Alleged match-fixer back in court over detention order

SINGAPORE — Alleged soccer match-fixing kingpin Tan Seet Eng, otherwise known as Dan Tan, appeared in High Court again today (July 27) to appeal against an earlier court decision, which saw his application for an order to review his detention thrown out.

Tan, 51, is the suspected mastermind of a global match-fixing syndicate. He was one of 14 people arrested in a crackdown on match-fixing cartels in Sept 2013, and was subsequently detained under the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act. This law allows the Government to detain suspects indefinitely without trial, should this be in the interest of public safety, peace and good order. Yearly reviews are a must.

Lawyer Hamidul Haq, representing Tan, called his client’s detention “illegal”, and argued that match-fixing activities did not constitute activities that harmed public safety, peace and good order. He pointed out that the act was traditionally used as ammunition against communism and secret society and loansharking activities.

He also said that the act had no provision for extra-territoriality and asked the court if Tan’s alleged activities had any impact “in and within” Singapore.

Addressing this, Deputy Public Prosecutor Hay Hung Chun said activities conducted overseas could be taken into account, provided that there was a link to Singapore. And in this case, Tan had operated the match-fixing syndicate from Singapore and recruited runners here.

Calling for the appeal to be dismissed, DPP Hay added that match-fixing was a form of organised crime, and “activities of a criminal nature would pose a threat to public safety”.

In a written response to questions tabled in Parliament in Oct 2013, Minister for Home Affairs Teo Chee Hean had said that the act had previously been used as a “last resort” in cases where accomplices and witnesses dare not testify in court for fear of reprisal.

“Like drug trafficking and unlicensed money-lending, illegal soccer match-fixing activities are carried out by organised crime syndicates with complex and layered structures motivated by financial gain. Witnesses able to provide testimony against the syndicate are unwilling to do so,” said Mr Teo.

Judgment for the appeal has been reserved till further notice.