Connect with us

Current Affairs

International school in India has the exact same logo as Singapore Sports School

Published

on

Earlier in March, there was a plagiarism fiasco surrounding Singapore’s national song ‘Count on Me, Singapore’ after a composer from India was accused of copying the song. The Indian composer later retracted all claims to the lyrics and tune of the song.

What’s more, the local national song was even found to be copied and modified into a religious version by an Indian non-profit spiritual organisation.

Now, there seems to be another case of plagiarism concerning a Singaporean educational institution, this time coming from an international school in India.

To put it simply, the logo of Gaikwad-Patil International School in Nagpur, India is exactly the same as Singapore Sports School in Woodlands.

Every detail in colour, every curve, every pixel on your screen; both logos look one hundred per cent the same. No matter the angle you look at, they are indistinguishable to the hilt – so much so even a blind person wouldn’t argue otherwise.

Singapore Sports School’s logo is a registered trade mark

Singapore Sports School officially opened on 2 April 2004 by former Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong.

It is the only school in Singapore that offers selected youths an integrated academic and sports programme in a world-class environment.

Singapore Sports School’s logo features a pair of red and orange wings.

According to the school’s website, the pair of wings is a “universal symbol of flight and is used to embody the soaring aspirations” of its student-athletes.

“The symmetry of the wings denotes the striking balance between academic finesse and sporting excellence.

“Outlined amidst the pair of wings is a trophy. The trophy symbolises our School’s commitment towards providing our student-athletes with the environment and ample opportunities to help them fulfil their sporting potential and let their dreams take flight,” it added.

Singapore Sports School also stated that its logo is a “registered trade mark”. The same applies to the school’s tagline, ‘Learned Champions With Character‘.

It is noteworthy that Gaikwad-Patil International School only came into being sometime between end of 2016 and early 2017.

Singapore Sports School was told that Gaikwad-Patil International School has been closed; no reason was given

Following this, TOC reached out to both the institutions via email to enquire about the matter.

We received no reply from Gaikwad-Patil International School. We did, however, received word from Singapore Sports School.

A spokesperson from the school told TOC that they “were alerted recently to this matter”. After reaching out to Gaikwad-Patil International School, they were informed that the “school has since closed”.

Responding to a follow-up question, the spokesperson said that “no reason was given” by Gaikwad-Patil International School on its closure.

“We reached out to them last week after we were alerted by our staff. No reason was given by the said school. It was merely a message from the Principal to say that the school is shut now. We interpreted it as closed, although we have not heard from them any further.”

Principal of Gaikwad-Patil International School refuses to share details of the school’s closure

Subsequently, TOC reached out to the former Principal & Director of Gaikwad-Patil International School, Shabih Chaurasia, on LinkedIn to confirm on the school’s closure as well as the reasoning behind it.

After a series of exchanges, we practically received no proper confirmation on the subject. Ms Shabih refused to divulge any piece of information as she did not see any reason to do so.

She also claimed to “have shared the details with the principal of Singapore Sports School”, yet the response we’ve gotten from Singapore Sports School proved otherwise.

Is Gaikwad-Patil International School really closed?

After reaching a dead end with the former Principal & Director of the school, TOC managed to get ahold of Gaikwad-Patil International School via WhatsApp after acquiring the contact number listed on the school’s website.

At the time of writing, the website and social media platforms of the school are no longer accessible.

Interestingly, when asked if the school is still operating, the response given was “yes”.

Another interesting point is the name of the WhatsApp account registered under the contact number – ‘DPIS’.

As it turns out, DPIS stands for ‘Delhi Public International School’.

This begs the question: why is Delhi Public International School saying that Gaikwad-Patil International School is open?

Not forgetting, who is DPIS to begin with and why is it involved in the picture?

Mysterious connection between Delhi Public International School and Gaikwad-Patil International School

Now, let’s have a look at Delhi Public International School (DPIS) and its mysterious connection with Gaikwad-Patil International School.

First off, it says on DPIS’ website that the school is located “near Jamtha International Stadium, Dongargaon, Wardha Road, Nagpur”.

Meanwhile, a poster from Gaikwad-Patil International School last year shows the same address as DPIS.

The poster also shows the same contact number as DPIS, whom TOC contacted earlier.

Source: DPIS / Facebook

Oddly enough, it appears both schools also share the same premise, judging by these two pictures uploaded on DPIS’ Facebook page.

The first picture was uploaded on 27 May 2021. The second picture was uploaded on 2 November 2020.

Source: DPIS / Facebook

Source: DPIS / Facebook

Besides that, heading over to the ‘About Us‘ section on DPIS’ website, it literally says:

“Gaikwad-Patil International School offers well defined CBSE syllabus with day boarding facility and intend to start a full fledge IB school with stay for the Secondary and Higher Secondary students. The teaching methodology provides student-centred education with a focus on individual growth.”

Seeing is believing, as the saying goes; so here’s a screenshot of the website.

Screenshot from DPIS’ website

Moving on, remember Ms Shabih from LinkedIn? She was the former Principal & Director of Gaikwad-Patil International School.

Well, turns out she has reprised her role as Principal & Director at DPIS immediately after Gaikwad-Patil International School had seemingly closed down.

According to her LinkedIn profile, Ms Shabih’s four-and-a-half-year tenure at Gaikwad-Patil International School ended earlier in May.

Screenshot from Shabih Chaurasia’s LinkedIn profile

Screenshot from Shabih Chaurasia’s LinkedIn profile

Now, perhaps this last finding might prove to be the final nail in the coffin of the whole mystery between the two international schools.

According to the ‘Page Transparency’ section on DPIS’ Facebook page, it appears that the page had recently changed its name to ‘Delhi Public International School’. The change was made earlier on 26 May.

The page was created on 2 January 2017 with the name ‘Gaikwad-Patil International School’.

Well, this explains why DPIS’s Facebook page has been sharing numerous posts featuring Gaikwad-Patil International School up until recently.

Screenshot from DPIS’ Facebook page

At the end of the day, the million-dollar question is how and why did Gaikwad-Patil International School end up blatantly passing off Singapore Sports School’s registered trade mark logo as its own all this while.

What exactly happened to Gaikwad-Patil International School remains in limbo per se, but at least we have assurance that the majestic pair of red and orange wings symbol is exclusively for Singapore.

Continue Reading
15 Comments
Subscribe
Notify of
15 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Current Affairs

Chee Soon Juan questions Shanmugam’s $88 million property sale amid silence from Mainstream Media

Dr Chee Soon Juan of the SDP raised concerns about the S$88 million sale of Mr K Shanmugam’s Good Class Bungalow at Astrid Hill, questioning transparency and the lack of mainstream media coverage. He called for clarity on the buyer, valuation, and potential conflicts of interest.

Published

on

On Sunday (22 Sep), Dr Chee Soon Juan, Secretary General of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), issued a public statement on Facebook, expressing concerns regarding the sale of Minister for Home Affairs and Law, Mr K Shanmugam’s Good Class Bungalow (GCB) at Astrid Hill.

Dr Chee questioned the transparency of the S$88 million transaction and the absence of mainstream media coverage despite widespread discussion online.

According to multiple reports cited by Dr Chee, Mr Shanmugam’s property was transferred in August 2023 to UBS Trustees (Singapore) Pte Ltd, which holds the property in trust under the Jasmine Villa Settlement.

Dr Chee’s statement focused on two primary concerns: the lack of response from Mr Shanmugam regarding the transaction and the silence of major media outlets, including Singapore Press Holdings and Mediacorp.

He argued that, given the ongoing public discourse and the relevance of property prices in Singapore, the sale of a high-value asset by a public official warranted further scrutiny.

In his Facebook post, Dr Chee posed several questions directed at Mr Shanmugam and the government:

  1. Who purchased the property, and is the buyer a Singaporean citizen?
  2. Who owns Jasmine Villa Settlement?
  3. Were former Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and current Prime Minister Lawrence Wong informed of the transaction, and what were their responses?
  4. How was it ensured that the funds were not linked to money laundering?
  5. How was the property’s valuation determined, and by whom?

The Astrid Hill property, originally purchased by Mr Shanmugam in 2003 for S$7.95 million, saw a significant increase in value, aligning with the high-end status of District 10, where it is located. The 3,170.7 square-meter property was sold for S$88 million in August 2023.

Dr Chee highlighted that, despite Mr Shanmugam’s detailed responses regarding the Ridout Road property, no such transparency had been offered in relation to the Astrid Hill sale.

He argued that the lack of mainstream media coverage was particularly concerning, as public interest in the sale is high. Dr Chee emphasized that property prices and housing affordability are critical issues in Singapore, and transparency from public officials is essential to maintain trust.

Dr Chee emphasized that the Ministerial Code of Conduct unambiguously states: “A Minister must scrupulously avoid any actual or apparent conflict of interest between his office and his private financial interests.”

He concluded his statement by reiterating the need for Mr Shanmugam to address the questions raised, as the matter involves not only the Minister himself but also the integrity of the government and its responsibility to the public.

The supposed sale of Mr Shamugam’s Astrid Hill property took place just a month after Mr Shanmugam spoke in Parliament over his rental of a state-owned bungalow at Ridout Road via a ministerial statement addressing potential conflicts of interest.

At that time, Mr Shanmugam explained that his decision to sell his home was due to concerns about over-investment in a single asset, noting that his financial planning prompted him to sell the property and move into rental accommodation.

The Ridout Road saga last year centred on concerns about Mr Shanmugam’s rental of a sprawling black-and-white colonial bungalow, occupying a massive plot of land, managed by the Singapore Land Authority (SLA), which he oversees in his capacity as Minister for Law. Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, also rented a similarly expansive property nearby.

Mr Shanmugam is said to have recused himself from the decision-making process, and a subsequent investigation by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) found no wrongdoing while Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean confirmed in Parliament that Mr Shanmugam had removed himself from any decisions involving the property.

As of now, Mr Shanmugam has not commented publicly on the sale of his Astrid Hill property.

Continue Reading

Comments

Redditors question support for PAP over perceived arrogance and authoritarian attitude

Despite Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s warning that slimmer electoral margins would limit the government’s political space “to do the right things”, many Redditors questioned their support for the ruling PAP, criticising its perceived arrogance. They argued that SM Lee’s remarks show the party has ‘lost its ways’ and acts as if it alone can determine what is right. Others noted that the PAP’s supermajority allows for the passage of unfavourable policies without adequate scrutiny.

Published

on

In a recent speech, Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong warned that “if electoral margins get slimmer, the government will have less political space to do the right things.”

Mr Lee, who served as Prime Minister for 20 years, highlighted the risks associated with increasingly competitive politics.

“It will become harder to disregard short-term considerations in decision-making. The political dynamics will become very different,” he stated during his speech at the Annual Public Service Leadership Ceremony 2024 on 17 September.

“Singaporeans must understand the dangers this creates, and so must the public service,” SM Lee stressed.

SM Lee pointed out that Singapore faces formidable internal and external challenges in the years ahead, with rising expectations and demands from citizens.

As growth becomes harder to achieve and politics becomes more fiercely contested, he warned, “Things can go wrong for Singapore too.”

He urged vigilance in preparing for an uncertain future, noting, “As the world changes, and as the generations change, we must do our best to renew our system – to ensure that it continues to work well for us, even as things change.”

Critique of PAP’s Arrogance and Disconnect from Singaporeans

The People’s Action Party (PAP) experienced a notable decline in its vote share during the 2020 General Election, securing 61.24% of the votes and winning 83 out of 93 seats, a drop from 69.9% in 2015.

A significant loss was in Sengkang GRC, where the PAP team, led by former Minister Ng Chee Meng, was defeated by the Workers’ Party (WP).

In discussions on Reddit, some users questioned why they should support the ruling PAP, criticising the party’s perceived arrogance.

They pointed out that SM Lee’s recent remarks illustrate that the party has strayed from effectively serving Singaporeans and seems to believe it has the sole authority to decide what is right.

Others highlighted that the PAP’s super-majority in Parliament enables the passage of unfavourable policies without sufficient scrutiny.

One comment acknowledged that while many older Singaporeans remain loyal to the PAP due to its past achievements, younger generations feel the party has failed to deliver similar results.

There is significant frustration that essentials like housing and the cost of living have become less affordable compared to previous generations.

The comment emphasised the importance of the 2011 election results, which they believe compelled the PAP to reassess its policies, especially concerning foreign labor and job security.

He suggested that to retain voter support, the PAP must continue to ensure a good material standard of living.

“Then, I ask you, vote PAP for what? They deserve to lose a supermajority. Or else why would they continue to deliver the same promises they delivered to our parents? What else would get a bunch of clueless bureaucrats to recognise their problems?”

Emphasising Government Accountability to the Public

Another Redditor argued that it is the government’s responsibility to be accountable to the people.

He further challenged SM Lee’s assertion about having less political space to do the right things, questioning his authority to define what is “right” for Singapore.

The comment criticised initiatives like the Founder’s Memorial and the NS Square, suggesting they may serve to boost the egos of a few rather than benefit the broader population. The Redditor also questioned the justification for GST hikes amid rising living costs.

“Policies should always be enacted to the benefit of the people, and it should always be the people who decide what is the best course of action for our country. No one should decide that other than us.”

The comment called for an end to narratives that present the PAP as the only party capable of rescuing Singapore from crises, stating that the country has moved past the existential challenges of its founding era and that innovative ideas can come from beyond a single political party.

Another comment echoed this sentiment, noting that by stating this, SM Lee seemingly expects Singaporeans to accept the PAP’s assumption that they—and by extension, the government and public service—will generally do the “right things.”

“What is conveniently overlooked is that the point of having elections is to have us examine for ourselves if we accept that very premise, and vote accordingly.”

A comment further argued that simply losing a supermajority does not equate to a lack of political space for the government to make the right decisions.

The Redditor express frustration with SM Lee’s rhetoric, suggesting that he is manipulating public perception to justify arbitrary changes to the constitution.

Concerns Over PAP’s Supermajority in Parliament

Another comment pointed out that the PAP’s supermajority in Parliament enables the passage of questionable and controversial policies, bypassing robust debate and discussion.

The comment highlighted the contentious constitutional amendments made in late 2016, which reserved the elected presidency for candidates from a specific racial group if no president from that group had served in the previous five terms.

A comment highlighted the contrast: in the past, the PAP enjoyed a wide electoral margin because citizens believed they governed effectively. Now, the PAP claims that without a substantial electoral margin, they cannot govern well.

Continue Reading

Trending