Following the judgment, the church said all six are now taking legal advice, with some of their lawyers suggesting their clients may appeal the sentence. All have been released on bail of between S$750,000 and S$1 million, though overseas travel is not permitted. Sentencing will take place at a later date, with the court due to hear submissions from defence and prosecution lawyers from Nov 6 to 20.
In a statement released later on Wednesday, the National Council of Churches said it was "saddened" to learn of the verdict, calling it a reminder for the community to pay greater attention to church governance and the management of funds. The six leaders of the church - founder and senior pastor Kong Hee; deputy senior pastor Tan Ye Peng; former church board member and Chairman of CHC's Investment Committee John Lam Leng Hung; former church board and CHC Investment Committee member Chew Eng Han; and former finance managers Sharon Tan and Serina Wee - were each convicted on between three and 10 counts of criminal breach of trust and falsifying church accounts.
"CONSPIRACY TO MISUSE CHURCH FUNDS"
 |
| Chief District Judge Mr See Kee Oon, |
"Each of them participated and functioned in their own way as crucial cogs in the machinery."
The defence lawyers’ arguments – centering on the altruistic motives of the six, who the lawyers argued did nothing for personal gain, but out of a belief in the evangelistic mandate of the church – did not negate their active and knowing participation in their acts, said Judge See. "They chose to participate in the conspiracy to misuse CHC’s funds, which included siphoning off large amounts from the building fun for Sun Ho’s music career and eventually for the round-tripping transactions to enable the bond redemptions. They chose to defraud the auditors with falsified accounts suggesting a series of genuine transactions for the redemption of bonds and advance rental," he said.
"The evidence points overwhelmingly to a finding that they had all acted dishonestly and in breach of the trust reposed in them and they played their respective roles in a conspiracy with intent to cause wrongful loss to CHC and to defraud the auditors." Kong and Lam were convicted on three counts of criminal breach of trust; Tan Ye Peng, Chew and Wee each were found guilty of six counts of criminal breach of trust and four counts of falsifying the church's accounts; while Sharon Tan was convicted on three counts of criminal breach of trust and four counts of falsifying the church's accounts.
"WE ARE DISAPPOINTED BY THE OUTCOME"
 |
| Ho Yeow Sun |
"This protracted season has been extremely difficult, not just for the six, but also for all their families and friends, as well as for our congregation. More than ever before, let’s have a unity that is unbreakable," she wrote.
"Pastor Kong and I are humbled by the tremendous outpouring of love and support shown to us during this time. We thank you for your prayers. Please continue to pray for Pastor Kong, Pastor Tan, John Lam, Sharon, Serina and Eng Han." She added: "Since 2012, we have had a new management and a new Church Board running the operations of the church. Therefore, let’s stay the course with CHC 2.0."
Of the six, Chew - the only one to represent himself during the trial - told Channel NewsAsia that he was considering appealing the judgment following the sentencing.
All were offered bail, with Kong, Tan Ye Peng, Lam and Chew set at S$1 million. Wee and Sharon Tan had their bail set at S$750,000. All six posted bail.For each count of criminal breach of trust, the six accused could face up to 10 years’ jail and a fine. The falsification of accounts carries a jail term of up to 10 years and a fine. The punishment for criminal breach of trust by a public servant, banker, merchant or agent set out under Section 409 of the Penal Code – the section under which all six accused have been convicted – is a life sentence or up to 20 years’ jail. However, the maximum sentences judges of the District Court can impose is 10 years per charge, or an aggregate sentence of up to 20 years.
This means that the maximum punishment that can be meted out to the six accused is 10 years’ jail per charge, with a total sentence not exceeding 20 years’ jail.
Source : Channel News Asia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pastor Kong Hee given the heaviest sentence of eight years' jail while Sharon Tan received the lightest at 21 months.
By Vanessa Paige Chelvan and Justin Ong
POSTED: 20 Nov 2015 14:38 • UPDATED: 21 Nov 2015 00:08
SINGAPORE: Six City Harvest Church (CHC) leaders were sentenced to between 21 months and eight years' jail on Friday (Nov 20) for misappropriating S$50 million of church funds.
 |
| Changi Prison |
Bail for all six was extended and the start of their sentence was deferred until Jan 11 next year for them to spend time with their families over Christmas.
In reading out the sentencing, Judge See Kee Oon said that Kong was the most culpable, followed by Tan Ye Peng, Chew Eng Han, Serina Wee and John Lam.
The six were found guilty on Oct 21 on all counts of criminal breach of trust, and falsification of accounts. They were in court on Friday for oral submissions.
Source :
Channel News Asia
Other sources :
Singapore Law Watch
CHC Church Watch
The Straits Times
TODAY Online
Mothership
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
City Harvest appeal: Kong Hee's sentence reduced to 3.5 years
SINGAPORE: In a split decision on Friday (Apr 7, 2017 ), the High Court cut City Harvest Church’s pastor Kong Hee’s eight-year jail term to three-and-a-half years, along with those of five others convicted of misappropriating about S$50 million of church funds. Judge of Appeal Chao Hick Tin and Justice Woo Bih Li, in the majority, convicted Kong and five accomplices of reduced charges, resulting in significantly reduced sentences for the six. Justice Chan Seng Onn dissented. All six were in court on Friday to hear the outcome of their appeal against both their conviction and sentences after being found guilty in October 2015. Former fund manager Chew Eng Han had his six-year sentence lowered to three years and four months, while deputy pastor Tan Ye Peng had his original five-and-a-half-year sentence cut to three years and two months.
Former finance manager Serina Wee Gek Yin's original five-year sentence was halved to two years and six months, and former finance committee member John Lam Leng Hung's three-year sentence was similarly halved to one year and six months. Former finance manager Sharon Tan Shao Yuen had her 21-month jail sentence reduced to seven months. Friday's hearing was the culmination of a five-day appeal heard in September last year by a three-judge panel, including Judge of Appeal Chao Hick Tin and Justices Woo Bih Li and Chan Seng Onn.
After the revised sentences were announced, Kong, Lam, Chew, Wee and Tan Ye Peng all asked for their sentences to start after two weeks, and the court agreed.
Sharon Tan asked to defer the start of her sentence by two months, as her family is relocating overseas in June and she said she wants to help her children adjust to the move. The court agreed to this too.
Friday’s hearing before a packed courtroom took place nearly seven years after an investigation into the megachurch was launched in May 2010. The six were convicted in 2015 of the most serious form of criminal breach of trust (CBT) - under section 409 of the Penal Code - for misappropriating S$50 million of church funds to secretly bankroll the extravagant lifestyle and budding Hollywood career of Kong’s wife, Sun Ho. Kong, the “ultimate leader” of the group and “main player” in the conspiracy, “had directed and influenced” Chew, Ye Peng, Wee, Lam and Sharon, “providing them with the overall direction and moral assurance for their actions”, JA Chao and Justice Woo said.
By virtue of their roles in the church - Ye Peng is a pastor, Chew and Lam were on the church’s board, and Wee and Sharon worked in the finance department - they were able to orchestrate a series of illicit transactions and cover ups for two years, between 2007 and 2009.
A LANDMARK FINDING
But in a blow to the prosecution, JA Chao and Justice Woo decided that not all the elements of the aggravated CBT charge had been made out, choosing instead to convict Kong, Chew, Ye Peng, Wee, Lam and Sharon of the least aggravated form of CBT, under section 406 of the Penal Code.
In particular, the decision stemmed from a landmark finding that the six, despite being “directors” of the church entrusted with control over millions in the church’s coffers, cannot fall within section 409 because of the “internal” nature of their relationship with the church. JA Chao and Justice Woo said “the relationship between a director (who is entrusted with the property) and the company (which is the one entrusting the property) is an internal one and this stands in stark contrast to the external nature of the relationship that (an agent) shares with his customer who entrusts the property with him".
"For these reasons, we do not think that a director who has been entrusted with the property of the company or organisation by virtue of his capacity as director can fall within section 409 of the Penal Code.” CBT in “external” relationships - such as when a person “offers his services to the community at large” and from which services he makes a living - may fall under the aggravated provision.
"EXCEPTIONAL" MITIGATING FACTORS
JA Chao and Justice Woo said that although the amount involved - S$50 million - is “substantial”, the “exceptional” mitigating factors in the case cannot be ignored, including the fact that the conspiracy involved no personal gain on the part of Kong and his accomplices. “This case should not be viewed as a sinister and malicious attempt on (their) part(s) to strip the church of funds for their own purposes,” the judges said. “They were acting in what they genuinely believed to be in (the church’s) interests.” The six resorted to “deceit and lies” to keep the conspiracy under wraps by inflating Ms Ho’s success and falsifying the church’s accounts to fool board members, auditors and lawyers, and lying to the congregation. But, the judges said, “it is telling that a substantial proportion of (the congregation) continued to support (Ms Ho’s career, in the name of evangelism) even after the full facts … were brought to light”.
Speaking to reporters minutes after his wife’s jail term was halved, Wee’s husband said he “(doesn’t) want to think about it”. “The first thing I want to do is talk to my wife and … go back and spend time with my family,” he said. Sharon Tan, who was in tears, is “disappointed” that she was not acquitted, her lawyer Paul Seah said. “But at least the court recognised (she is the least culpable). Now she wants to spend time with her family and pray.” Lam said he would accept the verdict and “move on with life”. But Chew seemed less resigned. He told reporters he is seriously considering bringing his case to the Court of Appeal.
Each party to the case has one month to apply for leave to refer a question of law to the apex court.
Source - Channel News Asia NA/db
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SINGAPORE: 10 Apr 2017The prosecution in the City Harvest case has filed a "criminal reference" to the Court of Appeal, to clarify the law under which the High Court made its decision to cut the jail terms of all six church leaders, said the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) in a statement on Monday (Apr 10).
A day after the High Court delivered its decision, Law Minister K Shanmugam said that the AGC told the Government they were appealing. "And the Government believed that the original (State Court) sentences were too low as well," said Mr Shanmugam
The AGC added: "The prosecution has accordingly filed a Criminal Reference today, to refer these questions of law to the Court of Appeal.
"If the Court of Appeal answers the questions referred in accordance with the prosecution’s submissions, the prosecution intends to request that the Court of Appeal exercises its powers under section 397(5) to reinstate the appellants’ original convictions under section 409 of the Penal Code and make necessary and consequential orders in relation to the sentences given."
Source : Channel News Asia
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment