-
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.
Iswaran sentence …
- Thread starter blissquek
- Start date
A sacrificial lamb by PAP
He will be POI person of interests so he will be accorded certain ‘privileges’
He’s likely to be house in single man cell and unlikely to be granted working stint due to his short sentence too. His fellow inmates that get to interact with him will be screened beforehand and the warden that’s guarding him specially selected
He’s likely to be house in single man cell and unlikely to be granted working stint due to his short sentence too. His fellow inmates that get to interact with him will be screened beforehand and the warden that’s guarding him specially selected
Akan Datang
Can't they find a better looking reporter?
Fuiyoh, pui pui one, Samsters got steamed?
If like this might as well let him enter the front gate, get dress change and leave by the back gate secretly and pte jet to secret place.
Lol,
Maybe at night secretly transferred to Parc Komo Condominium. Next morning after breakfast, check-in again.
i hope he appeal...then got more drama.
don’t think he will be squatting in a common cell or eating at the common messing area
.
Eng Kai tio one year sentence, more than what the PP proposes, LOL..:
https://www.straitstimes.com/singap...rmer-minister-abused-position-to-accept-gifts
S. Iswaran leaving the Supreme Court at 11.34am after the sentencing on Oct 3. ST PHOTO: JASON QUAH
SINGAPORE – Former transport minister S. Iswaran was handed a 12-month jail term on Oct 3 in a landmark case that saw, for the first time, a former Cabinet minister being sentenced.
The punishment was almost double the six to seven months’ jail the prosecution had sought.
Addressing the court, Justice Vincent Hoong said he was unable to agree with the positions of both the prosecution and the defence. The defence had sought not more than eight weeks’ jail.
The judge said he was of the view that it was appropriate to impose a heavier sentence than what both parties had asked for, which were manifestly inadequate.
Gasps were heard in the courtroom when Justice Hoong said this. Iswaran’s wife, Ms Kay Mary Taylor, shook her head.
The sentence was meted out in front of more than 40 members of the public in the gallery and Iswaran’s family, who sighed as the sentence was read out.
In his sentencing remarks, Justice Hoong emphasised that trust and confidence in public institutions are the bedrock of effective governance.
He said: “This can all too easily be undermined by a public servant who falls below standards of integrity and accountability.”
The judge added that it was significant that Iswaran had made public statements rejecting the charges as false.
In a letter in January to then Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, Iswaran rejected the charges and said he was innocent and believed he would be acquitted, said Justice Hoong.
“Thus, I have considerable difficulty accepting that these acts were indicative of the accused’s remorse and desire to make reparations,” he added.
As Justice Hoong addressed the court, Iswaran looked down and took notes.
The judge said: “Holders of high office ordinarily wield a greater degree of potential influence over significant business transactions or proceedings and have a larger resultant impact on the public interest.”
Such individuals set the tone for public servants in conducting themselves to high standards of integrity, and they must avoid any perception that they are susceptible to influence by financial benefits, he said.
“Persons who accept appointments to high office take on the heavy responsibilities of their office along with the associated power and status, and should generally be regarded as having acted with greater culpability in abusing their position to obtain valuable gifts,” said Justice Hoong.
The judge also noted that an offender’s awareness that the giver was motivated by a desire to cultivate his goodwill and loyalty would be a relevant factor in sentencing.
Addressing the charges involving Mr Ong Beng Seng, the judge said Iswaran abused his position by obtaining gifts from Mr Ong despite knowing that the Singapore GP chairman had close connection to his official duties.
Mr Ong will be charged on Oct 4 for abetting a public servant in obtaining valuables and for obstructing the course of justice.
Property tycoon Ong Beng Seng, seen at the paddock at the F1 Pit Building in September, will be charged on Oct 4 in relation to Iswaran’s case. ST PHOTO: SHINTARO TAY
The judge noted that Iswaran’s culpability cannot be considered low given his standing as a minister.
He said he was not persuaded by the defence’s argument that Mr Ong would have incurred the cost of the private jet flight regardless of whether Iswaran had accompanied him.
Iswaran acted with deliberation in requesting valuable items and taking urgent personal leave for the trip to Doha, allowing himself to enjoy the all-expenses-paid trip with only four days’ prior notice, said Justice Hoong.
“I am unable to accept that the absence of financial detriment to the giver is a mitigating factor. The giver’s voluntary provision of the valuable item is not a mitigating factor because it does not reduce the offender’s culpability or the resultant damage to public confidence in public institutions,” he said.
The sentence was meted out in front of Iswaran’s family, and more than 40 members of the public in the gallery. ST ILLUSTRATION: MIEL
Iswaran’s lawyer, Senior Counsel Davinder Singh, asked for his client’s sentence to commence on Oct 7.
Iswaran is to surrender himself at 4pm on Oct 7 at the State Courts.
He exited the High Court at around 11.35am, almost an hour after the 40-minute court session.
He told the media he had no comments at this point and walked to an awaiting car.
More On This Topic
Why was Iswaran handed a one-year jail sentence? Key points from judgment
Property tycoon Ong Beng Seng to be charged in relation to Iswaran's case
Criminal lawyer Choo Si Sen, a former deputy public prosecutor, said that if Iswaran wants to appeal against his sentence, his lawyers must do so within 14 days.
If he lodges an appeal, his lawyers will likely apply for bail pending appeal.
Even though Iswaran was asked to surrender himself at the State Courts on Oct 7, he would not have to turn up if this bail is granted, said Mr Choo.
The veteran lawyer added that the court may impose different conditions on this bail.
He said: “In most cases, the court will increase the bail amount by up to 50 per cent since the offender has been convicted and sentenced.”
Iswaran’s sentencing comes after he pleaded guilty on Sept 24 to four charges of obtaining valuable items as a public servant.
He also pleaded guilty to a fifth charge of obstructing the course of justice, for making payment of $5,700 for a business-class flight he had taken from Doha to Singapore in 2022 at Mr Ong’s expense.
Another 30 charges were taken into consideration during sentencing.
Ms Kay Mary Taylor (in black), wife of former transport minister S. Iswaran, leaving the Supreme Court on Oct 3. ST PHOTO: JASON QUAH
Justice Hoong said the charges taken into consideration revealed the scale, extent and repetition of Iswaran’s offending over a significant duration of time.
Iswaran admitted to these charges on what was supposed to be the first day of his trial on Sept 24.
The surprising twist last week in court began when the prosecution decided not to proceed with the two corruption charges, and amended them to charges of obtaining valuable items as a public servant.
All 35 charges were read to Iswaran, and he told the court he was pleading guilty.
Iswaran admitted to obtaining valuable items worth more than $400,000 in total from Mr Ong and Mr David Lum Kok Seng, managing director of mainboard-listed construction company Lum Chang Holdings.
He has paid back more than $380,000 to the state and will forfeit the items he received.
Deputy Attorney-General Tai Wei Shyong argued that as Iswaran was a minister for 12 years, his acts have had significant impact on the reputation of the Singapore Government, which is well known for its commitment to integrity.
He said if public servants could accept substantial gifts in such a situation, public confidence in the integrity of the Government would be undermined.
Former transport minister S. Iswaran leaving the Supreme Court on Oct 3. ST PHOTO: GAVIN FOO
In a statement on Oct 3, Prime Minister Lawrence Wong said Singapore’s system of government and politics must always stay clean and free from corruption.
He added: “Those entrusted with public service must uphold the highest standards of integrity and their conduct must be beyond reproach. This is absolutely vital and non-negotiable.
“I am disappointed and saddened that Mr Iswaran’s political career has ended like this.”
PM Wong noted that Iswaran’s past contributions during his time in politics did not right this wrong.
He said: “We will do what is right by Singapore and Singaporeans, regardless of the political costs or the personal pain we feel when a colleague and friend has been jailed.”
---------------
https://www.straitstimes.com/singap...rmer-minister-abused-position-to-accept-gifts
Iswaran gets 12 months’ jail; sentence nearly double what prosecution sought
1 of 4
S. Iswaran leaving the Supreme Court at 11.34am after the sentencing on Oct 3. ST PHOTO: JASON QUAH
SINGAPORE – Former transport minister S. Iswaran was handed a 12-month jail term on Oct 3 in a landmark case that saw, for the first time, a former Cabinet minister being sentenced.
The punishment was almost double the six to seven months’ jail the prosecution had sought.
Addressing the court, Justice Vincent Hoong said he was unable to agree with the positions of both the prosecution and the defence. The defence had sought not more than eight weeks’ jail.
The judge said he was of the view that it was appropriate to impose a heavier sentence than what both parties had asked for, which were manifestly inadequate.
Gasps were heard in the courtroom when Justice Hoong said this. Iswaran’s wife, Ms Kay Mary Taylor, shook her head.
The sentence was meted out in front of more than 40 members of the public in the gallery and Iswaran’s family, who sighed as the sentence was read out.
In his sentencing remarks, Justice Hoong emphasised that trust and confidence in public institutions are the bedrock of effective governance.
He said: “This can all too easily be undermined by a public servant who falls below standards of integrity and accountability.”
The judge added that it was significant that Iswaran had made public statements rejecting the charges as false.
In a letter in January to then Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, Iswaran rejected the charges and said he was innocent and believed he would be acquitted, said Justice Hoong.
“Thus, I have considerable difficulty accepting that these acts were indicative of the accused’s remorse and desire to make reparations,” he added.
As Justice Hoong addressed the court, Iswaran looked down and took notes.
The judge said: “Holders of high office ordinarily wield a greater degree of potential influence over significant business transactions or proceedings and have a larger resultant impact on the public interest.”
Such individuals set the tone for public servants in conducting themselves to high standards of integrity, and they must avoid any perception that they are susceptible to influence by financial benefits, he said.
“Persons who accept appointments to high office take on the heavy responsibilities of their office along with the associated power and status, and should generally be regarded as having acted with greater culpability in abusing their position to obtain valuable gifts,” said Justice Hoong.
The judge also noted that an offender’s awareness that the giver was motivated by a desire to cultivate his goodwill and loyalty would be a relevant factor in sentencing.
Addressing the charges involving Mr Ong Beng Seng, the judge said Iswaran abused his position by obtaining gifts from Mr Ong despite knowing that the Singapore GP chairman had close connection to his official duties.
Mr Ong will be charged on Oct 4 for abetting a public servant in obtaining valuables and for obstructing the course of justice.
Property tycoon Ong Beng Seng, seen at the paddock at the F1 Pit Building in September, will be charged on Oct 4 in relation to Iswaran’s case. ST PHOTO: SHINTARO TAY
The judge noted that Iswaran’s culpability cannot be considered low given his standing as a minister.
He said he was not persuaded by the defence’s argument that Mr Ong would have incurred the cost of the private jet flight regardless of whether Iswaran had accompanied him.
Iswaran acted with deliberation in requesting valuable items and taking urgent personal leave for the trip to Doha, allowing himself to enjoy the all-expenses-paid trip with only four days’ prior notice, said Justice Hoong.
“I am unable to accept that the absence of financial detriment to the giver is a mitigating factor. The giver’s voluntary provision of the valuable item is not a mitigating factor because it does not reduce the offender’s culpability or the resultant damage to public confidence in public institutions,” he said.
The sentence was meted out in front of Iswaran’s family, and more than 40 members of the public in the gallery. ST ILLUSTRATION: MIEL
Iswaran’s lawyer, Senior Counsel Davinder Singh, asked for his client’s sentence to commence on Oct 7.
Iswaran is to surrender himself at 4pm on Oct 7 at the State Courts.
He exited the High Court at around 11.35am, almost an hour after the 40-minute court session.
He told the media he had no comments at this point and walked to an awaiting car.
Why was Iswaran handed a one-year jail sentence? Key points from judgment
Property tycoon Ong Beng Seng to be charged in relation to Iswaran's case
Criminal lawyer Choo Si Sen, a former deputy public prosecutor, said that if Iswaran wants to appeal against his sentence, his lawyers must do so within 14 days.
If he lodges an appeal, his lawyers will likely apply for bail pending appeal.
Even though Iswaran was asked to surrender himself at the State Courts on Oct 7, he would not have to turn up if this bail is granted, said Mr Choo.
The veteran lawyer added that the court may impose different conditions on this bail.
He said: “In most cases, the court will increase the bail amount by up to 50 per cent since the offender has been convicted and sentenced.”
Iswaran’s sentencing comes after he pleaded guilty on Sept 24 to four charges of obtaining valuable items as a public servant.
He also pleaded guilty to a fifth charge of obstructing the course of justice, for making payment of $5,700 for a business-class flight he had taken from Doha to Singapore in 2022 at Mr Ong’s expense.
Another 30 charges were taken into consideration during sentencing.
Ms Kay Mary Taylor (in black), wife of former transport minister S. Iswaran, leaving the Supreme Court on Oct 3. ST PHOTO: JASON QUAH
Justice Hoong said the charges taken into consideration revealed the scale, extent and repetition of Iswaran’s offending over a significant duration of time.
Iswaran admitted to these charges on what was supposed to be the first day of his trial on Sept 24.
The surprising twist last week in court began when the prosecution decided not to proceed with the two corruption charges, and amended them to charges of obtaining valuable items as a public servant.
All 35 charges were read to Iswaran, and he told the court he was pleading guilty.
Iswaran admitted to obtaining valuable items worth more than $400,000 in total from Mr Ong and Mr David Lum Kok Seng, managing director of mainboard-listed construction company Lum Chang Holdings.
He has paid back more than $380,000 to the state and will forfeit the items he received.
Deputy Attorney-General Tai Wei Shyong argued that as Iswaran was a minister for 12 years, his acts have had significant impact on the reputation of the Singapore Government, which is well known for its commitment to integrity.
He said if public servants could accept substantial gifts in such a situation, public confidence in the integrity of the Government would be undermined.
Former transport minister S. Iswaran leaving the Supreme Court on Oct 3. ST PHOTO: GAVIN FOO
In a statement on Oct 3, Prime Minister Lawrence Wong said Singapore’s system of government and politics must always stay clean and free from corruption.
He added: “Those entrusted with public service must uphold the highest standards of integrity and their conduct must be beyond reproach. This is absolutely vital and non-negotiable.
“I am disappointed and saddened that Mr Iswaran’s political career has ended like this.”
PM Wong noted that Iswaran’s past contributions during his time in politics did not right this wrong.
He said: “We will do what is right by Singapore and Singaporeans, regardless of the political costs or the personal pain we feel when a colleague and friend has been jailed.”
---------------
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/why-was-iswaran-handed-a-one-year-jail-sentence
The sentence was meted out in front of S. Iswaran’s family, and over 40 members of the public in the gallery on Oct 3. ST ILLUSTRATION: MIEL
Updated Oct 03, 2024, 09:21 PM
SINGAPORE – Former transport minister S. Iswaran was handed a one-year jail sentence on Oct 3. This exceeded the requests of both the prosecution and the defence, which Justice Vincent Hoong described as “manifestly inadequate”.
The sentence was nearly double that of the six to seven months’ jail that Deputy Attorney-General Tai Wei Shyong had asked for, while Iswaran’s lawyer, Senior Counsel Davinder Singh, had argued for no more than eight weeks.
Iswaran, 62, had on Sept 24 admitted to one charge of obstruction of justice and four charges under Section 165 of the Penal Code, including obtaining valuable items from businessman Ong Beng Seng while in his official capacity.
Here are the key points of Justice Hoong’s judgment.
“I agree with the prosecution that the higher the office held by the offender as a public servant, the higher his level of culpability,” Justice Hoong said in his judgment.
As a minister and chairman of the Formula One (F1) steering committee, Iswaran was tasked to oversee high-level decisions and collaboration between government agencies and the Singapore GP as a national project.
Mr Ong, meanwhile, owned more than 90 per cent of the shares in Singapore GP and had a longstanding relationship with the Government and the Singapore GP, according to court documents.
The judge said that Iswaran’s roles wielded influence in matters of great public interest, even if there was no evidence the gifts had influenced decisions over F1 or its contracts.
“Such persons set the tone of public servants in conducting themselves in accordance with high standards of integrity, and must be expected to avoid any perception that they are susceptible to influence to pecuniary benefits,” said Justice Hoong.
He said the mere perception that the receiver is under the influence of the giver, who is cultivating goodwill, is already harmful to trust in public institutions.
Justice Hoong said that he considered whether Iswaran was aware of the giver’s motive, which can be interpreted as motivated by a desire to cultivate goodwill or loyalty.
He added: “The decision to obtain a valuable item in such circumstances, where the offender knows of a close connection between the giver’s interest and his official functions, is a marker of a more culpable state of mind.”
Iswaran’s public service and contributions to Singapore are, at best, a neutral factor in the sentencing decision, given the need for deterrence, said Justice Hoong.
Former transport minister S. Iswaran leaving the Supreme Court after his sentencing on Oct 3. ST PHOTO: GAVIN FOO
Regarding Iswaran voluntarily returning the benefits he had received, the judge said: “The harm done to the public interest, in the form of damage to trust and confidence in public institutions, is unlikely to be adequately remedied by these actions.”
Justice Hoong said Iswaran had acted reasonably in paying back the costs linked to the Doha trip and F1 Green Room tickets after he knew the corruption charges would be amended, but added that he should have disgorged the other costs earlier.
The judge said: “Although some credit can be given for the accused’s voluntary disgorgement of his benefits, the mitigating value is low, given that this was not done at an earlier stage of the proceedings.”
Iswaran acted with deliberation
“While the accused did not actively seek out the gifts, he cannot be described as a mere passive acceptor,” said Justice Hoong, who listed the ways Iswaran had acted with deliberation in obtaining gifts.
In 2017, Iswaran had asked for 10 F1 Green Room tickets – each worth more than $4,200 – which grant access to a premium hospitality suite for guests to enjoy the F1 race. The court heard that Iswaran had been offered the complimentary tickets on the urging of Mr Ong.
As a mitigating factor, the defence argued that Iswaran did not sell the tickets, which were issued by Mr Ong, and instead distributed them to family and friends.
But the argument ignores the fact that the tickets would have otherwise been distributed for free by Singapore GP as the promoters of the event, Justice Hoong said.
“The fact that (Iswaran) obtained special access to the Green Room tickets by virtue of his connection with OBS (Mr Ong), who was concerned in business transacted by the accused in his official capacity, was of itself injurious to the integrity of (Iswaran’s) office,” he said.
In another sign of deliberation, Iswaran had taken urgent personal leave for the trip to Doha with Mr Ong, allowing him to enjoy an all-expenses paid trip with only four days’ prior notice, Justice Hoong said.
According to court documents, Iswaran’s hotel stay and travel expenses – valued at $20,848.03 in total – were covered, including a flight on Mr Ong’s private jet from Singapore to Doha, a return business class flight to Singapore and a Doha hotel stay.
When Iswaran became aware that the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) was investigating Mr Ong’s associates, it was Iswaran who requested that Mr Ong send him the bill for his expenses linked to the Doha trip, Justice Hoong said.
By paying for the expenses, Iswaran was attempting to avoid investigations into the gifts, he said.
“The accused’s actions stemmed from his personal perceived interest of avoiding the CPIB’s investigations into gifts received by him,” said Justice Hoong, adding that doing so marked “a grave culpability-increasing factor”.
The defence argued that Iswaran was offered the gifts in the context of friendship, but the judge disagreed and said that the former transport minister had abused his position by obtaining gifts despite knowing Mr Ong’s close connection to his duties.
Iswaran expressed remorse only at a late stage of the proceedings, he added.
The former transport minister had earlier pleaded guilty to five offences on the first day of what was supposed to be his criminal trial on Sept 24, after saying for months he would be contesting the case to clear his name.
Justice Hoong said in his sentencing: “The accused had simultaneously made public statements rejecting the allegations in the charges as false and asserting his innocence.”
Citing Iswaran’s letter to then Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, the judge said: “(Iswaran) stated that he rejected the charges and was innocent, and expressed his strong belief that he would be acquitted.”
He added: “Thus, I have considerable difficulty accepting that these acts were indicative of the accused’s remorse and desire to make reparations.”
Justice Hoong said: “I am unable to accept that the ‘colour’ and ‘complexion’ of the charges under Section 165 of the Penal Code were affected by the initial framing of (the charges) under the Prevention of Corruption Act.”
He was referring to the prosecution’s decision on Sept 24 to amend Iswaran’s corruption charges to those under Section 165, which forbids all public servants from obtaining anything of value from someone involved with them in an official capacity.
“In my view,” said Justice Hoong, “the accused, having made tactical choices which he did at the initial stages of the proceedings, must stand by the consequences of those choices.”
Iswaran is due to surrender himself on Oct 7 at the State Courts.
Why was Iswaran handed a one-year jail sentence? Key points from judgment
The sentence was meted out in front of S. Iswaran’s family, and over 40 members of the public in the gallery on Oct 3. ST ILLUSTRATION: MIEL
Updated Oct 03, 2024, 09:21 PM
SINGAPORE – Former transport minister S. Iswaran was handed a one-year jail sentence on Oct 3. This exceeded the requests of both the prosecution and the defence, which Justice Vincent Hoong described as “manifestly inadequate”.
The sentence was nearly double that of the six to seven months’ jail that Deputy Attorney-General Tai Wei Shyong had asked for, while Iswaran’s lawyer, Senior Counsel Davinder Singh, had argued for no more than eight weeks.
Iswaran, 62, had on Sept 24 admitted to one charge of obstruction of justice and four charges under Section 165 of the Penal Code, including obtaining valuable items from businessman Ong Beng Seng while in his official capacity.
Here are the key points of Justice Hoong’s judgment.
General deterrence a key consideration
Rejecting the defence’s argument, Justice Hoong said that general deterrence, aimed at setting an example for others who commit offences, should be the primary consideration in his sentencing decision.“I agree with the prosecution that the higher the office held by the offender as a public servant, the higher his level of culpability,” Justice Hoong said in his judgment.
As a minister and chairman of the Formula One (F1) steering committee, Iswaran was tasked to oversee high-level decisions and collaboration between government agencies and the Singapore GP as a national project.
Mr Ong, meanwhile, owned more than 90 per cent of the shares in Singapore GP and had a longstanding relationship with the Government and the Singapore GP, according to court documents.
The judge said that Iswaran’s roles wielded influence in matters of great public interest, even if there was no evidence the gifts had influenced decisions over F1 or its contracts.
“Such persons set the tone of public servants in conducting themselves in accordance with high standards of integrity, and must be expected to avoid any perception that they are susceptible to influence to pecuniary benefits,” said Justice Hoong.
Trust in public institutions damaged
Justice Hoong said that harm was caused to the trust in public office.He said the mere perception that the receiver is under the influence of the giver, who is cultivating goodwill, is already harmful to trust in public institutions.
Justice Hoong said that he considered whether Iswaran was aware of the giver’s motive, which can be interpreted as motivated by a desire to cultivate goodwill or loyalty.
He added: “The decision to obtain a valuable item in such circumstances, where the offender knows of a close connection between the giver’s interest and his official functions, is a marker of a more culpable state of mind.”
Iswaran’s public service and contributions to Singapore are, at best, a neutral factor in the sentencing decision, given the need for deterrence, said Justice Hoong.
Former transport minister S. Iswaran leaving the Supreme Court after his sentencing on Oct 3. ST PHOTO: GAVIN FOO
Regarding Iswaran voluntarily returning the benefits he had received, the judge said: “The harm done to the public interest, in the form of damage to trust and confidence in public institutions, is unlikely to be adequately remedied by these actions.”
Justice Hoong said Iswaran had acted reasonably in paying back the costs linked to the Doha trip and F1 Green Room tickets after he knew the corruption charges would be amended, but added that he should have disgorged the other costs earlier.
The judge said: “Although some credit can be given for the accused’s voluntary disgorgement of his benefits, the mitigating value is low, given that this was not done at an earlier stage of the proceedings.”
Iswaran acted with deliberation
“While the accused did not actively seek out the gifts, he cannot be described as a mere passive acceptor,” said Justice Hoong, who listed the ways Iswaran had acted with deliberation in obtaining gifts.
In 2017, Iswaran had asked for 10 F1 Green Room tickets – each worth more than $4,200 – which grant access to a premium hospitality suite for guests to enjoy the F1 race. The court heard that Iswaran had been offered the complimentary tickets on the urging of Mr Ong.
As a mitigating factor, the defence argued that Iswaran did not sell the tickets, which were issued by Mr Ong, and instead distributed them to family and friends.
But the argument ignores the fact that the tickets would have otherwise been distributed for free by Singapore GP as the promoters of the event, Justice Hoong said.
“The fact that (Iswaran) obtained special access to the Green Room tickets by virtue of his connection with OBS (Mr Ong), who was concerned in business transacted by the accused in his official capacity, was of itself injurious to the integrity of (Iswaran’s) office,” he said.
In another sign of deliberation, Iswaran had taken urgent personal leave for the trip to Doha with Mr Ong, allowing him to enjoy an all-expenses paid trip with only four days’ prior notice, Justice Hoong said.
According to court documents, Iswaran’s hotel stay and travel expenses – valued at $20,848.03 in total – were covered, including a flight on Mr Ong’s private jet from Singapore to Doha, a return business class flight to Singapore and a Doha hotel stay.
When Iswaran became aware that the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) was investigating Mr Ong’s associates, it was Iswaran who requested that Mr Ong send him the bill for his expenses linked to the Doha trip, Justice Hoong said.
By paying for the expenses, Iswaran was attempting to avoid investigations into the gifts, he said.
“The accused’s actions stemmed from his personal perceived interest of avoiding the CPIB’s investigations into gifts received by him,” said Justice Hoong, adding that doing so marked “a grave culpability-increasing factor”.
The defence argued that Iswaran was offered the gifts in the context of friendship, but the judge disagreed and said that the former transport minister had abused his position by obtaining gifts despite knowing Mr Ong’s close connection to his duties.
Not remorseful
The rest of the 30 charges taken into consideration reveal the scale and repetition of Iswaran’s offending over a significant period of time, increasing his culpability, Justice Hoong said.Iswaran expressed remorse only at a late stage of the proceedings, he added.
The former transport minister had earlier pleaded guilty to five offences on the first day of what was supposed to be his criminal trial on Sept 24, after saying for months he would be contesting the case to clear his name.
Justice Hoong said in his sentencing: “The accused had simultaneously made public statements rejecting the allegations in the charges as false and asserting his innocence.”
Citing Iswaran’s letter to then Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, the judge said: “(Iswaran) stated that he rejected the charges and was innocent, and expressed his strong belief that he would be acquitted.”
He added: “Thus, I have considerable difficulty accepting that these acts were indicative of the accused’s remorse and desire to make reparations.”
Justice Hoong said: “I am unable to accept that the ‘colour’ and ‘complexion’ of the charges under Section 165 of the Penal Code were affected by the initial framing of (the charges) under the Prevention of Corruption Act.”
He was referring to the prosecution’s decision on Sept 24 to amend Iswaran’s corruption charges to those under Section 165, which forbids all public servants from obtaining anything of value from someone involved with them in an official capacity.
“In my view,” said Justice Hoong, “the accused, having made tactical choices which he did at the initial stages of the proceedings, must stand by the consequences of those choices.”
Breakdown of sentencing
- For obtaining 10 F1 Green Room tickets: Six months’ jail.
- For expenses related to the Doha trip: Three months and three weeks’ jail.
- For obstructing justice by paying $5,700 to Singapore GP to cover the cost of his business-class flight ticket: Four months’ jail.
- For obtaining 14 bottles of whiskey and wine: Two months’ jail.
- For obtaining a Brompton T Line bicycle: Three months’ jail.
Iswaran is due to surrender himself on Oct 7 at the State Courts.
Very dicey here … justice Hoong noted for his strong stance and will not waver .. I.e after he upped the prosecutor call from 8 months sentence to 12 months ; he will probably not move it down .!!!
Similar threads
