Search the Community

Overweight police officers in East Java go through weight-loss programme https://www.asiaone.com/asia/overweight-police-officers-east-java-go-through-weight-loss-programme "Size does matter for the East Java Police as they are requiring that overweight officers go through a weight-loss programme at the State Police Academy (SPN) in Mojokerto, East Java. The officers will go through a variety of activities designed to reduce body fat for 10 days. Fifty personnel from each East Java Police unit will take part in the programme from July 15 to 26, according to East Java Police spokesman Sr. Comr. Frans Barung Mangera. "It's a programme to lower your body mass index (BMI) for overweight and obese personnel," Frans was quoted by kompas.com. During the programme, the personnel must undergo activities aimed at reducing body fat such as running, wearing a parachute jacket, long marches, aerobic gymnastics, swimming and other sports. Aside from physical activities, personnel also receive psychological guidance. "Through guidance from nutritionists and medical experts provided by East Java Police, dietary habits and menus are adjusted to help reach the goal of this programme," said Frans. The aim of the programme is for East Java police officers to provide better service. "[so the police] are quicker and nimble in serving the public," Frans added.

A familiar scene outside primary schools. Parents and guardians waiting in their cars to pick up their children at mid day. Most primary schools are located in HDB neighbourhood where car parks are plenty. Yet, these drivers choose to park along public roads despite the continuous white line in the middle of a narrow road. And the engines are idling! More sheltered areas have now been gazetted as non-smoking areas. Yet, it remains a common sight to see cigarettes being lit up at HDB void decks, sheltered walkways outside HDB shops, at overhead bridges. While not trying to be bad-hearted to make these drivers and smokers get fined, I wish that they be considerate and selfless enough to park at nearby car parks to reduce congestion and risk to other road users, help reduce air pollution. It's getting warmer, there are more storms and more people having cancer. (Of course, there are many other causes but these are one of the contributions.)

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/harsher-punishment-for-security-officers-who-sleep-on-the-job-or-act-unprofessionally-from SINGAPORE - Private security officers who slack off, sleep on the job or come to work drunk can face tougher punishment from next year, as the police strengthen penalties for errant behaviour to boost the industry's professionalism and bolster Singapore's defences. From Jan 1, officers who display errant behaviour can be punished by a fine not exceeding $2,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months, or both, The Straits Times has learnt. ***** Would it not applied to the SMRT to "cure" the deep-seated cultural extraction? Have become so intolerant of the security or has the security becoming so blatant that this has become law?

ICA officers who hit truck driver at Woodlands Crossing have been taken off operational duties (video at URL) Two Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) officers who were caught on video hitting a truck driver on Friday (Dec 21) have been taken off operational duties, ICA said. Several Stompers alerted Stomp to the video that has been circulating online. In the video, the two officers wearing fluorescent vests are seen confronting a man sitting on a grass patch next to a road. One of the officers lunges towards the man who then falls on his side. They are then seen pointing fingers at the man while talking to him. ICA said in a statement posted on their Facebook page at about 9.37am that they are aware of the incident that happened near Woodlands Checkpoint on Dec 21 at about 4.40pm. "Preliminary investigations showed that the two officers, who were performing traffic control duties at Woodlands Crossing, were directing the container truck which was on its way to Woodlands Checkpoint for departure clearance," it said. The truck driver, who was travelling on the rightmost lane of the three-lane carriageway, disregarded the officers' instructions and reportedly drove recklessly across three lanes into the officers' direction, endangering the lives of the officers and of other road users. The officers then confronted the driver and engaged in a physical altercation with him. In its statement, ICA said it takes a serious view of the incident: "Our officers are expected to discharge their duties professionally. "ICA does not condone such behaviour, even if the driver may have disregarded the safety of others, and has referred both officers to the Police following our preliminary investigations. "The officers have also been taken off operational duties pending the Police investigation."

The group of us shop owners have been parking our vehicles at the end of the road for the longest time. Clearly, we did not infringe any continous white line, nor are there any double yeloow lines in the area. Even when LTA enforcement officers came to book other errand drivers did not booked us, as according to them, there was nothing wrong with us parking that way ( we did asked them on several occasions). However recently some idiotic CISCO (based on the summons) started to issue summons on the vehicles, with lame reasons "parking in a manner that obstruct other road users", and "not parking in a manner parallel to the road". KNN WTF. Lim bei park neatly at the end of the road without blocking any entrances, obstruct what f%^#? I did not wait for the summon letter, and immediately wrote emails complaining the double standards and question them if these CISCO people are well versed with highway code anot. Let's see what they say.

Up for awareness, those with loud or modified exhaust do take note! http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/singaporeseen/this-urban-jungle/lta-officers-seen-inspecting-car-for-illegal-modifications-at-toa-payoh-carpark LTA officers seen inspecting car for illegal modifications at Toa Payoh carpark Posted on 19 August 2014 | 3,334 views | 9 comments A Stomper came across officers from the Land Transport Authority inspecting a Lotus car for illegal exhaust modifications at a multi-storey carpark in Toa Payoh. According to the Stomper, this was after residents complained about the car being noisy. Said the Stomper: "LTA officers went up to a HDB multistorey carpark in Toa Payoh to check a Lotus car for illegal exhaust modifications." "A neighbor complained that the car was too noisy when he was on his way home, and that it disturbed those who were trying to sleep."

The officers shot him dead. One of the NYPD officers is in critical condition. Man suspected to have ISIS links. Scary. Could this happen in Singapore? http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/nypd-officers-attacked-man-hatchet

A video footage of an argument between a teenager and two officers from security firm Cisco Certis has gone viral on Facebook (Photo: Facebook / Screen grab) An incident involving an argument between a 16-year-old boy and two auxiliary police officers from Certis Cisco has drawn criticism from online users after a video of the encounter went viral on Facebook. The three-and-a-half minute video clip shows the boy and two officers at Bedok Reservoir, and when the officers told him not to fish in non-designated areas and to leave, the boy refused, Channel NewsAsia reported. The commercial security company said in a statementthat the incident “could have been better managed in a more professional and diplomatic manner”. Certis Cisco also said that it "trains and expects officers to be above board and exhibit values of professionalism and integrity", and that serious action will be taken against those who contravene such values. http://features.insing.com/feature/teen-s-argument-with-security-officers-in-singapore-caught-on-video/id-893f3101/ After watching the video, I am of the view that these 2 Cisco Officers are big bully. Demanding the teenager to produce his ID in a very threatening manner.

Two former Certis Cisco officers who were tasked with the job of replenishing money at ATMs in Singapore ended up misappropriating nearly $147,000 instead. For that, 21-year-old Palwinder Singh A/L Harjan Singh will now spend 30 months in jail while 27-year-old Theywa Subramaniam will serve a 36-month jail term. The court heard that Theywa, deemed to be more culpable, was also convicted of one count of moving the criminal proceeds to Malaysia and another count of moving more than $30,000 cash out of Singapore. The court was told that the offences were committed in mid-September last year when the two officers made their rounds with another colleague, who was not involved. The two men had discussed their plan over tea break, after sharing with each other their unhappiness with their employer's management. They decided to execute their plan when they were at Plaza Singapura. Instead of heading for the ATMs directly, the two men pushed the trolley carrying the cash into the men's washroom. Their movement was captured on CCTV. They took out $147,000 and left the other $293,000 cash in the bags before continuing their rounds. The prosecution had previously argued that the starting point for such offences is a jail term of between 24 and 28 months. The aggravating factors in this instance were that the two accused were security officers and that their plea of guilt is inequitable, as they were caught on CCTV and the offences would have been discovered. In mitigation, the defence counsel argued that $135,000 was recovered at Theywa's Malaysian residence, and that his client was truly remorseful, having "supreme stupidity of thinking that they could get away". But District Judge Siva Shanmugam pointed out that the acts were pre-meditated and that the amount involved was substantial. He said the blatant abuse of trust has undermined public confidence in the security industry. For criminal breach of trust as an employee, they could each have been jailed up to 15 years and fined. Source: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/two-ex-certis-cisco/1012028.html?cid=FBSG

http://www.tremeritus.com/2014/02/23/gic-continues-to-use-officers-involved-in-insider-trading/ GIC continues to use officers involved in insider trading February 23rd, 2014 | Author: Editorial A reader has written in to let TRE know of a case where GIC officers caught for insider trading were allowed to continue to work in GIC. The insider trading case involved 3 GIC staff in 2003: Lim Kee Chong, Teng Cheong Thye and Choo Yong Cheen. The case surfaced in 2004 and was reported by international media when the Financial Services Agency (FSA) and the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission (SESC) of Japan reported the matter to the central bank of Japan. The Associated Press reported the incident on 21 Oct 2004 [Link]: Singapore’s central bank said Thursday it has fined three employees of the government’s secretive investment fund for insider trading involving shares of a Japanese financial company. Lim Kee Chong, Teng Cheong Thye and Choo Yong Cheen were fined a total of 710,000 Singapore dollars (US$422,700; euro 346,000) for the offense, the Monetary Authority of Singapore said in a statement. The employees of the Government of Singapore Investment Corp., or GIC, sold the shares of Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group Inc. last year after obtaining confidential information that the company planned to issue new shares, the statement said. When news of the issue was made public, investors sold the stock due to fears that the additional supply would reduce the value of Sumitomo Mitsui’s existing shares. By selling the shares before the announcement, the employees avoided a loss of S$710,000 for the GIC – the same amount they were fined. Singapore’s Securities and Futures Act imposes fines of up to three times the profit – or loss avoided – from insider trading. The GIC wasn’t penalized and the employees will not face criminal charges, the statement said. TRE was not able to find the said statement on MAS website anymore. However, we were able to find an old statement on FSA website. FSA is the Japanese government organization responsible for overseeing banking, securities and exchange, and insurance in order to ensure the stability of the financial system of Japan. The agency operates with a commissioner and reports to the Minister of Finance. It also oversees the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission (SESC) and, the Certified Public Accountants and Auditing Oversight Board. According to the 2004 statement from FSA website [Link], the 3 GIC staff did “insider trading involving Japanese securities market”. It said that the kind of insider trading committed is called “cross border transaction” which is a securities transaction in a Japanese securities market by a foreign resident. FSA further said, “The enforcement action by MAS has come as a result of our request of investigation into and providing information of a suspicious case of insider trading, which was detected by the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission of Japan (SESC), based on the bilateral Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with MAS on the sharing of information on securities matters.” Excerpt of the statement has been screen captured by TRE and appears below: The TRE reader wrote: The leader, Mr Lim Kee Chong, settled the civil suit against him. Two others, Teng Cheong Thye and Choo Yong Cheen, were also found guilty in the civil suit then. They accepted the civil suit and were fined various amounts and were also suspended from work. They remained in GIC. Teng left GIC in late 2012. Both Lim and Choo are Managing Directors of GIC now. In fact, Lim is the Group Deputy Chief Investment Officer. A check by TRE on GIC website [Link] confirmed this. Indeed, Lim Kee Chong is now the Deputy Group Chief Investment Officer: Choo Yong Cheen is part of the GIC Investment Groups (Special Investments). He is currently in-charge of direct investments in Asia as well as funds and co-investments in Asia and the emerging markets: The TRE reader further added: Based on the MAS’s Guidelines on Fit and Proper Criteria (revised on 7 August 2012), one of the factors that is relevant to the assessment of the honesty, integrity and reputation of a relevant person is in clause 13(i) of the Guidelines: has had any civil penalty enforcement action taken against it or him by MAS or any other regulatory authority under any law in any jurisdiction. He then asked the following questions: Have Lim and the other two been subjected to the same standards of test that I am told every financial industry practitioner is put through? If not, why? If so, does it mean they were wrongly punished by the 2003 civil penalty? In fact, further checks by TRE revealed that Deputy Group Chief Investment Officer Lim Kee Chong’s name was in the industry-related sanction list of the US-based CFA Institute. CFA Institute [Link], is a global association of investment professionals. The organization offers the Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) designation, the Certificate in Investment Performance Measurement (CIPM) designation, as well as the Claritas Investment Certificate. On its website, the CFA Institute has a section which lists individuals who, since 1 January 2000, are currently serving public disciplinary sanctions for violations of the CFA Institute Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional Conduct or have resigned their memberships while under investigation for industry-related misconduct. Public sanctions for industry-related conduct may include the followings [Link]: Censure Suspension from the CFA Program Suspension of membership Suspension of the right to use the CFA designation Permanent prohibition/suspension from the CFA Program Revocation of membership Revocation of the right to use the CFA designation Summary suspension In the case of Lim Kee Chong, the CFA Institute conducted its own hearing in 2010 and found Lim to have violated the CFA Institute Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional Conduct with regard to the 2003 insider trading incident. This was later affirmed by another review panel in 2011. This is what the CFA Institute said of Lim: It’s not known if Lim voluntarily disclosed his past insider trading case to the CFA Institute in 2010 or the CFA Institute found out about it 7 years later. It’s also not known if the MAS knew about the CFA Institute’s hearing of Lim Kee Chong case in 2010, 7 years after the insider trading incident. The delay of 7 years to come to the attention of CFA Institute remains a mystery.

The Government will rely on measures outside of the COE system to enhance social equity in car ownership. Fifty Aetos Auxiliary Police Officers (APOs) have undergone in-house training by the Traffic Police (TP) since April this year, the police said today (Sept 30). The deployment of these APOs are part of the TP's initiatives to step up enforcement efforts. At least nine APOs are deployed everyday around the island at various locations to take action against offences such as drivers beating red lights, cyclists riding on the footway or pedestrians jaywalking. From April to August this year, a total of 3,612 summonses have been issued to errant road users, the police said. These summonses include traffic violations such as drivers making unauthorised U-turns and failing to give way to pedestrians. Over this same period, over 2,180 operations have been conducted by the APOs. Source: http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/traff...iliary-officers

I know they have been around a while now but what is their scope compared to the regular TP / LTA uniformed in big bikes..?? Seems they have been increasing in numbers for those riding those small bikes like 150cc with those emergency light usually used for emergency vehicles...

Reminiscent of the Virginia Tech massacre, except this time, it's at freakin' MIT. Source: http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/world/1680313...-at-mit-campus/

Just curious after reading that SMRT will be bringing in more SAF people into the organization. Who have experienced working with ex-senior officers in the private sector before?

Rude? Issuing fines indescrimately? Power tripping? Exerting otherwise non-existent authority? In civilian life they are nothing. But put them in uniform and they think they are god.

Dear drivers, Our enforcement officers are doing a tough job answering to calls requesting for enforcement. I wonder why drivers who are in the wrong have to cheek to scream at them and verbally abuse them? "You are just a F**king carpark attendant. I pity them at times.

Here is a list of both senior public officers and politicians (except one) charged and convicted in court of corruption as accordance to CPIB's website: Senior Public Officers http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=236 Choy Hon Tim : the largest total bribe amount in CPIB's history Choy Hon Tim, the former Director of the Electricity Department as well as the Deputy Chief Executive (Operations) of the Public Utilities Board (PUB) may not be the most senior public officer investigated by the Bureau, but his case involved the largest amount of bribes uncovered. He was investigated in 1995 following allegations that he had received kickbacks in return for awarding contracts to suppliers and contractors of PUB when he was a Chief Electrical Engineer of PUB. Choy was subsequently charged for obtaining gratifications totalling $13.85 million. He was convicted and sentenced to 14 years' jail term and the $13.85 million bribe obtained by him was forfeited to the State. ***** Yeo Seng Teck : Trade Development Board Chief Yeo Seng Teck, then Chief Executive Officer of Trade Development Board was investigated in 1993 for cheating offences dating back to 1988. Investigation revealed that he had used forged document to cheat his principals (in this case, the organisations he was working for) involving the purchase of Chinese antiques worth about $2 million. He was subsequently charged and convicted for cheating offences and sentenced to 4 years' imprisonment. ***** Lim How Seng : Director of Singapore History Museum Lim How Seng was charged for corruptly receiving two loans of $20,000 each from a private vendor named 3G Studio. In return, Lim recommended a contract for the production of a new 3-dimensional show at the museum to be awarded to 3G Studio. He was sentenced to 3 month's imprisonment and ordered to pay a $20,000 penalty. **** Andrew Goh Keng Guan : Assistant Head, Talent Group, Economic Development Board. Andrew Goh, the Assistant Head of Talent Group took bribes totalling $380,000 from seven Chinese nationals between February 1999 and June 2001. In return, he helped the 7 Chinese nationals by processing their application for permanent residency in Singapore. Andrew was sentenced to 26 months' imprisonment and the money he took from the seven Chinese nationals was forfeited. ***** Ong Beng Leong : Commanding Officer of Training Resources Management Centre Ong Beng Leong, a Lieutenant Colonel in the SAF, was the Commanding Officer of Training Resource Management Centre (TRMC) from 1st April 1999 to 14th December 2001. During this period, he knowingly accepted fictitious quotes submitted to him by the sole-proprietor of Sin Hiaptat Construction. According to financial procedures, he should have sourced for quotations from other contractors. Ong had then gone on to award contracts to the Sin Hiaptat Construction. He was later charged and convicted for using false documents to deceive his principal (i.e. his employer in this case), an offence under section 6© of the Prevention of Corruption Act, Cap 241. He was sentenced to 1.5 months' imprisonment. ***** Politicians http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=237 "There is no way a Minister can avoid investigations and a trial if there is evidence to support one". - then Prime Minister of Singapore, Mr. Lee Kuan Yew, quoted in the Straits Times, Jan 27, 1987 Tan Kia Gan : Minister for National Development Tan Kia Gan, then Minister for National Development, was investigated in August 1966 for attempting to help his close businessman friend Lim Tjin Hauw and his son William Lim to clinch the sale of Boeing aircraft to Malaysian Airways. He also acted as an intermediary for his brother-in-law in the sale of a

According to 8 Days, Ch 5's latest drama Point of Entry showcasing the work of ICA (Immigration & Checkpoints Authority) Special agents in their fight against immigration offenders and smugglers of contrabands will be debuting on Ch 5 on 2 Dec 2010 (Thur) at 8pm. According to the information, the drama is based on real cases detected. Point of Entry Facebook 8 Days

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/man-accidentally-...b-officers.html Imagine being locked inside your flat without food or water for a day. At least that

Smoker who littered accuses NEA officers of violence A smoker caught littering outside a mall on Tuesday complained of violent treatment from officers of the National Environment Agency (NEA). Sales executive Zhong Wen Cai, in his late 20s, had left his cigarette butt on a stone seat after his smoke break outside Raffles City Shopping Centre when two NEA officers descended on him. They informed Zhong that he was littering and asked him for his identification card (IC). In response, he picked up the cigarette butt, threw it into a nearby rubbish bin and tried to explain that it was a misunderstanding.

Recently I saw a lot of LTA enforcement officer on over head bridges....at first I thought it was TP, but saw their blue vest with "LTA enforcement" working closely. And they are armed with a digital camera on hand, yup, not speed gun..... wonder what r they doing...

Six men who posed as National Environment Agency (NEA) workers, made off with more than S$100,000 in cash from a semi-detached house off Bukit Batok Road last Wednesday. According to news reports, the home owner was told by the

are so c--k. CSO: Hello, may I speak to Mr so-n-so" Me: Speaking. CSO: Sir, this is so-n-so from so-n-so bank. This is regarding your request for account cancellation. Me: Ok, for my credit acc. CSO: Wait, sir, I need to do some verifications first. CSO: Can I have your DOB and NRIC? Gives info. CSO: Thank you sir. May I... Me: Wait, mdm, can I do some verifications that you are really calling from so-n-so bank? CSO: er... Me: Nevermind. CSO: Sir may I know the reason for cancellation? Me: I don't need it. CSO: Sir, but a lot of customers also don't need it but they still.. Me: I don't need it, just cancel it for me. CSO: Ok sir, but I still need a reason. Abit dulan liao. Me: THE REASON IS I DON'T NEED IT. CSO: Thank you sir, will proceed with your request.

KUALA LUMPUR: Action will be taken against high-ranking officers overseeing the Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) fighter jet at the time when its RM50mil engines were stolen, said Defence Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi. He said the action to be taken will be decided during the next meeting of the Malaysian Armed Forces Council of which he was the chairman. Describing the thieves as traitors to the nation, Dr Ahmad Zahid vowed that those found guilty would have to pay a heavy price for the crime.

http://www.todayonline.com/Voices/EDC09082...ers-accountable? Letter from Michelle Ho 05:10 AM Aug 20, 2009 TODAYonline A traffic summon I recently received has left me questioning the power with which police officers are able to issue such charges. On July 11 at 4 pm, I was pulled over by two traffic police (TP) officers on the AYE who told me I had caused the vehicle behind me to slow down while I switched lanes. The officers did not issue anything in writing but said I would be penalized with three demerit points-my first ones in almost four years of driving-- and a fine of $120. I was told to wait for the summon in mail. I received the notice a week later and was shocked to read that the officer had -- in my opinion-- grossly overstated my offences. Contrary to what was earlier said, the officers also doubled the demerit points penalty and increased the fine to $150. The charge itself was already questionable. On that occasion, I was driving within the speed limit of the expressway, had signalled prior to changing lanes and had ascertained that vehicles were at a safe distance behind before I switched lanes. In no event did I cause any driver to "apply sudden brakes in order to avoid a collision", as the summon had so dramatically described. Admittedly, the validity of the charge boils down to a case of "my word against his". But the officers certainly did their credibility no favours by issuing in written form a much more severe penalty than they had indicated verbally. How can the officers tell me one thing but write up a completely different one? I sent in an appeal and was told a month later that the matter had been reviewed and the charge still stands. No explanation was given. I find this apparent lack of accountability disturbing. In the first place, a proper summons form, instead of hand-written notes, should have been used to record the offences. The summons should state the offence committed and accompanying penalties, and be signed by both the officer and driver at the time of the incident. Notice of offences should also include names of issuing officers, since there is little reason for them to operate behind an anonymous veil. Lastly, the authorities should at least explain their reasons for rejecting an appeal instead of just leaving the accused feeling a sense of injustice. Such measures could impede the TP's efficiency that has for the large part served our nation so well. But surely, it is the lesser evil compared to the apparent free rein with which an officer could otherwise wield in issuing summons. Are police officers infallible, incapable of human error or always beyond reproach? Why is there no transparency or system of checks of balances that can hold the officers in question responsible and accountable for their actions or subject their potential wrongdoings to scrutiny? Such a system opens doors for inconsistencies by which the law is enforced upon, and as such, can cause government agencies to lose credibility.