Unacceptable for public servants to accept valuable gifts, says Deputy A-G

While there have been cases of politicians in other countries accepting valuable gifts, this is not acceptable in Singapore, and that is why the prosecution charged former minister S. Iswaran, said Deputy Attorney-General Tai Wei Shyong.

He was explaining why the public prosecutor brought charges under Section 165 of the Penal Code, which makes it an offence for public servants to accept or obtain valuable items from people who they have dealings with in their official capacity.

On what was to be the first day of the trial on Sept 24, the prosecution amended the two corruption charges that Iswaran faced to charges under Section 165.

The prosecution then proceeded with four charges under Section 165 and one charge under Section 204A(a) for obstruction of justice, with the remaining 30 charges against Iswaran taken into consideration.

Mr Tai said the objective of Section 165 was to “criminalise a public servant who, through obtaining or accepting gifts, makes questionable his loyalty to the Government” in respect of the business transactions linked to his official duties.

If public servants were allowed to accept substantial gifts over the long term, public confidence in the impartiality and integrity of government would be severely undermined, he added, in arguing for a sentence of six to seven months for Iswaran.

Bringing up the example of Britain, Mr Tai noted that there have been news reports of politicians there receiving gifts running into hundreds of thousands of pounds from donors.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, as leader of the Labour Party, had declared free tickets and gifts worth £100,000 (S$172,000), while former British prime minister Boris Johnson had received free holiday accommodation and also money to pay for the renovation of his apartment, for instance.

Mr Tai added that in highlighting these cases, he was not seeking to draw any comparisons with or parallels to what happened in other countries, nor was he suggesting that gift giving in other countries was wrong.

Rather, it was to stress that the receipt of such gifts was unacceptable in Singapore, he added.

“Our systems are different, and what we pay our public servants is also different,” he said, adding that this was part of the “system and equation” here. 

Addressing this in his mitigation remarks, Iswaran’s lawyer, Senior Counsel Davinder Singh, noted the prosecution’s point that it was not seeking to compare the current case with what has happened in other countries.

He said it is clear things in Singapore are different, and that people know what is acceptable and what is not.

“When the prosecution decided to prosecute the accused, that signal was sent loud and clear across the globe,” he added.

It is clear the Singapore Government operates with integrity, and nothing Iswaran did has undermined that, he said, adding that the case resulted in the Government restating its position on its integrity.

Source: Straits Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction.

What is Section 165, and how did Iswaran go from claiming trial to pleading guilty?: ST Explains Iswaran convicted of 5 charges, will be sentenced on Oct 3