Connect with us

Court Cases

Closed-door disciplinary tribunal hearing against prosecutors in Parti Liyani trial concludes

Published

3 years ago

on

The disciplinary tribunal hearing against Deputy Public Prosecutors (DPPs) Tan Wee Hao and Tan Yanying over their conduct in former domestic worker Parti Liyani‘s trial concluded on Wednesday (9 Sep).

The closed-door hearing was originally slated to be held between 6 Sep to 13 Sep. It was, however, noted earlier that the hearing may or may not take up all the days allocated for it.

Ms Parti was represented by lawyers Peter Low and Choo Zheng Xi from Peter Low & Choo LLC. Counsel Anil Balchandani from Red Lion Circle, who represented her in her trial and appeal on a pro bono basis, testified as witness.

The Indonesian national was accused of stealing 114 items worth S$50,856 belonging to her former employer, ex-Changi Airport Group chairman Liew Mun Leong, as well as his family members, namely his son Karl Liew and daughter-in-law Heather Lim Mei Ern and their daughter Liew Cheng May.

Her conviction was overturned by High Court judge, Justice Chan Seng Onn on 4 Sep 2020.

ST previously reported a spokesperson from the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) as saying that Ms Tan has engaged senior counsel Davinder Singh from Davinder Singh Chambers while Mr Tan will be represented by senior counsel Jason Chan from Allen & Gledhill.

The AGC spokesman explained that the DPPs were being represented by lawyers from the bar instead of counsels from the AGC, as the Legal Profession (Disciplinary Tribunal) Rules do not allow state counsels to represent the DPPs.

However, state counsels have been allowed to be present at the proceedings during the leave stage to provide assistance to the Court where appropriate and “enable the DPPs to understand the complaint that was being made against them,” said the spokesman.

Based on what was said, it is likely that AGC is footing the bill for the two top lawyers in Singapore for the disciplinary tribunal hearing.

TOC has written to AGC to confirm if the agency is paying for the two counsels hired to represent their prosecutors, and will include AGC’s response when we receive a reply.

Chief Justice gave green light in Oct 2020 for disciplinary proceedings to commence

In October 2020, Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon gave Ms Parti the green light for her complaint against the two DPP’s to be heard. The Disciplinary Tribunal is appointed by the Chief Justice.

It was reported that Ms Parti’s originating summons was taken out on ex-parte basis, meaning the decision is decided by a judge without requiring all of the parties involved to be present.

This prompted the AGC to seek to be represented at the application hearing.

The AGC also applied to submit court notes related to the case and relevant extracts of evidence given by Ms Parti and other witnesses.

Additionally, it also applied to place extracts from the record of proceedings in the State Courts trial, including relevant extracts of the court notes from part of the appeal hearing on 1 November 2019 by Ms Parti before Justice Chan.

CJ Menon in a written judgement stated — in reference to a Pioneer DVD player Ms Parti was accused of stealing — that Ms Parti “contends that the DPPs had, in their conduct of the trial, concealed material facts and thereby created the false impression that the device was fully functional”.

“She contends that but for the false impression that had been conveyed, she would not have agreed, under cross-examination, that the device was operational.

“On this basis, the DPPs suggested that she had lied about the circumstances in which the device came to be in her possession. However, if she had been apprised of all the facts, there would have been no basis for the DPPs to suggest that she had been lying,” ruled CJ Menon.

High Court earlier dismissed Parti Liyani’s compensation application

Ms Parti had earlier made an application for compensation against the DPPs in her case.

Her application for compensation, made under Section 359(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, is the first of its kind to have been made in Singapore under this section after it was introduced in 2010.

In dismissing Ms Parti’s application on 21 June, Justice Chan said that Ms Parti had failed to meet the high threshold to prove the assertions made against the Prosecution.

He took the view that the scope covering the Prosecution under Section 359(3) refers to the decision to prosecute and to continue the said prosecution, and does not apply to the conduct of the prosecution during the proceedings.

Even if the DPPs had failed to disclose the functionality of the Pioneer DVD player Ms Parti was accused of stealing, that would only relate to one item of one of the charges.

It is therefore insufficient to prove malice on the part of the DPPs, he reasoned.

Background on Parti Liyani’s trial and appeal

Ms Parti was convicted in Mar 2019 of stealing items belonging to the senior Liew and his family — his son Karl Liew in particular. Ms Parti’s employment was abruptly terminated on 28 Oct 2016.

Mr Liew had asked Mr Karl to oversee Ms Parti’s termination and repatriation process to Indonesia, as the former was abroad at the time.

Prior to being sent back to her home country, Ms Parti was given only three hours to pack her belongings despite having worked for the family for almost nine years.

Mr Liew subsequently reported the purported theft on 30 October the same year after returning to Singapore.

Less than two months later, Ms Parti was arrested at Changi Airport on 2 December upon her return to Singapore.

Ms Parti was charged with stealing items totalling S$50,000.

The amount, however, was reduced to S$34,000 when District Judge Olivia Low removed several items from the charge sheet and reduced the estimated value of certain items, such as knocking down the value of a damaged Gerald Genta watched from S$25,000 to S$10,000.

Judge Low sentenced Ms Parti to two years and two months of jail after removing items from and reducing value on the allegedly stolen items that Mr Anil had successfully disproved in the State Courts hearing.

The prosecution originally sought a three-year jail sentence.

Ms Parti then filed an appeal against the conviction which was heard by Justice Chan Seng Onn.

After three days of hearings between Nov 2019 to August last year, Justice Chan on 4 Sep 2020 ultimately overturned the conviction from the lower court as he finds them unsafe.

In allowing Ms Parti’s appeal against her conviction and jail sentence of two years and two months, the High Court branded the Liew family as having “improper motives” against Ms Parti.

The “improper motives” revolved around Mr Liew and his son Karl Liew’s plans to lodge a police report against her to stop her from notifying MOM regarding the cleaning work she was made to do at Mr Karl’s home at 39 Chancery Lane and his office at Killiney Road.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
11 Comments
Subscribe
Notify of
11 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Court Cases

AGC announces no charges against businessman Lum Kok Seng in Iswaran case

In a statement on 4 October, the Attorney-General’s Chambers announced no charges against businessman Lum Kok Seng. This follows the sentencing of former Minister S. Iswaran, who pleaded guilty to five charges, including receiving gifts from Lum such as wine, whisky, and a Brompton T-Line bicycle.

Published

1 day ago

on

4 October 2024

By

SINGAPORE: The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) announced on 4 October 2024 that no charges will be filed against businessman Lum Kok Seng  (林國城).

Mr Lum, the managing director of Lum Chang Holdings, had been named in March this year as one of two businessmen involved in a case concerning former transport minister S Iswaran.

The AGC had previously stated that it would take a decision regarding Mr Lum following the conclusion of Iswaran’s case.

On 24 September, Mr Iswaran pleaded guilty to a total of five charges, including receiving luxury items from Mr Lum between November 2021 and November 2022.

The items, allegedly given without any compensation, included several bottles of high-end whisky and wine, expensive golf equipment, and a premium bicycle.

The specific gifts from Mr Lum to Mr Iswaran were detailed as follows:

  • Four bottles of Gordon & MacPhail Caol Ila whisky valued at S$1,084.46
  • Fourteen bottles of whisky and wine worth S$3,255.75
  • A TaylorMade golf driver valued at S$749
  • Two more bottles of Gordon & MacPhail Caol Ila whisky, priced at S$542.23
  • A set of Honma Beres BE-08 Black AQ MX golf clubs worth S$4,420
  • A Brompton T Line bicycle worth S$7,907.50
  • Two bottles of M&H Elements Sherry Cask whisky worth S$198
  • A Scotty Cameron Phantom golf putter and two golf chippers valued at S$800

In total, these gifts amounted to approximately S$18,956.94.

These items were given during a period when Lum Chang Holdings was involved in a contract for construction work at Tanah Merah MRT station.

Attorney-General’s Chambers cites evidentiary risks in reducing Iswaran’s corruption charges

On 3 October, Iswaran has been sentenced to 12 months in jail after pleading guilty to four amended charges under Section 165 of Singapore’s Penal Code and one charge of obstructing the course of justice under Section 204A(a) of the Penal Code.

Iswaran admitted to accepting valuable gifts from prominent businessmen, including Ong Beng Seng, chairman of Singapore GP, and Mr Lum, while holding public office.

These gifts, which included private flights and other benefits, were worth over S$400,000 in total.

The 35 charges against Iswaran were amended by the prosecution on 24 September from corruption to lesser offences under Section 165, which pertains to public servants receiving valuable items in connection with their official duties.

The court also took into account Iswaran’s admission of obstructing the course of justice, for which he had repaid over S$5,000 to Singapore GP for a business-class flight he had taken at Ong’s expense.

The remaining 30 charges were taken into account during sentencing.

Iswaran had originally faced 35 charges, including two counts of corruption.

The charges were amended from two counts of corruption under the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA) to offences under Section 165.

This section, unlike Section 8 of the PCA, does not include a presumption of corruption, which would have placed the burden on the accused to prove the gifts were not given as inducements.

The AGC in an explanation cited substantial evidentiary risks in proving the original corruption charges, which involved  Ong Beng Seng and Lum Kok Seng.

The AGC noted that proving the original corruption charges under PCA would have been difficult due to the involvement of both Iswaran and Ong as primary parties.

Both would have had to implicate themselves to establish corrupt intent.

The AGC explained that “there are two primary parties to the transactions, and both would have an interest in denying corruption in the transactions.” This made securing a conviction for corruption highly uncertain.

In light of these risks, the AGC amended the charges to offenses under Section 165 of the Penal Code, which carries a lower evidentiary threshold and a reduced maximum sentence of two years’ imprisonment.

According to AGC, the amendment was made to ensure a fair and just outcome while considering public interest.

 

Continue Reading

Court Cases

Ong Beng Seng faces two charges linked with Iswaran’s offences, out on S$800k bail

Property tycoon Ong Beng Seng was charged on 4 October with abetting offences in relation to former Minister S Iswaran’s corruption case. Ong, the managing director of Hotel Properties Limited, faces charges under Sections 165 and 204A of Singapore’s Penal Code. His case has been adjourned to 15 November, and he is currently out on S$800,000 bail.

Published

1 day ago

on

4 October 2024

By

SINGAPORE: Property tycoon and hotelier Ong Beng Seng charged in court on Friday (4 October) with two offences linked to former Transport Minister S Iswaran’s case.

Mr Ong, who serves as Hotel Properties Limited (HPL)’s managing director, faces one count each under Sections 165 and 204A of Singapore’s Penal Code for abetment.

Section 165 pertains to a public servant obtaining valuables from individuals with whom they have an official relationship, while Section 204A deals with obstructing justice.

If found guilty under Section 165, offenders face up to two years in jail, a fine, or both. Abetting such offences carries the same penalties if the crime is committed due to the abetment.

Ong’s charges stem from his involvement in a high-profile corruption case linked to Iswaran.

The defence has requested a six-week adjournment for further instructions from Ong, a motion the prosecution, led by Deputy Chief Prosecutor Christopher Ong, did not oppose.

The case has been rescheduled for a pre-trial conference on 15 November at 9 am.

Ong is currently out on S$800,000 bail and is represented by Aaron Lee from Allen & Gledhill.

The 80-year-old businessman was named in Iswaran’s initial graft charges earlier this year.

These charges alleged that Iswaran had corruptly received valuable gifts from Ong, including tickets to the 2022 Singapore Formula 1 Grand Prix, flights, and a hotel stay in Doha.

These gifts were allegedly provided to advance Ong’s business interests, particularly in securing contracts with the Singapore Tourism Board for the Singapore GP and the ABBA Voyage virtual concert.

Although Iswaran no longer faces the original corruption charges, the prosecution amended them to lesser charges under Section 165.

Iswaran pleaded guilty on 24 September, to four counts under this section, which covered over S$400,000 worth of gifts, including flight tickets, sports event access, and luxury items like whisky and wines.

Additionally, he faced one count of obstructing justice for repaying Ong for a Doha-Singapore flight shortly before the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) became involved.

On 3 October, Iswaran was sentenced to one year in jail by presiding judge Justice Vincent Hoong.

The prosecution had sought a sentence of six to seven months for all charges, while the defence had asked for a significantly reduced sentence of no more than eight weeks.

Ong was arrested by CPIB in July 2023

Ong, a Malaysian national based in Singapore, was arrested by CPIB in July 2023 and released on bail shortly thereafter.

Although no charges were initially filed against him, Ong’s involvement in the case intensified following Iswaran’s guilty plea.

The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) had earlier indicated that it would soon make a decision regarding Ong’s legal standing, which has now led to the current charges.

According to the statement of facts read during Iswaran’s conviction, Ong’s case came to light as part of a broader investigation into his associates, which revealed Iswaran’s use of Ong’s private jet for a flight from Singapore to Doha in December 2022.

CPIB investigators uncovered the flight manifest and seized the document.

Upon learning that the flight records had been obtained, Ong contacted Iswaran, advising him to arrange for Singapore GP to bill him for the flight.

Iswaran subsequently paid Singapore GP S$5,700 for the Doha-Singapore business class flight in May 2023, forming the basis of his obstruction of justice charge.

In addition to Ong, construction tycoon Lum Kok Seng was also linked to the additional charges filed against Iswaran in March this year.

Iswaran, who became transport minister in 2021, admitted to accepting valuable items worth approximately S$19,000 from Lum, including a Brompton bicycle, luxury wines, and golf equipment.

However, no charges have been publicly announced against Lum.

Controversies surrounding Ong

This is not the first time Ong has found himself embroiled in controversy.

The 1990s saw questions over luxury condominium units sold by his company to Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew and his son. The units, part of the Nassim Jade and Scotts 28 condominiums, were allegedly sold at special discounts.

This raised eyebrows due to Ong’s familial links with the Lees – his uncle, Lee Suan Yew, was a director at HPL. Although then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong cleared the Lees of any wrongdoing in 1996, the incident has remained a notable mark on Ong’s business record.

Furthermore, an investigative report by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project in 2018 revealed allegations of corruption involving Ong in the leasing of two islands in the Maldives.

The report suggested that HPL had sidestepped Maldivian laws requiring public tender for island leases, instead conducting direct negotiations with Maldivian officials.

It was also alleged that a US$5 million payment made for the lease of Fohtheyo island had been siphoned off through a company associated with friends of the then Maldivian Vice President Ahmed Adeeb. Ong did not respond to these allegations.

Ong, who is the founder of the Singapore-based organization Hotel Properties and a shareholder in many businesses, has a net worth of S$1.7 billion.

Together with his wife Christina, they ranked No. 25 on Forbes’ Singapore’s 50 Richest list, which was published in August 2022.

 

Continue Reading

Trending