The trial will begin after months of court applications and delays.
Iswaran had declared from the outset that he was innocent, putting in a not-guilty plea from the day he was first charged in January – an unusual move as accused persons do not usually record their pleas so early.
His lawyers have led various court manoeuvres since January.
These include his successful application to leave the country for Australia to help his son settle into university, his delayed return due to an illness and multiple bids to have the prosecution turn over all its witness statements.
WHAT ISWARAN HAS SAID ABOUT THE CASE
In a statement to the media after his January charging, Iswaran said: “I am innocent and will now focus on clearing my name.”
Iswaran, whose political career spanned almost 30 years, resigned from his positions in government two days before his first court appearance in January.
He had previously been placed on a leave of absence pending investigations by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB).
He said he had submitted his resignation letter to then-prime minister Lee Hsien Loong “even without being asked to do so”.
“I resigned as Cabinet Minister, Member of Parliament and as a member of the People’s Action Party because I believe it was the right thing to do.”
“Further, I informed the prime minister on (Wednesday) that, even though I am innocent, I will be returning all monies that I received by way of salary as Minister and allowances as Member of Parliament from the commencement of CPIB’s investigations in July 2023.”
He had been drawing a reduced monthly salary of S$8,500 and a full MP annual allowance of S$192,500.
In a glimpse at his possible defence, heavyweight lawyer Mr Singh said in a court hearing in May that Iswaran did not know or suspect that gifts from Mr Ong and Mr Lum were “veiled gratification”.
“He was dealing with very, very dear and close friends,” said Mr Singh. “His state of mind at that time was that not only was he dealing with close friends, he had no idea at all that there was any … he had no knowledge or suspicion that the gifts were offered as veiled gratification.”
