Former SCDF and CNB chiefs arrested

[octoberbaby]

EMA happened in many places. Only time will tell. With advance technology, these people who want to play with EMA fire, very stupid. They should know their actions/conversation can be recorded, screenshots, etc. ‘Sins will find you out’.

[Nebbermind]

Actually I’m not convinced regarding the part that PL leaked info on the tender. Afaik, it’s quite common practice to ask for specifications and prices way before a tender is called so they can gather the specs to compare and draft the product specifications/performance. They also need to know the prices so they can put up a budget for the tender. They may call in suppliers for demo and presentation to understand the products especially those uncommon ones.


In this case, it seemed like pang also did not know of the detailed requirements prior to the tender.

So if the persecution is going in that direction, it’s really quite weak.

[AC_Power]

Nebbermind:

Actually I'm not convinced regarding the part that PL leaked info on the tender. Afaik, it's quite common practice to ask for specifications and prices way before a tender is called so they can gather the specs to compare and draft the product specifications/performance. They also need to know the prices so they can put up a budget for the tender. They may call in suppliers for demo and presentation to understand the products especially those uncommon ones.


In this case, it seemed like pang also did not know of the detailed requirements prior to the tender.

So if the persecution is going in that direction, it's really quite weak.

I do not think that prosecution meant to portray it as a leak. It is more to highlight to the judge that PL had revealed that into to her to show that he has authority over this procurement.

You are right to say that before tender, it is common to sound out the vendor on the rough pricing to plan for budget. In my course of work, I have provided such before. It is also made known to me that my quote is in no way official and they are just enquiring for budget planning. An open tender will shortly follow if they can push through the project and thereafter, I will be invited to submit our bid if we are keen. I do believe they will not just be sounding me out.

However, the difference here is that the disclosure is made quite overboard and there is no sex, free gifts, free lunches or entertainment that I have provided prior to them seeking an estimate costing.

Unlike NBG's case which all the while I maintain that he and CS is more a EMA then a corruption, I cannot say the same for PL.

[AC_Power]

limlim:

AC_Power:

Is it really necessary for the judge to confirm that it is an EMA and not a corruption? Is the judge the wisest man of all such that only he can tell the difference between an EMA and a corruption and hence a court trial is needed?

No lah.. aiyo.. I got mention in the other post mah..

There are differences between a court and BOI.. and these differences can have big impact on uncovering the truth.

of coz, before he is charged in court, there have to be material evidences sufficient for the prosecution to decide to proceed.

If depend on BOI alone, maybe the truth wouldn't see the light at all.

I also got mention in other post.

It is not about the difference between court and BOI. It's about having the balls to make a stand.

After their investigation, don't tell me none of the top men has a doubt in the mind that NBG and CS are purely lovers and then put up a case to AGC not be proceed with criminal charges but to refer back to MHA for disciplinary action against NBG?

I believe that they do not want to make this call and took the easier way out - charge NGB in court and let the judge decide.

[pirate]

AC_Power:

It is not about the difference between court and BOI. It's about having the balls to make a stand.

Charge head of CNB and SCDF? You think the call would have been made by anyone lower than Cabinet level? The stand was to sacrifice these two whose conduct was, at the very least, less than totally exemplary. Balls or no balls? That one I don't know.

[3Boys]

Just relax:

limlim:

[quote=\"AC_Power\"]

Is it really necessary for the judge to confirm that it is an EMA and not a corruption? Is the judge the wisest man of all such that only he can tell the difference between an EMA and a corruption and hence a court trial is needed?

No lah.. aiyo.. I got mention in the other post mah..

There are differences between a court and BOI.. and these differences can have big impact on uncovering the truth.

of coz, before he is charged in court, there have to be material evidences sufficient for the prosecution to decide to proceed.

If depend on BOI alone, maybe the truth wouldn't see the light at all.

Don't confuse BOI with criminal trial. BOI is administrative procedure in many civil service organisations around the world to deal with breach of employee code of conduct. It is inquisitorial in nature unlike a criminal trial in Singapore. The powers of BOI are dependent on the rules that create the BOI. My point which you have missed is that the BOI performs its task away from the media so that an innocent person need not spend hundreds of thousands of dollars defending himself, since such costs cannot be recovered in a criminal trial. There is no media glare and if innocent the matter ends there but if there is some questionable conduct then refer to CPIB to investigate further.

A BOI would have easily uncovered the same thing as the NBG trial which is a man and a woman having an affair. It would also have uncovered that NBG had no control of tender process. It would have uncovered that CS's company has no contract with CNB and none awarded.

So then BOI can recommend disciplinary action if appropriate. I don't think employee handbook says cannot have affairs :rotflmao: So see how BOI will deal with situation. How to punish a civil servant for being unfaithful in marriage :idea:[/quote]Precisely what I have been trying to tell limlim, who continues to conflate the role of investigation/BOI with that of prosecution. Should one use the prosecutorial process as a fact-finding mission? And potentially do harm to the accused?

I really can't see the logic of that line of thinking, other than just being plain voyeuristic and blood-thirsty.

[AC_Power]

pirate:

AC_Power:

It is not about the difference between court and BOI. It's about having the balls to make a stand.

Charge head of CNB and SCDF? You think the call would have been made by anyone lower than Cabinet level? The stand was to sacrifice these two whose conduct was, at the very least, less than totally exemplary. Balls or no balls? That one I don't know.

If what you are saying is true, it is then very wrong about our system.

The Cabinet should in no way has a say in this. If we allow them to have a say, ie to sacrifice these two, in other cases, they can also have a say on not to charge someone as well. Do we want this?

My ideal state of affairs is this, CPIB investigate independently. Based on their findings, they recommend the course of action to the AGC who would advise on the legal aspect and see if their recommendation is sound. If the decision taken is to charge them, the Minister for Home Affairs should then be informed (FOR HIS INFORMATION ONLY) so that he can prepare for press enquiry etc. IN NO WAY must he influences the outcome.

If you are right that Cabinet is involved in this, God Bless Singapore. Having the Cabinet exerting influence over a criminal proceeding is worse then our top dogs getting sexual gratification from the vendors.

[AC_Power]

The only issue with the BOI is this - it can only be convened if no police report is made against NBG for a possible corruption practice. Once there is an official report made, CPIB will have to step in if potentially it is a corruption case.


Therefore, procedurally, there isn’t a choice on whether we should go the BOI way or the CPIB investigation route. Once a report is lodged, it sets the entire machinery into motion.

[limlim]

Just relax:

A BOI would have easily uncovered the same thing as the NBG trial which is a man and a woman having an affair. It would also have uncovered that NBG had no control of tender process. It would have uncovered that CS's company has no contract with CNB and none awarded.

Did it explain in the verdict why he is not guilty?

bcoz the witness statement was invalid or bcoz they found that he has no influence on the tender process and there is no contract between CNB and CS company?

[limlim]

Just relax:

Don't confuse BOI with criminal trial. BOI is administrative procedure in many civil service organisations around the world to deal with breach of employee code of conduct. It is inquisitorial in nature unlike a criminal trial in Singapore. The powers of BOI are dependent on the rules that create the BOI. My point which you have missed is that the BOI performs its task away from the media so that an innocent person need not spend hundreds of thousands of dollars defending himself, since such costs cannot be recovered in a criminal trial. There is no media glare and if innocent the matter ends there but if there is some questionable conduct then refer to CPIB to investigate further.

A BOI would have easily uncovered the same thing as the NBG trial which is a man and a woman having an affair. It would also have uncovered that NBG had no control of tender process. It would have uncovered that CS's company has no contract with CNB and none awarded.

So then BOI can recommend disciplinary action if appropriate. I don't think employee handbook says cannot have affairs :rotflmao: So see how BOI will deal with situation. How to punish a civil servant for being unfaithful in marriage :idea:

I'm very clear what is the difference between BOI and trial. I'm not sure why you get that wrong impression from. And in fact I have been repeating not only once that trial and BOI is DIFFERENT.

Away from the media, of coz I'm aware of that. But that is not a consideration.

The consideration is if there is any criminal act and whether there is sufficient material evidence to warrant/justify a prosecution. And apparently, there is.

And that is all that matters.

BOI is appropriate if they want to investigate professional misconduct, EMA, or maybe not.. since EMA is not \"wrong doing\" wrt professional conduct and discharge of job duties.

But a trial is appropriate for a corruption charge (with material evidences), as simple as that.

How would you know if there had been, or had been no, BOI before they press charges?