Minister who supported Durai's wrongful acts does not own up
-
What kind of government or talent is it if after all the overwhelming evidences we the citizens have heard in newspapers, parliament and the court, the minister concerned who has condoned or abetted Durai's wrongfulness and misconduct still remains in office and getting all the pay increases and bonuses.
-
did he even have to stand for elections?
-
some people are just more equal than others i guess..
-
A rogue shielded by the statutes of a partial Constitution. That's what it is...Originally posted by robertteh:What kind of government or talent is it if after all the overwhelming evidences we the citizens have heard in newspapers, parliament and the court, the minister concerned who has condoned or abetted Durai's wrongfulness and misconduct still remains in office and getting all the pay increases and bonuses. -
He doesn't need to.
-
Thursday June 21, 11:17 PM
Former NKF CEO Durai sentenced to 3 months in jail
SINGAPORE: Former National Kidney Foundation chief TT Durai has been sentenced to three months in jail, but he is filing an appeal against the sentence.
The sentence was announced more than a week after Durai was found guilty of falsifying documents to release S$20,000 of NKF funds to interior designer and Durai's long-time friend, David Tan.
In his remarks, District Judge Aedit Abdullah said a charity organisation such as the NKF is similar to a government institution as funds are obtained from the public.
Therefore, the criminal act is significant and it has resulted in a lot of damage.
He added that for a person in Durai's position to initiate the act of arranging for David Tan to falsify the invoice is "particularly culpable".
As for Durai's social contributions, the judge said the records speak for themselves, but they cannot make up for Durai's grave mistake.
Durai will return to the High Court where his appeal will be heard.
In the meantime, 27 June has been set for the prosecution and defence to meet with the judge to decide on a second charge.
The outstanding charge is similar to the current charge, but Channel NewsAsia understands that it involves a different sum of money.
The prosecution may proceed on this second charge, but it is also possible that the charge will be dropped entirely.
For now, Durai will remain in Singapore as his passport is being withheld by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau.
He is currently out on a S$100,000 bail.
- CNA/so -
Originally posted by iveco:
wow.. 'justice' done finally...
Thursday June 21, 11:17 PM
[b]Former NKF CEO Durai sentenced to 3 months in jail
SINGAPORE: Former National Kidney Foundation chief TT Durai has been sentenced to three months in jail, but he is filing an appeal against the sentence.
The sentence was announced more than a week after Durai was found guilty of falsifying documents to release S$20,000 of NKF funds to interior designer and Durai's long-time friend, David Tan.
In his remarks, District Judge Aedit Abdullah said a charity organisation such as the NKF is similar to a government institution as funds are obtained from the public.
Therefore, the criminal act is significant and it has resulted in a lot of damage.
He added that for a person in Durai's position to initiate the act of arranging for David Tan to falsify the invoice is "particularly culpable".
As for Durai's social contributions, the judge said the records speak for themselves, but they cannot make up for Durai's grave mistake.
Durai will return to the High Court where his appeal will be heard.
In the meantime, 27 June has been set for the prosecution and defence to meet with the judge to decide on a second charge.
The outstanding charge is similar to the current charge, but Channel NewsAsia understands that it involves a different sum of money.
The prosecution may proceed on this second charge, but it is also possible that the charge will be dropped entirely.
For now, Durai will remain in Singapore as his passport is being withheld by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau.
He is currently out on a S$100,000 bail.
- CNA/so
[/b] -
He should follow the japanese example, and make amends for his incompetance and dishonesty via his resignation and suicide.Originally posted by robertteh:What kind of government or talent is it if after all the overwhelming evidences we the citizens have heard in newspapers, parliament and the court, the minister concerned who has condoned or abetted Durai's wrongfulness and misconduct still remains in office and getting all the pay increases and bonuses.
Really. I'm serious. -
even if he does, it's an honest mistake
-
But no one even challenged him in the GE??Originally posted by av98m:He should follow the japanese example, and make amends for his incompetance and dishonesty via his resignation and suicide.
Really. I'm serious.
Oh wait... Chee's Sis did, but at the wrong GRC -
Who are you referring to? If you have the courage to make such serious allegations, surely you are prepared to stand by them?Originally posted by robertteh:What kind of government or talent is it if after all the overwhelming evidences we the citizens have heard in newspapers, parliament and the court, the minister concerned who has condoned or abetted Durai's wrongfulness and misconduct still remains in office and getting all the pay increases and bonuses. -
Isn't it funny to see those cowards hiding away when the chips are down? I would say this is elitism inplay. What they fear however is the public backlash.
I say bullocks to these cowards... -
you mean after the way Durai furnished his office a la penthhouse style.. no one even knew abou it?Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Who are you referring to? If you have the courage to make such serious allegations, surely you are prepared to stand by them?
if you got something to add counterwise , please do, if not pls stfu, we'll pretty used to your 'surely you are prepared to stand by them?' statements.. -
agreed. after it was revealed that Durai's office was furnished so "rich man" style, i think that he used NKF's money for his own useOriginally posted by 4getmenot:you mean after the way Durai furnished his office a la penthhouse style.. no one even knew abou it?
if you got something to add counterwise , please do, if not pls stfu, we'll pretty used to your 'surely you are prepared to stand by them?' statements.. -
Go and read the old Straits Times how the minister in charge defended Durai's figures on patient subsidies and years of reserve in parliament which were subsequently exposed in SPH court case as fabrication and untruths. Surely you read the newspapers yourself ?Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Who are you referring to? If you have the courage to make such serious allegations, surely you are prepared to stand by them? -
You are good... I had forgotten all about that.Originally posted by robertteh:Go and read the old Straits Times how the minister in charge defended Durai's figures on patient subsidies and years of reserve in parliament which were subsequently exposed in SPH court case as fabrication and untruths. Surely you read the newspapers yourself ? -
You call that 'justice'??? Other crimes are mandated with a far longer jail term. What's the 3 months for? Just to show that so-called 'justice' works? Considering such a luxurious life that he led and the arrogance he displayed, and not forgetting misleading the good population into donating to his 'fund', the 'justice' does not fit the crime!!!Originally posted by 4getmenot:wow.. 'justice' done finally... -
Do u have a link to the article?Originally posted by robertteh:Go and read the old Straits Times how the minister in charge defended Durai's figures on patient subsidies and years of reserve in parliament which were subsequently exposed in SPH court case as fabrication and untruths. Surely you read the newspapers yourself ?
Why wasn't the minister in charge of monitoring the charity be questioned? -
as much as we want to see him disembowelled in public, i think this was for the invoices to his office..
the rest.. who knows if he'll ever be put on trial again..Originally posted by Croaking_Toad:You call that 'justice'??? Other crimes are mandated with a far longer jail term. What's the 3 months for? Just to show that so-called 'justice' works? Considering such a luxurious life that he led and the arrogance he displayed, and not forgetting misleading the good population into donating to his 'fund', the 'justice' does not fit the crime!!! -
personally, i think durai got off light for all the arrogance, abuse and ethical business conducts that he practiced during his reign. i can never forget the arrogance he displayed pre-ST debacle in casting people aside who questions his accountability and way he ran NKF. he yielded so much power....
once caught, his silence and indifference to `the public finding the truth' is deafening. he got away without revealing much. how much he and the government swept under the carpet on what else not known publically is something maybe only will be revealed 25 years from now...
u swing a mirror to the men in white who supported him and all ducked. suddenly, they are all on the commoners side. they switched side before you could even mutter N................KF that is.... (if this is the opposition, they will be sued to death)
one shld also nvr forget the `peanut money' quote by the wife of the bootlicker. We are all so out of touch with the Singapore reality....they bask in the singapore dollars and all its glories while we (those who are not in the elite group i.e.) are all in the sewers of the strata. -
some ppl just doesn;t get the difference between a word and a word in between 'abc' ...maybe i shud be be more direct in my statement next time..Originally posted by Croaking_Toad:You call that 'justice'??? Other crimes are mandated with a far longer jail term. What's the 3 months for? Just to show that so-called 'justice' works? Considering such a luxurious life that he led and the arrogance he displayed, and not forgetting misleading the good population into donating to his 'fund', the 'justice' does not fit the crime!!! -
It will be too much of an irony for you to be left in the dark since you are so far off the scene of local action.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Original post by robertteh:
What kind of government or talent is it if after all the overwhelming evidences we the citizens have heard in newspapers, parliament and the court, the minister concerned who has condoned or abetted Durai's wrongfulness and misconduct still remains in office and getting all the pay increases and bonuses.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who are you referring to? If you have the courage to make such serious allegations, surely you are prepared to stand by them?
With CSJ being bankrupted more than once, he seems more fearless than the empty vessel of the Resident Doctor in speaking the TRUTH. We shall let CSJ provide a ''memory recall'' ::
continue below
Extract from ''Govt canot claim it was ''misled'' in NKF scandal : Chee'' - 17 January 2006
In 2004, however, the Government was still defending NKF. Ministers Khaw Boon Wan and Lim Hng Kiang were still singing the praises of an organization and its staff when the rot had already set in. Mr Khaw lauded NKF’s operations and wanted the organization to remain transparent. He said: “I take my hat off to the NKF.” Mr Lim assured everyone that NKF was on “quite a sound record.”
I highlight these statements made by the Ministers not to show how silly they now in retrospect because Mr Khaw Boon Wan has admitted as much. Words like “duped”, “misled”, “naïve”, and “oversight” were used liberally in the aftermath of the KPMG exposē.
Parliamentary statements in 2004, however, indicate otherwise.
For example, in Parliament on 19 April 2004, NMP Braema Mathi had raised the concern of NKF’s computation of the amount of donated money going to the beneficiary. Second Minister for Finance Lim Hng Kiang brushed off the matter and concluded that NKF was” on quite a sound record.” The following was the exchange:
[b]Braema Mathi: “…NKF, in the public domain, has made two announcements of 52 cents coming back to the beneficiary, as well as 56 cents…What I am raising here with this incident is that different definitions do go into making up what comes back to the beneficiary in terms of a precise dollar value. There needs to be greater consistency in the factors that go into such computation.”
Lim Hng Kiang: “…[NKF] put up the press release and explained the differences between 52% and 56% go to the beneficiaries. I recall also that they indicated in the press release that about 26% goes to the reserves. So, actually, if you add up the two numbers, nearly 80% goes to the beneficiaries. I think that puts NKF on quite a sound record.”
The NMP also brought up the question of transparency and suggested that NKF reveal the salary of its CEO. Mr Lim left it to the NKF to decide whether it wanted to tell the public (remember, this was in spite of the misgivings many quarters had over NKF). He said:
“…this is a decision by NKF whether to disclose the salaries of the CEOs. Here, I have some sympathy for their dilemma. If they do not disclose, then there will be critics who say they are not transparent. If they disclose, there will also be critics who will say that whatever they pay are too high. So I think they are caught between a rock and a hard place. I think it is their decision not to disclose.”
If there was ever any doubt that concern was brought to the direct attention of the Government, it was removed by this statement from Ms Braema Mathi: “NKF’s reserves…[are] in dire need of better governance.”
To put the publicÂ’s unease over the NKFÂ’s compliance with regulations, Mr Lim Hng Kiang told Parliament in 2004:
Lim: “Mr Speaker, Sir, it is important to have clear guidelines on the raising and utilisation of funds to maintain public confidence in our non-profit organisations and their programmes. There are essentially three questions the public is most interested in. First, what methods are used to raise the money? Second, how much of the charity dollar is used to raise funds? And, finally, how is the money spent or saved?”
Of the three questions, the third is the most relevant to the issue today: Was NKF in compliance with regulations over how the money spent or saved?
PAP MP Charles Chong asked Minister Lim point-blank: “Sir, could the Minister tell us whether the National Kidney Foundation is in full compliance with all the current guidelines that he mentioned just now in the collection and utilisation of the funds that it receives from the public?”
Mr Lim did not mince words: “Mr Speaker, Sir, the NKF is in full compliance with the regulations.” (emphasis added)
From the above parliamentary exchanges, it can be seen that the Government was alerted to questionable practices in the NKF. Not only did Mr Lim ignore these warnings he categorically told Parliament that he had “full confidence” that NKF had complied with regulations.
Then there was the matter of the National Council of Social Services (NCSS). On Dec 31, 2001, the NCSS revoked the IPC status of NKF. The NCSS took action because it saw the problems within the NKF. And yet, within a month the Ministry of Health reinstated the NKFÂ’s IPC status.
Now read what Mr Lim told Parliament in 2004: “[The Ministry of Finance] has certain criteria by which [it] evaluates applicants who want IPC status, and these criteria are set by IRAS, and we make sure that people who apply have to qualify before they are given this IPC status.” (emphasis added)
In other words we are given to believe that there was an active search for answers from the NKF before NKF was given clearance to reclaim its IPC status. -
continuation
:
Before we go further, letÂ’s do a quick recap. There were several occasions in which NKFÂ’s operations were questioned:
· Criticisms by NKF volunteers which led to Durai taking defamations suits against them in 1997 and 1998.
· Letters to the press from 2002-2004 questioning NKF’s practices.
· NCSS revoking NKF’s bid for IPC status.
· Statements in parliament pointing to problematic operations in NKF.
With all these warning signs, can the Government claim that it was “misled” and that it was an “oversight” that allowed the abuses to continue for years?
What is especially noteworthy is that the Government not only ignored these warnings, it actually overruled the NCSS. This indicates that the Government felt that the concerns of NCSS were misplaced. Remember that Mr Lim had told Parliament that the MOF “makes sure” that applicants for IPC status the criteria that it sets before approval is given. How can the Government say that it “makes sure” and gives the assurance that the NKF was in “full compliance” with the guidelines, but then later claim to have been “misled”?
Think about it this way. A driver speeding along a highway comes across a sign asking him to slow down. He continues to speed on. Another signpost reminds him to slow down again, and again he speeds on. The third signpost comes up and this time the driver stops, gets out of his car, takes the signpost down and then speeds down the road again. Further down the road someone frantically waves to the driver to pay attention to the fourth slowdown sign. The driver acknowledges the person and the sign, but then picks up speed. Not long after he crashes and kills someone.
Can the driver now claim that he was “misled” and that it was an “oversight” that he didn’t slowdown? What do you think the judge would say?
There are several urgent questions that need to be asked:
1. Why did Lim not make greater effort to look into the matter of how the expenditure was computer when it was pointed out to him that there were discrepancies? Even if the audited reports did not raise any alarm, there were plenty of other sources that had, repeatedly through many years, drawn the attention of the Minister to the problems. Why were these ignored?
2. Not only were warnings ignored, the Government actually overruled NCSSÂ’ decision to rein in the NKF. Did the Government seek the feedback of NCSS and find out why it had revoked NKFÂ’s IPC status? If it did, what did the NCSS tell the Government? If not, why not?
3. What questions were asked of NKF before the IRAS reinstated the NKF its IPC status?
4. Why is the MOF keeping so quiet?
The scary part is that if TT Durai had not sued, NKF would have gone on merrily doing what it did.
Clearly there was no transparency. The mystery over what happened when the Government overruled the NCSS and reinstated NKFÂ’s IPC status remains. The Government said it was all right for NKF not to reveal DuraiÂ’s despite mounting evidence that there was abuse.
Will there be any accountability? Going by what Mr Khaw has said, we shouldn’t hold our breath. After all, how can we hold people who have been duped and misled – the victims – responsible?
Now think of everything else that is going on right now. The Government wonÂ’t open the books of the GIC, HDB, CPF, etc. and insists that everything is all right just as Messrs Khaw and Lim were telling us that everything was all right with NKF.
And when questions are asked, lawsuits start flying. Suits lead to silence. Silence is taken as support.
PAP MP Halimah Yacob said of the NKF matter: “There was a total failure of checks and balances and all those who were supposed to supervise and act as guardians of the public interest failed in their task. The public was completely misled and their trust was abused.”
Wise words no doubt. Pity that she cannot see that it is the very organisation that she belongs to and works for that ensures the total eradication of a checks-and-balance system, system that only democracy provides. But listen to what her bosses say:
1. Lee Hsien Loong: Singapore “doesn’t aspire to be a Western-style democracy.”
2. Goh Chok Tong: “[Singaporeans] have rejected Western-style liberal democracy and freedoms.”
3. Teo Chee Hean: “A two-party system would put us on the dangerous road to contention when we should play as one team.”
4. George Yeo: Singapore cannot function “solely one a one-man-one-vote democracy.”
5. Lee Kuan Yew: “We haven’t found it necessary yet [to change the one-man-one-vote system]. If it became necessary we should do it.”
With these pronouncements and the ability to make, amend, and break the law at will, it is realistic to bring about a state of democracy and everything else that goes with it, including transparency and accountability, checks-and-balance, etc?
So whatÂ’s the solution?
Train activists in nonviolent action. ThatÂ’s the only way the Singaporeans are going to be able to demand transparency and accountability and checks and balance in Parliament.
We need to empower ourselves. We need to break the mental shackles of fear and helplessness. We need to say that we will not submit to intimidation and repression any longer. I leave you with a quote by a 16th century French philosopher Etienne de la Boatie:
''He who dominates over you has only two eyes, only two hands, only one body, no more than is possessed by the leastÂ…among the infinite numbers of dwelling in your cities; he has indeed nothing more than the power you confer on him to destroy you.
How has he acquired enough eyes to spy upon you, if you do not provide them yourselves? How can he have so many arms to beat you with, if he does not borrow them from you?
The feet that trample down your cities, where does he get them if they are not your own? How does he have any power over you, except through you?
What could he do to you if you yourselves did not connive with the thief who plunders you? If you were not accomplices of the murderer who kills you? If you were not traitors to yourselves?''
We, the people, need to demand change. As Frederick Douglass, a black American abolitionist once said:
” Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.” -
tap in to somebody's wireless network - jail three years
charged on corruption - jail three mths
stupidity of it all - priceless -
I think in Singapore, lady Justice is not impartial, but is blind.