ANTI-CORRUPTION LAWS REVIEW IS NOW NOT NEEDED.
Mr Lim also asked about whether Singapore’s anti-corruption regulations may be reviewed for greater effectiveness.  ,
Mr. Chan argued that, despite Singapore’s strict measures against problem, some people might occasionally fall short.  ,
” When this happens, we should not have a knee-jerk response and soon stretch or put more laws”, said Mr Chan.
Rather, it needs to be determined if it is an adult or structural issue.
What we need to do is never change the rules, but to take decisive action against the perpetrator if the guidelines were clear but were flouted or ignored. If the guidelines were vague, we should understand or reduce the rules. We may revise the rules if the regulations were very weak, or if a new circumstance was not anticipated or covered by the regulations,” he said.  ,
Ms. Lim then inquired as to why the government should look into the PCA, given the justifications the Attorney-General’s Chambers ( AGC ) had provided regarding the PCA charges ‘ modifications.  ,
Given that there are two main factions to the deals and that both parties would have an interest in denying problem in the deals, the AGC had stated that it had changed the charges after considering the legal risks involved in proving them at trial beyond a reasonable question.
Mr. Chan made note of K Shanmugam, the secretary of laws and home affairs, who suggested that Section 165 should be merged with the PCA.  ,
Mr. Shanmugam stated that the government may examine the possibility of moving crimes under Sections 161 to 165 of the Penal Code to PCA in 2022.
” But as of right now, suffice it to say that the CPIB ( Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau ) and our enforcement agencies find the current framing to be able to do what we need to do,” said Mr. Chan.  ,
” But going forth, if there are new innovations that necessitate a review of this, we are available to them”.
Given that charges needed to be changed in the wake of the Iswaran case, Ms. Lim also questioned whether the CPIB and AGC had carried out a detailed investigation.  ,
According to Mr. Chan, that are reasons to believe that CPIB and AGC have performed as they should.
However, as I’ve mentioned and explained along the way, it is not unusual for the prosecution and the defense to observe the development of the case, and costs may occasionally be changed in this instance or any other cases,” he continued.  ,