Tan Kin Lian's Blog: Cheating and the rule of law

Saturday, March 28, 2009

Cheating and the rule of law

Here is the definition of cheating in the criminal code of Singapore.

Cheating – Whoever, by deceiving any person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he or she would not do or omit if he or she were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property, is said to "cheat". For example, A cheats if he intentionally deceives Z into a belief that A means to repay any money that Z may lend to him when A does not intend to repay it, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to lend him money. Cheating is punished with imprisonment of up to one year, or a fine, or both.

A Singapore lawyer told me that the attorney general will only prosecute cheating when it is in the public interest. So, if a citizen is cheated and lodge a complaint, the attorney general may not take up the case.

My friend told me that in America, the attorney general will look out for cheating cases and prosecute the culprits. They do not wait for a complaint to be lodged.

It seems that the system is different between Singapore and America. I am not sure what is meant by "the rule of law", when the law is only enforced at the discretion of the authority.

4 comments:

David said...: Not only cheating. If an ordinary Joe got assaulted and report to police, the police will not take any action. Police will advise Joe to take a civil suit on his own against the assailant! Presumably not in the public interest for police to intervene!

However, if an MP felt threatened by someone who did not even mention the MP's name in his threat, this person will be charged in court! There was a case already recently!

Why? Presumably like cheating, assaults or threats on MPs and the elites are in public interest unlike on ordinary Joes, or lesser mortals (termed coined by PAP MP Charles Chong)!; March 28, 2009 2:12 PM
zhummmeng said...: "As a result of the bonus restructuring last year, NTUC Income is able to maintain yields and payouts for life policies in 2009, despite the financial crisis. This year, the restructuring will be extended to other participating policies."

Mr. Tan ,what does the above mean?
I am puzzled that it says that because of the restructuring of the bonus that it is able to maintain the 'yields and payouts" even in financial crisis.
What is the "yields and payouts"
Does it mean in good times and without the restructuring it cannot deliver the 'yields and payouts"? or does it mean restructuring of bonus can weather any financial crises?
Instead of saying that it will not cut bonus , like other insurers,NTUC is saying another thing. Does it mean the same thing or ntuc is evasive?
Hope it is not the case of 1/4 salad oil and 3/4 water drum scam. This will misrepresent to the polycholders.; March 28, 2009 5:19 PM
zhummmeng said...: "Commenting on the 'Income Cares Fund', Mr Tan said: "As a social enterprise where people are at the heart of our decision making, we are committed to placing policyholders’ interests first. Although this costs us $1 million, we believe this is the right thing to do in these extraordinary times"

If people are at the heart of decision making and the interest of the policyholders is placed first, then the products rolled out should give good yields and good protection at low cost instead of dubious ones. If the predecessor could do it I don't see why it cannot. or it is manipulating the cost so that the management can enjoy high salary?
If the interest of the consumers is placed first why ntuc insurance agents push and peddle products?
Pushing and peddling products to consumers will NOT help them meet their needs but only the agents themselves who will gain from high commission.Product pushing also borders on unethical and miss-selling and conflict of interest.
Press statement like this is shameless when it is not true.; March 28, 2009 5:37 PM
kilroy said...: Starhub has for the 2nd time continued to bill me for a value added service after I had terminated it by e-mail ( which was acknowledged by them ). This was one of the freebies that they offer when you re-contract. Starhub hopes that you will forget that it is for a limited period and will continue the service on a payable basis after the free trial finishes. Is Starhub guilty of cheating? Can I lodge a police report against them. I am annoyed because this is the second time that they are doing this.; March 28, 2009 8:57 PM