SINGAPORE — Robust exchanges unfolded in Parliament in Monday (Feb 6) over a decision not to prosecute six ex-senior management personnel at a subsidiary of conglomerate Keppel Corporation who were caught up in a major bribery scandal.
One key question under the microscope involved what directors on earlier boards of Keppel and its subsidiary knew, or should have known, when huge bribes were paid to a Brazilian firm over many years. Keppel as a corporate entity has already admitted paying the bribes.
The key figures involved in Monday's exchanges were Ms Indranee Rajah, Minister in the Prime Minister's Office, and three Members of Parliament (MPs), one of them from the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) and two from the opposition Workers' Party (WP).
In responding to questions from more than 10 MPs, Ms Indranee reiterated an earlier statement from the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) in consultation with the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC).
She said that the decision not to pursue prosecutions was a result of "insufficient evidence to establish their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt".
"Beyond a reasonable doubt" is the standard of proof that the prosecution must meet in criminal trials where accused persons contest the charges against them.
The MPs' questions covered issues such as the impact of the decision on Singapore's zero-tolerance approach to corruption.
DID KEPPEL DIRECTORS HAVE CONSTRUCTIVE KNOWLEDGE OF THE BRIBE?
Mr Pritam Singh: I would like to confirm if police investigations and CPIB investigations included determining the constructive knowledge of the Keppel board of directors at the material time when corrupt payments were made to secure contracts in Brazil? That means not the current board (as of 2017 and 2018) that the minister referred to in 2018.
(In 2018, when the decision to defer prosecution came to light, at a parliamentary sitting back then, Mr Singh had asked a supplementary question of Ms Indranee, then in her capacity as Senior Minister of State for Law about the state of knowledge of the boards of Keppel Corp and its unit Keppel O&M over the corrupt payments. Strict laws govern the way that directors must keep themselves informed of relevant information as well the way that they owe a legal duty — known as a fiduciary duty — to act in the best interests of shareholders.)
https://www.todayonline.com/singapo...ords-mps-not-prosecute-bribery-keppel-2101711
