Former transport minister S Iswaran had two of his initial charges amended on Sep. 24. The charges, initially under the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA), were changed to charges under Section 165 of the Penal Code. Iswaran pleaded guilty to one of these amended charges, along with four others. His remaining 30 charges will be considered during sentencing.
Background
The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) agreed to amend the charges under the PCA to charges under Section 165 of the Penal Code, indicating a plea bargaining process. In a written answer to Workers’ Party MP Jamus Lim in April 2024, Minister for Law K Shanmugam explained that plea bargaining is a negotiation process between the prosecution and the defence before the accused decides whether to plead guilty. The prosecution may extend a plea offer based on factors such as resource savings, the accused’s cooperation, and other mitigating circumstances.
Why were the charges amended?
Criminal lawyer Sunil Sudheesan, head of the criminal department at Quahe Woo & Palmer LLC, noted that plea bargaining is a standard part of the criminal justice system. He explained that lawyers often request charge reductions to save time and reach a fair outcome. In Iswaran’s case, there could be specific factors in his relationship with Ong Beng Seng that influenced the prosecution’s decision. Sunil also mentioned that the prosecution likely considered public perception and resource allocation when deciding to amend the charges.
In a statement on Sep. 24, AGC cited “litigation risks” in proving the charges beyond a reasonable doubt at trial and aimed for a fair and just outcome in the public interest.
Section 165 of the Penal Code
Section 165 makes it an offence for a public servant to obtain any valuable thing “without consideration” from a person involved in any proceeding or business transacted by the public servant. This section is part of Singapore’s anti-corruption laws targeting various forms of bribery involving public servants. Sunil explained that Section 165 deals with a different kind of offence compared to the PCA, as it does not require an “actual favour” to be given. The offence is made out solely because the public servant is in a position of conflict of interest.
Will Iswaran be imprisoned?
Sunil stated that the main question is the length of Iswaran’s imprisonment, as neither the prosecution nor the defence is asking for fines. Both sides have made submissions for custodial sentences, with the prosecution seeking a six- to seven-month jail term and the defence asking for no more than eight weeks. Iswaran’s sentencing has been adjourned to Oct. 3.
Future implications
The amended charges state that Iswaran knew Mr Ong, through Singapore GP, was involved in the performance of the facilitation agreement between Singapore GP and the Singapore Tourism Board. The earliest of Iswaran’s charges dates back to November 2015, when he was the minister for trade and industry. This case highlights the strict approach Singapore takes towards corruption and conflict of interest among public servants.
