Connect with us

Uncategorized

Arrested and handcuffed for a S$30 offence

Published

on

Leong Sze Hian

John (not his real name) is a Singaporean who has been working and living overseas with his family for a few years.

He received a call last Thursday from the new owners of his flat which he had sold in March. They informed him that they’ve received a warrant of arrest addressed to him.

He called the warrant enforcement unit (WEU) the next day (Friday), and was told to report to the WEU on Monday. Apparently, the matter was about his non-payment of a  traffic parking fine in a park, which we understand is a S$30 offence.

John, who had planned to visit Singapore anyway, then took the 7-hour flight back to Singapore over the weekend.

John told The Online Citizen what took place upon his return:

“I called NParks on Friday before my trip to find out more and see if I could come down and get this sorted out.  The reply I got from the officer was to just report to the police station as this is already a warrant of arrest case and is thus out of their hands.

When I reported to the WEU on Monday morning at 11.30, I was immediately put in handcuffs.

I was then transported to court in handcuffs at about 12.30. In court I was processed and put in a cell. That’s when the handcuffs came off.

Around 3pm I was escorted to chambers in handcuffs to stand before the judge. I had to post a personal bond of $1,000 before I was released. Only after signing the bail document were the handcuffs removed. I only left the court at about 5 in the evening.

The next day, I went to see NParks at 9am to sort this out. The head of the department and the officers were nice and understood what I went through.  The compound fine was $400, but they reduced it to $200. I paid and left.

I had to go back to court at 2.30 for the matter to be dropped and resolved.

According to John, he believes his address record may have been the problem, because in November 2006, when he did not receive his road tax from the Land Transport Authority (LTA), he had gone to the LTA to provide them with the correct address. But apparently, the wrong address was keyed into the LTA’s records.

He moved from his rental flat in December, 2006.

When he tried to explain to NParks about his address record being in error, it was explained to John that it was LTA that handles the address records of Singaporeans and that NParks was just using LTA’s records.

From John’s recollection of the events which transpired, is it possible that NParks sent the notice to the wrong address before November 2006, which resulted in John not receiving the summons which in turn resulted in him being arrested upon his return to Singapore?

Also, is it necessary for the authorities to subject “offenders” to such treatment (handcuffed and arrested and having to spend time in a hold-up), especially when apparently it is through no fault of their own that the summons were sent to the wrong address?

In this connection my home address has been used by a Singaporean as his mailing address, because he has  been working in another country for the last three years.

Recently, a letter arrived informing him that as he had not paid the TV license  fee of about twenty plus dollars for three months in 2007, he was summoned to appear in court. When the Media Development Authority (MDA) was contacted by telephone, the advice was that the matter could be settled by paying $198.81.

However, the MDA said that they could not just accept a cheque for the amount in the mail, and that one has to pay in person at the MDA’s office, with documentary proof that he has been working in another country.

Notwithstanding this, as he was not in Singapore, a cheque for the amount required, a  photocopy of his work visa in the foreign country and copies of the MDA letter, were mailed to MDA.

About  slightly more than two weeks, after the cheque was cleared by MDA, a warrant of arrest arrived.

So, copies of the cheque, work visa, MDA letter and the warrant of arrest were sent to both MDA and the Warrant Enforcement Unit, as the warrant of arrest stated that: “If you wish to make an appeal regarding the Warrant of Arrest issued against you, please send your appeal directly to the prosecuting agency for their consideration”.

More than six weeks have lapsed since the cheque was cleared by the MDA, but there has been no correspondence at all from the MDA, not even an acknowledgement of receipt for the cheque payment cleared.

So, will he be arrested when he next returns to Singapore?

Finally, as I understand that hundreds of people are charged almost every week at the night courts for failure to pay traffic fines, Service and Conservancy Charges (S & CC), TV licence, etc, how many Singaporeans have been charged in court and served with warrants of arrest?

———-

Picture from jmplawyers.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Indonesia

Miss Universe cuts ties with Indonesia chapter after harassment allegations

The Miss Universe Organization severs ties with Indonesia franchise due to harassment claims. Malaysia edition canceled.

Women allege body checks before pageant. Investigation launched. Safety prioritized.

Indonesia winner to compete in November finale. Height requirement controversy.

Published

on

WASHINGTON, UNITED STATES — The Miss Universe Organization has cut ties with its Indonesia franchise, it announced days after allegations of sexual harassment, and will cancel an upcoming Malaysia edition.

In the complaint, more than a half dozen women said all 30 finalists for Miss Universe Indonesia were unexpectedly asked to strip for a supposed body check for scars and cellulite two days before the pageant’s crowning ceremony in Jakarta.

Their lawyer said Tuesday that five of the women had their pictures taken.

“In light of what we have learned took place at Miss Universe Indonesia, it has become clear that this franchise has not lived up to our brand standards, ethics, or expectations,” the US-based Miss Universe Organization posted Saturday night on social media site X, formerly known as Twitter.

It said that it had “decided to terminate the relationship with its current franchise in Indonesia, PT Capella Swastika Karya, and its National Director, Poppy Capella.”

It thanked the contestants for their bravery in coming forward and added that “providing a safe place for women” was the organization’s priority.

Jakarta police spokesman Trunoyudo Wisnu Andiko said Tuesday that an investigation into the women’s complaint has been launched.

The Indonesia franchise also holds the license for Miss Universe Malaysia, where there will no longer be a competition this year, according to the New York-based parent organizer.

In a lengthy statement posted to Instagram, Indonesia franchise director Capella denied involvement in any body checks.

“I, as the National Director and as the owner of the Miss Universe Indonesia license, was not involved at all and have never known, ordered, requested or allowed anyone who played a role and participated in the process of organizing Miss Universe Indonesia 2023 to commit violence or sexual harassment through body checking,” she wrote.

She added that she is against “any form of violence or sexual harassment.”

The Jakarta competition was held from 29 July to 3 August to choose Indonesia’s representative to the 2023 Miss Universe contest, and was won by Fabienne Nicole Groeneveld.

Miss Universe said it would make arrangements for her to compete in the finale, scheduled for November in El Salvador.

This year’s Indonesia pageant also came under fire for announcing a “significant change in this (year’s) competition guidelines” with the elimination of its minimum height requirement after it had crowned a winner.

In its statement, the Miss Universe Organization said it wanted to “make it extremely clear that there are no measurements such as height, weight, or body dimensions required to join a Miss Universe pageant worldwide.”

— AFP

Continue Reading

Malaysia

A Perodua service centre in Kuantan, Malaysia went viral for its strict dress code, Perodua responds

A dress code for vehicle servicing? A Malaysian car brand’s service centre dress code signage has puzzled netizens, raising queries about the need for attire rules during a routine service.

The manufacturer responded with an official statement after a flurry of comments, seeking to clarify and apologize.

Published

on

By

MALAYSIA: A dress code signage positioned at a service centre belonging to a prominent Malaysian car brand has sparked bewilderment among Malaysian netizens, who question the necessity of adhering to attire guidelines for a simple vehicle servicing.

The signage explicitly delineates clothing items that are deemed unsuitable, including sleeveless tops, short skirts, abbreviated pants, and distressed jeans.

The car manufacturer swiftly found itself flooded with comments from both inquisitive and irked Malaysian netizens. This surge in online activity prompted the company to issue an official statement aimed at clarifying the situation and extending an apology.

In a post that gained significant traction on the social media platform, politician Quek Tai Seong of Pahang State, Malaysia, shared an image to Facebook on Monday (7 Aug).

The image showcased a dress code sign prominently displayed at a Perodua Service Centre in Kuantan. Within the post, Quek posed the question: “Is this dress code applicable nationwide, or is it specific to this branch?”

The signage reads, “All customers dealing with Perodua Service Kuantan 1, Semambu, are requested to dress modestly and appropriately.”

Adding visual clarity to these guidelines, the sign features illustrative graphics that explicitly outline clothing items deemed unacceptable, including sleeveless tops, short skirts, short pants, and ripped jeans.

Delineating the specifics of the dress code, the signage stipulates that male visitors are expected to don shirts accompanied by neckties, opt for long pants, and wear closed shoes.

Conversely, female visitors are advised to don long-sleeved shirts, full-length skirts, and closed-toe footwear.

Perodua’s dress code sparks online uproar

Following the rapid spread of the post, Perodua’s official Facebook page found itself inundated with comments from both intrigued and frustrated Malaysian netizens, all seeking clarifications about the newly surfaced dress code policy.

Amidst the flurry of comments, numerous incensed netizens posed pointed questions such as, “What is the rationale behind the introduction of such regulations by the management? We demand an explanation.”

Another netizen expressed their dissatisfaction, arguing against the necessity of the rule and urging Perodua to take inspiration from the practices of other 4S (Sales, Service, Spare Parts, and Survey) automotive dealerships.

A concerned Facebook user chimed in, advocating for a more lenient stance, asserting that attempting to dictate customers’ clothing choices might not be in the company’s best interest.

Someone also commented in an angry tone, “Oi what is this? Going there for car service, not interview or working, right.”

As the discourse unfolded, it became evident that while some inquiries carried genuine weight, others chose to inject humor into the situation, playfully remarking, “If I wanted to buy a Myvi, I should buy or rent a formal attire first.”

“I sell economy rice at a hawker centre, I have never worn a long sleeve shirt and a tie… I guess I will not buy a Perodua car then.”

“I guess they will not serve those who wear short pants.”

Perodua addresses dress code controversy

As reported by Chinese media outlet Sin Chew Daily News, the manager of Kuantan’s Perodua Service Centre had acknowledged that the images on the dress code signage were misleading.

In response, the manager divulged that discussions had transpired with the head office, leading to the prompt removal of the signage to prevent any further misconceptions.

The manager clarifies, “We do encourage visitors to adhere to the dress etiquette, but we won’t go to the extent of restricting their choice of attire.”

He also revealed that currently, no complaints have been directly received from the public.

However, feedback from certain customers was relayed through Perodua’s agents.

Perodua also released an official statement by chief operating officer JK Rozman Jaffar on Wednesday (9 Aug) regarding the dress code on their official Facebook page.

The statement stated the dress code etiquette is not aligned with their official guidelines and they are currently conducting an official investigation on the matter followed by corrective measures to avoid the same incident from happening.

Perodua also extends its apologies for any inconvenience caused.

 

Continue Reading

Trending