Teo Soh Lung, a lawyer and former Internal Security Act (ISA) detainee under Operation Spectrum in 1987, was one of the two individuals who were called to assist the police in the investigation of alleged violations of Cooling Off Day regulations at the Cantonment Police Station, around 10am on Tuesday, 31 May 2016.

Teo said that the police questioned her about her Facebook post made on Cooling Off Day, asking about the number of likes, who her visitors are, what she usually posts about, whether she thinks her post can influence the way people vote. Teo told the police that the Parliamentary Elections Act applies to political parties and candidates, not citizens like her, who have a constitutional right to post what they like on Facebook.

Instead of being allowed to leave the police station following her two hour interview, Teo was escorted by 7-8 police officers back to her residence to search for evidence relating to her alleged offence.

About five friends were there at her residence, accompanying Teo when the officers went through her belongings without a search warrant.

Lawyer Remy Choo recalled his experience of the incident as he arrived at Teo’s residence on Tuesday at about 2.20 p.m. He wrote that 7–8 police officers were in the midst of seizing her handphone, desktop and laptop when he arrived.

The investigating officer (IO), Angie Ng, was asked why the police had to seize Teo’s electronic devices given that Teo was not disputing the publication of the articles on her personal Facebook page on Cooling Off day.

Choo further pointed out that Teo was willing to cooperate with the police by giving them all the necessary information relating to the offence under the Parliamentary Elections Act which was being investigated.

The response from the IO was, “This is an arrestable offence, and we do not need to tell you how we conduct our investigations.”

Video of the police conducting the search at Teo Soh Lung’s house

Two individuals claiming to be police officers without pass.

After Choo pointed out politely but firmly that it was disproportionate to seize Teo’s personal electronic devices which contained personal data, another officer mentioned to Choo that he could be charged with obstructing investigations.

At the end of the search, the police seized one desktop computer, one laptop and one mobile phone belonging to Teo. The police said that Teo was not required to follow them back to the station. Ngerng, who also had his residence raided, had to follow the police back to the station.

Choo noted that Teo was visibly shaken by the entire spectacle. She was particularly upset that the police had to take her laptop, which had nothing related to the Facebook posts on it.

Choo commented on his Facebook post:

“I was disappointed with the police action. The seizure of a person’s electronic devices is gravely disruptive to their personal lives, and that these devices contain large amounts of personal private data irrelevant to the investigation. I would have thought the police could give a proper explanation as to why they needed to go to such extremes, especially given the fact that these are essentially ‘political’ offences under the Parliamentary Elections Act.

Soh Lung is a fiercely passionate social and political activist, but why must she be treated like a criminal, hell bent on concealing evidence from the police? She’s a former practicing lawyer and council member of the Law Society!”

Choo also said that he has written to the police to ask that her electronic devices be returned as soon as possible, upon her provision of any information or material which is relevant to investigations which he believes to be a reasonable request and should be acceded to.

He further noted that there was no such extreme action being taken against politicians who were alleged to have breached Cooling Off day regulations and asked about the need to use such a heavy hand against individuals posting on their personal Facebook pages.

Some individuals have speculated that the seizure of personal electronic devices may be part of a fishing expedition by the authorities to seek out “incriminating” information that might lead to other charges.

Read : Stark contrast in police enforcement of Cooling Off Day regulations

Under the Parliamentary Election Act, any person who is found guilty of violating the cooling off day regulation will be fined for a sum of not exceeding $1,000 or to imprisoned for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both.

Subscribe
Notify of
3 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

两家公司获陆交局总值7.4亿新元合约 建裕廊区域线首五个地铁站

陆路交通管理局宣布,将两份总值近7亿4000万元的工程合约,颁发给两家公司,以建造裕廊区域线(Jurong Region Line ,JRL)首五个地铁站。 其中三个地铁站:蔡厝港、蔡厝港西以及登加地铁站,以及4.3公里长的高架桥,由上海隧道工程股份新加坡有限公司负责,合约总值大约4亿650万新元。 陆交局在脸书介绍,上海隧道工程公司也曾参与,中央线(Circle Line)和市区线(Downtown Line)数个车站和隧道的项目。 至于丰加和企业站的设计和建筑,以及3.4公里的高架桥工程,由Eng Lee Engineering和伟峰建筑组成的财团负责,合约总值2亿7400多万元。 该财团目前也参与陆交局在汤申-东海岸地铁线的车站和隧道项目。…

回收商被令不准在万拿街五座后巷交易 捡纸皮乐龄人士向议员请命

非政府组织“乐于助人”(Happy People Helping People Community)今日在专页分享,一群在牛车水一带捡纸皮谋生的乐龄人士,于本月21日向惹兰勿刹集选区议员梁莉莉请命,希望请当地市镇会收回成命,让回收商能在该处进行交易,方便这群乐龄人士。 根据贴文解释,在牛车水万拿街第五座(Blk 5 Banda St)后巷,有两位长期在该处进行旧货回收的商家,据了解他们在那里经营也有超过六年之久。一些住在附近租赁组屋的年长者,都会到那里把回收的铝罐、旧衣服和纸皮拿到卖钱。 不过,据了解回收商遭到市镇会勒令,禁止在该处继续进行交易,理由是阻碍交通和影响整洁。但是回收商每日仅在该处逗留两小时,而且多年来也未构成问题。 有关回收处被勒令关闭后,许多收纸皮的长者就被迫推着手推车,走更远的路到厦门街卖掉回收物品,而且间中还要穿过繁忙马路,对于年老体弱的他们来说,十分危险。 年长者也在请愿书中提到,希望议员能与市镇会沟通给予通融,而当局如有任何要求也会尽量配合,例如清理杂物和在最短时间内完成交易,不干扰交通等。…