Re: Yang Yin : Where Are You ? (Paging For Yang Yin )
Yang Yin arrived in Singapore in 2008 and within 3 years received his PR status, thanks to PAP MP for Ang Mo Kio GRC, Intan Azura Mohktar not being diligent enough to do a thorough check before recommending his PR status.*
Yang Yin used fake degrees and a fake namecard and masqueraded as the director of SCCI as well as a tour guide of SA tours in order to apply for his PR status. Soon after obtaining his PR status, he took advantage of Mdm Chung’s mental condition and somehow managed to get her to sign off $40 million worth of her savings to him. Besides, auctioning off the old lady’s art collection, Yang Yin also moved his family into her bungalow and sacked Mdm Chung’s driver and helpers. For quite some time, the widow was held hostage in her own house.*
MP Intan claimed that Madam Chung Khin Chun had told her that Yang Yin was her grandson and in May 2011, she had written the letter of appeal at the ‘behest of Mdm Chung.’*
The phrase ‘at the behest’ means a command or directive (
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/behest). So, MP Intan is saying an old widow who suffers from dementia has the power to command a MP to do things.*
Dr Intan did not bother to verify if Yang Yin was really Mdm Chung’s grandson. So basically, Dr Intan who has a phD wrote a letter of appeal without even having the facts. This is very unprofessional of a scholar. I’m curious to know what was in the letter of appeal. How could a MP appeal for someone to get PR status if she has no details on what to write?*
Dr Intan said she only agreed to help Yang Yin get his PR because Mdm Chung was “a resident of my constituency and a Singaporean”. This showed that Dr Intan trusted her constituent so much that she did not even bother to ask for documentary proof. If government agencies were to work the way Dr Intan works, a lot of Nsmen will be successful in getting deferment from ICT without proof and a lot of frivolous requests will be acceded to.*
Dr Intan clearly did not visit her constituents enough to vaguely know about their situations. A widow living by herself in a bungalow was completely unnoticed by Dr Intan, and she was unaware of Yang Yin’s family moving into the bungalow later on. If Dr Intan cannot even visit the private estates in the GRC, how does she conduct her duties as a MP?*
At the time when she wrote the letter of appeal, Yang Yin was a grassroots volunteer in her ward and there were photos of him with the Ang Mo Kio GRC MPs. Despite initially saying that he was a grassroots leader, Dr Intan now says that Yang Yin was not a grassroots “leader” and that he held no key position. She says she considers all grassroots volunteers "grassroots leaders". This is an insult to all grassroots leaders. It shows that the MP doesn’t bother to acknowledge your leadership role. Dr Intan also did not comment on why or how Yang Yin was appointed as an “Integration and Naturalization Champion”.*
Dr Intan has been irresponsible in her handling of this case and refuses to take responsibility till now. Rather than own up than she has not been diligent, she is pushing the blame to an old lady with a history of mental illness. Even so, her careless writing of a MP letter has unfortunately allowed a foreigner to take advantage of a Singaporean.*
The ICA claimed that “Individuals who provide false information in their applications for immigration facilities will be dealt with firmly under the law. In addition, they will have their immigration facilities cancelled or revoked.” For her role in abetting Yang Yin to hoodwink the ICA, is Dr Intan liable for blame? The ICA reversed their rejection of Yang Yin’s PR upon receiving Dr Intan’s appeal letter. It is clear that Dr Intan’s letter had an impact on ICA. Dr Intan should be transparent and release the contents of the letter so that the public can have a better judgement.*
The court case is ongoing, but Dr Intan should not be exempt from taking responsibility. The court case is about Yang Yin swindling the widow, but concurrently a public enquiry should be held into how Dr Intan and ICA were so lax in granting PR status. For Dr Intan, it was dereliction of her duty. A MP letter written without facts or proof?!
Moreover, since Ang Mo Kio GRC is the Prime Minister’s own GRC, it is disgraceful to see that a MP is not taking responsibility and is trying to avoid the limelight even though the whole Yang Yin saga can be traced back to her own lack of diligence. As there is no defence for Dr Intan’s lack of diligence, she has to own up and stop pushing the blame to her constituent.*
A Disappointed Singaporean
TRS Contributor
Go ask that Minah Intan. Sure got.
