There are a number of factors that would be familiar to any public servant of standing or corporate executive of a listed firm in the realm of poor conduct that would typically attract a dismissal. Receiving gifts, services, etc. MAS would have not told the PM and the PM would not have disclosed to the public that an inquiry would be initiated if these dealing were not questionable..
Besides Sec 8 that have been highlighted by others, even without Sec 8, anyone of standing in public service or in the listed corporate world are not allowed to receive gifts and services for free and that includes receiving discounts and paying underpriced items of substantial value. Where due to cultural or business practices of certain countries where declining such offers is an insult, these must be declared in the first instance and usually required to be handed over if above a certain value.
Dismissals of public servants or corporate figures takes place every year for receiving free holidays, free hotel stays, heavily discounted cars and houses. For some reason free holidays usually are the ones. Gone are the days where cash is given.
In the old man's case, these are the concerns;
- his brother is director of HPL and opportunity to buy made to members of his family and close associates of the fmailybut not open to shareholders
- he and son received higher discounts than others and above the usual market practice of %5 in a soft launch in a rising market.
People will continue to cast aspersions on this affair because it did not go thru the expected route for an appropriate level of investigation that others in a similar situation would have to face i.e. CPIB.
It should also be noted that properties in that development flipped within 6 weeks of option given with at least one case making close to a million dollars. The caveats which are publicly available shows this. By the time this case came to light, they had gone past the $1m dollar mark. So both son and father were in the money after they donated their discounts to charity. And no, this is not considered good investment on their part - they were given access to investment opportunities that was not made to others. In the private sector this may be kosher but not to someone in public office. And each day I am sure someone in the Public Sector will be turning down such offers and good for them and the country.
The Stock exchange also revealed that HPL were not cooperating, quite damming. They also eventually censured HPL for this matter.
i am not lawyer..but from my understanding of the wording...it simply means lao lee received discount and lao lee must provide certain reward to ah Seng for the discount received in order to be charged for corruption...so did lao lee give Ah seng good lobang prior or after the discount ? as for the word gratification- i am not sure if the discount can be considered as such..we need a lawyer...
