• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

'Deeply offensive': Singapore rebuts Economist column questioning CPIB's independence

Hightech88

Alfrescian
Loyal
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/sin...cpib-independence-ridout-road-iswaran-3662036
'Deeply offensive': Singapore rebuts Economist column questioning CPIB's independence

In a letter dated Jul 28, 2023, Singapore's High Commissioner to the United Kingdom told The Economist the publication had mispresented the relationship between Singapore's Prime Minister and the country's anti-graft body, the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB).

SINGAPORE: Singapore’s High Commissioner to the United Kingdom on Friday (Jul 28) rebutted a column in The Economist which questioned the independence of the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB).

In a letter addressed to The Economist’s letters editor Mark Doyle, Mr Lim Thuan Kuan said the newspaper's regular Banyan column, published on Jul 27 and titled "A slew of scandals puts Singapore’s government on the back foot", makes a "serious charge" by claiming that CPIB cannot be independent as the agency reports to Singapore's Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

In its column, The Economist laid out details of the rentals by Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam and Foreign Affairs Minister Vivian Balakrishnan of two black-and-white bungalows at Ridout Road, the graft probe involving Transport Minister S Iswaran and the departure of Parliament Speaker Tan Chuan-Jin.

On the Ridout Road rentals, the publication noted that no wrongdoing or favours to either Mr Shanmugam or Mr Balakrishnan were found following a CPIB probe.

However, it added that as CPIB reports to Mr Lee, who also appoints its head, it “cannot be fully independent”.

In his letter, Mr Lim said the column “misrepresents the process”.

"CPIB does not require the Prime Minister's permission for its investigations. It sought his concurrence before initiating formal investigation of Minister for Transport S Iswaran because it involved a Cabinet Minister," Mr Lim said, adding that Mr Lee concurred within a day of receiving the CPIB director’s report.

“No Prime Minister of Singapore has ever prevented the CPIB from investigating anyone. But even if the Prime Minister does not consent to CPIB investigations, under the Constitution, the director of the CPIB can still proceed with the investigations if he obtains the concurrence of the President (of Singapore).”

Mr Lim noted that this is a “constitutional provision unique among Westminster-style democracies, and added that there are safeguards for the appointment or removal of the CPIB director, which requires the concurrence of the President.

On the Ridout Road rentals, the column said that Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean, who conducted a separate review in order to address wider potential process or policy issues, "is both a friend of Mr Shanmugam’s and in the same branch of government".

“No Prime Minister of Singapore has ever prevented the CPIB from investigating anyone. But even if the Prime Minister does not consent to CPIB investigations, under the Constitution, the director of the CPIB can still proceed with the investigations if he obtains the concurrence of the President (of Singapore).”

Mr Lim noted that this is a “constitutional provision unique among Westminster-style democracies, and added that there are safeguards for the appointment or removal of the CPIB director, which requires the concurrence of the President.

On the Ridout Road rentals, the column said that Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean, who conducted a separate review in order to address wider potential process or policy issues, "is both a friend of Mr Shanmugam’s and in the same branch of government".

He also said that Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh accepted the CPIB’s finding and stated in Parliament that “he did not believe anybody was making an allegation that the ministers were corrupt”.

“When the CPIB completes its investigation of Mr Iswaran, its findings will be submitted to the AGC which will decide on what to do with them,” Mr Lim said. “Such is the CPIB’s fearsome reputation for thoroughness, few Singaporeans doubt its ability to see any case of corruption to its logical conclusion.

“This is why The Economist’s charge that simply because the CPIB reports to the Prime Minister calls into question its independence, would strike many Singaporeans as deeply offensive and uninformed.”

Mr Lim then asked how it could be possible that Singapore has consistently ranked high in Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index, “if indeed CPIB is so lacking in independence as The Economist makes out”.

He pointed out that Singapore ranked fifth in the latest Corruption Perceptions Index, published in 2022. The ranking puts the Republic behind Denmark, Finland, New Zealand and Norway, and ahead of every other Asian country.

Mr Lim also asked whether the Economist would suggest the head of Scotland Yard is not independent because he is appointed on the advice of the UK Home Secretary, in consultation with the Mayor of London.

“The Prime Minister – as well as his successor, Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong – are as determined as their predecessors were to investigate any case of corruption, no matter whom it involves, thoroughly and transparently,” Mr Lim said.

“Singaporeans and foreign investors alike can be certain of this.”

In an interview with the BBC’s Newsday programme on Wednesday, Mr Wong also stressed again that the CPIB is an independent agency that has legal powers to conduct thorough investigations.

------------
 

glockman

Old Fart
Asset
Following the pap's playbook, The Economist will be sued and made to pay a hefty fine. If it fails to do that, it will be banned in sg. Deja vu siah.
 

borom

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
I will believe the Economist until its being POFMA, FICA and sued till pants dropped.
Under the law everyone is innocent until proven guilty and Shan has to prove than the Economist is guilty in a court of law and enforce the judgement against it THis is the chance for Shan to show his true calibre as a lawyer on the intenational stage or PAP can send lawyers like Desmond Lee and Edwin Tong who were so fierce against LHY and WP.
 

mojito

Alfrescian
Loyal
Looong gang was going the reference the Great Qing where the anti corruption envoy is all ways appointed by the emperor before they realise LKY and son have all ways be have like Chinese despots. :x3:
 

laksaboy

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
'Deeply offensive'... so you're playing the triggered snowflake card now eh? The last refuge for scoundrels who have no argument. :cool:
 

batman1

Alfrescian
Loyal
CPIB reports directly to the PM.CPIB initiates investigation only when greenlight is given by the PM.Is CPIB an independent agency ?:unsure:
 

eatshitndie

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
should have sexplained to the economist with sarcasm that a once long time pm was infallible and incorruptible thus it was placed under his watch as perhaps the least corrupt person in power should oversee the cpib? otherwise if left independent it will becum corrupt too and with no incorruptible person supervising it it will be abused by others with devious agendas for political gain, much like what is happening in californicate, new yuck, georgia, and washington dc. economist with liberal and woke columns, please fuck off.
 

bobby

Alfrescian
Loyal
They cannot POFMA but they can childishly ban the Economist magazine from being sold at newsstands or on-line like a spoilt brat.
 

laksaboy

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
It's very simple really. No need to think too complicated. Suppose the PM is corrupt. Does the CPIB investigate him? Or is there a conflict of interest since the CPIB is under the PMO? :wink:

This is what happens when your totalitarian shithole regime does not have separation of power (三权分立) and have one political party bao gar liao (一党专政). You will always end up with the trashiest government. :biggrin:

And if you think that's a worthy sacrifice for 'prosperity' or 'stability' or whatever nonsense they constantly try to sell you (e.g. 'social compact')... you'll eventually find out the hard way that it is NOT a good deal. :cool:
 

Hightech88

Alfrescian
Loyal
To samurai...:

Considering the fact that Tharman, a recent PAP SM will 99.9% become the next president, the following hypothetical scenario will likely happen:

CPIB: Dear PM, we have established credible preliminary evidence that has linked corruption case to you. Hence we would like to invite you to Lim Kopi to assist in this investigation. Seeking your concurrence please.

PM Lee: Unfortunately I do not concurr. I ownself check ownself can already. After checking, I found myself not corrupt. If you not happy can try to approach the President.

CPIB to president: Dear President, PM Lee has rejected our request to investigate him. We need you to exercise your presidential powers to override his rejection for us to carry out our duties.

President Tharman: Sure, I will now exercise my presidential powers ...which is to agree with the PM. Case closed.

CPIB: Ok, thank you, Mr. President.
We will proceed to close the case with no corruption. :confused::wink:
----------

So Tharman claimed recently that " S’pore has never had a PM who prevented CPIB from doing its work "..

There's always a first time for current or future PM to block CPIB investigation.

Not forgetting that under OSA, CPIB is forbidden to leak any such requests to the public so the public will always be kept in the dark. This is the prelude of the most scary part.

Next, even if PM refuse to concur and CPIB goes directly to the President and the President (most likely a very recent ex-PAP minister/Speaker/crony etc.) were to agree with the PM and also block the request, again this news will not be allowed to made know to the public. 神不知鬼不觉。

The 3rd and scariest part is...God knows what 'obstacles' CPIB director will face if he were to go against the PAP PM's refusal to concur and wants to go directly to the President, because this will become unprecedented and the PM being the most powerful authority will find all ways to prevent this from happening, including choot pattern to even change the constitution, not forgetting Anti-Corruption branch used to be under SPF, then become CPIB to report to the AG, before being constitutionally amended to report to PMO.

The fun part is, noone knows whether the PM has ever block such requests before simply because the CPIB reports to the PM and if the PM instructs such news not to be leaked to anyone including cabinet ministers, not even a soul would know. 神不知鬼不觉, so how the fark would Tharman know? LOL.

The 'CPIB can always go directly to the President if PM refuse to concur' is only a red herring nonsense to hookwink the public.

Moreover, the law did not specify that CPIB must approach the President should the PM refuse to concur. CPIB has the right to somehow back down the request for 'further review' (related to the 3rd reason stated above). Hence all these communications will be swept under the carpet and the public will never know what the fark is happening, again 神不知鬼不觉。LOL.

https://www.wp.sg/the-workers-party...ch-by-pritam-singh-on-the-presidents-address/
" The Constitution – the highest law of our land which all other laws must take reference from – can only be changed if at least 2/3 of the MPs in this House agree. Should any political party with more than 2/3 of the seats in this House decide to change the Constitution arbitrarily, there is nothing that can be done to stop them. Today, the PAP doesn’t just have a 2/3 majority, it has a super-majority of more than 75% of the seats. If we exclude NMPs who cannot vote on Constitutional changes, the total denominator is 93 elected MPs and two NCMPs. That brings the PAP super-majority to close to 90% today. "
.
.
.
In the end, always remember...

[Image: glvv3Pb.jpg]
 
Last edited:

mojito

Alfrescian
Loyal
It's very simple really. No need to think too complicated. Suppose the PM is corrupt. Does the CPIB investigate him? Or is there a conflict of interest since the CPIB is under the PMO? :wink:

This is what happens when your totalitarian shithole regime does not have separation of power (三权分立) and have one political party bao gar liao (一党专政). You will always end up with the trashiest government. :biggrin:

And if you think that's a worthy sacrifice for 'prosperity' or 'stability' or whatever nonsense they constantly try to sell you (e.g. 'social compact')... you'll eventually find out the hard way that it is NOT a good deal. :cool:
U young people and ur foreign adulating ways! Our Chinese ways are the most compatible with our Asian values. :cautious:
 

JohnTan

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/sin...cpib-independence-ridout-road-iswaran-3662036
'Deeply offensive': Singapore rebuts Economist column questioning CPIB's independence'Deeply offensive': Singapore rebuts Economist column questioning CPIB's independence

In a letter dated Jul 28, 2023, Singapore's High Commissioner to the United Kingdom told The Economist the publication had mispresented the relationship between Singapore's Prime Minister and the country's anti-graft body, the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB).

SINGAPORE: Singapore’s High Commissioner to the United Kingdom on Friday (Jul 28) rebutted a column in The Economist which questioned the independence of the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB).

In a letter addressed to The Economist’s letters editor Mark Doyle, Mr Lim Thuan Kuan said the newspaper's regular Banyan column, published on Jul 27 and titled "A slew of scandals puts Singapore’s government on the back foot", makes a "serious charge" by claiming that CPIB cannot be independent as the agency reports to Singapore's Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

In its column, The Economist laid out details of the rentals by Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam and Foreign Affairs Minister Vivian Balakrishnan of two black-and-white bungalows at Ridout Road, the graft probe involving Transport Minister S Iswaran and the departure of Parliament Speaker Tan Chuan-Jin.

On the Ridout Road rentals, the publication noted that no wrongdoing or favours to either Mr Shanmugam or Mr Balakrishnan were found following a CPIB probe.

However, it added that as CPIB reports to Mr Lee, who also appoints its head, it “cannot be fully independent”.

In his letter, Mr Lim said the column “misrepresents the process”.

"CPIB does not require the Prime Minister's permission for its investigations. It sought his concurrence before initiating formal investigation of Minister for Transport S Iswaran because it involved a Cabinet Minister," Mr Lim said, adding that Mr Lee concurred within a day of receiving the CPIB director’s report.

“No Prime Minister of Singapore has ever prevented the CPIB from investigating anyone. But even if the Prime Minister does not consent to CPIB investigations, under the Constitution, the director of the CPIB can still proceed with the investigations if he obtains the concurrence of the President (of Singapore).”

Mr Lim noted that this is a “constitutional provision unique among Westminster-style democracies, and added that there are safeguards for the appointment or removal of the CPIB director, which requires the concurrence of the President.

On the Ridout Road rentals, the column said that Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean, who conducted a separate review in order to address wider potential process or policy issues, "is both a friend of Mr Shanmugam’s and in the same branch of government".

“No Prime Minister of Singapore has ever prevented the CPIB from investigating anyone. But even if the Prime Minister does not consent to CPIB investigations, under the Constitution, the director of the CPIB can still proceed with the investigations if he obtains the concurrence of the President (of Singapore).”

Mr Lim noted that this is a “constitutional provision unique among Westminster-style democracies, and added that there are safeguards for the appointment or removal of the CPIB director, which requires the concurrence of the President.

On the Ridout Road rentals, the column said that Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean, who conducted a separate review in order to address wider potential process or policy issues, "is both a friend of Mr Shanmugam’s and in the same branch of government".

He also said that Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh accepted the CPIB’s finding and stated in Parliament that “he did not believe anybody was making an allegation that the ministers were corrupt”.

“When the CPIB completes its investigation of Mr Iswaran, its findings will be submitted to the AGC which will decide on what to do with them,” Mr Lim said. “Such is the CPIB’s fearsome reputation for thoroughness, few Singaporeans doubt its ability to see any case of corruption to its logical conclusion.

“This is why The Economist’s charge that simply because the CPIB reports to the Prime Minister calls into question its independence, would strike many Singaporeans as deeply offensive and uninformed.”

Mr Lim then asked how it could be possible that Singapore has consistently ranked high in Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index, “if indeed CPIB is so lacking in independence as The Economist makes out”.

He pointed out that Singapore ranked fifth in the latest Corruption Perceptions Index, published in 2022. The ranking puts the Republic behind Denmark, Finland, New Zealand and Norway, and ahead of every other Asian country.

Mr Lim also asked whether the Economist would suggest the head of Scotland Yard is not independent because he is appointed on the advice of the UK Home Secretary, in consultation with the Mayor of London.

“The Prime Minister – as well as his successor, Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong – are as determined as their predecessors were to investigate any case of corruption, no matter whom it involves, thoroughly and transparently,” Mr Lim said.

“Singaporeans and foreign investors alike can be certain of this.”

In an interview with the BBC’s Newsday programme on Wednesday, Mr Wong also stressed again that the CPIB is an independent agency that has legal powers to conduct thorough investigations.

------------

I was deeply offended by this defamatory article. I hope the government's bayi lawyer is looking into this.
 
Top