Ministerial statement: Chan Chun Sing on CPIB probe involving S Iswaran

We can rely on the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) to conduct investigations thoroughly and independently and to see the probe into Minister S Iswaran to its logical conclusion, said Minister-in-charge of the Public Service Chan Chun Sing. Addressing MPs’ questions in Parliament on Wednesday (Aug 2), he cautioned that investigations are still ongoing and stressed that Mr Iswaran has not been charged, much less convicted. Members should avoid speculating and prejudicing the outcome of the investigations, he said. As MPs sought more details on CPIB’s investigation findings, Mr Chan reminded them that this is an ongoing investigation and said he was not able to disclose further details at this juncture. This is to ensure that investigations are not jeopardised, and affected individuals or entities are not prejudiced, he said. Mr Chan noted that Singaporeans are understandably concerned about the matter. He said in due course, further details of the investigations will be made public. He stressed the need to give CPIB the time and space it needs to do its work. Mr Chan said law enforcement agencies typically avoid naming individuals they are investigating. But because Mr Iswaran is a minister, the CPIB disclosed that he was assisting with investigations but at that point on Jul 12, it did not state that he had been arrested as it wanted to establish more facts. These are decisions for CPIB to make, said Mr Chan. What law enforcement agencies, including CPIB, reveal at any point in time takes into account their operational considerations in the cases they deal with, including preserving the integrity of evidence, protecting the confidentiality of ongoing investigations and avoiding impact on other related parties. That is why the Prime Minister’s initial statement and Deputy Prime Minister’s doorstop interview on Jul 12 took reference from CPIB’s press release on the same day, said Mr Chan. This was the proper thing to do because ministers, including the Prime Minister, should not reveal more than what the law enforcement agencies are prepared to disclose, he added. Mr Chan also said while CPIB reports directly to the Prime Minister, it is functionally independent. CPIB does not require the Prime Minister’s concurrence to conduct its investigations. In this case, it kept the Prime Minister informed and sought his concurrence to initiate formal investigations of Mr Iswaran because the investigations concerned a Cabinet minister. Mr Chan pointed out that under the Constitution, in the event the Prime Minister refuses to give his consent to a CPIB investigation, the Director of CPIB can go directly to the elected President for concurrence to proceed with the investigation.