Menk issued clarifications saying he was unaware of the rabbi’s identity and apologised to those who felt betrayed ^{[7] [2]}.

3. Kashmir visit backlash

Menk’s October 2021 trip to Srinagar to solemnise a nikah drew social‑media controversy because the event was tied to a pro‑India politician’s family; his office defended the visit as a pastoral engagement done at his own expense and emphasised his intent to meet local ulema rather than take political positions ^[3]. Reporting captured both the outrage among critics who read the visit politically and Menk’s statement stressing charitable motives and lack of political intent ^[3].

4. Past statements on LGBT issues and a formal retraction

A decade‑old public remark by Menk comparing homosexual acts to animals resurfaced in later debates; Menk has publicly retracted and clarified that 2011 statement, saying he no longer believes it and offering a full retraction on his official statements page ^[4]. The retraction itself is documented on his site and has been used by supporters to argue he is willing to correct past errors, while critics have pointed to the original line as evidence of earlier problematic rhetoric ^[4].

5. Criticism for Gaza silence and accountability questions

More recently, opinion pieces have accused Menk of evasiveness over Gaza and of failing to name actors such as “Israel” in condemning Palestinian suffering, arguing his responses to related incidents were insufficient and damaged his moral credibility among some observers; these critiques appeared in pieces published in 2025 ^[5]. The reporting is largely editorial and evaluative, documenting public disappointment rather than formal sanctions ^[5].

6. Menk’s responses, clarifications and the contested record

Across episodes—Dubai iftar, Kashmir visit, LGBT comments—Menk’s team has issued clarifications, explanations that he was unaware of political contexts, and an outright retraction on the LGBT remark, positioning many controversies as misunderstandings or mistakes rather than deliberate political positioning ^{[2] [3] [4]}. Independent observers and critics, cited in opinion reporting, counter that intent and impact differ and that repeated episodes have eroded trust among some constituencies ^{[7] [5]}.

7. Assessment: sanctioned once, repeatedly embroiled in controversy

The record available in the reporting shows one clear, documented governmental sanction—Singapore’s 2017 entry ban—while other disputes have been public controversies driven by optics, associations, or past remarks rather than formal penalties ^{[1] [6]}. Menk has both faced durable criticism from activists and intellectuals and sought to manage fallout through apologies and retractions; the balance between genuine correction and reputational damage remains contested in the sources ^{[7] [4] [5]}.