DID THE PROSECUTION GO EASY ON ISWARAN?
However, it would be erroneous to conclude that the PP has gone easy on the former Member of Parliament (MP) by proceeding with fewer charges (five, down from 35) and less severe offences (amended from the PCA to Section 165 Penal Code charges. Far from it. The PP’s arguments in court do not point to a change of heart.
For example, the PP (and the government) regard Section 165 Penal Code as a corruption offence, serving a more targeted purpose of ensuring that public servants do not put themselves in a position of conflict of interest knowingly or otherwise in the course of their official duties. Iswaran, however, took the position that in pleading guilty to Section 165 Penal Code charges, he was not pleading guilty to any corruption offence.
Although both sides disagree vehemently on whether Section 165 of the Penal Code is an offence of corruption, Iswaran’s guilty plea to the amended charges suggests that each side largely secured what they sought.
For the PP, the guilty plea removes the uncertainty of whether a conviction can be secured, given the more onerous evidential burden under the PCA to prove the receiver agreed to do something that benefits the giver. Iswaran pleaded guilty to obtaining items, such as F1 hospitality suite tickets, a private jet flight and a hotel stay “for no consideration” under the amended charges.
In criminal prosecutions, the PP acts in the public interest and this includes not securing a conviction at all costs. With about 70 hearing days scheduled originally, the abrupt end to the case also saves significant public resources while holding the accused accountable for his actions.
