Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/ahtc-trial-law-firm-shook-lin-bok-to-submit-bill-to-town-council-10883920
By Jalelah Abu Baker @JalelahCNA
(Updated: )
Lu Pin
Well, we all know that u waive tender is acceptable, others waive tender is unacceptable. Dumb hypocrites. That's the reason why WP is able to garner sufficient support all round.
Ricky Lim
WP make false claim to justify the waiver of tender :-
(1) AIM withdraw
(2) CPG withdraw
that is why they have to do a waiver of tender ----
-- which have proven to be untrue in Court.
WP wanted to terminate both AIM and CPG - to be replace by FMSS software and FMSS service.
You mean making false claim to justify waiver of tender is acceptable to you?
(1) AIM withdraw
(2) CPG withdraw
that is why they have to do a waiver of tender ----
-- which have proven to be untrue in Court.
WP wanted to terminate both AIM and CPG - to be replace by FMSS software and FMSS service.
You mean making false claim to justify waiver of tender is acceptable to you?
Like · Reply · 1m
Ricky Lim
This is the Penal Code Section 199:-
False statement made in any declaration which is by law receivable as evidence
199. Whoever, in any declaration made or subscribed by him, which declaration any court of justice, or any public servant or other person, is bound or authorised by law to receive as evidence of any fact, makes any statement which is false, and which he either knows or believes to be false or does not believe to be true, touching any point material to the object for which the declaration is made or used, shall be punished in the same manner as if he gave false evidence.
False statement made in any declaration which is by law receivable as evidence
199. Whoever, in any declaration made or subscribed by him, which declaration any court of justice, or any public servant or other person, is bound or authorised by law to receive as evidence of any fact, makes any statement which is false, and which he either knows or believes to be false or does not believe to be true, touching any point material to the object for which the declaration is made or used, shall be punished in the same manner as if he gave false evidence.
Like · Reply · 1m
Ricky Lim
MOF PROCUREMENT PROCESS
The procurement process requires approvals to be sought at key junctures. There must also be a segregation of key procurement roles and responsibilities to ensure there are checks and balances in the system.
AHTC breach this.
The procurement process requires approvals to be sought at key junctures. There must also be a segregation of key procurement roles and responsibilities to ensure there are checks and balances in the system.
AHTC breach this.
Like · Reply · 1m · Edited
Ricky Lim
Did other tenders you mention breach the above 2 ?
If WP is charged under the Penal Code - it will be a serious offence - that come with jail sentence.
If WP is charged under civil law - they may escape the jail sentence.
--- if you still think this is a "political driven events".
If WP is charged under the Penal Code - it will be a serious offence - that come with jail sentence.
If WP is charged under civil law - they may escape the jail sentence.
--- if you still think this is a "political driven events".
Like · Reply · 1m
Breeke Lo
Ricky Lim "which have PROVEN to be untrue in Court" (caps mine)
Did you like just came back from Mar 2019 on a time machine?
If you can't produce the Court Judgement (expected to be delivered in Mar 2019) now, you have breached this.
Administration of Justice (Protection) Act 2016
As soon as a writ is filed for civil proceedings or when a suspect has been charged with a criminal offence, individuals cannot comment on the case — relating to guilt or facts that have not been established by a court — or it would constitute sub judice, which falls under contempt of court.
- For cases before the High Court or Court of Appeal, offenders can be fined up to $100,000 and/or jailed up to three years.
- For cases involving other courts, offenders can be fined up to $20,000 and/or jailed up to 12 months.
Did you like just came back from Mar 2019 on a time machine?
If you can't produce the Court Judgement (expected to be delivered in Mar 2019) now, you have breached this.
Administration of Justice (Protection) Act 2016
As soon as a writ is filed for civil proceedings or when a suspect has been charged with a criminal offence, individuals cannot comment on the case — relating to guilt or facts that have not been established by a court — or it would constitute sub judice, which falls under contempt of court.
- For cases before the High Court or Court of Appeal, offenders can be fined up to $100,000 and/or jailed up to three years.
- For cases involving other courts, offenders can be fined up to $20,000 and/or jailed up to 12 months.
Ricky Lim
Breeke Lo - You have been commenting alot and extensively on this case (so have many people, including the press report) --- so have you also committed sub judice, which falls under contempt of court?
This is a comment column for discussion, if no one can comments on the case --- why are you doing so, why CNA did not censor all comments - but allow everyone to put comments here? Many who commented have even distorted the facts reported including you.
The false claim have been brought out by :-
(1) Evidence
(2) Cross examination
(3) FMSS How's testimony
--- which are not disputed by the defence --- I am merely refering to what is reported in the press report. I have not distorted the facts as reported by the press report.
Are you suggesing the press report has also committed sub judice?
This is a comment column for discussion, if no one can comments on the case --- why are you doing so, why CNA did not censor all comments - but allow everyone to put comments here? Many who commented have even distorted the facts reported including you.
The false claim have been brought out by :-
(1) Evidence
(2) Cross examination
(3) FMSS How's testimony
--- which are not disputed by the defence --- I am merely refering to what is reported in the press report. I have not distorted the facts as reported by the press report.
Are you suggesing the press report has also committed sub judice?
Like · Reply · 1m
Ricky Lim
You even did a colorful distortion of facts on the press reports about this case:-
Breeke Lo
Looks like DS is no match for this lady. Plaintiff cross examination turned into counter defence :
Sylvia inexperience - mitigating factor
All Govt bodies coming at us - extenuating factor
Sylvia everything scared - v careful and meticulous
We disagree with each other - not in cahoots
Help PAP kill them off - political interference in AHTC
Caused my husband's death - has motive to attack Sylvia
No computer system for balancing - mitigating factor
Don't use our advice - WP has oversight and in control
Good job Ms How!
WP +1 today
Like · Reply · 1m
--- You are more likely to have committed sub judice by distorting facts --- whereas I was merely quoting the facts as reported by the press report. I did not add or minus facts as per the press report.
You distort facts, add your own opinion and interpretation - contrary to what is reported by the press --- which will be more liable to have committed sub judice.
Breeke Lo
Looks like DS is no match for this lady. Plaintiff cross examination turned into counter defence :
Sylvia inexperience - mitigating factor
All Govt bodies coming at us - extenuating factor
Sylvia everything scared - v careful and meticulous
We disagree with each other - not in cahoots
Help PAP kill them off - political interference in AHTC
Caused my husband's death - has motive to attack Sylvia
No computer system for balancing - mitigating factor
Don't use our advice - WP has oversight and in control
Good job Ms How!
WP +1 today
Like · Reply · 1m
--- You are more likely to have committed sub judice by distorting facts --- whereas I was merely quoting the facts as reported by the press report. I did not add or minus facts as per the press report.
You distort facts, add your own opinion and interpretation - contrary to what is reported by the press --- which will be more liable to have committed sub judice.
Like · Reply · 1m
Ricky Lim
This are some comments by legal circle on sub judice in this era of proliferation of social media:-
When a crime has taken place and the media report on it, sub judice infringement is not possible.
CNA will have close this comment column if there is a breach, isn't it?
When a crime has taken place and the media report on it, sub judice infringement is not possible.
CNA will have close this comment column if there is a breach, isn't it?
Like · Reply · 1m · Edited
Lu Pin
Ricky Lim You really have a lot of time to write loads of nonsense. I need only 1 point to write u off. The WP did not break any penal code, bcos if they did, it will be a criminal case instead of this lame civil case. U really are a disgraceful liar Ricky Lim. And looking at the time u have to waste away, u must either be a retiree or unemployed. Try looking for a job. Don't waste your time away like this.
Lau Lan Chu
Lu Pin Do you know if anything that is dilvulge in court further action can be taken. So don't be too complacent if there is no other action taken so far.
Lau Lan Chu
I am surprise engaging a lawyer also need to go through tender. Are they mocking the defendants?
Breeke Lo
Ricky Lim "CNA will have close this comment column if there is a breach, isn't it?" You are solely responsible for what you said in the comments. CNA is responsible for what they said, in the article, which never have once, used words like "PROVEN" or "GUILTY", which you have when you said "which have proven to be untrue in Court". You are stupid enough to take the Plaintiff lawyer's words to be PROOF. You are doing Justice Ramesh an injustice by implying he will simply follow what Davinder claim. Or have you been stupidly mistaking Davinder to be the judge all this whille?
Breeke Lo
Lau Lan Chu It's because "Shook Lin & Bok were also the legal advisers to audit firm KPMG", and one of the 3 panel members is KPMG managing partner. Because of the existing close working relationship, there ought to be good reasons why they were handpicked, and this article is the explanation why. AHTC and not the panel is paying for it afterall.
Manenough Tan
Lu Pin:"Ricky Lim .... I need only 1 point to write u off. The WP did not break any penal code, bcos if they did, it will be a criminal case instead of this lame civil case. " Now Ricky Lim is speechless.
Like · Reply · 3 · 2h
Ricky Lim
As per sub judice infringement not possible :- "When a crime has taken place and the media report on it, sub judice infringement is not possible."
As per press report, "Proof have been established that false claim was made" :-
(1) CNA Oct 16, 2018 AHTC trial: Davinder Singh accuses Sylvia Lim of lying to town council members, court and Parliament.
Addressing Ms Lim, Mr Singh said: "You see the words 'due to'? Ms Lim. In your defence you gave the impression that it was because AIM had terminated that AHTC had to upscale its computer system.
"In Parliament, you gave that very same impression. To your own town council members, both in the report and what was discussed, you continued to give that impression as well.
“In all the instances I have shown you, you led the town councillors, the court, Parliament, and the public, to believe that it was because AIM had terminated that AHTC had no choice but to upscale. And therefore was put in a difficult position as far as its collections were concerned. Correct?”
Ms Lim agreed.
(2) Today Published 29 OCTOBER, 2018 - AHTC trial: FMSS director asked Low Thia Khiang to replace ‘hopeless’ town council chairman Sylvia Lim
Ms How also accused Ms Lim of withholding information from auditors KPMG about “improper payments”, and that it was Ms Lim who did not want to keep the computer system of IT firm Action Information Management (AIM).
-- "which have proven to be untrue in Court" --- Proof - through evidence, cross examination, admission by defendant and testimony by FMSS How ---- have proven false claim was made to obtain approval for waiver of tender by the Plantiff lawyer.
Breek Lo - I did not put words into the mouth of the judge/court, like saying the defendant is FOUND GUILTY during the trial. You are the one that put words into my mouth.
I merely quote the press report in my comments - and I am cover under :- "As per sub judice infringement not possible :- "When a crime has taken place and the media report on it, sub judice infringement is not possible.""
Breek Lo - you are the one that is distorting facts and put words into my mouth.
As per press report, "Proof have been established that false claim was made" :-
(1) CNA Oct 16, 2018 AHTC trial: Davinder Singh accuses Sylvia Lim of lying to town council members, court and Parliament.
Addressing Ms Lim, Mr Singh said: "You see the words 'due to'? Ms Lim. In your defence you gave the impression that it was because AIM had terminated that AHTC had to upscale its computer system.
"In Parliament, you gave that very same impression. To your own town council members, both in the report and what was discussed, you continued to give that impression as well.
“In all the instances I have shown you, you led the town councillors, the court, Parliament, and the public, to believe that it was because AIM had terminated that AHTC had no choice but to upscale. And therefore was put in a difficult position as far as its collections were concerned. Correct?”
Ms Lim agreed.
(2) Today Published 29 OCTOBER, 2018 - AHTC trial: FMSS director asked Low Thia Khiang to replace ‘hopeless’ town council chairman Sylvia Lim
Ms How also accused Ms Lim of withholding information from auditors KPMG about “improper payments”, and that it was Ms Lim who did not want to keep the computer system of IT firm Action Information Management (AIM).
-- "which have proven to be untrue in Court" --- Proof - through evidence, cross examination, admission by defendant and testimony by FMSS How ---- have proven false claim was made to obtain approval for waiver of tender by the Plantiff lawyer.
Breek Lo - I did not put words into the mouth of the judge/court, like saying the defendant is FOUND GUILTY during the trial. You are the one that put words into my mouth.
I merely quote the press report in my comments - and I am cover under :- "As per sub judice infringement not possible :- "When a crime has taken place and the media report on it, sub judice infringement is not possible.""
Breek Lo - you are the one that is distorting facts and put words into my mouth.
Like · Reply · 1m · Edited
Ricky Lim
As for the rest :-
This is a civil lawsuit that was brought to Court - because 2 independent auditors established that :-
(1) There are "improper payment" that lead to the lost of $33 million.
(2) There are breach in the procurement process
(3) There are conflict of interest
--- it did not establish that "false claim" was made before the civil lawsuit ---- but the Plantiff lawyers only managed to establish this during presentation of evidence, cross examination, defendant admission and co-defendant testimony in this civil lawsuit.
I personally hope that the $33 million can be recovered - and ends with this civil lawsuit - and will not proceed further.
Personally I feel that the WP MPs has made contribution to the Country - and I wish them well.
(Citing the Penal Code is just a reminder for those who keep distorting facts in the forum --- to be mindful of what you say especially if you keep distorting facts).
This is a civil lawsuit that was brought to Court - because 2 independent auditors established that :-
(1) There are "improper payment" that lead to the lost of $33 million.
(2) There are breach in the procurement process
(3) There are conflict of interest
--- it did not establish that "false claim" was made before the civil lawsuit ---- but the Plantiff lawyers only managed to establish this during presentation of evidence, cross examination, defendant admission and co-defendant testimony in this civil lawsuit.
I personally hope that the $33 million can be recovered - and ends with this civil lawsuit - and will not proceed further.
Personally I feel that the WP MPs has made contribution to the Country - and I wish them well.
(Citing the Penal Code is just a reminder for those who keep distorting facts in the forum --- to be mindful of what you say especially if you keep distorting facts).
