No improper influence in Parti Liyani's case: Shanmugam

Internal reviews by the police and the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) have found lapses in how they handled the case of former domestic worker Parti Liyani, but also confirmed that there was no improper influence at any point, Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam told Parliament yesterday.

That a maid accused of theft by her prominent employer, former Changi Airport Group chairman Liew Mun Leong, was found guilty by a lower court but later acquitted on appeal in the High Court, shows that all are equal before the law here, the minister added.

Delivering a ministerial statement that stretched for more than two hours, Mr Shanmugam told the House there was no sign that Mr Liew or anyone from his family had lobbied or exerted pressure on the police, deputy public prosecutors or trial judge over the case.

In fact, the decisions on the case were taken by the investigation officer and his immediate supervisor, and it was the deputy public prosecutors and their directors in the AGC who decided to prosecute Ms Parti - the typical way such theft cases are handled.

There were good reasons for these decisions too, since Ms Parti herself had admitted to taking 10 to 15 items of clothing without permission and had also changed her explanations for some of the items from one statement to another, Mr Shanmugam told Parliament.

Justice Chan Seng Onn's acquittal of Ms Parti on Sept 4 had sparked questions about whether a powerful man had worked the system to his advantage, whether the police and AGC had unfairly prosecuted Ms Parti, whether she got a fair trial and whether there was one law for the wealthy and another for others.

Addressing these questions yesterday, Mr Shanmugam said: "I can be categorical. There was no influence by Liew Mun Leong. It was treated as any other theft case and handled accordingly."

"If Liew Mun Leong did unfairly influence the proceedings, then it will be a hit to our foundations. It will hit to our sense of fairness, equality, justice and (be) a dent to Project Singapore itself, because Singapore is built on these ideals."

There must be a ruthless intensity in upholding integrity, he said.

Workers' Party chairman Sylvia Lim (Aljunied GRC) and Progress Singapore Party Non-Constituency MP Leong Mun Wai accepted that Mr Liew did not exert influence in the case, but suggested that more could be done to ensure that the scales of justice are not tipped against the less powerful.

Ms Lim and Ms He Ting Ru (Sengkang GRC) moved a motion for debate on issues raised by the case, asking that "the House affirms that fairness, access and independence are cornerstones of Singapore's justice system, and calls on the Government to recognise and remedy its shortcomings in order to enhance justice for all, regardless of means or social status, including facilitating a review of the justice system".

Ms Lim and six of her party colleagues called on the Government to take a two-pronged approach to address what they saw as shortcomings in the system. She suggested the executive branch can tackle the "low-hanging fruit" like enhancing the criminal legal aid scheme, but said a Constitutional Commission should be set up to review more "complex matters" such as the separation of the Attorney-General's powers as public prosecutor and government lawyer.

Midway through the debate, Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok) suggested four amendments to the motion, which was changed to read: "That this House recognises that fairness, access and independence are cornerstones of Singapore's justice system, and affirms the Government's continuous efforts since independence to build a fair and just society and remedy any shortcoming in order to enhance justice for all, regardless of race, language, religion, economic means, or social status."

Expressing disappointment at this, Ms Lim said it implied the Government "does not even accept that there are any shortcomings... and that there would be no review".

In the end, all 10 WP MPs and two Progress Singapore Party NCMPs voted against the amended motion in a show of opposition unity.

During the marathon session that ended close to midnight, the House discussed issues thrown up by Ms Parti's case, going through the High Court judge's remarks as well as suggesting ways to improve access to justice for the poorer and less educated, and to protect the independence of the different parts of the criminal justice system.

Mr Shanmugam stressed that the point of his statement was not to reopen Ms Parti's case, and declined to comment on her conduct when asked by Mr Xie Yao Quan (Jurong GRC). "She has been acquitted by the High Court. And I said that we must proceed on that basis and not reopen that issue. I think we leave it at that and I don't want to be commenting on the decision," he said.

He noted the High Court's finding that Mr Liew's son Karl was dishonest, and yesterday, the police said the younger Mr Liew will be charged with perjury today for giving false information to a public servant and giving false evidence in court.

The investigation officer involved in the case and his supervising officer will also be disciplined for lapses in attending to evidence.

MPs agreed with Mr Shanmugam on the overall soundness of the system.

Responding to their points, Mr Shanmugam thanked Ms Lim and Ms He for recognising that the criminal justice system, taken in totality, works well.

"They're not saying the system is broken, or ineffective," he said. "We are on the same page, in many ways we are pushing at an open door."