Former Singapore minister S Iswaran sentenced to 12 months’ jail for obtaining valuables worth S$403,300, obstructing justice

SINGAPORE: Former transport minister S Iswaran has been sentenced to jail for obtaining gifts worth about S$403,300 (US$313,200) over seven years, from two businessmen he considered his friends.
The 62-year-old was given a jail term of 12 months on Thursday (Oct 3), after his decision to plead guilty on the first day of trial proceedings cut short what was set to be a protracted trial with 56 prosecution witnesses.
In sentencing, Justice Vincent Hoong said he had considered submissions on sentence from both prosecution and defence but was “ultimately unable to agree with both the positions taken”. 
Iswaran’s lead lawyer Davinder Singh had argued for no more than eight weeks’ jail, while Deputy Attorney-General Tai Wei Shyong sought a jail term of six to seven months. 
“I’m of the view it is appropriate to impose a sentence in excess of both parties’ positions,” said Justice Hoong, adding that taking the submission of either prosecution or defence would result in a “manifestly inadequate sentence”.
Justice Hoong noted certain aggravating factors such as the total duration of Iswaran’s offending, the high office he occupied and the overall harm to public interest as well as trust in public institutions.
Mr Singh asked for the jail term to be deferred to Oct 7, and for Iswaran to surrender at 4pm at the State Courts that day.
However, he stressed that this is subject to the defence taking instructions from Iswaran, alluding to the possibility of an appeal. Iswaran remains out on bail of S$800,000 in the meantime.
In a summary of his judgment that took about 40 minutes to read before a packed courtroom, Justice Hoong rejected various submissions by the defence.
These include the arguments that a 30 per cent guilty-plea discount should be applied across the board for Iswaran’s charges, and that it was mitigating since the cost of a flight taken by Iswaran would have been incurred whether or not Iswaran went on it.
Justice Hoong said Iswaran occupied “the highest level of executive office”, and that the business transactions in the case were “of wide public interest”. The greater the public interest, the greater the harm, he explained.
Iswaran’s culpability was therefore higher as he had been a minister for six to 10 years when the offences were committed.
Justice Hoong also found that Iswaran had “acted with deliberation” in the sixth charge, where he obtained 10 Green Room tickets worth S$42,265 to the 2017 Singapore Formula 1 Grand Prix from Mr Ong, as he had specifically requested these items.
Iswaran had also acted with deliberation for the Singapore-Doha trip, taking urgent personal leave to “enjoy an all-expenses-paid trip”, said Justice Hoong.
He found that Iswaran had “abused his position” for these two charges, despite knowing that Mr Ong had a particularly close connection with his official duties.
However, the judge found that Iswaran did not act with premeditation or deliberation in the proceeded charges involving Mr Lum.
As for Iswaran’s public service and contributions to Singapore, Justice Hoong said they are “at best a neutral factor in sentencing”.
Regarding Iswaran’s voluntary disgorgement, Justice Hoong said the harm done to public interest was “unlikely to be adequately remedied by these actions”.
“It is also significant in my view that the accused had simultaneously made public statements rejecting the allegations as false and asserting his innocence,” said the judge.
He cited an example of Iswaran’s published letter to then-prime minister Lee Hsien Loong, where he rejected the allegations and expressed his “strong belief” that he would be acquitted.
As for the defence’s explanation on why it took time for Iswaran to decide to plead guilty, Justice Hoong said he was “unable to accept” this submission.
He said Iswaran could have indicated that he was contesting the initial corruption charges and agreeing to plead guilty to the rest, but he did not.
“In my view, the accused, having made the tactical choices he did at the initial stage of proceedings must stand by the consequences of those choices,” said Justice Hoong. 
“I’m unable to accept that the colour and complexion of those charges were affected by the initial framing of the charges under Prevention of Corruption Act. The allegations in the 165 charges related to the receipt of various items over a significant period of time in distinct incidents relating to various official functions of the accused.”
The sentencing comes more than a year after details of the probe by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) first came to light, and 10 months after Iswaran was first charged in court.
Iswaran resigned from office in January and made a voluntary disgorgement of S$380,305.95 to the state a day before his intended trial on Sep 24. This refers to giving up illegally obtained gains and differs from restitution.
Bottles of whisky and wine, golf clubs and a Brompton bicycle were also seized from him.
Between November 2015 and December 2022, Iswaran obtained valuables like musical, football and Formula 1 tickets from Singapore GP majority shareholder Ong Beng Seng, as well as bottles of whisky and wine from construction boss Lum Kok Seng.
This was while Iswaran held portfolios that had official dealings with the two men, said the prosecution.
Mr Lum’s company, Lum Chang Building Contractors, entered into a contract worth S$325 million with the Land Transport Authority in 2016 for works on the Tanah Merah MRT Station and its viaducts. Iswaran became transport minister in May 2021.
Mr Ong was linked to two facilitation agreements between the Singapore GP and the Singapore Tourism Board (STB) to handle the annual Singapore Formula 1 race.
Iswaran was chairman of the F1 Steering Committee, established by the government to oversee F1 as a national project.
He was also minister for industry in the Ministry of Trade and Industry from October 2015 and April 2018, with STB under him. He was also minister-in-charge of trade relations from May 2018 until January 2024 when he resigned from office.
The prosecution accepted, however, that Iswaran did not intervene in any decisions relating to Mr Lum’s company contract, and that there was “nothing to suggest that the F1 contracts were structured to the disadvantage of the government”.
The case came to light in May 2023 when CPIB was investigating a separate matter linked to Mr Ong’s associates and came across a flight manifest for an outbound flight on Mr Ong’s private jet.
Iswaran was on that flight worth S$10,410 from Singapore to Doha on Dec 10, 2022. His trip there, his one-night stay at the Four Seasons Hotel Doha and his business class flight back was at the expense of Singapore GP, on Mr Ong’s instructions.
Iswaran did not declare the trip to the government. He applied for urgent personal personal leave to take it on Mr Ong’s offer to join him as his guest.
When Mr Ong caught wind of CPIB’s seizure of the flight manifest, he called Iswaran and told him about this. Iswaran later asked Ong to have Singapore GP bill him for the trip’s expenses, and later paid S$5,700 for the return flight.
This forms the charge of obstructing justice.
Despite claiming innocence and announcing his intention to contest the charges from the get-go, Iswaran pleaded guilty after the prosecution amended two charges of corruption to charges under Section 165 for obtaining valuables from someone linked to him officially.
According to his lawyer Mr Singh, the ex-minister did not agree to plead guilty earlier because he did not agree to the corruption charges, which coloured the complexion of the entire case.
Iswaran eventually pleaded guilty to five charges – four under Section 165 and one count of obstructing justice by belatedly repaying the cost of a flight he had taken from Doha to Singapore in December 2022.
Another 30 charges under Section 165 were taken into consideration.
Section 165 is such a rare offence that there are no reported cases and no sentencing framework for it.
In sentencing arguments, Mr Tai argued that Iswaran was “more than a passive acceptor of gifts”. 
He said the objective of the Section 165 offence is to criminalise a public servant who, through obtaining or accepting gifts, “makes questionable his loyalty to the government in respect of the business transactions in question”.
Mr Tai said Iswaran’s actions, when he was the most senior government representative negotiating with SGP on F1-related business matters, “significantly compromised his position as chief negotiator for the government”.
Defence counsel Mr Singh said Iswaran did not actively seek out the items given to him and that he did not know about Section 165 at the time, although he accepts that “ignorance of the law is no excuse”.
He said “the mere dint of the prosecution” against Iswaran was “the most powerful signal that can be sent”.
“The Singapore Government has made it clear that if a public servant accepts gifts and the ingredients under Section 165 are satisfied, that public servant will be prosecuted,” said Mr Singh.
Explaining some of Iswaran’s actions, he said Mr Ong told Iswaran in December 2022 during the World Cup that Mr Hassan Al-Thawadi, the chairman of the World Cup Organising Committee, had invited Mr Ong to watch the quarter-final matches in Doha.
Mr Ong invited Iswaran to join him, and Iswaran understood the invitation to be because Mr Ong considered him a friend and guest.
Iswaran also viewed the trip as an opportunity for both of them to learn how a city like Doha staged a world event, said Mr Singh.
On the whisky and wine Iswaran obtained from Mr Lum, Mr Singh said Iswaran had asked Mr Lum for his regular supplier so he could buy the alcohol himself, but Mr Lum gifted it to him along with a batch of red wine.
The Brompton bicycle Mr Lum gave Iswaran was given to him on the ex-minister’s 60th birthday as a gift, said the lawyer.
Some of the F1 tickets Iswaran received were complimentary and never meant for sale in the first place, with no loss suffered by Singapore GP or Mr Ong, Mr Singh argued.
He also distributed the tickets to grassroots volunteers and a charity his wife was involved in, said Mr Singh.
The penalties for obtaining a valuable thing as a public servant are a jail term of up to two years, a fine, or both.
For obstructing justice, an offender can be jailed for up to seven years, fined, or both.