Public Prosecutor v. Victorine Noella Wijeysingha: Corruption Charges & Inducement for Leniency
The Public Prosecutor appealed against the acquittal of Victorine Noella Wijeysingha by the District Court on three charges under s 6(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Wijeysingha was accused of corruptly obtaining gratification from Tan Kok Keong, the managing director of Kok Keong Landscape Pte Ltd, as an inducement for showing favour to KKL in relation to her principal’s affairs. The High Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the Prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Wijeysingha had corruptly intended to solicit and accept payments from Tan as inducements for her to exercise leniency in her supervision.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Victorine Noella Wijeysingha was acquitted of corruption charges for allegedly receiving gratification to show leniency in supervising landscaping works. The High Court dismissed the Public Prosecutor's appeal.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Appellant | Government Agency | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Navin S Thevar of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Victorine Noella Wijeysingha | Respondent | Individual | Acquittal Upheld | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Choo Han Teck | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Navin S Thevar | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Peter Keith Fernando | Leo Fernando |
4. Facts
- The respondent was acquitted of three charges under s 6(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
- The respondent was accused of receiving gratification from Tan Kok Keong.
- The gratification was allegedly an inducement for showing favour to KKL.
- The respondent was a Resident Technical Officer (Landscape) for landscaping works.
- The payments were made in November 2008, January 2009, and March 2009.
- The respondent claimed the payments were for additional services provided to TKK prior to her appointment as RTO.
5. Formal Citations
- Public Prosecutor v Victorine Noella Wijeysingha, Magistrate's Appeal No 87 of 2012 (DAC No 60801-60803 of 2010), [2013] SGHC 63
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| DAC No 60801-60803 of 2010 | |
| Respondent received $1,500 from Tan Kok Keong. | |
| Respondent received $1,000 from Tan Kok Keong. | |
| Respondent received $1,500 from Tan Kok Keong. | |
| Magistrate's Appeal No 87 of 2012 | |
| Judgment reserved | |
| Judgment issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Corruption
- Outcome: The court held that the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the respondent had corruptly intended to solicit and accept payments as inducements for leniency.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Corruptly obtaining gratification
- Inducement for showing favour
- Related Cases:
- [1998] 2 SLR(R) 211
8. Remedies Sought
- Conviction
- Appeal against acquittal
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Prevention of Corruption Act s 6(a)
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Litigation
11. Industries
- Construction
- Tourism
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kwang Boon Keong Peter v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [1998] 2 SLR(R) 211 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that s 6(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act is concerned with corrupt bargains and requires guilty knowledge on the part of the recipient. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Prevention of Corruption Act (Cap 241, 1993 Rev Ed) s 6(a) | Singapore |
| Prevention of Corruption Act (Cap 241, 1993 Rev Ed) s 9(1) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Gratification
- Inducement
- Leniency
- Corruption
- Resident Technical Officer
- Prevention of Corruption Act
15.2 Keywords
- Corruption
- Prevention of Corruption Act
- Gratification
- Inducement
- Singapore
- Criminal Law
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Prevention of Corruption Act | 95 |
| Offences | 60 |
| Evidence Law | 40 |
| Duty to Account | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Corruption