SINGAPORE: Former Transport Minister S Iswaran did not know or suspect that gifts from property tycoon Ong Beng Seng and construction firm boss Lum Kok Seng were "veiled gratification", his lawyer said on Wednesday (May 8).
"He was dealing with very, very dear and close friends," said defence lawyer Davinder Singh during a court hearing to argue for a joint trial of all his charges.
"His state of mind at that time was that not only was he dealing with close friends, he had no idea at all that there was any ... he had no knowledge or suspicion that the gifts were offered as veiled gratification."
Iswaran, 61, attended the hearing in the High Court on Wednesday. He was represented by Mr Singh, Mr Navin Thevar and Mr Rajvinder Singh of Davinder Singh Chambers.
Iswaran was first handed 27 charges on Jan 18 and given another eight charges on Mar 25.
The first set of charges comprises 24 of obtaining valuables as a public servant, two of corruption and one of obstructing justice.
These include corruptly receiving more than S$166,000 (US$122,418) worth of flights, hotel stays and tickets to events in exchange for advancing the business interests of Mr Ong.
In the second set of charges, Iswaran is accused of obtaining valuables worth nearly S$19,000 from Mr Lum Kok Seng, the managing director of Singapore-listed Lum Chang Holdings.
Iswaran has pleaded not guilty to all the charges. Mr Ong and Mr Lum have not been charged.
Former Transport Minister S Iswaran arrives at the Supreme Court on May 8, 2024. (Photo: CNA/Raydza Rahman)
Opening the hearing, Mr Singh set out the timeline of court events after his client was charged in January.
He told Justice Vincent Hoong that tentative trial dates had been set for the first 27 charges – which he referred to as the OBS charges – in August and September, before Iswaran was given the second set of charges involving Mr Lum.
The prosecution had sought to "push off" the first set of charges, Mr Singh said.
But the defence objected to having the second set of charges heard first and asked for all the charges to be heard together.
"In truth, the OBS trial hadn't been fixed, what the prosecution was and is today seeking is to push off the OBS trial and to use the dates that have been allocated for the OBS charges, for the (Lum Kok Seng) charges.
"That cannot happen unless the prosecution satisfies you that there is reasonable cause for that," Mr Singh said.
Mr Singh added that the prosecution has not shown reasonable cause and that its claim of resource constraints was "extraordinary".
He pointed out that the prosecution had more lawyers than the defence did and that the issue had not cropped up when the trial dates were set for the first set of charges.
He also suggested that the prosecution wanted separate trials so as to have a "preview" of the defence.
Mr Singh argued that having resource constraints was "not a good basis" to adjourn a trial, as his client has been waiting for his day in court.
The lawyer said that the charges should be heard in a joint trial due to "similar features" in the charges. He also pointed out that his client had a total of 32 charges of obtaining valuables as a public servant.
"(A grand total of 32 charges) all invoking a section which has never, to my knowledge, been invoked in Singapore courts. This is going to be the first time the Singapore courts are dealing with (Section) 165, its ingredients and what defence is available," said Mr Singh.
This was a matter of public interest, he argued.
Deputy Attorney-General Tai Wei Shyong, Chief Prosecutor Tan Kiat Pheng and four other Deputy Public Prosecutors appeared for the prosecution.
Mr Tai argued that there was "no basis" for a joint trial of all the charges.
He said that "certain statements made" may cast the prosecution in a negative light and he had to set the record straight.
"We asked for the (Lum Kok Seng) charges to be tried first and OBS charges to be tried consecutively.
Two trials. It has been consistent. We have not deviated from this position today," he added.
On the suggestion that the prosecution wanted to split the charges to have a preview of the defence, Mr Tai said: "With respect to defence if he has a good defence and shows reasonable doubt .... he would be acquitted. There is no issue of preview."
Addressing why the two sets of charges were tendered separately, Mr Tai said the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau had only completed investigations into the charges involving Mr Lum after the first set of charges were tendered in court.
"We have a duty to conduct this case in public interest and it is not static duty, it's ongoing duty, so every time there is a considerable change in facts we need to review and decide what to do next," said the Deputy Attorney-General.
He added it was "common practice" for the prosecution to proceed with some charges at trial and not others. In the prosecution's view, the two sets of charges have "no connection" and have different contexts.
"The underlying transactions, in our view, that bring it under (Section) 165 are entirely different," he said, objecting to a joint trial.
The hearing will resume on Wednesday afternoon.
Continue reading...
"He was dealing with very, very dear and close friends," said defence lawyer Davinder Singh during a court hearing to argue for a joint trial of all his charges.
"His state of mind at that time was that not only was he dealing with close friends, he had no idea at all that there was any ... he had no knowledge or suspicion that the gifts were offered as veiled gratification."
Iswaran, 61, attended the hearing in the High Court on Wednesday. He was represented by Mr Singh, Mr Navin Thevar and Mr Rajvinder Singh of Davinder Singh Chambers.
Iswaran was first handed 27 charges on Jan 18 and given another eight charges on Mar 25.
The first set of charges comprises 24 of obtaining valuables as a public servant, two of corruption and one of obstructing justice.
These include corruptly receiving more than S$166,000 (US$122,418) worth of flights, hotel stays and tickets to events in exchange for advancing the business interests of Mr Ong.
In the second set of charges, Iswaran is accused of obtaining valuables worth nearly S$19,000 from Mr Lum Kok Seng, the managing director of Singapore-listed Lum Chang Holdings.
Iswaran has pleaded not guilty to all the charges. Mr Ong and Mr Lum have not been charged.
Former Transport Minister S Iswaran arrives at the Supreme Court on May 8, 2024. (Photo: CNA/Raydza Rahman)
DEFENCE OPENS HEARING
Opening the hearing, Mr Singh set out the timeline of court events after his client was charged in January.
He told Justice Vincent Hoong that tentative trial dates had been set for the first 27 charges – which he referred to as the OBS charges – in August and September, before Iswaran was given the second set of charges involving Mr Lum.
The prosecution had sought to "push off" the first set of charges, Mr Singh said.
But the defence objected to having the second set of charges heard first and asked for all the charges to be heard together.
"In truth, the OBS trial hadn't been fixed, what the prosecution was and is today seeking is to push off the OBS trial and to use the dates that have been allocated for the OBS charges, for the (Lum Kok Seng) charges.
"That cannot happen unless the prosecution satisfies you that there is reasonable cause for that," Mr Singh said.
Mr Singh added that the prosecution has not shown reasonable cause and that its claim of resource constraints was "extraordinary".
He pointed out that the prosecution had more lawyers than the defence did and that the issue had not cropped up when the trial dates were set for the first set of charges.
He also suggested that the prosecution wanted separate trials so as to have a "preview" of the defence.
Mr Singh argued that having resource constraints was "not a good basis" to adjourn a trial, as his client has been waiting for his day in court.
The lawyer said that the charges should be heard in a joint trial due to "similar features" in the charges. He also pointed out that his client had a total of 32 charges of obtaining valuables as a public servant.
"(A grand total of 32 charges) all invoking a section which has never, to my knowledge, been invoked in Singapore courts. This is going to be the first time the Singapore courts are dealing with (Section) 165, its ingredients and what defence is available," said Mr Singh.
This was a matter of public interest, he argued.
Related:
PROSECUTION'S REBUTTAL
Deputy Attorney-General Tai Wei Shyong, Chief Prosecutor Tan Kiat Pheng and four other Deputy Public Prosecutors appeared for the prosecution.
Mr Tai argued that there was "no basis" for a joint trial of all the charges.
He said that "certain statements made" may cast the prosecution in a negative light and he had to set the record straight.
"We asked for the (Lum Kok Seng) charges to be tried first and OBS charges to be tried consecutively.
Two trials. It has been consistent. We have not deviated from this position today," he added.
On the suggestion that the prosecution wanted to split the charges to have a preview of the defence, Mr Tai said: "With respect to defence if he has a good defence and shows reasonable doubt .... he would be acquitted. There is no issue of preview."
Addressing why the two sets of charges were tendered separately, Mr Tai said the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau had only completed investigations into the charges involving Mr Lum after the first set of charges were tendered in court.
"We have a duty to conduct this case in public interest and it is not static duty, it's ongoing duty, so every time there is a considerable change in facts we need to review and decide what to do next," said the Deputy Attorney-General.
He added it was "common practice" for the prosecution to proceed with some charges at trial and not others. In the prosecution's view, the two sets of charges have "no connection" and have different contexts.
"The underlying transactions, in our view, that bring it under (Section) 165 are entirely different," he said, objecting to a joint trial.
The hearing will resume on Wednesday afternoon.
Continue reading...