Singapore Corruption Case Study

1088 Words3 Pages

In the last couple of years, there have been a few high-profile corruption investigations and prosecutions in Singapore. Former Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) Assistant Director Edwin Yeo Seow Hiong misappropriated funds issued to the branch he headed within the bureau to fuel his gambling habit. For 15 years, Edwin served the bureau, eventually becoming the Head of Field Research and Technical Support. He made 372 trips to the casinos over two-and-a-half years, losing at least S$478,583 at Resorts World Sentosa and Marina Bay Sands between April 2010 and September 2012. From 2008 to 2012, he lost S$263,699 through betting with Singapore Pools. Yeo was head of the CPIB’s Field Research and Technical Support (FRTS). His illegal …show more content…

For each sum of money Yeo misappropriated, he would cover up the missing funds using the next sum of cash available. This was because the earlier funds had been spent on his personal debts and expenses. He also asked his staff to negotiate with vendors for delayed payment of sums owed to them. Yeo had gone against the management’s instruction to have two people authorizing transactions for an FRTS bank account. He applied for Internet banking facilities, which allowed online transactions to be carried out using a single Internet banking token, and transferred S$470,265 from the account into his personal account between May and August 2012. He edited a voucher documenting payment to trick CPIB Assistant Director of Administration and Support Sze Chinyu into thinking payment had been made to an equipment supplier. In total, Yeo misappropriated S$1.76 million, of which S$1.64 million has not been repaid (Cuellar, …show more content…

The recent active investigations and prosecutions of sex-for-benefit corruptions in Singapore suggest the enforcement agencies’ readiness to deal with corruption in all forms. That said, it does not mean that the CPIB would only be interested in investigating “big” cases involving public officials or substantial amounts. As consistently emphasized by the CPIB, “no case is too small to investigate”, and it is expected that the CPIB will continue to watch closely both the demand (the recipients) and supply (the givers) sides of bribery, regardless of the amount of bribery or the stance of the corrupted (Quah,

More about Singapore Corruption Case Study

Open Document