Prosecution, defence appeal against sentences in Ang Mo Kio Town Council corruption case

SINGAPORE — Prosecutors on Tuesday (May 19) pushed for about twice the length of jail time meted out in a district court last year to former Ang Mo Kio Town Council (AMKTC) general manager Wong Chee Meng and company director Chia Sin Lan, from whom he took bribes. 

At the same time, lawyers for Wong, 60, and Chia, 64, sought lower sentences during a High Court appeal, arguing that no harm was caused to the town council’s interests due to their acts of corruption.

Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, who heard the three-hour-long appeal by both the prosecution and defence held over video-conferencing platform Zoom, reserved judgement. 

He will issue his decision at a later undetermined date.

In November last year, Wong was sentenced to two years and three months’ jail and ordered to pay a fine of S$23,398.09. 

Chia was sentenced to a year and nine months’ jail. 

In the middle of the trial spanning several months, both men pleaded guilty to three counts of corruption each. They are now serving their sentences in prison.

Chia’s building and repair companies were also ordered to pay S$75,000 of fines each for being in a criminal conspiracy to commit corruption.

The prosecution, led by Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Jiang Ke-Yue, is now seeking jail terms of four years for Wong and three years and eight months for Chia.

Wong is seeking 11 to 14 months’ jail while Chia argued for a year behind bars.

Wong had pleaded guilty to receiving S$86,141 in kickbacks from 2014 to 2016 to advance the business interests of Chia’s two companies, 19-ANC Enterprise and 19-NS2 Enterprise.

The bribes included overseas remittances from Chia to Wong’s mistress in China, entertainment expenses at various karaoke lounges, restaurants, spas and a hotel, as well as discounts on a car.

Wong was an employee of CPG Facilities Management, the managing agent of the town council that serves the Ang Mo Kio public housing estate.

He was appointed AMKTC’s general manager in November 2013 and was in charge of the town council’s overall operations including selecting contractors for works.

Chia’s companies, 19-ANC and 19-NS2, handle general building, repairs and redecoration works for town councils including AMKTC.

Wong admitted to influencing his staff members from the contracts department to include 19-ANC in the list of contractors to invite for quotes. 

AMKTC also awarded more jobs to both companies in 2015, compared with 2014.

Wong is represented by Ms Melanie Ho, Mr Tang Shangwei and Ms Janie Hui from WongPartnership, while Chia is now defended by Mr Eugene Thuraisingam, Mr Chooi Jing Yen and Mr Hamza Malik.

ARGUMENTS DURING APPEAL

While prosecutors are asking for higher sentences for the two men than what was given in the district court, the sentences they are now seeking are slightly lower than what they asked for in the district court. 

This is due to a new proposed sentencing framework that the prosecution developed to provide “structured guidance” for corruption offences.

DPP Jiang argued that District Judge John Ng had made several “erroneous findings” during sentencing, including considering overseas remittances to Wong’s mistress to be loans rather than outright payments.

This led to the judge undervaluing the gratification that Chia gave to Wong, DPP Jiang added.

The district judge also did not give enough weight to several aggravating factors, the prosecution said, such as Wong owing fiduciary duties to the town council. 

Another factor was the “grave public disquiet” arising from the offences, which could affect trust in town councils, DPP Jiang added.

In his ruling, District Judge Ng found that there was no basis to say that Wong’s influence or favours had resulted in contracts being awarded to 19-ANC or 19-NS2. 

But DPP Jiang argued that Wong had directly intervened in tender bids and this directly contributed to the successful securing of contracts.

In Wong’s defence, Ms Ho raised several issues with the proposed sentencing framework, saying that it could result in “significant inconsistencies” in sentences for corruption offences involving government procurement contracts.

The contracts awarded to 19-ANC and 19-NS2 were on their own merit as they had a reputation as reliable contractors for other town councils, Ms Ho argued.

She repeated a point made in the district court — that Wong could not have decided on the award of contracts and quotations as it was decided collectively by a 14-member estate maintenance committee.

In that regard, Ms Ho argued that District Judge Ng should have put less weight on finding that Wong was in charge of AMKTC’s operations.

She added that the judge had also disregarded that the bulk of the offences happened when Wong was undergoing divorce proceedings with his wife which “triggered a regrettable lapse of judgement”.

In Chia’s defence, Mr Thuraisingam raised similar points, saying that this was not “pure premeditated cultivation” of Wong by Chia, but “rather one where the line between friends and work became blurred and crossed into illegal means”.

The bribes also did not lead to more works being awarded to Chia’s two firms, he said. 

The lawyer also asked for Chia’s companies’ monies, which have been frozen since the beginning of the trial, to be released as the district judge did not find that they were the fruits of Chia’s bribes.