Singapore Rifle Association sues parent body for losses caused by armoury flooding

Singapore Rifle Association sues parent body for losses caused by armoury flooding

The incident is among several issues that dampened relations between the Singapore Rifle Association and the Singapore Shooting Association.

SINGAPORE: A flood in the armoury of the National Shooting Centre in 2014 had damaged more than 185,000 rounds of ammunition belonging to the Singapore Rifle Association (SRA).

It also dampened relations between SRA and its parent body, the Singapore Shooting Association (SSA), culminating in the SRA’s expulsion from SSA in December last year.

On Tuesday (Feb 14), the High Court heard the first of at least three lawsuits brought by SRA against SSA and its president Michael Vaz.

SRA is suing the national shooting authority over S$455,678 in losses it allegedly suffered as a result of two floods in December 2014 and May 2015 “caused by SSA’s negligence”.

SRA maintains that the cause of the first flood, on Christmas Eve, was a blocked drain filled with earth fill material, which caused the water to flow into the basement armoury through its open windows.

It was SSA’s duty, as the party which holds the lease of the premises, to maintain the drainage infrastructure, argued lawyer Wendell Wong who represents SRA. “SRA is an innocent party and has no control over the areas outside of the armoury,” Mr Wong said.

The flood damaged 185,000 rounds of ammunition, which were submerged under water for more than 24 hours, making them unsafe for use.

SRA’s operations manager, Marcus Kung, testified that if the gun powder inside a bullet is wet, the “explosion” from pulling the trigger “will not result in the bullet being propelled from the barrel completely”. If the shooter failed to realise this before firing the next round, it would result in a “chamber explosion”, he said.

The cause of the second flood, which happened on May 3, 2015, was caused by a blockage of the pipe connecting two sections of the drain which was chocked by debris, claimed SRA.

No damage to the armoury was caused by the second flood, Mr Kung said, because he had used plastic pellets to raise the boxes of ammunition off the floor.

Mr Wong said the S$455,678 in losses SRA claims it suffered include the cost of damaged ammunition, cost of disposal of damaged ammunition, losses of SRA’s members and cleaning and replacement of damaged items.

On its part, SSA will argue that SRA was “contributorily negligent”, and had refused to seal the windows to the armoury “in full knowledge that the armoury was located in the basement and prone to the ingress of water in the event of a flood”.

SRA also argued that the “windows issue” was a matter of security.

Mr Wong said the sealing of the windows for security reasons had been raised by the police in 2014. SRA had sought SSA’s approval to seal the windows in 2015, but was “not allowed to”, Mr Wong said, explaining that SSA had been “under instructions” by Sport Singapore not to carry out any construction works until after the 2015 SEA Games.

Sport Singapore is the national sports governing body. Last February, it had ordered the closure of the National Shooting Centre run by the SRA due to irregularities in gun licensing which were found during an audit of its armoury. Police seized more than 70 weapons from the armoury.

This sparked another legal tussle between SRA and Mr Vaz.

The trial involving damages from the flooding continues.

Source: CNA/gs