Standpoint

1. The eviction of an occupier was followed by a transfer of the flat to the neighbour in '99. The owner, who wrote the complaint about the occupier, was informed by an officer of the eviction although the owner was unaware of the transfer. He thought the neighbour (husband and wife), whom he had seen a few times before the eviction, owned the flat.

 

2. About four years later when the owner was feeling the effect of the noise, an insider stopped the neighbour. He came to live in the flat across the neighbour for a while, greeted the owner once, and a woman gave the owner his full name. Noise stopped after he left. He had inside information since the owner had not made a complaint yet.

 

3. Another four years later in '07 the neighbour signalled with loud noises for many days that they were starting work. They may have known beforehand officers would be on their side.

4. The cover-up started right off from the behaviour of the OIC (Officer-in-Charge) and a well-dressed man when they first visited the owner. Also, one of the complaints in the first letter to HDB Branch Office was noise made by a maid during the number of months she was there. There were indications the maid was not registered to work in the flat and it was insider who caused the maid to be removed. The owner later wrote to the Ministry of Manpower to verify, but there was no reply.

5. The owner handed a draft of the second letter to the Branch Office when the OIC said they did not receive it. Following which the owner insisted on a meeting with HBO (Head, Pasir Ris HDB Branch Office). Although HBO said there was a recent transfer of the neighbour's flat, the owner deduced it was the eviction that let to the transfer. What was more, an officer wrote later there was no record of there having been an eviction.

6. There was indication of a force-entry into the neighbour's flat on the fourth week after the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour moved in. They moved in on the fourth day after the owner's first Meet-the-People Session. It would seem there was an understanding between officers after the force-entry, and the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour stayed to protect the neighbour. An old friend, who the owner had not been in contact for many years, met the owner in the evening on the same day of the force-entry. The friend was an intermediary, though he did not say so, who had since met the owner five times. The last time was after the owner emailed the President a month after the presidential election. In this instance there was considerably noise reduction the next day. The email is the post President.

 

7. The owner suspected a break-in of his flat, in which he called the police, a few months following the force-entry. The door lock to his flat was jammed. The circumstances leading to it were examined in his first post under Findings. He never had any problem with door locks before having lived in three other HDB flats and the present one since '93. But it happened in Jun '08 when events come to a head.

 

8. The officers have the resources, and the break-in is a strong possibility. Beside the instances noted in his blog indicating collaboration between officers and neighbour, the owner was shown times and again the extensive influence the officers had over ordinary citizen like himself as he went about his business. There is motive and they would find ways to stop him, including the use of noise to force him into selling his flat.

 

9. The-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour could communicate with the neighbour and watch the owner by sight from their flat. The purpose is to monitor the workers, ensures the noise is not obvious outside the neighbour's flat, and keeps the insiders out. Noise through the day including late night and early morning indicates workers take shifts during each 24 hours period. In fact they once showed the owner what they could do with noise through the night to the next morning. The officers are able to keep their cover because of their network of contacts that extends across government departments. More immediate examples are police officers at Neighbourhood Police Centre, branch members and community centre members at Meet-the-People Session, and the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour. At HDB, no attempt to address the complaint against its officers is out-of-character.

 

10. At a Meet-the-People Session (MPS) the owner asked the MP, who is also the Minister-in-Charge of Civil Service, to by-pass HBO. The Minister then wrote to Town Council and they replied to the owner he would hear from HDB soon. This letter and the letter from the Minister were copied to HBO with a note stating it was for his information only. After the Town Council's letter, the Minister enquired of the owner whether anyone visited him. There was no visit from HDB. Subsequently all letters to HDB from MPs including one from the Minister were answered by HBO as usual. During the final MPS, the area's MP said he would go and meet HBO the next day. Does it not also showed HBO has the power to influence others?

 

11. The owner could not be mistaken. The signs: Noises were real, it forced him to leave his flat; he noted the behaviour of the officers and their contacts, and the many details that would check out; insiders who supported; MPs who gone out of their way to assist; and the official silence.

 

12. Events stretching over more than a decade indicate officers are familiar with the neighbour. Investigation would have consequences on the officers, and admission of mistakes by the authorities. Without an investigation there is an injustice, and the next owner could be a start of a new one.

 

13. Three factors led to the lessening of noise when the owner emailed the President just after the presidential election. First, general support for the owner although no one referred to the case directly; second, the complaint was to the President who ensures integrity of the civil service; and third, the owner continued to blog relevant details of the case. The three factors at the right time.

 

14. Previous to this there was support as the owner blogged about the same issue for two years and he wrote his first letter to the President one and a half years ago, but there was no change. Even now, since the problem has not been identified technically, the officers and neighbour could go back to their old way.

 

15. It is important that the President know. The posts President, Ombudsman and Dissent let him in on the situation. Nevertheless the Minister-in-Charge of Civil Service does. He is aware of the bcc between HBO and Chairman, Residents Committee, that was sent to the owner. It indicated they met in the flat across the neighbour. Some time later the Minister met the owner at a Meet-the-People Session that was supposed to be scheduled for the area's MP, but before the meeting a Community Centre member (CC member) introduced the owner to another CC member who lived in the same block of flat as the owner to discuss the noise. As in this first and on two more occasions, the owner showed this other CC member has been in contact with the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour. They in turn ensure things do not get out-of-hands.

 

16. The owner explained the purpose of the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour in separate correspondence to the President and the Singapore Police Force. Both correspondences were acknowledged by Bedok Police Division and Neighbourhood Police Centre (NPC). Bedok Police Division noted the concern raised and referred it to NPC. NPC wrote they were unable to find evidence of alleged noise or criminal offence, yet nowhere in the letter was the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour mentioned. When the owner wrote again to the President after the presidential election, the matter was subsequently referred to Bedok Police Division. Because Bedok Police Division already knew of the situation, they did not reply. In the post News the Minister-in-Charge of Civil Service and Head, Civil Service, spoke of issue not falling within neat domain and of issue not falling neatly into any one agency's work respectively. The owner thinks the speeches fit his case.

 

17. A government that is too centralized and forms relationships too tightly could be an explanation of the problem. It could also be about accountability.

 

18. A key democratic idea is adequate accountability.

 

Observation Noise started up for two days on the fourth day after the posting of News and Citizen. On and off there were many more days where noise was obvious. By the eighth week noise was adjusted down but the difference came with more noise in length of time heard, at least for a few days.

 

Now into the sixteenth week their works are still continuing. Some days noises are frequent and annoying. Some noises are muffled, others are heard clearly. The noises are continual, mostly in the morning and afternoon.

 

Some things remain the same. Message from the administration to the officers who collaborate with the neighbour causes the neighbour to reduce noise. No action taken to the officers, who are still in their places including the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour, serves the neighbour. The officers guide the neighbour on what to do.

 

Compare that to the insider who was able to stop the neighbour for about four years in Item 2 above.

By-Election

News items between Nomination Day, 16 May 12 and one day after Polling Day, 26 May 12:

a) The Workers' Party candidate for Hougang, Png Eng Huat, said the composition in Singapore Parliament is "too lopsided".

He said democracy is about political and social equality and it is something he doesn't see in Parliament as the majority of MPs are from the People's Action Party.

Mr Png made this point in response to comments by his PAP opponent, Desmond Choo. Mr Choo had urged voters not to "mix up" the democratic process with the need for alternative voices in Parliament.

b) Workers' Party's Png Eng Huat won the Hougang by-election with 13,447 votes against PAP's Desmond Choo's 8210 votes. Mr Png won the single-seat constituency with 62.09% of the vote against Mr Choo 37.91%.

The by-election was held to fill the seat vacated by former Member of Parliament Yaw Shin Leong, who was expelled from the Workers' Party following reports of his personal indiscretions. Mr Yaw had won the seat in May 2011 General Election with 64.8% of the vote, against Mr Choo's 35.2%.

c) Hougang's grassroots advisor Desmond Choo said he would do his best to support projects that are sound and in the best interests of residents in the single member constituency.

Mr Choo was speaking to reporters on Sunday morning before he went around Hougang to thank residents. He was asked if he would support projects, such as the Home Improvement Programme, in Hougang. Mr Choo, who was the candidate for the People Action Party, lost Hougang by-election after he secured only about 38% of the vote.

d) Uphold integrity & excellence, DPM Teo tells civil servants

Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean said greater citizen interest and engagement in how the government carries out its business should be welcomed, and public officers must adapt to a closer partnership in those they serve.

In the message to some 130,000 public officers to celebrate Public Service Week, Mr Teo, who is also Minister in charge of the Civil Service, urged public officers to continue to earn the trust of the public.

e) The Public Service is adding three service principles to better guide the relationship between the Public Service and Singaporeans.

Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean, who is also the Minister in charge of the Civil Service, said these are people-centricity, mutual courtesy and respect, and shared responsibility for public good. Mr Teo was speaking to public officers at the annual Excellence in Public Service Awards Ceremony on Friday.

f) HDB is stepping up efforts to build stronger community ties by recreating the kampong spirit in housing estates.

National Development Minister Khaw Boon Wan described the HDB's effort as a campaign to simply "love thy neighbour".

g) Former Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew has said that as a small country, Singapore needs a strong armed forces to ensure its continued survival.

Speaking at the Temasek Society 30th Anniversary dialogue session, Mr Lee said without a strong Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) "there is no economic future" and "there is no security".

Mr Lee said the SAF has done better than he had hoped.

2. The owner had hoped his case could be mentioned during the by-election. But earlier, the potential office of ombudsman was raised in parliament and the CUTS filed in the Prime Minister Office. The CUTS is at www.wp.sg of the Workers' Party dated 7 Mar 12.

3. Ombudsman: official empowered to investigate individual complaints of bureaucratic injustice.

Citizen

1. Who is to say the noise from the neighbour would not cause the owner to have a nervous breakdown? Especially when he is targeted.

2. Nature of the noise at times are loud, sharp and heavy; types of sound are ramble, knock, thump and others; and, in connection with their work, a noisy drainpipe. Noise is through the day including early morning and late at night. Workers are seen, and there is collaboration with officers.

3. It has been going on for years despite complaints to the authorities. In fact the complaints is cause for the officers to force the owner out of his flat. They could not be disciplined because of their connection, and the stationing of the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour is part of their strategy.

4. Noise may be reduced for a time after the owner had seen a MP or when he posted in his blog, but there has been no let up in their work. Noise is reduced considerably after he wrote to the President in Sep 11 just after the presidential election. The email to the President is the seventh post counting back or five periods of observation.

5. To a casual observer the noise may have seemed acceptable for two weeks after the Administrative Service dinner referred to in the previous post, but the noise has increased. Over the next four weeks some days are better and others worse. Better, because noise is muffled and less frequent. Worse, where ramble, knock, thump, drag, and drain are heard clearly and frequent. Previously rest day and public holiday were usually worse but, of the five public holidays last week, the two at Labour Day were worse and the three after at Vesak were better. They would maintain a level, start up, reduce for a time being when asked, but not stop, having persisted coming to five years now. The administration in government may not have sufficiently deterred them.

6. It is unconscionable to allow the neighbour to carry on. For a long time noise was undisguised, which forced the owner to leave his flat. The owner went to see his MPs about ten times then wrote a blog. When facts were line up including actions by insiders, it showed the neighbour and officers collaborated. These were listed and explained under various contexts. Yet the problem is not resolve. The neighbour continues with their work because HBO (Head, Pasir Ris HDB Branch Office) is in a position to use his influence, and the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour watches out for them.

 

7. Thump and ramble could only be from machine-tools, and the noise for hours each day could only be from a trade. It was not that they were not found out, rather the owner was blocked from bringing the case forward. Why the authorities have not taken action has been shown in a letter and two emails to the President.

8. The owner also wrote to the Police, PSC, MND and HDB; and he informed through his blog the media, companies, people he found in the government directory and, where he could find their email addresses, citizens in general. He did it after seeing his MPs many times over a year.

9. It may seems the administration in government is overly legalistic by being silent, but it implies more. The connections between the officers, the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour, and the neighbour are telling. If there were nothing, the authorities would have said so and put a stop to an issue the owner had brought up many times to support his case. Silence means not disclosing, which muddles the issue, shields the officers, and allows the neighbour to go on.

10. When rules make no allowance for how it is to be used, there is no justice and equality. It is not neutrality either. In the case, HBO answered all letters MPs wrote to HDB even after it was made clear to him it was intended for HDB, and HDB gave no direction nor conducted investigation.

11. In any case the government should respond. Impartial conduct, standard procedure, and authority of the state are values that would apply. Until the owner wrote to the President after the presidential election, he was like a hostage having to cope with the noise as best as he could.

12. Democracy is supposed to create the conditions where ordinary citizens could find their voice. There is no freedom when its citizens would not speak up against wrongdoing because they have reservation about speaking up.

13. Citizenship Richard Bellamy, A Very Short Introduction series

Now any reasonably stable and efficient political framework, even one presided by a ruthless tyrant, will provide us some of these benefits. For example, think of the increased uncertainty and insecurity suffered by many Iraqi citizens as a result of the lack of an effective political order following the toppling of Saddam Hussein. However, those possessing no great wealth, power, or influence - the vast majority of people in other words - will not be satisfied with just any framework. They will want one that applies to all - including the government- and treats everyone impartially and as equals, no matter how rich or important they may be. In particular, they will want its provisions to provide a just basis for all to enjoy the freedom to purse their lives as they choose on equal terms with everyone else, and in so far as is compatible with their having a reasonable amount of personal security through the maintenance of an appropriate degree of social and political stability. And a necessary, if not always a sufficient, condition for ensuring the laws and policies of a political community possess these characteristics is that the country is a working electoral democracy and that citizens participate in making it so. Apart from anything else, political involvement helps citizens shape what this framework should look like. People are likely to disagree about what equality, freedom, and security involve and the best policies to support them in given circumstances. Democracy offers the potential for citizens to debate these issues on roughly equal terms and to come to some appreciation of each other's views and interests. It also promotes government that is responsible to their evolving concerns and changing conditions by giving politicians an incentive to rule in ways that reflect and advance not their own interests but those of most citizens.

Above all, the appeal of a society of civic equals who share in fashioning their collective life remains a powerful one. Citizenship informs and gives effect to central features of our social morality. It underlies our whole sense of self-worth, affecting in the process the ways one treat others and are treated by them. It stands behind the commitment to rights and the appreciation of cultural diversity that are among the central moral achievements of the late 20th and 21th centuries. It has become fashionable to try and detach these effects of citizenship from any involvement in politics or democracy. What I hope to have shown in this book is that that is not possible. Citizenship and democratic politics stand and fall together. To seek to divorce the two undermines not just the possibility of political citizenship, but the values associated with the very idea of citizenship itself. The reinvigoration of citizenship, therefore, depends on revitalizing rather than diminishing political participation and with it the sense of belonging and the commitment to rights that are its prime benefits.

News

The Straits Times of 28 Mar 12.

Govt must not shy away from hard decisions: DPM

Engagement is part of policy process but there are trade-offs, he says

Mr Teo, who is also the Minister in charge of the Civil Service, Coordinating Minister for National Security, and Home Affairs Minister, was speaking at the Administrative Service dinner during which 74 Administrative Service officers received their promotion certificates.

Rather than grapple with whether to do more or less, Government should "focus on doing the right things, and doing these things right", he said.

But the greater challenge as Mr Teo saw it was in performing these roles in the right way. This called for civil servants to take a long-term perspective, and ensure whole-of-Government coherence when complex issues no longer fell within neat domains.

Public service standing 'hurt by recent events'

Individual failings must not lead to systemic lapses: Civil service head

The Head of the civil service said at the annual Administrative Service dinner, "It makes some wonder if the public service and the values we esponse are being eroded. There are officers who have felt let down by these episodes. I share the same disappointment."

Mr Peter Ong, who is also Permanent Secretary for Finance and for Special Duties in the Prime Minister's Office said of recent cases of cheating by officers and others being investigated for alleged misconduct. He was probably referring to an on-going investigation into alleged misconduct by the former Chiefs of Singapore Civil Defence Force and Central Narcotics Bureau; and the jailing of two Singapore Land Authority senior executives for cheating government agencies of more than $12 million.

Mr Ong also spoke of changes in public expectations, observing that from 2007 to last year, feedback to government feedback unit Reach and to the Land Transport Authority increased by 200 per cent.

When feedback relates to issues that do not fall neatly into any one agency's work, officers must "deal with the public's immediate needs first and then sort out inter-agency issues backend."

2. As usual, the owner reads between the lines whether the speeches fit his case.

3. There were evasions. After trying to call up the branch office, the owner called the OIC (Officer-in-Charge) who said the office did not receive his second letter. The owner then went to the office with a handwritten copy, asked for an acknowledgment, and insisted on a meeting with HBO (Head, Pasir Ris HDB Branch Office). The acknowledgment was a signed photocopy of the letter but two lines were missing from a page. The lines pointed to OIC having an arrangement with the neighbour. During the meeting with HBO and OIC, HBO asked the owner whether he knew of a recent transfer of the neighbour's flat to throw him off. The transfer was likely to be in '99 just after an eviction, which was about nine years ago and not a recent event.

4. At the first Meet-the-People Session (MPS), the owner handed over a letter to the interviewer who pointed to HBO in the letter when asked what he would do since no MP was present, and he gave his name as that of his brother when asked. His brother who lived in the same block of flat as the owner was later shown to be in contact with the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour.

5. The owner wrote to the MP and met him at the second MPS. He said he would attach the owner's letters to HDB. HBO's reply was not to refer to the issues raised but that the owner may engage his solicitors.

6. The owner went to see the MPs about ten times that involved HBO himself, his officers, community centre members, residents committee members, and the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour but each time HBO replied for the owner to seek assistance elsewhere. Later, the owner blogged and he wrote directly to the police, higher authorities and the President.

7. The collaboration between the officers and neighbour is likely to continue since no overt action is taken.

Dissent

11 Feb 2012

President
Republic of Singapore
Orchard Road
Singapore 238823

Dear Sir,

Officers Colluded With Neighbour

1. I wrote to the President on 1 Feb 10 and 15 Sep 11, each time the President's Office referred me to the police. Despite stating the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour watched out for the neighbour, the police still posed the problem as only between the neighbour and myself. I also wrote to PSC and HDB since they are directly responsible for the officers. They did not give a reply.

2. The case has features of whistleblowing. I would not have noticed the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour if someone in the same flat had not stopped the neighbour many years earlier, and someone sent me a bcc between HBO (Head, Pasir Ris HDB Branch Office) and Residents Committee chairman that indicated they met in the flat across the neighbour. At a Meet-the-People Session one Community Centre member introduced me to another who lived at my block of flat to talk about the noise, and two other meetings with the latter indicated he had contact with the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour.

3.It seemed a plan was underway when loud noise for a number of days signalled the start of work in '07. I wrote to Pasir Ris HDB Branch Office about a maid who was only removed at the same time a poster appeared on the noticeboard at my block.The poster showed a maid at a coffeeshop saying she was only allowed to work at the address she was registered in. Someone other than the Branch Office took action a number of months after my complaint and indicated by putting up the poster.

4. Because I complained, the neighbour together with the officers retaliated with noise to force me to leave my flat. In the meantime the officers kept their silence on issues raised in the complaint and waited for me to slip up. They would, however, repeatedly referred me to the Community Mediation Centre where, if they succeeded, would confine and leave me without an audience.

5. King (1999) stipulated that variation in organizational structure would have a direct impact on organizational dissent, particularly whistleblowing. He postulated that in centralized-vertical-bureaucratic organization where dissent is met with retaliation or ignored, fewer channels exist for expressing dissent and employees believe they can exercise little influence. As a result employees tend to express dissent externally. Conversely, in hybrid structure, where decision-making is decentralized among business units while administrative functions remain centralized, communication and exchange of information flows without difficulty between divisions and upper management. King stipulated that in these arrangements, dissent should be expressed internally within organization.

Accordingly, we can see that dissent may be ineffectual and risky, fundamental to participation, key to shaping organizational culture, reflective of organizational discourse, or instrumental to identity enactment.

Dissent in Organization Jeffery Kassing (2011), Pg 132 and 70.

6. Cabinet Office may have taken a step in the direction when PM announced after the general election that Ministers would have a free hand to think and reshape policies.

7. The neighbour is able to continue over the years because of backing from the officers. It allows the neighbour to carry on as usual even though the motive of the officers and neighbour were known and shown to be early on. Admitting the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour is an evidence is embarrassing. If not, where is the justice?

8. At the moment light knock, low rambling and muffled thump are heard although the noise is less than in the period covered by the previous post. The general reduction over the last four peiods covered may be seen as a concession by the neighbour. They use their flat as a work place rather than as a space to live in, but over the years there was nothing to stop them.

9. My complaint comes down to HBO who has influential connection within the administration so that dissent against his wrongdoing is risky.

10. The President may be unaware. In the reply two weeks after I wrote to the President an officer referred me to the relevant authorities without giving his name. It was followed by a reply from a police officer from SPF Customer Relation Branch who referred me to Bedok Police Division. Another two weeks later, another police officer from SPF Customer Relation Branch, instead of Bedok Police Division, replied. He stated the matter had been adequately addressed before, which would be the investigation by Neighbourhood Police Centre that did not investigate the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour. (It reminded me of a police officer who, in reply to my email to the Commissioner of Police, stated HDB had investigated thoroughly the matter and there was no unnecessary noise nor misuse of flat in Sep '09.) Bedok Police Division did not reply because they were aware of the issue the first time I wrote to the President. The officer from the President Office and the second police officer who replied may have took over the case in that my email never reached the President.

11. I hope the President takes a serious view of my situation of many years as the underlying cause have not been addressed.

Regards,

hh

Ombudsman

1. The Straits Times printed "a national ombudsman" under a reply from Mr Tony Tan Keng Yam during the presidential election. He says ombudsman is an established method when citizen is wronged. Mr Tony Tan is now the President.

2. There are two types of ombudsman. The first is an external official who investigates citizens complaints against the government. He is empowered to adjudicate matters as a sort of arbitrator.

3. The second type is one who mediates agreeable settlements between aggrieved parties. It is non-adjudicative.

4. In the owner's case PSC and HDB could investigate. Defining principles such as neutrality and type of resources differ from the first type of ombudsman, but all three takes action to investigate.

5. Community Mediation Centre, which mediates between citizens, is the second type of ombudsman. It is not appropriate in this case because officers are involved.

6. The President could show the way. As Head of State he is impartial and works toward a solution. His moral authority comes from being elected by the people, from appointing government nominees to key posts and from other duties. He could be the voice of the people when wrongdoing is not rectify.

7. The following questions need asking:

  a) Who accounts for the-people-in-the-flat-across-the neighbour?

  b) After the Police was informed, why did not they investigate?

  c) PSC and HDB are official channels of complaint, what keep them from giving a reply?

   

8. Once again after the previous posting some muffling of noise and, overall, there is less noise. It is heard early in the morning, morning, afternoon, night and, at times, past midnight. It could be single or a number of noises in the morning and late at night to over many hours of noise in the afternoon. The noises are knock, ramble, thump, drag and, in connection with their work, a noisy drainpipe.

9. The neighbour is in a business, they work the day long everyday. That is where insiders and the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour come in: insiders knew and stopped the neighbour before, and the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour was stationed to protect the neighbour from insiders. Though it would not have been permitted, the-people-in-the-flat-across-the-neighbour stayed on for over three years and still do.

10. There is no doubt the situation just described exists, and why MPs and others have supported. An outline this is so is the previous post Overview.

11. In a real manner the owner is forced by constant noise to leave. Being unable to work or take a nap, the continuing noise is a stress.

12. In 22 May 09 Minister-in-Charge of Civil Service said the government was on a lookout for bold and visionary leaders to raise the quality of public service. Later, PM said it was difficult to get leaders from the private sector into the public service due to different culture and mid-career change. The statement by Minister-in-Charge of Civil Service was made one to two weeks after the owner posted his complaint at civicadvocator.com

13. Thus the owner has no alternative, but calls on the President to help.