In the case of former Workers' Party MP Spicy Yusha lying in Parliament, the parliamentary privilege committee in charge of the investigation submitted a report recommending to Congress that Spicy Yusha was fined S$35,000.
(The scene of the hearing.) Image source: gov.sg)
In addition, the report pointed out that Bi Danxing, the leader of the Workers' Party, was suspected of perjury at the hearing and was suspected of leading the way in lying about Li Yusha; Vice Chairman Fraser repeatedly refused to answer at the hearing, suspected of contempt for Parliament.
Four people were involved in the matter – then-MP Li Yusha, the workers' party leader Bi Danxing, the workers' party vice chairman Frasha, and the workers' party chairman Lin Ruilian. Since this committee was established to investigate the matter of Spicy Yusha's lying, it only has the right to investigate and recommend punishment for Spicy Yusha's lying, and other problems that arise in the process of investigating and collecting evidence in this case (such as witnesses suspected of perjury) do not have the right to recommend punishment.
Accordingly, the Commission recommended to Congress that BiDanxing and Fraser refer the matter to the Attorney-General's Office for further investigation and to study whether to bring criminal charges before the courts.
This is the first time in the history of Singapore's Parliament that a member of parliament suspected of committing a crime has been brought to the Attorney General's Office for investigation. Many years ago, Workers' Party mp Jayerlenen and Democratic Party leader Xu Shunquan were also judged to be at fault by the Parliamentary Privileges Committee, but they were all directly handled by the National Assembly and did not transfer to justice.
Last December, the Congressional Privileges Committee held a 31-hour hearing on Whata Li Yusha lied about and its follow-up, and yesterday presented more than 300 pages of recommendations to Congress. Congress could debate the report and the recommendations as early as next Tuesday.
Small science popularization:
Why is it that Li Yusha is not criminally liable for lying in Congress, but bi Danxing's alleged lying at the hearing may be criminally liable?
In order to protect the freedom of expression of members of Congress, members of Congress have the privilege of exempting them from criminal or civil charges when speaking in Congress. Lying in Congress is a serious misconduct and an abuse of Congressional privileges, but does not constitute a criminal offense.
On the other hand, at the hearing, witnesses have sworn to make truthful confessions. At this point, lying may constitute a criminal offence of perjury, which can be fined up to S$7,000 or jailed for no more than three years, or both.
If a reasonable question is refused at a hearing, a maximum fine of S$5,000 or imprisonment for no more than two years, or both, if convicted.
She did not lie at the hearing, so she was not suspected of perjury, not of a criminal offense, so she did not have to hand it over to the Attorney General's Office, but only had to be disposed of by Congress itself.
(Bi Danxing swore that he would give truthful testimony.) Image source: gov.sg)
Several contradictory testimonies at the hearing
Spicy Yusha's behavior and punishment
On August 3, 2021, Workers' Party MP Li Yusha spoke in Parliament. She said she had accompanied a 25-year-old rape victim to police three years earlier to report the crime. She said the officer who took over the case commented at the time on the victim's dress, as well as commenting that she had been drinking. The victim then left the police station crying.
(On Aug. 3, Spicy Yusha spoke before Congress.) Image source: gov.sg)
On October 4, Interior Minister Shanmugan informed Parliament that "the police spent a great effort searching all the records but did not find the people and things that Spicy Yusha said" On the same day, Spicy Yusha reconfirmed in Congress that what she said on August 3 was true, but she and the victim had disappeared, and she did not want to let the other party be hurt twice, so she was unwilling to provide details.
On November 1, the National Assembly resumed, and Li Yusha spoke in Congress, admitting that she lied on August 3, but in fact there was no such thing. On 2 November, the Workers' Party announced the formation of a disciplinary committee to investigate Li Yusha's lying in Parliament. On November 30, Spicy Yusha resigned and lost her seat in the National Assembly.
The Board of Inquiry believes that the responsibility for the first time that Li Yusha lied on August 3 is all her own, so it is recommended that she be fined S$25,000 for lying on August 3.
As for Spicy Yusha's repetition of the lie on October 4, the Committee held that at that time, Spicy Yusha had confessed to the highest level of her political party that she had repeated the lie in Parliament under the guidance of the highest level, and therefore recommended that she be fined S$10,000 for repeating the lie on October 4.
Bi Danxing is "dominant"
The committee believes that the reason why Li Yusha has not confessed to the National Assembly after August 3 is that the party leader Bi Danxing is "dominant".
(Bi Danxing testified at a hearing on Dec. 10.) Image source: gov.sg)
According to the report, on October 3, after Spicy Yusha confessed to Bi Danxing that she had lied to the Parliament on August 3, As a leader, Bi Danxing instructed that if she maintained the lie of August 3, "I will not criticize you." As a result, at the congressional meeting the next day (October 4), Spicy Yusha repeated the lie.
Bi Danxing's explanation was that he let Spicy Yusha decide for herself whether to confess to Congress; the committee believed that Bi Danxing could have directly instructed Spicy Yusha to confess in Congress, but he did not do so, but guided her to continue to lie.
The report also pointed out that if Bi Danxing asked Spicy Yusha to confess in the Parliament on October 3, there would be a series of preparations, including the preparation of the speech, the approval of the Central Committee of the Workers' Party, etc., but bi Danxing did not start these tasks at that time, indicating that he did not intend to let Spicy Yusha tell the truth.
One proof is that later, when Li Yusha was preparing to confess in Parliament on November 1, the Workers' Party launched this series of preparations.
Bi Danxing "smeared" spicy yusha with mental illness
At the hearing, Bi Danxing pointed out that the reason why Li Yusha said that "the workers' party top brass said to take this matter to the grave" may be that she suffers from dissociation disorder. Bi Danxing suggested that the Congressional Privilege Committee allow Li Yusha to undergo a psychological evaluation.
Little Science
Dissociation disorder is a relatively unfamiliar mental illness, including "dissociative amnesia, dissociative eczema, multiple personality abnormalities, and self-inductive aphasia" and so on. Dissociation refers to the dissociation of functions in memory, self-awareness, or cognition. The cause is usually extreme stress or deep trauma.
The committee noted that at the hearing, Bi Danxing testified that from August to September last year, Li Yusha's work performance as a member of Parliament was not abnormal, but he later said that Li Yusha may have dissociation disorder, which was a contradictory confession.
Spicy Yusha underwent an independent mental assessment that determined that she was in good spirits.
The Committee considers that the reason why Bi Danxing alleged that Li Yusha may have mental illness was to relieve Bi Danxing of his own behavior.
Bi Danxing "smeared" party cadres and volunteers
Luo Peiying, assistant secretary of Spicy Yusha, and volunteer Naden testified that Spicy Yusha had told them, "The workers' party top brass said to take this matter to the grave."
At the same time, they believe that the disciplinary committee set up by the Workers' Party against Spicy Yusha should disclose all facts, otherwise it will be extremely unfair to Spicy Yusha. They told the Commission that Spicy Yusha should not resign.
Luo Peiying said at the hearing that she believed that the three members of the disciplinary committee— Bi Danxing, Lin Ruilian and Fraser — had selfish intentions. She believes that it is very unfair to let Spicy Yusha carry the pot alone now.
(Luo Peiying testified at the hearing.) Image source: gov.sg)
Bi Danxing said at the hearing that Luo Peiying and Nadeng were very protective of Spicy Yusha, and they were very dissatisfied with the outcome of Spicy Yusha's "resignation". He believed they might have lied to the hearing.
The investigation report pointed out that Luo Peiying and Naden told the truth at the hearing, but Bi Danxing "shamelessly falsely accused" them of possible lying.
According to the report, Luo Peiying has been The assistant secretary of Bi Danxing for many years, Naden has assisted many workers' party members in their work for many years, and he also went out of the workers' party propaganda film for the 2020 general election, and the two of them told the truth at the hearing, which was not good for themselves, but could lose a lot.
The testimony of the second-in-command is extremely unfavorable to the first-in-command
In his testimony, Bi Danxing said that he did not let Spicy Yusha choose to continue to lie or confess to Congress, but clearly gave Instructions to Spicy Yusha to confess to Congress.
Lin Ruilian, the second in command of the Workers' Party and chairman of the party, submitted her notebook as evidence when she gave evidence. Her notebook recorded: "Bi Danxing told Spicy Yusha that when I saw you, I told you that you had to decide for yourself. Have you ever thought you have to tell the truth in Congress? ”
(Source: gov.sg)
The report notes that this piece of evidence, "you have to decide for yourself," is extremely detrimental to BiDanxing, and it directly overturns Bidanxing's previous confession of "explicitly instructing Li Yusha to confess to Congress."
"As a lawyer and party chairman, Lin Ruilian should be well aware of the effectiveness of her evidence," the report said. ”
The third officer was reluctant to respond to questions
Fascha, the third in command of the Workers' Party and vice chairman, was suspected of deliberately concealing the facts because he refused to answer questions during the hearing.
December 9
Of course
On December 9, Fraser attended the hearing with some documentary documents.
He told the hearing that the documents were used to help him recall the sequence of events that happened at the time.
He said that two days before attending the hearing, he met with Bi Danxing and Lin Ruilian on December 8 and 9, and the meeting time was about two or three hours, discussing whether the dates at various points after the incident were correctly recorded.
The hearing asked if Bi Danxing and Lin Ruilian had brought any documents or records when they met with Fraser. Fraser refused to answer, saying that I could only answer what I had brought, not what the other two had brought.
Tang Zhenhui, a member of the hearing, asked again, "From your point of view, what documents or records are they carrying?" ”
Fraser replied that in order for the information to be complete and correct, the hearing could be directly asked of Bi Danxing and Lin Ruilian when they were summoned.
The hearing cautions that refusing to answer questions at a hearing can constitute contempt for Congress. Tang Zhenhui asked again, "Do they have any documents or records with them?" ”
Fraser replied, "Yes." ”
Tang Zhenhui asked again: "Do you know what documents or records those are?" ”
Fraser replied, "I don't answer that question. ”
At the hearing, Fraser agreed that as a member of Congress, he had a responsibility to ensure clarification in Congress that the misrepresentations were made and that she should clarify Her august 3 and October 4 remarks as soon as possible.
However, he did not take any action and did not mention the matter to anyone. Frasha said he believes the matter should be handled by a number one, BiDanxing, and when to confess to Congress and clarify that it should be for Bidanxing to judge and decide.
After he found out that Spicy Yusha had lied again on October 4, he neither asked Spicy Yusha why she did not confess, nor did he ask why the first leader had not dealt with it. He agreed that, according to general logic, he should have done this, but since he trusted Bi Danxing, and he himself did not do things purely by logic, he did not act.
He also agreed that since he had always had a direct connection with Spicy Yusha, he could have suggested that she confess to Congress and clarify the facts, but he did not; he admitted that it was illogical.
The report notes that Fraser was unable to give a logical explanation for these acts because he did not confess to the Committee.
What happens next?
First of all, when the National Assembly meets next week, the content of the investigation report will be debated, and the three parties, Bi Danxing, Lin Ruilian and Fraser, are all members of Congress, and they will all participate in the debate.
The debate included whether to carry out the recommendations of the investigation report: the fine of Spicy Yusha, the transfer of Bi Danxing and Fraser to the Attorney General's Office for investigation.
Generally speaking, these two things are a foregone conclusion.
So, if Bi Danxing and Fraser are transferred to the General Prosecutor's Office for investigation, what will be the follow-up?
1. If the Attorney General's Office considers that the factual evidence suspected of contempt of the National Assembly and suspected perjury is conclusive and that the matter is so serious, it is possible to bring charges to the court; in general, it is quite normal for the Attorney General's Office to spend half a year investigating and collecting evidence; if the Attorney General's Office has sufficient evidence but believes that the situation is not serious enough to warrant prosecution, it may warn the matter
2. If the Attorney-General's Office considers that the evidence is insufficient, it will not bring charges
If charges are filed, a trial must be held; If convicted of perjury, they are punishable by a fine and imprisonment for up to three years;
If the Attorney-General's Office does not bring charges, the matter may be referred to the National Assembly, and the National Assembly has the power to impose a fine or imprisonment on the deputies, or to dismiss the deputies. If a fine or imprisonment is imposed by Congress, the person concerned will not be disqualified from membership.
The Workers' Party expressed its solemn concern
Today, the Workers' Party issued a statement expressing its grave concern about the matter. The statement also pointed out that the last time opposition MPs were charged with criminal offences for their political work occurred in the 1980s. The Singapore Eye looked through the materials and found that in 1983, the Workers' Party mp Jajernan was charged with criminal offences for misrepresenting the party's financial reports.
The PKK statement also stated: "Since its founding in 1957, the PKK has endured hardships and we are grateful to all singaporeans who have supported us for decades. We are confident that the PKK will persevere and stick to its mission and continue to contribute to the building of a democratic society. ”
However this matter evolves, it will be a major event that will affect Singapore's short- to medium-term political landscape. Areas that could have an impact include: How do voters view this? Will this become a "nother piece of evidence" for the Papa to "suppress the opposition"? How do the Workers' Party and its supporters see this? Whether active or passive, there will be no leadership change in the Workers' Party, and so on.