Skip to main content

Advertisement

Advertisement

Brompton bikes case: AG seeks clarification on sentencing

SINGAPORE — Public Prosecutor and Attorney-General V K Rajah has sought the apex court’s clarification on two questions of law, arising from prosecutors’ dismissed appeal to seek a jail term for former National Parks Board (NParks) assistant director Bernard Lim Yong Soon.

Bernard Lim Yong Soon. TODAY file photo

Bernard Lim Yong Soon. TODAY file photo

Follow TODAY on WhatsApp

SINGAPORE — Public Prosecutor and Attorney-General V K Rajah has sought the apex court’s clarification on two questions of law, arising from prosecutors’ dismissed appeal to seek a jail term for former National Parks Board (NParks) assistant director Bernard Lim Yong Soon.

Lim was fined a maximum of S$5,000 in June for lying to auditors from the Ministry of National Development over a deal worth S$57,200 to buy 26 Brompton bicycles.

In a legal application called a criminal reference filed yesterday, the Attorney-General asked about the threshold to be crossed in order for a custodial sentence to be imposed for providing false information to mislead inquiries into matters on public-sector governance. And when the threshold has been crossed, can mitigating factors justify a non-custodial sentence being imposed, he also asked.

Lim had in 2011 alerted the owner of a bicycle retailer about a coming NParks tender for foldable bicycles. The retailer was the only bidder and when the deal came under scrutiny, Lim lied to auditors about his relationship with the owner. The prosecution had sought three to four months’ jail for Lim and its appeal against a fine for Lim was dismissed last month by High Court judge Tay Yong Kwang.

The prosecution had sought a deterrent sentence, citing strong public interest in ensuring the integrity and transparency of the way in which public funds are spent.

The prosecution had also charged that Lim had sought to undermine safeguards to the procurement process in his concealment of the facts, but Lim’s lawyer argued that his offence did not warrant a jail term, noting that there had been no evidence of corruption.

An Attorney-General’s Chambers spokesman said yesterday that important questions of law had arisen in the course of the Magistrate’s Appeal, and the Attorney-General felt it was in the public interest to clarify certain issues of sentencing law. NEO CHAI CHIN

Read more of the latest in

Advertisement

Advertisement

Stay in the know. Anytime. Anywhere.

Subscribe to get daily news updates, insights and must reads delivered straight to your inbox.

By clicking subscribe, I agree for my personal data to be used to send me TODAY newsletters, promotional offers and for research and analysis.