Ex—CNB chief’s defence asks court not to convict innocent man

SINGAPORE: The defence in the corruption trial of the former chief of the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB), Ng Boon Gay, has asked the court not to convict an innocent man just to bring home the message that corruption is wrong.

Senior Counsel Tan Chee Meng, who is defending Ng, made the statement in his closing arguments on Monday morning.

Ng, 46, is accused of obtaining oral sex from 36—year—old Cecilia Sue, a former IT sales representative, in exchange for helping to further the business interests of her employers.

Mr Tan pressed the prosecution to nail the evidence in the case.

Mr Tan said a criminal trial is not prosecuted based on general principles and arguments but evidence on which the accused can be convicted.

He pointed to the so—called inconsistencies with which the prosecution had sought to impeach Ng.

He argued that the prosecution picked and chose selected parts of Ng’s statements to the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) and took them out of context.

The defence pointed out that Ng did not influence CNB’s procurement of projects with NCS and Jardine OneSolution.

Mr Tan said all procurement processes were complied with and that Ms Sue never asked Ng for favours, nor did she expect favours from Ng.

But Mr Tan admitted that there was a non—declaration conflict by Ng. However, he maintained that this in itself does not amount to corruption.

Given all these factors, he argued that the only possibility left for the prosecution is to base its case on future favours, which the defence said does not make sense.

Mr Tan said the prosecution’s case is internally inconsistent and that it is dangerous to convict Ng on Ms Sue’s evidence.

He said the prosecution had acknowledged that its key witness had lied in court but had taken "a blinkered approach with selective references to the evidence" and made submissions "without any evidential basis".

Mr Tan stressed that the prosecution is asking the judge to speculate, in the absence of evidence, as to what went on in Ms Sue’s mind and what went through Ng’s mind.

"We do not come before the court to read minds. It would be totally unsafe to base a conviction on this," said Mr Tan.

— CNA/al