THE authorities had received information connected to transactions, now
alleged to be bogus, by City Harvest Church members as far back as
2008.
Almost two years later, in 2010, the Commercial Affairs Department (CAD) opened an investigation into the matter.
This timeline emerged in court yesterday when prosecution witness Kevin
Han, who led the CAD investigation, clarified that 2008 was when
sources first came forward with information related to the alleged
wrongdoings. He had said earlier the first information about the case
surfaced in 2005.
Six people, including City Harvest founder Kong Hee, are on trial for
allegedly funnelling millions in church funds through bogus deals
between 2007 and 2009, either to finance the pop music career of his
wife, Ms Ho Yeow Sun, or to cover this up.
Mr Han's clarification that it was 2008, and not 2005, was seized upon
by defence lawyer N. Sreenivasan, who said that the CAD had given him a
2010 report when he had asked for the "first information report" (FIR)
about the charges against his client, deputy senior pastor Tan Ye Peng.
Mr Sreenivasan said he had been "misled", and added the FIR was "moving
all over the place". He said the accused should have the true FIR so
they could explain the alleged conduct in it.
He also noted that if the FIR was in 2008, CAD did not commence
investigations until "almost one year and eight months" later. To this,
Mr Han said "there may have been enquiries done on the report, but I am
not aware".
Deputy Public Prosecutor Mavis Chionh argued that the 2010 report was
CAD's assessment "based upon their examination of information from
various sources". She noted that the prosecution had clarified this with
Mr Sreenivasan shortly after that report was sent.
When the defence sought to find out more about the 2008 report, Ms
Chionh said that, as it is a suspicious transaction report, its content
is confidential to protect the informer's identity under the law.
Defence lawyer Andre Maniam, acting for former finance manager Serina
Wee, requested a copy of what the prosecution considered the FIR, even
if redactions were needed. Chief District Judge See Kee Oon suggested he
take it up with the prosecution.
The trial is expected to resume next Wednesday with Ms Foong Ai Fang, who was involved in the audits of the church.
No comments:
Post a Comment