City Harvest Lenient verdict shows Judiciary is
Sleeping on the job by taking Anti-Terrorism message with a light
pinch of salt.
![[Image: city-harvest-leaders-sentences---3660682.png]](http://www.channelnewsasia.com/image/8716804/0x0/1200/1262/89c4630ee651caad18a647d31055fa32/fc/city-harvest-leaders-sentences---3660682.png)
This
association of the concept of 'agent' as a solely commercial /
licensed professional limitation is a much too NARROW
definition.
By
all accounts, Kong Hee proclaimed himself to be the 'agent' of God
to City Harvest Church (CHC). Kong Hee was the primary mastermind
in both GROOMING his flock to accept his unquestionable authority
as well as masterminding the CORRUPT transfer of church funds
towards the illicit and covert objective of satisfying his wife's
childhood dreams of becoming an international sex-bomb pop-music
icon.
The
high court has thus OVERLOOKED the highly culpable aspect of
'GROOMING' as well as self proclamation by the pastor to be the
'agent/messenger ' of God, which in the minds of the impressionable
or lay public, is likely to cause them to be in a position of GREAT
VULNERABILITY and thus part with LARGE SUMS OF
MONEY.
These
ILLICITLY obtained finances obtained through the deceit of
MISREPRESENTING religious texts can then be transferred towards
even more nefarious causes such as mass killings and other inhuman
terrorism related causes.
Religion
based terrorist commonly recruit followers and fund their attacks
on innocent civilians by GROOMING illiterate or unsuspecting
individuals into perpetuating their extremist ideologies by
representing themselves as religious authority figures, aka
'agents/ representatives/ prophets of God'
The
ability of religious leaders to brainwash and indoctrinate is
certainly much GREATER than any licensed professional such as an
accountant, lawyer/ doctor etc since none of the listed licensed
professionals ordinarily bring the concept of the AFTERLIFE into
the picture.
The
quantum of monies corruptly misused is a good clue to the severity
of crime committed.
For
the judiciary to navel gaze and insists upon sentencing LENIENCY
merely based upon their limited and sudden knee jerk re-definition
of the term 'agent' is to commit an error of judgement akin to
missing the forest for the trees.
The
Judiciary has totally overlooked the issue of GROOMING which ought
DOUBLE the culpability of Kong Hee's crime.
The
City Harvest Church High Court judgement is thus a MISTAKE that
society will only live to pay the price for as religious leaders
with terror objectives read it as a judicial LOOPHOLE/
OBSOLESCENCE, and encouragement for them to achieve their
destructive, ethnic cleansing / genocidal
outcomes.
======================
Singapore
Why
judges ruled to reduce the jail terms of City Harvest Church
leaders
The
High Court, in a split decision, convicted Kong and his five
accomplices of a reduced charge - the least aggravated form of
Criminal Breach of Trust for which the punishment is up to seven
years’ jail.
(Clockwise
from top left): Tan Ye Peng, Kong Hee, John Lam, Chew Eng Han,
Sharon Tan and Serina Wee. (Photo: Ngau Kai Yan)
By
Vanessa Paige Chelvan
07
Apr 2017 09:49PM (Updated: 15 Jun 2017 12:36PM) Share this
content
SINGAPORE:
They were found guilty of misappropriating S$50 million of church
funds - a record amount in Singapore’s legal history - but six City
Harvest Church leaders saw their sentences reduced on Friday (Apr
7), in a twist to a long-running case that first went before the
courts way back in mid-2013.
image: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/image/8716804/0x0/1200/1262/89c4630ee651caad18a647d31055fa32/fc/city-harvest-leaders-sentences---3660682.png
So
why did the three-judge panel rule as it did?
In
2015, the six members - Kong Hee, Tan Ye Peng, Chew Eng Han, John
Lam, Serina Wee and Sharon Tan - were convicted of the most
aggravated form of Criminal Breach of Trust (CBT) under the Penal
Code: CBT by public servant, or by banker, merchant, or
agent.
Section
409 of the Penal Code states that:
Whoever,
being in any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion
over property, in his capacity of a public servant, or in the way
of his business as a banker, a merchant, a factor, a broker, an
attorney or an agent, commits criminal breach of trust in respect
of that property, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or
with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 20 years, and
shall also be liable to fine.
However
the High Court, in a split decision, convicted Kong and his five
accomplices of a reduced charge - the least aggravated form of CBT
for which the punishment is up to seven years’
jail.
For a
conviction under the aggravated CBT charge under section 409 of the
Penal Code to stand, the elements of the offence must be made
out:
1.
The accused (namely, Kong Hee, Tan Ye Peng and John Lam) were
entrusted with control over CHC’s funds.
2.
This entrustment was in the way of Kong, Ye Peng and Lam’s business
as agents.
3.
Money from CHC’s funds were misappropriated for various
unauthorised purposes as part of a conspiracy to misuse CHC’s
funds.
4.
The accused abetted each other by engaging in the above conspiracy
to misuse CHC’s funds; and
5.
The accused acted dishonestly in doing so.
Majority
of the panel - Judge of Appeal Chao Hick Tin and Justice Woo Bih Li
- decided the prosecution had not proved the second element of the
offence.
Their
decision largely came down to the wording of section 409, hinging
on the definition of the word “agent” and whether Kong and the
co-conspirators could be said to be “in the business” of
agents.
The
decision was also influenced by the judges’ interpretation of the
law. They said an agent under section 409 must refer to
“professional agents” as opposed to “casual
agents”.
The
wording of the law “(cannot) conceivably encompass a person (a
casual agent) who has been appointed the treasurer of a society and
by virtue of that appointment is holding onto the funds of the
society”, the judges said.
Section
409 must refer to a “professional agent”, “one who professes to
offer his agency services to the community at large and from which
he makes his living”, they said. “It refers to a commercial
activity done for profit.”
In
coming to their decision, JA Chao and Justice Woo abandoned a
precedent which has been applied in Singapore for the past 40
years, to draw this distinction: To fall under the scope of section
409, the agent must be “external” to the company or organisation
that is entrusting the property to him.
Kong,
Tan Ye Peng and Lam were directors of the CHC board, which were
“internal” roles, the judges deemed.
“While
a director undoubtedly holds an important position in a company or
organisation, it cannot be said that a person by becoming a
director has offered his services as an agent to the community at
large and makes his living as an agent.”
JA
Chao and Justice Woo acknowledged their decision would upset the
state of affairs, but said: “This does not, however, mean that we
can ignore the wording of the section.”
Between
the most aggravated form of CBT (section 409) and least aggravated
(section 406), there are another two sections covering other
aggravated forms of CBT - sections 407 and 408 - for which the
punishment is up to 15 years’ jail.
“We
agree that it is intuitively unsatisfactory,” the judges said, that
“(under sections 407 and 408), a clerk, servant, carrier or
warehouse keeper would be liable for an aggravated offence. This
does not, however, mean that we can ignore the wording of the
section”. “If an interpretation of a statutory provision is
erroneous … it must be corrected notwithstanding how entrenched it
may have become.”
Justice
Chan Seng Onn disagreed with the other judges.
The
convictions of Chew, Ye Peng, Serina and Sharon for falsification
of accounts were upheld.
Source:
CNA/xk
Read
more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/why-judges-ruled-to-reduce-the-jail-terms-of-city-harvest-church-8716810