RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.83

INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION OF CORRUPTION OFFENCES
Koh Teck Hin*

I. INTRODUCTION
My first paper, (Corruption Control in Singapore) outlines the corruption control framework that has been
put in place in Singapore. The Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB)’s mandate is to enforce andinvestigate all corruption offences. Through persistent enforcement efforts, we are able to keep corruption
levels low. We must ensure that the corrupt offender feels that corruption is a high risk business and that they
will be caught and dealt with for their crimes. The law and the enforcement agency must combine to give bite toanti-corruption efforts.

II. PURPOSE
We know that different anti-corruption agencies around the world adopt different approaches andstrategies in their enforcement and investigation into corruption offences. This paper has two purposes:(i) Firstly, to share our experiences; and(ii) Secondly, an understanding of the investigation approaches and strategies of other countries canfurther enhance the basis for mutual co-operation and assistance. By understanding one another ininvestigation matters, we can facilitate support for one another.

III. A TOTAL APPROACH TO ENFORCEMENT & INVESTIGATION
A. Approaches & Strategies to Investigation
CPIB is under the Prime Minister’s Office. We report to the Prime Minister and not to any otherminister or government authority. This gives us functional independence so that no government body canquestion us or influence us in our enforcement and investigation efforts.
Our approach in investigation is a total approach . This ensures we have a good control over the situation
and we can contain corruption cases as far as possible. This simply means:a)Firstly, no case is too small to investigate. For example, a motorist is stopped for drunk driving andhe tries to bribe the traffic police officer to get off the hook. He will be charged in court. If a foreign
visitor is at our immigration control point at our border and he did not meet the entry requirements
but tries to bribe the immigration officer, he will be charged in court. In short, corruption is nottolerated and all cases will be investigated and dealt with seriously.

b)Secondly, we deal with cases regardless of rank and status. Even serving ministers have been charged
and chief executive officers of major companies have been dealt with too. There is no exemption forthe ‘big fish’ or for anyone in high places. We have in the past investigated and prosecuted ministers
for indulging in corruption-related activities. In a case involving Wee Toon Boon, then Minister of State
for Environment, he was charged with corruption involving a sum of about $840,000/-. He had used his
ministerial status to make representation on behalf of a property developer in return for gratifications,which included a bungalow and free air travel tickets for his family. He was subsequently convicted andsentenced to imprisonment and also ordered to pay a penalty. And Teh Cheang Wan, another Minister
for National Development, was investigated for accepting two bribes totalling $1 million in return for
helping two property developers to retain and acquire pieces of land for development. However, Teh* Deputy Director (Operations), Corrupt Practices Investigations Bureau, Singapore.

132

THE 13TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE ON THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESPONSE TO CORRUPTIONVISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

committed suicide before he could be formally charged in Court.
c)

We are prepared to deal with both givers and receivers of bribes. Under our law, they are equallyculpable. However, sometimes we may not charge the giver if he or she was under duress when heor she gave the bribe or there were some other compelling reasons which led to the offence.

d)

We can deal with corruption in all areas, in any industry or business sector, in all branches ofgovernment, the judiciary, Parliament, political parties, non government organizations. Thereis no area where the law does not permit the CPIB to investigate. The powers given to CPIB toinvestigate also apply equally to all sectors. In this way, CPIB helps to keep government clean andensures healthy economic activities in the private sector.

e)

We don’t leave it to various government authorities to deal with the problem. For example, if there
is an issue involving Immigration Department, we don’t just leave it to them. We will take overcorruption investigation and, if necessary, the immigration investigation as well. In some cases, we
may jointly investigate with them so that a complete resolution of the corruption and immigration
offences can be achieved. We may also help government departments review their systems toremove or change those procedures which may be vulnerable to corruption.

f)

We are prepared to investigate based on anonymous complaints. However, we need to be very
careful so that we are not “used” by someone who is malicious and wants to cause harm to others.
We will process the information and there is a weekly session where the Directorate members(comprising of Director and Heads of Operation Units) will meet to decide if investigation should be
conducted on the complaints received.

CPIB is also empowered to investigate other offences, besides corruption. This is extremely importantbecause corruption crime may not exist in isolation. It may occur and be mixed with other crimes such as
cheating, commercial crimes, etc. Therefore any anti corruption agency must have the power to question
suspects on the full range of offences, otherwise there will be severe limits placed on investigations and theaccused person will probably be able to get away from the punishment that he or she deserves.
CPIB can also refer non-corruption offences to other specialized enforcement agencies like the Singapore
Police Force, Immigration Department etc. when these were detected during the course of our investigation.
We make it easy for anyone to report corruption offences. The CPIB is very accessible. The public can makereports by calling our 24-hour hotline, or they can visit our office at any time. They can also send us letters bypost or fax. They can also report from their homes via the CPIB internet website (www.cpib.gov.sg) or send us anemail. By opening up all possible venues for reporting, we hope that those who have come across or are aware ofcorruption cases will have less difficulty and unwillingness to report.

B. Corruption in the Private Sector
As mentioned, CPIB is empowered to investigate corruption in both the public and private sectors. Our
corruption control efforts in the private sector are not only confined to businesses. It also includes non-profit
organizations and charity organizations. In recent times in Singapore, charity organizations have come underinvestigations by the authorities. CPIB has also stepped in when there is corruption committed by personnelof charity organizations. This strict stance on corruption in charity organizations is necessary so as to deter
offenders from taking advantage of kindhearted people to enrich themselves.
Some may ask why there is a need to deal with private sector corruption cases. There are good reasons
why CPIB has to deal with the private sector, namely:a)Corruption in the private sector affects public interest. Some used to erroneously think that private
sector corruption is a private affair between the giver and the taker. But consider the following.
When a supermarket purchaser take bribes from a supplier, the supplier will inevitably mark up its
cost to cover the bribes. In so doing, the supermarket which purchased the goods at a higher pricewill sell it an even higher price. It is the public that suffers in the end.

b)

Singapore is a small nation without natural resources. It has to depend on trade and foreign

133

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.83

investment. To attract investment, we have to ensure that business cost is low and corruption,
whether in the private or public sector, increases business costs.
c)

The private sector is a key pillar of the Singapore’s economy. It drives national economic growth.
We need to have a level playing field for all and the private sector must be clean in order for foreignbusinesses to want to work with us and to invest in Singapore.

d)

The private and public sectors are also intertwined, which is another reason why it matters that
CPIB watches over the private sector as well. As more and more government functions become
outsourced to the private sector, many private companies are now performing functions once used tobe performed by the government. Corruption in the private sector which affects strategic functions
can also impact the key areas of government and society at large.

e)

A lot of the private sector enterprises have huge public shareholdings as well. If the enterprise is
not well run and commits crimes, then its share price may be affected and this in turn affects theinterests of the public.

C. Types of Private Sector Cases
Private Sector corruption cases can come in various forms – some of the cases we have seen in theprivate sector are:a)Cases involving contracts or procurement of services or supplies. The corrupt offender receives
kickbacks in return for awarding contracts. An example of a recent case involves senior managementof a car company receiving expensive gifts in return for awarding agency contracts.

b)

Cases involving corrupt offenders who supervise contractors or suppliers, for example, not checking
on the quality of work or product delivered and overlooking deficiencies. This can result in serious
repercussions. An example, in building works, we have dealt with clerks of work who took bribes
to overlook certain deficiencies. We have also dealt with inventory or warehouse staff who were
corrupted and accepted imitation or substandard goods delivered by suppliers in return for bribes.

c)

There are those who are corrupt and have access to sensitive data and divulge to unauthorized
persons in return for some rewards. These cases involve people working in areas where there
are storehouses of data about customers and they abuse it by passing on to persons such as illegalmoneylenders who were looking for their debtors and private investigators tracing whereabouts ofpersons of interest.

d)

There are those who are in positions of authority such as the CEO or General Manager, who tookbribes and granted approval for various matters in favour of the bribe givers.

e)

In some cases, corruption is mixed with other offences. For example, the corrupted may also cook
the company’s books when they try to hide the corrupt transactions. They may manufacture false
invoices to reflect fictitious transactions. Once uncovered, they will be dealt with by CPIB. Our
officers are also empowered to investigate other crimes uncovered in the course of corruption
investigations.

IV. INVESTIGATION STRATEGIES
So, what is the magical formula for the CPIB to sustain the good efforts of our government and toeffectively fight corruption? In order to achieve this mission, we approach it through a framework of action
which involves four linked competencies, that is Intelligence, Interview, Forensics and Field Operations.
Success in solving corruption cases hinges on the interplay of these core competencies.

A. Intelligence
The first competency – Intelligence. Intelligence work is critical in the current landscape of constantthreats and vulnerabilities. It involves the collation and processing of information for specific objectives,
so you can say that intelligence work is really investigation in the covert sense. Intelligence work often
provides the basis for successful investigation. CPIB’s many successes in cracking major corruption
cases were largely attributed to the proactive approach and the efficiency of our exceptional intelligence134THE 13TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE ON THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESPONSE TO CORRUPTIONVISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

capability. Our Intelligence Division adopts both a pro-active and re-active stance - we have projects which
are intelligence-led operations, which involve ‘live’ cases where our Intelligence Division centralizes
its efforts in collation, analysis and ‘live’ monitoring. We also have cases which are sent for intelligenceenrichment. For such cases, the Intelligence Division plays a supportive role to our Operations Units intheir investigations, providing critical information such as establishing identities, relationships, housing
targets, etc. during the pre-operation and operation phases.
To stay on top of the situation, we need to continue to build on its capabilities and strong expertise,and expand on its current resources and established networks and relationships. Our Intelligence Division
is in close liaison with our overseas counterparts such as Hong Kong’s ICAC (Independent Commission
Against Corruption), and Malaysia ACC (Anti-Corruption Commission), as well as our local intelligenceagencies from the Singapore Police Force, Immigration & Checkpoints Authority and Central Narcotics
Bureau, etc. Information and expertise are shared robustly amongst these agencies, resulting in mountingof joint operations or co-ordinated operations on some cases. Some examples include the investigations into
Citiraya, a public listed company, when CPIB and the Commercial Affairs Dept (CAD) of the Police Force,
moved in to uncover corruption and commercial offences. Another example is the co-ordinated operationin the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) saga, which involved CPIB and CAD looking into various aspectsof the excesses by the former CEO of NKF and others. We know full well that law enforcement is effective
only when we can deal with the problem in its totality and the need for collaboration is there.

B. Interview
It is often challenging to deal with corruption cases where more often than not, the complainant is as
likely to be culpable of the corrupt act as the accused person. Lines are blurred, and our officers are hardpressed to find a clear-cut situation where there is a distinct perpetrator and victim. In corruption cases,
our officers are frequently confronted by complainants or witnesses who are not forthcoming, for fear thatwhat they say may implicate them. Hence, it is imperative that our officers are equipped with all aspects ofinvestigative work, particularly their ability to sieve out the truth from witnesses, as well as to discern theinnocent from the guilty. This brings us to the second competency - “Interview.”
An interview, simply put, involves the questioning of a person regarding his or her involvement orsuspected involvement in a criminal offence. There are many reasons why people choose not to give thenecessary information, or choose to mislead by giving false information. Hence, it is important for ourofficers to be flexible enough to switch modes to tailor to the different situations or types of persons being
interviewed.
Our judicial courts are quite stringent these days, increasing the weightage given to other admissible
evidence, as opposed to merely just accepting positive statements given by accused persons. As a result,
we have to emphasize greatly developing the interview skills of our officers, which can be the determining
element in reducing the time and resources devoted to highly complex investigations.
With regard to interview, we make use of polygraph machines and we find it very useful. However, we do
not use the test result as evidence in Court but only as an aid to investigation.

C. Forensics
Another area which we pay much attention to these days is Forensics, or specifically, Computer Forensics– which is becoming indispensable in our investigations.
The sheer complexity of illicit transactions, whether it is at the individual, syndicate or corporate levels,
requires an incredible level of expertise and capability from our officers. Criminals’ little black books haveundergone a major facelift and have progressed to PDAs, smart phones, and personal desktops; the amountof records detailing corrupt transactions electronically is overwhelming.
To overcome this challenge, CPIB set up a Computer Forensics Unit, with officers coming from theOperations Division performing on a part-time basis, trained to handle the collection, preservation,
anaylsis and court presentation of computer-related evidence. Our officers are in regular contact with ourcounterpart from the Criminal Investigation Department’s Technology Crime Forensic Branch to shareexperiences and pointers in this area.

135

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.83

There are various cases where forensic evidence played a big part in solving cases. I foresee in the near
future, with great advances in technological tools, software, and elaborate IT infrastructures, computer
forensics will play an even more proactive role, in tandem with intelligence, as opposed to being a mere
investigative support and response mechanism.

D. Field Operations
The last competency is Field Operations. By field operations, I refer to the range of investigative
activities carried out in the field, such as search and seizure, field enquiries, raids and arrests. How theoperations are being carried out and how much information security is exercised over it will determine thesuccess of any operation. This cannot be overlooked and the capability needs to be developed and worked oncontinuously.
E. Interplay of the Four Competencies
The synergy from the interplay of these four competencies – Intelligence, Interview, Forensics andOperations - is critical to the success of cracking some of our major cases. Operation Crossover is one
such case, showcasing the interplay of these elements. In this case, our Intel asset had given us sufficientdetails on who were the main players of the syndicate in Citiraya involved in the diversion of the computer
chips; who were the staff from client companies that were bribed; and their modus operandi. Our Intel asset
also told us the exact container, kept in the free trade zone, containing a shipment of computer chips to beenrouted to Hong Kong. With this information, an operation was mounted, resulting in the seizure of that
container. Subsequently, through intensive interrogations and interviews, the parties involved admitted tothe corrupt activities. Forensic searches and analysis carried out on (a computer notebook of) Ng Teck Boon,one of the main players, also contributed to the cracking of this case – it revealed records of shipments ofcomputer chips fraudulently obtained through corrupt means and inflation of the company’s accounts. This
piece of evidence, together with other physical evidence such as uncrushed computer chips, seized from
Teck Boon’s company and warehouse, led to his confession and admissions of other parties involved in thescam.
The four competencies interact and, by extracting the appropriate value from each one and allowing eachto leverage off the other, achieve maximum results. At various junctures, any one of these pillars will playa more significant role to provide the breaking point for successful solution of cases. For example, if crucial
evidence was hidden in computers and, through computer forensics, investigators are able to retrieve theevidence, then this may prove to be the key to solving the case in hand. Similarly, the interview competency
may play the bigger role when skilful interrogation of suspects leads to confessions or the gathering of
critical evidence which is instrumental in solving the case.

V. EVIDENCE GATHERING & PROSECUTION
What we are mindful of is that for us to be successful in investigation, we need to emphasize evidence
gathering. This is always a challenge due to the following reasons:a)b)Corruption offenders will hide and not tell the truth; andThere are increasingly sophisticated modus operandi and methods to transact and hide bribe monies.

When we apply our minds in using the four competencies of intelligence, interview, forensics and field
operations, we also focus on collecting and consolidating the evidence. From the evidence, we review thecase. Sometimes, we sit together in case conferences to go through these issues: “Do we have the evidence
to charge anyone? What evidence is there when we proceed to charge?” We make use of an evidence matrix.
This matrix has facilitated our case review and decision making process. Evidence of accepting/receiving/obtaining gratifications is reflected in the table, where officers document actus reus , inputting details of
the corrupt transactions which the subject has admitted to in his or her statements, e.g. when did thetransaction occur, who did he or she hand the gratification over to, what is the documentary evidence, etc.
Next to the information is the detailing of documentary or other evidence of giving/offering/promising of
the corrupt transactions. Usually, for easier reference, the evidence for giver and receiver involved in thesame transaction are placed next to each other, quoting the exact paragraph of the subject’s statements from136

THE 13TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE ON THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESPONSE TO CORRUPTIONVISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

which the information was extracted. As for the evidence on corrupt intent, it is also recorded in the table,
and it includes details such as what are the gratifications meant for.
We are also mindful that we need to address the legal aspects. In the Singapore system, CPIB does
not have in-house legal experts. We understand that in some countries, the anti-corruption agency has its
own in-house legal experts and some agencies also conduct prosecution themselves. CPIB depends on
the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) for legal advice. Under our law, we cannot charge a person incourt for corruption unless the Attorney-General gives his or her express consent. So there is a division of
responsibilities and a check and balance. We in CPIB are the operational experts in investigating corruption
offences. But we need the legal experts from AGC. Together, when both operational experts and legal
experts agree that there is a case, we can then proceed to charge offender in court. Once prosecution is
mounted, CPIB officers will work together with prosecutors to present the evidence in Court.
In terms of prosecution, as we are prepared to prosecute both the givers and receivers of bribes, we haveto stage our prosecution of the accused persons in sequential order. Sometimes the receiver is prosecuted
first and the giver is the prosecution witness. After the case is over, the giver is prosecuted and thereceiver in turn becomes the witness. This can present some challenges, especially when there is not much
independent evidence apart from what the giver and receiver say about the crime. Therefore, as we adopt
this tough stance against both sides of the corruption crime, it is the responsibility of CPIB to ensure that itgathers strong evidence on the case so as to be able to prosecute all parties involved. So far, our conviction
rate is of above 95% each year and this bears testimony to the strength of cases brought to the Court.
There are instances where the only evidence we have is from the giver and the giver is not willing totestify unless given immunity from prosecution. As a rule, the Attorney General’s Chambers does not grant
immunity easily. It will be under exceptional grounds if immunity is granted.
There may be cases in the public sector, where after investigation, there is no evidence of corruption
but there is evidence that the public official had infringed some government rule or regulation. In suchsituations, CPIB will provide the information to the Public Service Commission or to the officer’s
Department or Ministry for them to take departmental disciplinary proceedings against the said officer.
In some cases, apart from dealing with the culprits, after the case is over, CPIB may identify flaws orloopholes in the system, work process or procedures of the affected government department and offer somerecommendations or suggestions for them to consider as they work towards plugging the loopholes.

VI. STRATEGIC THRUSTS
To discharge its role effectively, CPIB must stay on top of the situation at all times and its capability must
be kept up to the mark. To ensure this, CPIB embarks on three strategic thrusts, namely Strengthening
Operational Capabilities, Forging Networks & Partnerships and Investing in Organisational Excellence.
In “Strengthening Operational Capabilities,” CPIB seeks to improve on investigation capabilities such as
document examination, computer forensic, financial investigation. We need to hone our skills in the areas
required.
In “Forging Networks & Partnerships,” CPIB forges partnerships with local and international entities.
To ensure good governance and to combat corruption effectively, CPIB recognizes the need to strengtheninternational and regional co-operation and liaison. As such, CPIB actively participated in various anticorruption initiatives and international fora, such as the United Nations Convention against Corruption(UNCAC) – Conference of State Parties, ADB/OECD Anti-Corruption Initiative, ACT Task Force (APEC
Anti-Corruption and Transparency Task Force), MOUs amongst anti corruption agencies of the ASEAN
region and the International Association of Anti Corruption Authorities (IAACA).
In “Investing in Organisational Excellence,” CPIB invests heavily in training her people and encourages
staff to do knowledge sharing and innovation. We regularly do in-house learning where we bring all
operational staff together for training. We may invite experts from various government Ministries and fromprivate industry to address the officers on issues of topical interest. When there are new areas of work,

137

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.83

we will build new capabilities. For instance, with the opening of the two Integrated Resorts with casinos
operations in Singapore, CPIB may have to tackle casino-related corruption cases. Therefore, CPIB has
built up its capability to deal with this challenge. CPIB is also active in outreach programmes to raise publicawareness through regular talks, especially for public officers in the enforcement agencies, on the pitfalls ofcorruption. Selective outreach is done with specific industry sectors.

VII. CONCLUSION
While Singapore has successfully controlled corruption, this is no guarantee that it is always easy tosuppress corruption. There are various challenges we face in investigating corruption offences.
a)Firstly, the changing nature of corruption. While behaviour and motivation of the corrupted may besimilar, the methods used have transformed greatly. There is more sophistication seen in corruption
today. More complex methods are used. The corrupt transactions are more complicated, going
through various loops and intermediaries. There are more methods used to hide the money trail
such as bank transfers, false accounting, phantom workers, camouflage payments of various types.
Computers are often used in the commission of the offence such that where we used to seize paper
records in the past, today, we seize a lot of computers and electronic media. It is thus important
for the enforcement agency to continually upgrade its capability and ensure its personnel are welltrained and well skilled.

b)Secondly, there is internationalization of the issue of corruption. Corruption offences can crossinternational borders. This brings with it challenges for law enforcement and where necessary, weneed to work with foreign counterparts in investigating corruption cases. At the international level,
there is also greater interest by governments around the world in dealing with corruption.

Corruption is a dynamic phenomenon and CPIB continues to have an important role to play in keeping
Singapore clean, and our efforts to combat corruption and uphold a high standard of transparency would nothave been possible without synergy with the whole of government. In addition, we also require our fellow
law enforcement members, like all of you, to join in and help in the fight against corruption to make theworld a better place to live in.

138