Wali Khan is the founder and Editor-in-Chief of The Parrot Review (Source: The Parrot Review)

The Editor-in-Chief and founder of The Parrot Review (TPR), Wali Khan, says he harbours “no intention to harass or cause alarm or distress” in publishing the article and Instagram post about a National University of Singapore (NUS) Investigations Officer on 30 June.

Mr Khan explained that just a few hours after the article was published on TPR, the officer sent him a text saying that the article paints her as a “sexual assault[er]”.

“She also stated that she and/or her counsel are of the view that the contents of the article amount to harassment, as defined in the Protection From Harassment Act (POHA),” he added in a letter to readers on the same day.

“Accordingly, she has put me on notice that she wishes to apply for an expedited protection order (EPO) against me.”

In the letter, Mr Khan said he found it “puzzling” that the officer was communicating directly to him instead of via her attorneys. Still, he responded to her to inform her that “the article never once painter her, as she suggests, to be a “sexual assault[er]”.

He went on, “I take the respectful view that this is not, by any stretch, a reasonable and fair interpretation of the article.”

In the letter which is published on both the TPR website and Instagram, Mr Khan clarified his intention in publishing the earlier article in which he highlighted the officers “checkered” past as an ex-Senior Staff Sergeant from the Singapore Police Force.

In the earlier article, Mr Khan had highlighted that the officer had been one of the last three officers to have interviewed 14-year-old Benjamin Lim in 2016 for molesting an 11-year-old girl.

Tragically, young Mr Lim was found dead at the foot of his HDB block in Yishun just after 10 minutes of being released from Ang Mo Kio Police Division. His death was ruled a suicide.

The article also highlighted the officer’s prior conviction which led to five months in prison in 2019 for forging an alleged sexual assault victim’s testimony when she was still serving with the SPF.

In the letter to readers, Mr Khan stressed: “As any discerning reader would note, in my article and Instagram post about [the officer], I had never once issued a call to action or even, for that matter, advanced the argument that she should not have been hired.“

“In my humble opinion, all I did was present a fair and factual account of what had happened and I have given all parties involved a right of response/reply, although some have elected not to exercise that right for reasons best known only to themselves.”

Noting that EPOs are granted following an ex parte hearing—that is a hearing where only the applicant has the right to an audience before the court—Mr Khan said he has informed her to bring his response to the attention of the court if she wished to proceed with the action against him.

However, she responded to say that she was advised that she did not have a duty to do so. She also placed Mr Khan on notice that her attorney would take out proceedings in Court against him on Thursday (1 July).

Mr Khan also included screenshots of the messages he exchanged with the officer in question.

Mr Khan continued, “To reiterate, it is my position that the article was a fair, just and factual account of events that had occurred. As the matter is one of public interest, I believe it was just and equitable to issue a factual account of events that gave all parties involved reasonable time to respond.”

“I am writing this letter to make my position clear, lest it be distorted or, worse, swept under the rug.”

“In the meantime, I will seek legal advice.”

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

30客工静坐抗议 清水建设:分包商拖欠54万元

因被拖欠长达三个月工资,有30名客工从本周一起,在罗敏申路79号工地外静坐抗议。这批客工雇主是分包商Stargood建筑公司,业主林杰彪(译音)声称,遭总承包商清水建设(Shimizu Corporation)拖欠款项。 不过,清水建设公司对此发声明反驳,声称由于Stargood建筑无法提供足够的人手和建材,导致总承包商必须掏腰包承担,至今Stargood建筑仍拖欠他们高达54万新元的款项。 林杰彪之前称自去年12月就没有收到清水建设的款项,但后者反驳,至今已经支付给这个分包商多达126万元。 总承包商:已支付126万元 根据《今日报》报导,清水建设在声明中指出,Stargood理应每天供应80-110名员工在工地施工,但是对方只有40-60人工作,没有满足这项分包工程的要求。 清水建设表示,该公司别无他法,只能自掏腰包提供充足的建材和员工,为此耗费了82万元。这笔费用也由Stargood承担,在扣除了该公司的成本费用等,清水建设指出Stargood仍拖欠54万元。 此外,清水建设对于Stargood仍未支付客工的薪资,还将之怪罪到总承包商头上,表示“遗憾”。 这些30名客工静坐抗议,声称有多达59名客工,总共被拖欠高达30万元的薪资,有者已有两、三个月没有领到工资。 据了解,分包商Stargood将在今日会见人力部,而清水建设则表示会与客工中心商谈协助受影响客工的事宜,该公司表示如有需要会采取必要行动。 涉及静坐抗议的客工,工作于罗敏申路79号工地,即旧公积金局大厦原址。在2015年11月,星桥腾飞集团以5亿5000万元,标下旧公积金局大厦。 2016年10月,星桥腾飞集团(Ascendas-Singbridge…

Public feedback sought on proposed key amendments to Building Maintenance and Strata Management

The Ministry of National Development (MND) and the Building and Construction Authority…

过去个资泄露事故前车之鉴 人民党疑虑政府推出穿戴式配备

早前,主管智慧国计划的外交部长维文,宣称首批“合力追踪”穿戴式配备将在本月下旬推出,他也指出还配备不是追踪器,设备无网络连接性或卫星定位晶片,当局须取得确诊者同意,才能索取数据。 他强调穿戴式配备不会追踪使用者的位置。 不过,人民党副秘书长Ariffin Sha针对有关穿戴式配备表达疑虑,呼吁政府应当谨慎处理新加坡人的隐私,也提及过去政府曾有数次大型的数据泄露事故: 2018年新保集团150万病患资料被盗,其中16万住院治疗记录外泄,堪称历年来最严重,卫生部长颜金勇甚至特别为此事致歉。 2019年:1万4200名艾滋病病患,姓名、身份证号码、电话号码、住址和相关医疗资料等遭泄露。卫生部长颜金勇再度道歉。 2019年3月:卫生科学局(HSA)透露,超过80万名捐血者的姓名、身份证号码、性别和血性等个人资料,被挂上有互联网连接的服务器长达九个星期,面临资料疏漏风险。 该党认为,尽管疫情当前,惟不应正当化对民众隐私的干预,再者,配备仍会记录私人的数据,若落在不法之徒手上遭滥用是很危险的。该党为此呼吁政府寻求其他更合适的方案。