This country is placed in Band B

Singapore’s GI ranking in Band B places it in the low risk of corruption category, making it top of the league among ASEAN member states and one of the highest scoring countries in the Asia Pacific region. Singapore’s highest corruption risk area, and lowest score is Operations (Band D) followed by Finance (Band C). The country’s highest scores and lowest corruption risk areas are Procurement and Personnel (both Band A). Singapore’s Procurement scores place it first in the entire Asia Pacific Region. There is clear commitment by the government to anti-corruption, evidenced by robust institutional systems and comprehensive procedures that are followed in practice. Singapore’s Investigation Bureau (CPIB) is a regional best case example of an independent and active law enforcement agency. To further build integrity and strengthen this anti -corruption framework, TI suggests the following reforms of the security sector.

Integrate anti-corruption in military operations

Singapore has a history of participation in peace support operations and humanitarian assistance disaster relief (HADR) missions at both regional and international levels. Operations is Singapore’s highest risk area, and there is an awareness and preparation amongst Singapore's Armed Forces of these risks, as evidenced in their defence anti-corruption policy. However, there is no evidence of systematic training in corruption issues for commanders other than occasional participation in seminars.

We recommend the adoption of a comprehensive and detailed military doctrine addressing corruption issues for peace and conflict that is publicly available. The MoD could provide comprehensive guidelines and staff training on addressing corruption risks (including  contractors) whilst on deployed operations or peacekeeping missions) and deploy trained professionals capable of monitoring corruption in the field who regularly report while on mission.  These reports should be made available to the public, at least in summary form.

Independent legislative oversight

While there are provisions for formal oversight and evidence of debate, Singapore’s electoral system favours the first party’s dominant position in parliament which can inhibit effective and independent oversight. There is no defence specific parliamentary committee charged with oversight of secret spending which is estimated to constitute 10% of the defence budget. Government expenses are scrutinised by the Auditor General and reviewed by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the Parliament. However, there is no available information regarding PAC oversight of secret items (defined here as spending on intelligence agencies and national security).

We recommend that the Government ensure mandatory provisions are in place for oversight of all “secret” expenditure in closed Committee sessions and provides these PAC committee members with extensive information on all spending on secret items, which includes detailed, line item descriptions of all expenditures. The exact proportion of expenditure for dedicated secret items is not available to the public, while the allocation is significant, we recommend that the Government publicly disclose the percentage of defence and security expenditure in the budget year which is dedicated to spending on secret items

Further strengthening procurement measures

With the highest procurement scores in the whole  region, Singapore provides a best practice model for defence procurement in many respects (most notability, perhaps,  is its use of the Analytic Hierarchy Process for the identification of requirements in the needs assessment phase). A policy to disclose the procurement process on the government’s GeBiz portal ensures detailed information is made available to the public, including procurement announcements and justifications for tender awards. Further measures are taken to ensure transparency in the tender award phase, which include audits of tender board decisions and the private wealth of tender board personnel and their families.

Singapore's procurement cycle  emphasises contractual compliance with relevant Anti-Corruption and Government Procurement legislation and regulations, which impose strict anti-corruption clauses for companies in all types of state procurement (civil and defence). However, there are concerns related to the lack of transparency of procurement which is single-sourced. It is not clear to what extent, in practice, single sourcing takes place. We recommend that the government provides an estimate in terms of the proportion of overall procurement in the annual budget.

Enable public discussions and oversight

The Singaporean Government completed a government review of the GI 2015 research, which shows a willingness to open dialogue with an international NGO on defence corruption issues. There is an atmosphere of open and free discussion on Singapore's defence policy in academia, think tanks, and the media. The MoD has improved its online presence through an active website and online forums, but it needs to be more active in fostering dialogue with civil society. We recommend that the government be more active in providing information and encouraging debate and dialogue on defence and security issues with civil society. This will help ensure that the strategy is more aligned and that the budget is spent on arms that meet Singapore’s strategic needs. 

Leadership 30
01.
score
2

Is there formal provision for effective and independent legislative scrutiny of defence policy?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: According to the Ministry of Defence, the &quoute;Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) on Defence and Foreign Affairs&quoute; acts as an independent feedback mechanism. However, the GPCs are appointed by the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) and they are essentially Party organs. The political influence of the PAP on the GPCs is high and this undermines the credibility of the claim regarding their independent nature (Mauzy 2002 and Jothie, 2012). The PAP has ruled Singapore since its independence from the UK and although it has tolerated opposition, it maintains a monopoly on power.

Debate in the PAP-dominated parliament takes place every year. Different views are heard and MPs raise issues that refer to foreign affairs and security as well as to particular aspects of military policy (for instance the National Service). The Parliament approves all laws including those on security (Constitution articles 59-60) and approves major arms procurements regularly. The Parliament has the formal right to substantially alter or reject the defence budget, but this very unlikely to happen in Singapore's PAP-dominated system.

Response to Government Reviewer:

The Government Reviewer's comments address the overall formal rights and involvement of the parliament in defence issues. However, the Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) on Defence and Foreign Affairs, the closest institution to a parliamentary committee on defence, is PAP-controlled and not bipartisan. The participation of members from more than one party in parliamentary committees is essential for effective and independent legislative scrutiny. In addition, there is a lack of evidence that Parliament as a whole does exercise independent and effective parliamentary scrutiny.

Score maintained.

COMMENTS -+

Four Government Parliamentary Committees to get new chairmen and deputies, The Straits Times, May 15,2014 http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/four-government-parliamentary-committees-get-new-chairmen-and-deputies (accessed July 2, 2014)

Worker's Party (opposition) speeches on defence budget and security issues http://www.wp.org.sg/index.php?s=defence+budget (accessed July 2,2014)

Most MPs back high level of defence spending, Today, March 6, 2014http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/most-mps-back-high-level-defence-spending accessed (July 2,2014)

Speech by Dr Ng Eng Hen, Minister for Defence, at Committee of Supply Debate 2014
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2014/06mar14_speech.html#.U7aB6qiazZ4 (accessed July 2, 2014)

'Defence Policy and Diplomacy', MoD website http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_policy.html (accessed July 2, 2014)

Mauzy, Diane K. 'Singapore politics under the People's Action Party' (London: Routledge, 2002)

Jothie Rajah Authoritarian Rule of Law: Legislation, Discourse and Legitimacy in Singapore (Cambridge: CUP, 2012)

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: Singapore’s defence policy, along with other aspects of Singapore’s public policy, is open for debate in Parliament. The Members of Parliament are directly elected by the citizenry at free and fair multi-political party General Elections at regular intervals every 5 years or less. Non-Government party MPs form about 19% of the total number of MPs: 10 Opposition party Members and 9 non-partisan Members.

The legislature is independent of the executive and no standing military officials are members of Parliament. Members of Parliament, including both Nominated Members of Parliament and Non-Constituency Members from the opposition parties, can file questions on various aspects of defence and security policy or move motions for debate and propose budget cuts.

All questions filed in Parliament, together with the replies (written or verbally delivered) by the respective Ministers, are posted online in the Parliament’s e-Hansard system. All defence related parliamentary questions and their replies are also posted on a dedicated page on the MINDEF website. The Government’s budget each year, which has to pass Parliament, undergoes an extensive debate session in Parliament called the Committee of Supply budget debates. All MPs, including Opposition MPs can move cuts to the Defence Budget. Parliament will then vote on the Defence Budget for that year. Parliament has the power not to approve the Defence Budget for a financial year.

In Feb 2015, Minister for Defence was asked by an Opposition Member of Parliament, Ms Lina Chiam, on the opening of swimming pools and gyms in military camps on weekends and after work hours for NSmen to do reservist training preparations. In Sep 2012, Minister for Defence answered a Parliamentary Question, asked by an Opposition Member of Parliament, Mr Gerald Giam, on National Day Parade expenditure. In Mar 2014, an Opposition Member of Parliament Ms Sylvia Lim asked 2nd Minister of Defence on outsourcing and security controls. These parliamentary proceedings are open to the media for reporting. (Pls see sources listed below.)
(Continued from Question 1)
Source:

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/content/imindef/key_topics/defence_policy.html
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/ps/2015/23feb15_ps.html
http://www.parliament.gov.sg/what-we-do
https://www.parliament.gov.sg/sites/default/files/Supply%20Bill%208-2015.pdf
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2014/06mar14_speech2.html
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/ps/2012/10sep12_ps.html

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

02.
score
1

Does the country have an identifiable and effective parliamentary defence and security committee (or similar such organisation) to exercise oversight?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There is no specialised defence committee in the parliament of Singapore. However, some of the functions of such a committee are carried out by other institutions. Scrutiny and debate of the defence budget is the responsibility of the Committee of Supply, which has oversight of the entire proposed budget of the government. The MoD and SAF expenditures are externally audited by the Auditor-General's Office (AGO) and are scrutinised by the Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee (PAC).

It should be noted that as explained in question 1, the &quoute;Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) on Defence and Foreign Affairs&quoute; that according to the MoD website acts as an independent feedback mechanism for defence policy, is actually appointed by the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) and is essentially a Party organ.

Response to Government Reviewer:

The GPC has no formal rights. But although the GPC cannot formally scrutinise the defence ministry and its agencies, GPC members do exercise a certain amount of influence, and the Government Reviewer has presented some evidence that their comments and feedback on defence, in broad-brush-stroke terms, may prompt follow-on responses and actions by the ministry and its agencies.

There is no reason why the GPC cannot ask for expert witnesses and it is active, including making visits to military camps and attending national military exercises and joint exercises with other countries. But it does not publish documents, and ultimately the GPC is a party organ. So while the Committee may raise general awareness and understanding on defence and operational matters among parliamentarians who rotate through the Committee, it does not exercise an independent scrutiny function.

Score maintained.

COMMENTS -+

Parliament of Singapore, Public Accounts Committee, http://www.parliament.gov.sg/public-accounts-committee (accessed July 2, 2014)

Auditor General Year reports http://www.ago.gov.sg/publcatn.html (accessed July 2, 2014)

Auditor General - Audit Authority http://www.ago.gov.sg/ourrole.html (accessed July 2, 2014)

Supply Committee, Parliamentary debate on defence issues http://www.gov.sg/government/web/content/govsg/classic/subsite/cos2014/theme2 (accessed July 2, 2014)

Worker's Party (opposition) speeches on defence budget and security issues http://www.wp.org.sg/index.php?s=defence+budget (accessed July 2, 2014)

Constitution of Singapore http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22cf2412ff-fca5-4a64-a8ef-b95b8987728e%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: GPCs are set up by the governing party to scrutinise the legislation and programmes of ministries. While their powers are vague, the GPC for Defence and Foreign Affairs in practice exercise some powers of veto and oversight. For instance, the Minister for Defence Ng Eng Hen was grilled by the GPC on the issue of a 3 month language course for a PLA officer that cost $25 900, paid for by the SAF.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: Given how there is no change to GPC-DFA’s structures and processes to exercise oversight, it is unclear how the assessor had concluded that our parliamentary defence and security committee had become less effective.

There is a specific Government Parliamentary Committee on Defence and Foreign Affairs (GPC-DFA) which examines the policies, programmes and proposed legislation of MINDEF/SAF, provides the ministry with feedback and suggestions, and is consulted by the ministry on issues of public interest. It also scrutinises foreign affairs given that Singapore’s security is inextricably linked to our foreign partnerships. The GPC-DFA visits various defence facilities yearly to inspect and be briefed on the safety aspects, operational capabilities and activities of MINDEF/SAF.

The GPC-DFA is an independent body and its members frequently file Parliamentary Questions querying the Minister on various aspects of defence policy, ranging from costs, personnel policies, foreign partnerships, national service, among others.


Source:
https://www.parliament.gov.sg/publications/g
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/nr/2014/jul/11jul14_nr.html
http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/gpc-defence-and-foreign-affairs-visits-air-defence-and-operations-command
http://strengthenns.sg/imindef/resourcelibrary/cyberpioneer/topics/articles/news/2015/mar/09mar15_news.print.img.m.html

Kevin Yew Lee Tan (1999), &quoute;Parliament and the Making of Law in Singapore&quoute;, in Kevin Y[ew] L[ee] Tan, The Singapore Legal System (2nd ed.), Singapore: Singapore University Press, pp. 123–159 at 139–140, ISBN 978-997-169-213-1.

Heng Chiang Meng (1999), &quoute;System of Committees in the Parliament of Singapore&quoute;, in Gordon Barnhart & comp., Parliamentary Committees: Enhancing Democratic Governance: A Report of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Study Group on Parliamentary Committees and Committee Systems, London: Cavendish Publishing, pp. 61–67 at 64, ISBN 978-1-85941-532-0.

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

03.
score
2

Is the country's national defence policy debated and publicly available?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The country's defence policy is publicly available on the MoD's website. Debate in the PAP-dominated parliament takes place with MPs submitting questions on broader and specific defence policy issues. In addition, there is evidence of a free discussion on Singapore's defence policy in academia, think tanks and the media. Issues of grand strategy, major and new threats, Singapore's existential concerns etc are openly debated.

Comprehensive discussions on defence procurement and military operations are not held in public, however. Calls for public consultation are infrequent and when they do occur, usually focus on issues related to National Service. Public consultations on national service have been openly held, but the exact changes introduced as a result of these are unclear.

It should also be noted that the Parliament has been dominated by the PAP since the country's independence so the executive has considerable influence over parliamentarians. There is no evidence of parliamentary opposition in Singapore's defence policy.

Response to Government Reviewer:

The Government Reviewer rightly sets out that the national defence policy is public, and that policy is presented through the Committee of Supply budget debates. Although it is true that Members of Parliament can move motions, raise questions and issues during these debates, or raise Parliamentary Questions (PQs), formal consultation with the public is selective and mainly concentrated on National Service and threat perception. Nor can debates be considered particularly active, and there is limited evidence that Parliamentarians can influence national defence policy through such Parliamentary encounters.

COMMENTS -+

Worker's Party (opposition) speeches on defence budget and security issues http://www.wp.org.sg/index.php?s=defence+budget (accessed July 2, 2014)

Most MPs back high level of defence spending, Today, March 6, 2014, http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/most-mps-back-high-level-defence-spending (accessed July 2, 2014)

Speech by Dr Ng Eng Hen, Minister for Defence, at Committee of Supply Debate 2014
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2014/06mar14_speech.html#.U7aB6qiazZ4 (accessed July 2, 2014)

Tan Kwoh Jack, Ho Shu Huang and Koh Swee Lean Collin, Singapore: How to Stay “Stable and Strong”, The Diplomat, October 11, 2013 http://thediplomat.com/2013/10/singapore-how-to-stay-stable-and-strong/ (accessed July 2, 2014)

Rajaratnam School of International Studies website http://www.rsis.edu.sg/publications/newsletter.html

Institute of Policy Studies at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, survey on public attitudes to National Service in Singapore http://lkyspp.nus.edu.sg/ips/news/ips-report-on-singaporeans-attitudes-to-national-service-2013

The National Service Survey – A Poll to Ponder, or Pander?', The Online Citizen, October 16
10:30 http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2013/10/the-national-service-survey-a-poll-to-ponder-or-pander/

National Service website http://www.ns.sg/nsp/web/home?_afrLoop=716378514226657&_afrWindowMode=0&_afrWindowId=null#%40%3F_afrWindowId%3Dnull%26_afrLoop%3D716378514226657%26_afrWindowMode%3D0%26_adf.ctrl-state%3Dj6ft3e8fo_4

Ministry of Defence website http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/home.html (accessed February 10 2014)

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: Parliamentarians are granted little scope to influence national defence policy, which is strictly under the purview of the Cabinet, in particular the Ministry of Defence. The process of decision-making is executed alongside consultation with the senior management of the SAF.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: It is unclear why the assessor had concluded that our national defence policy is not updated, debated or made publicly available. MINDEF/SAF’s defence policy is articulated by its twin pillars of deterrence and diplomacy. The policy is openly available on MINDEF/SAF's website. Annual updates on MINDEF/SAF’s defence policy, priorities and areas for defence investment are presented by all three MINDEF political office holders through the Committee of Supply budget debates. During the annual Budget Debate, Members of Parliament can move motions to cut the defence budget and to raise questions and issues to the Minister.

Members of Parliament can raise Parliamentary Questions (PQs) to the Ministers about their respective Ministries’ areas of concern. A copy of the Minister for Defence’s answers and Parliamentary Statements are also placed online, along with replies to forum letters and replies to media query, as a formal public record, for public accountability and transparency.

MINDEF/SAF also makes Ministerial Statements in Parliament proactively on issues of grave public concerns, such as training deaths. For instance, Minister for Defence Ng Eng Hen proactively made a ministerial statement on training deaths in 2012. All parliamentary statements are also captured via hansard and placed on the Singapore Parliament website. Defence related parliamentary statements are also found on the MINDEF website.

Parliamentary debates are wide-ranging and include queries and statements from Opposition as well as PAP members. The Constitution also provides for the appointment of other MPs not voted in at a General Election. Up to 9 Non-Constituency Members of Parliament (NCMPs) from the opposition political parties can be appointed. This is to ensure that there will be a minimum number of opposition representatives in Parliament and that views other than the Government's can be expressed in Parliament. There are currently 3 NCMPs in Parliament belonging to the opposition. In Jan 15, NMP Mrs Lina Chiam asked in a Parliamentary Question about the breakdown of the number of graduates and non-graduates who are commissioned as officers (see source 4).

A constitutional provision for the appointment of up to 9 Nominated Members of Parliament (NMPs) was also made in 1990 to ensure a wide representation of community views in Parliament. There are currently 9 NMPs in Parliament and they contribute independent and non-partisan views.

Public discussions on defence procurement and military operations are active, as evidenced by frequent letters from the public to press forum pages, as well as detailed press commentaries by opinion-makers, and public blogposts and social media posts on defence matters (ranging from the defence budget to procurements to the Committee to Strengthen National Service to the Indonesian Navy naming its warships over two executed marines to deployments to the counter-ISIS coalition and, most recently, hybrid warfare).

Sources:

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/content/imindef/key_topics/defence_policy.html
https://www.rsis.edu.sg/rsis-publication/idss/1253-singapores-defence-policy/
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/content/imindef/press_room/official_releases.ps.html
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/ps/2015/19jan15_ps2.html
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/ps/2012/14nov12_ps2.html#.VUo9yNKqqko
http://www.parliament.gov.sg/publications-singapore-parliament-reports
https://www.parliament.gov.sg/members-parliament

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

04.
score
2

Do defence and security institutions have a policy, or evidence, of openness towards civil society organisations (CSOs) when dealing with issues of corruption? If no, is there precedent for CSO involvement in general government anti-corruption initiatives?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There is evidence of engagement with CSOs, including engagement on sensitive issues such as defence.

The government of Singapore has set up an Advisory Council on Community Relations in Defence (ACCORD) though its role is mainly related to welfare and public image related activities rather than cooperating with civil society on issues of corruption.

The Corruption Prevention Investigation Bureau has no reference on its website to engagement with CSOs. The interaction of the MoD and the CPIB with civil society organisations is limited to the latter participating in publicity projects of the former (interview 1). CSOs are also encouraged to participate in the government's 'Total Defence' programme, but no reports were found from CSOs comprehensively assessing their work with government institutions on matters of defence.

There is no evidence of systematic cooperation in policy implementation or of a dialogue on corruption between the two sides (Interview 1). However, it should be noted that defence procurement is centrally controlled by the government and not by the MoD or the SAF.

There is evidence of government-CSOs collaboration as part of the former's attempt to engage society in anti-corruption initiatives.

COMMENTS -+

CPIB website - 'Organizations we work with', http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=124 (accessed July 7, 2014)

CPIB website, 2013 report http://app.cpib.gov.sg/data/website/doc/ManagePage/1206/CPIB%20Annual%20Report%202013.pdf (accessed July 7, 2014)

MoD website, featured publication, Portraying The National Image of Singapore Through the Armed Forces and Its Leaders, http://www.mindef.gov.sg/content/imindef/publications/pointer/journals/2014/v40n2/feature4/_jcr_content/imindefPars/download/file.res/C%3A%5Cfakepath%5C33-43%20The%20National%20Image%20of%20Singapore.pdf (accessed July 7, 2014)

Total Defence website, MoD http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/topics/totaldefence/td14/community_outreach.html (accessed July 7, 2014)

Interview with Interviewee 1, Journalist, July 20, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

05.
score
4

Has the country signed up to international anti-corruption instruments such as, but not exclusively or necessarily, UNCAC and the OECD Convention? (In your answer, please specify which.)

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Singapore has signed all the international anti-corruption instruments (UNCAC, ADB/OECD Anti-Corruption Initiative) and is very active in regional and global cooperation in the field (by ADB and APEC).

There is evidence of compliance in the form of submitting reports, participating in fora and adjusting national legislation (please refer to pages 108-109 of the OECD Compilation of Written Reports for a comprehensive list of legislative adjustments).

Singapore has not yet published its self-assessment under the UNCAC review mechanism. The deadline for publication is in 2015.

COMMENTS -+

OECD Singapore related news http://www.oecd.org/countries/singapore/ (accessed July 3, 2014)

Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Anti-Corruption & Transparency Experts' Task Force http://www.apec.org/Groups/SOM-Steering-Committee-on-Economic-and-Technical-Cooperation/Working-Groups/Anti-Corruption-and-Transparency.aspx (accessed July 3, 2014)

ADB/OECD Anti-Corruption Initiative, Singapore self-assessment report http://www.oecd.org/countries/singapore/35052647.pdf

UNCAC reviewing mechanism, Singapore country profile https://www.unodc.org/unodc/treaties/CAC/country-profile/profiles/SGP.html (accessed July 3, 2014)

CPIB website: http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=151
http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=145
http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=173 (accessed July 3, 2014)

The Criminalisation of Bribery in Asia and the Pacific, OECD report 2011
http://www.keepeek.com/Digital-Asset-Management/oecd/governance/the-criminalisation-of-bribery-in-asia-and-the-pacific/singapore_9789264097445-38-en#page1 (accessed July 3, 2014)

UNCAC civil society coalition, UNCAC review official documents http://www.uncaccoalition.org/en/uncac-review/official-country-reports#self-assessments (accessed July 3, 2014)

OECD - Compilation of Written Reports of Steering Group Members on UNCAC Implementation and Other Specific Topics in the Anti - Corruption Field url: http://www.oecd.org/site/adboecdanti-corruptioninitiative/19th-StG-Compilation-Written-Reports.pdf (accessed July 3, 2014)

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

06.
score
2

Is there evidence of regular, active public debate on issues of defence? If yes, does the government participate in this debate?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There is evidence of occasional debate between the government and the media, especially on issues related to National Service (please refer to sources above). Think tanks and the government maintain a dialogue, with conferences and seminars on defence and security policy taking place on a regular basis.

In general, the public and the press discuss defence and NS related issues online, however interaction with the government is limited and tends to be on the latter's terms, as there is no evidence of investigative journalism or of critical public debate on other issues of defence. Debate on many issues with any political content in Singapore is somewhat muted, and the country ranked 153 in the 2015 World Press Freedom Index, which serves to inhibit debate on important strategic defence issues.

The government has set up an Advisory Council on Community Relations in Defence (ACCORD) but its role refers mainly to welfare and image related activities rather than fostering dialogue with society or civil opinion-formers. There is talk of upgrading the ACCORD's role to facilitate consultative processes however.

Response to Government Reviewer:

The MinDef has improved its online presence by an active website and online forums. The Government Reviewer has presented good evidence of the Ministry's efforts to engage the public. However, there is a lack of evidence of persistent debate with civil society rather than communication towards, or of the government encouraging the public to share in setting the terms of public debate. The role of CSOs remains quite narrow and there is no evidence that the ACCORD is engaging with the public on issues other than the NS, so a higher score is not justified.

COMMENTS -+

Speech by Dr Ng Eng Hen, Minister for Defence, at Committee of Supply Debate 2014
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2014/06mar14_speech.html#.U7aB6qiazZ4, accessed July 2, 2014

&quoute;Singapore: Freedom of the Press 2014, Freedom House, https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2014/singapore

2015 World Press Freedom Index, https://index.rsf.org/#!/

Tan Kwoh Jack, Ho Shu Huang and Koh Swee Lean Collin, Singapore: How to Stay “Stable and Strong”, The Diplomat, October 11, 2013 http://thediplomat.com/2013/10/singapore-how-to-stay-stable-and-strong/ accessed July 2, 2014

Rajaratnam School of International Studies website http://www.rsis.edu.sg/publications/newsletter.html

Examples of SAF/Defence related blogs and forums:
http://kementah.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/the-singapore-armed-forces-protecting.html
http://sgforums.com/forums/1390

Institute of Policy Studies at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, survey on public attitudes to National Service in Singapore http://lkyspp.nus.edu.sg/ips/news/ips-report-on-singaporeans-attitudes-to-national-service-2013

The National Service Survey – A Poll to Ponder, or Pander?', The Online Citizen, October 16 2013,
10:30 http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2013/10/the-national-service-survey-a-poll-to-ponder-or-pander/

National Service website http://www.ns.sg/nsp/web/home?_afrLoop=716378514226657&_afrWindowMode=0&_afrWindowId=null#%40%3F_afrWindowId%3Dnull%26_afrLoop%3D716378514226657%26_afrWindowMode%3D0%26_adf.ctrl-state%3Dj6ft3e8fo_4

MINDEF working on restructuring ACCORD, proposal for new SAF Volunteer Corps, Channel New Asia http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/specialreports/budget2014/mindef-working-on/1022872.html accessed February 11, 2015

Interview with Interviewee 1, Journalist, July 20, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: Public engagement on issues of national defence is almost exclusively limited to NS policies. Public discussion of other national defence issues, if conducted, is held on the government's terms. They usually take the form of dialogues to university students or industry leaders (Shangri-La Dialogue) with little potential for actually influencing policy.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: MINDEF/SAF is subject to parliamentary oversight and answers all queries in Parliament. Minister for Defence hosts media and answers media questions at many junctures over the year, e.g. SAF Day interview, during overseas trips, various defence and non-defence events. Given how there is no change to our parliament’s structures and processes to exercise oversight, it is unclear how the assessor had concluded that there is less debate on defence and security issues.

All three MINDEF political office holders also engage various public stakeholders to exchange views on defence-related policies. For instance, Minister for Defence spoke to undergraduates from the National University of Singapore (NUS) at the latest Kopi Talk session, organised by the Ministry of Communications and Information’s REACH (Reaching Everyone for Active Citizenry @ Home) and the Military Justice Project, NUS Law Criminal Justice Club, held on 16 Feb 2015. Kopi Talks is a series of dialogue sessions, that is open to media reporting, and brings together Political Officer Holders and tertiary institution students to discuss policy issues. Minister for Defence had also engaged NUS alumni in a discussion on defence policy at NUS’ U@live forum in Jan 2014. Former Second Minister for Defence, 2nd Min Chan Chun Sing had engaged the members of the American Chamber of Commerce in a lunchtime dialogue in July 2014. During the Committee to Strengthen National Service, Former Second Minister for Defence and Senior Minister for Defence, 2nd Min Chan Chun Sing and Minister-of-State, Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman, both led working groups comprising stakeholders from community and business organisations to consult and engage in discussion on how to improve National Service processes.

ACCORD’s reach has been expanded into three councils which engage more segments of the public on defence issues. The three Councils are the Employer and Business Council (E&B), Educational Institutions Council (EI) and Family and Community Council (F&C). The Councils play an active role in engaging their respective stakeholders to strengthen Commitment to Defence (C2D), support for National Service (NS) and Total Defence (TD). David Boey, an ACCORD member and keen defence observer, regularly blogs on defence-related issues (including procurement) and writes commentaries which are carried by mainstream media.

Source: http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/ps/2014/17feb14_ps.html
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/resourcelibrary/cyberpioneer/topics/articles/n ews/2014/jul/01jul14_news.html
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/resourcelibrary/cyberpioneer/topics/articles/news/2015/feb/17feb15_news.html
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/nr/2014/aug/25aug14_nr.html
http://kementah.blogspot.sg/2014/07/singapore-armed-forces-saf-is-no-peace.html

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

07.
score
4

Does the country have an openly stated and actively implemented anti-corruption policy for the defence sector?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The CPIB is an independent and very effective law enforcement agency under civilian control which is often used as an example of successful institutional response to the problem of corruption (Quah, 2010; 2013). Its jurisdiction also covers Singapore's military establishment.

Accordingly, Singapore has a comprehensive openly stated anti-corruption policy for the public sector which explicitly includes the Armed Forces (Prevention of Corruption Act and CPIB media releases are cited above). In addition to internal anti-corruption mechanisms, the MoD/SAF falls under the jurisdiction of the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau.

MoD/SAF personnel can be charged under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the Penal Code, and relevant military legislation. The SAF, MoD and CPIB websites offer information on cases of corruption in the Armed Forces. The public and the press is regularly informed about such cases (source 2).

Although there are no detailed implementation plans associated with the risks identified on the short public facing policy description - it is clear from the evidence throughout this assessment that this policy is underpinned by a recognition of the key problem areas and is accompanied by detailed and specific planning and implementation.

COMMENTS -+

'Anti-Corruption Policy',MoD website, http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/anti_corruption_policy.html accessed July 2, 2014

CPIB cases involving military officers: http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=1225
accessed July 2, 2014

Interview with source 1, Journalist, July 20, 2014

'Sex-for-contracts trial: 6 months' jail for former Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) chief Peter Lim', The Straits Times, Jun 13, 2013, http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/sex-contracts-trial-6-months-jail-former-scdf-chief-peter-lim-20130613#sthash.Yvw2ImzJ.dpuf accessed July 2, 2014

'Army transport warrant officer jailed for corruption', The Real Singapore, 26 Aug 2013 http://therealsingapore.com/content/army-transport-warrant-officer-jailed-corruption accessed July 2, 2014

CPIB Media releases, http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=1106 accessed July 2, 2014

Prevention of Corruption Act, http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=029a5950-d96e-4e96-bf0e-15a6d8cf4365;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22ba9a8115-fb33-4254-8070-7b618d4fd8d1%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0#pr36-he-. accessed July 2, 2014

Penal Code (2008) http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=e40d5913-c2dc-4284-bf68-eb315c55c8fa;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22025e7646-947b-462c-b557-60aa55dc7b42%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0#legis accessed July 2 2014

Speech by Senior Minister of State for Defence Mr Chan Chun Sing at the Committee of Supply Debate 2013, 12 March 2013
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2013/12mar13_speech2.print.img.html accessed July 2 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

08.
score
4

Are there independent, well-resourced, and effective institutions within defence and security tasked with building integrity and countering corruption?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The CPIB is an independent and very effective law enforcement agency under civilian control which is often used as an example of successful institutional response to the problem of corruption (Quah, 2010; 2013). Its jurisdiction also covers Singapore's military establishment. In addition, the MoD and SAF personnel can also be searched and arrested under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Military also has its own system of audits and administrative measures (rotation of officers, trainings) to mitigate the risk of corruption.

There is evidence of implementation, including the exposure of various cases as indicated in the sources provided.

COMMENTS -+

CPIB website http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=132 accessed July 3, 2014

Speech by Senior Minister of State for Defence Mr Chan Chun Sing at the Committee of Supply Debate 2013, 12 March 2013
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2013/12mar13_speech2.print.img.html accessed July 3, 2014

MoD anti-corruption policy http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/anti_corruption_policy.html accessed July 3, 2014

Prevention of Corruption Act, http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=029a5950-d96e-4e96-bf0e-15a6d8cf4365;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22ba9a8115-fb33-4254-8070-7b618d4fd8d1%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0#pr36-he-. accessed June 26, 2014

CPIB cases involving military officers: http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=1225
accessed July 3, 2014

'Sex-for-contracts trial: 6 months' jail for former Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) chief Peter Lim', The Straits Times, Jun 13, 2013, http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/sex-contracts-trial-6-months-jail-former-scdf-chief-peter-lim-20130613#sthash.Yvw2ImzJ.dpuf accessed July 3, 2014

'Army transport warrant officer jailed for corruption', The Real Singapore, 26 Aug 2013 http://therealsingapore.com/content/army-transport-warrant-officer-jailed-corruption accessed July 3, 2014

CPIB Media releases, http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=1106 accessed July 3, 2014

Quah JS (ed),Public Administration Singapore-Style: 19 (UK:Emerald, 2010)


Quah JS (ed) Different Paths to Curbing Corruption: Lessons from Denmark, Finland, Hong Kong, New Zealand and Singapore (UK:Emerald, 2013)

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

09.
score
4

Does the public trust the institutions of defence and security to tackle the issue of bribery and corruption in their establishments?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Although there is not a survey on the MoD/SAF's ability to deal with corruption in the military, many closely related surveys suggest that public confidence in this regard is significant.

Singapore scores very high in both national and international surveys regarding the government's overall ability to deal with corruption. Singapore ranks 7th in the 2014 Corruption Perceptions Index (score 84/100). Also, in the World Values Survey (2010-2014 wave) 77.2% answered that they have a 'great deal' or 'quite a lot' of confidence in the Armed Forces. A 2013 World Justice Project survey also reported that more than 70% of Singaporeans have confidence in the country's anticorruption capabilities. Similarly positive attitudes were recorded in a poll regarding the necessity of maintaining the National Service.

The 2011 Global Corruption Barometer (Singapore was not assessed in its 2013 edition) suggests that the percentage of people who think of their government's efforts to fight corruption as ineffective is at 31%. The percentage of people who feel that from 2007-2010 the level of corruption in the country has increased in the period 2007-2010 is at 38%. The SAF is one of the institutions least perceived by the public to be affected by corruption (2.7/5, in comparison NGOs are at 2.6/5 and Media 3/5).

Response to Government Reviewer and Peer Reviewer 2:

The score has been moderated in response to comments from reviewers.

Score changed from 3 to 4.

COMMENTS -+

'Most think Singapore will deal with corrupt officials: Poll' - Straits Times, May 2, 2014 http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/more-singapore-stories/story/most-think-singapore-will-deal-corrupt-officials-poll-20#sthash.D880O7q6.dpuf accessed July 3, 2014

Transparency International Corruption Perception Index http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2013/results/ accessed July 3, 2014

Transparency International http://www.transparency.org/country/#SGP_PublicOpinion accessed July 3, 2014

World Values Survey http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSOnline.jsp accessed July 3, 2014

Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, 'IPS Report on Singaporeans’ Attitudes to National Service' (2013), http://lkyspp.nus.edu.sg/ips/news/ips-report-on-singaporeans-attitudes-to-national-service-2013 accessed July 3, 2014

Transparency International Singapore corruption profile: http://www.transparency.org/country/#SGP accessed Feb 11, 2015

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: Given TI’s own assessment that Singapore ranks “very highly” in both national and international surveys, and the SAF is one of the institutions least perceived to be affected by corruption, it is unclear how the assessor concluded that there is less public trust in the institutions of defence and security to tackle corruption.

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: I assess that the current rating suggested by the Assessor is actually too strict. It ought to be '4'. There is a zero tolerance climate on corruption across Singapore society. This is buttressed by the perception among citizens that the Singapore Government, its Ministries, Agencies and Government-Linked Companies (State-Owned Enterprises) are already generating heady revenue in their G2B contracting of equipment and services. Government ministers, senior civil servants and senior management staff of government agencies and GLCs are also known to receive high salaries. Thus, instances of corruption by such figures would not be accepted by the public and it would expect an enquiry into such matters and judgements to be reached.

Suggested score: 4

Peer Reviewer-+

10.
score
3

Are there regular assessments by the defence ministry or another government agency of the areas of greatest corruption risk for ministry and armed forces personnel, and do they put in place measures for mitigating such risks?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Although there is no evidence suggesting that comprehensive risk assessments take place, a clear implicit understanding of risks is evident in the MoD/SAF system of audits and administrative measures (rotation of officers, credit bureau checks and checks of the assets held by officers and their family members, trainings). There is evidence of implementation, including the exposure of various cases. Special attention is given to personnel of the DSTA which is involved in procurement. There is limited information on how regularly these corruption risk mitigation measures take place.

There are also provisions for the involvement of independent institutions in the Army's anti-corruption efforts. The CPIB is a highly effective enforcement agency under civilian control which is also in charge of conducting investigations in the Army. In addition, the MoD and SAF expenditures are externally audited by the Auditor-General's Office (AGO) and are scrutinised by the Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee (PAC).

Response to Government Reviewer:

The Government Reviewer has outlined MINDEF approach to corruption risks:
- a rigorous personnel security vetting programme that identifies points of vulnerabilities such as financial indebtedness and periodic re-vetting.
- requirement for annual and ad hoc declarations of additional income, assets, indebtedness, financial embarrassment and other risk factors.
- identification of corruption prone appointments” (e.g. Senior commanders, officers in procurement and financial positions) which are subject to risk management and compliance regulations.

The represents good evidence that risks are clearly identified on a regular basis, and appropriate risk mitigation measures are in place to cover all risks in every case. But there is limited publicly available information on how regularly such assessments take place and how effective such risk mitigation measures are in practice. This is an area where there is space for improvement in terms of transparency and access to information.

COMMENTS -+

MoD - Defence Procurement: http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_procurement.html accessed July 5, 2014

MoD - Anticorruption policies http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/anti_corruption_policy.html accessed July 5, 2014

MoD - System of Audits: http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/system_of_audits.html accessed July 5, 2014

Defence, Science and Technology Agency - Code of Ethics: http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/defence-procurement/our-code-of-ethics accessed July 5, 2014

Defence, Science and Technology Agency - Our Procurement Principles and Governance: http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/defence-procurement/our-procurement-principles-and-governance accessed July 5, 2014

Defence, Science and Technology Agency - Law: http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/defence-procurement/the-law accessed July 5, 2014

Speech by Senior Minister of State for Defence Mr Chan Chun Sing at the Committee of Supply Debate 2013, 12 March 2013
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2013/12mar13_speech2.print.img.html accessed July 5 2014

CPIB Media releases, http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=1106 accessed July 3, 2014

Singapore Police Force Media Releases, http://www.spf.gov.sg/mic/2010/06/20100611_cidops.html accessed June 27, 2014

CPIB cases involving military officers: http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=1225

'Sex-for-contracts trial: 6 months' jail for former Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) chief Peter Lim', The Straits Times, Jun 13, 2013, http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/sex-contracts-trial-6-months-jail-former-scdf-chief-peter-lim-20130613#sthash.Yvw2ImzJ.dpuf accessed June 27, 2014

'Army transport warrant officer jailed for corruption', The Real Singapore, 26 Aug 2013 http://therealsingapore.com/content/army-transport-warrant-officer-jailed-corruption accessed June 27, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: It is unclear how the assessor had concluded that our corruption risk mitigation system is still less than effective in addressing corruption. MINDEF has in place a rigorous personnel security vetting programme that identifies points of vulnerabilities such as financial indebtedness that may put the organisation and our people at a higher risk of corruption, with corresponding mitigating measures. As a default, all MINDEF/SAF personnel are subjected to requirements for annual and ad hoc declarations of additional income, assets, indebtedness, financial embarrassment and other risk factors. They also undergo a process of security vetting and will undergo periodic security re-vetting, where required.

MINDEF also identifies a list of “corruption prone appointments” (e.g. Senior commanders, officers in procurement and financial positions) based on a rigorous set of criterion, whose officers are then subject to the following risk management and compliance regulations:
•tA system of regular job rotation for these positions with reasonable time-frames.
•tA system of compliance leave – during his absence, the officer will not be allowed to perform his official duties and these will be covered by a “covering officer” who will be granted the relevant information and system access. The objective for the “covering officer” is to spot any anomalies, and to report these to the proper authority for investigation.
•tAnnual and ad hoc declarations – of assets, financial embarrassment and other risk factors

MINDEF has also made available to all our officers our anti-corruption stance, measures and framework in our Ministry’s directives and general orders. The information will be made available on the MINDEF website shortly.

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

11.
score
3

Does the country have a process for acquisition planning that involves clear oversight, and is it publicly available?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There is evidence of long-term planning based on a well explained security strategy by the MoD/SAF as well as of sophisticated efforts to reduce waste and make the most cost-effective choices (see reference to the contribution of the Ministry of Defence Productivity and Innovation in Daily Efforts towards reducing costs).

Singapore's defence and security strategy is discussed and approved in parliament and there are provisions for planning oversight and budget audit by the relevant parliamentary committee and the Attorney General of Singapore.

The process of planning (in terms of monetizing the costs of acquisitions and including them in the annual budget) could however, be more transparent (as further explained in question 12A) as there is very little information in the press and in the government's websites.

And, as referenced in question 62, Singapore's defence policy is published in a general form and so, although audits exist to ensure integrity in the procurement cycle, it is left to the government's initiative and goodwill to explain exactly how procured military equipment actually serves Singapore's strategic goals.The MinDef could provide more information on how the weaponry procured is based on clearly identified requirements and why certain systems are preferred over others.

Response to Government Reviewer:

A score of 3 does not indicate that the process of acquisition planning is less than effective in addressing corruption, but that there are minor shortcomings. As indicated in the original assessment and explained further by Peer Reviewer 2, there is space for improving the transparency of the process for acquisition planning by making more information available to the public. For instance, as identified above, the government could provide more detailed information on how procured military equipment serves Singapore's strategic goals and why certain systems are preferred over others.

Score maintained.

COMMENTS -+

'Defence Policy and Diplomacy', MoD wesite http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_policy.html accessed July 2, 2014

'Defence Spending', MoD website http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_spending.html accessed July 2, 2014

'Defence Procurement' MoD wesite http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_procurement.html
accessed July 2, 2014

Speech by Dr Ng Eng Hen, Minister for Defence, at Committee of Supply Debate 2014 http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2014 July 1, 2014/06mar14_speech.html#.U7U3haiazZ4 July 1, 2014

PRIDE http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/resourcelibrary/cyberpioneer/topics/articles/news/2013/sep/05sep13_news.html accessed July 2, 2014

Speech by Dr Ng Eng Hen, Minister for Defence, at Committee of Supply Debate 2014
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2014/06mar14_speech.html#.U7aB6qiazZ4 accessed July 2, 2014

Tan Kwoh Jack, Ho Shu Huang and Koh Swee Lean Collin, Singapore: How to Stay “Stable and Strong”, The Diplomat, October 11, 2013 http://thediplomat.com/2013/10/singapore-how-to-stay-stable-and-strong/ accessed July 2, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: It is unclear how the assessor had concluded that our acquisition planning system is less than effective in addressing corruption. MINDEF/SAF’s long-term planning is premised on our defence and security which in turn is discussed and approved in Parliament. MINDEF/SAF’s acquisitions undergo stringent assessment by the Singapore Armed Forces, MINDEF and DSTA, based on careful studies and a cost benefit analysis. All acquisitions have to undergo an approval of requirements process, with endorsement and approvals sought from the various committees, which are documented. There is also a segregation of duties for (a) approval of requirements and purchase and (b) verification of purchase.

Further upstream in the defence acquisition life cycle, MINDEF/SAF departments submit multi-year programmes and annual developmental plans and operating cost plans to the Defence Finance Organisation for endorsement, consult with the necessary departments on alignment with strategic objectives, financing and risk management, and seek the necessary approvals with senior management committees. Specific programmes with high costs and signature also go through ad hoc deliberations and approval throughout the year.

Downstream, the Defence Science and Technology Agency (DSTA) is responsible for all aspects of the defence procurement process such as contract preparations, pricings and risks, identification of contractors, as well as the evaluation of tenders received, and the subsequent contract award. Most of the procurement functions undertaken by DSTA involve implementing rigorous regulatory measures to ensure the efficiency and integrity of the process.

Source:
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_procurement.html
http://sprs.parl.gov.sg/SelectCommittee/resource/pdf/2015/FOURTH%20REPORT%20OF%20THE%20PUBLIC%20ACCOUNTS%20COMMITEE%202015.pdf

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: The assessor's citations and assessment should actually lead us to conclude with '2'. If the details of procurement plans and thinking is indeed publicly available, it is because media-reporting agencies that cover such matters make it available. So, sometimes, broad brushstrokes may be available, but finer details, no. Case in point, the whole matter of whether Singapore was going to upgrade its existing F-16C/Ds fleet or purchase F-35s (http://www.defenceindustrydaily.com/singapores-steps-modernizing-the-rsafs-f-16-fleet-017430/) This is not made transparent by the Singapore government - external agencies report this information through their own scoops. Our local media only covered the final decision/outcome: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/us-approves-s-173m-deal/1833428.html




There is a clear, publicly available, process for acquisition planning in place, along with oversight mechanisms. There are minor shortcomings in the process or in the oversight mechanisms.

Suggested score: 2

Peer Reviewer-+

12.
score
2

Is the defence budget transparent, showing key items of expenditure? This would include comprehensive information on military R&D, training, construction, personnel expenditures, acquisitions, disposal of assets, and maintenance.

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The defence budget does not provide a detailed breakdown of expenditure. The published defence budget includes the following categories:

Operating expenditure
- Running costs
--Expenditure on manpower: political appointments, permanent staff,
--Other operating expenditure: Consumption of products and services, manpower development, international and public communications, miscellaneous, military expenditure
-Transfers: Transfers to institutions and organizations, Development Estimates

Development Expenditure:
Government Development

Training, personnel expenditures and consumption of products and services (routine procurement) are listed in some detail.

However, 'Military Expenditure' is the biggest part of the budget and includes, among others, procurement of weaponry without any detailed breakdowns. Characteristically, the total budget for 2014 is 12,566 billion SGD and 'Military Spending' is 12,113 billion SGD.

Response to Government Reviewer:

The evidence provided by the Government Reviewer does not support an increase in score. There is some degree of transparency but information provided is not detailed.

COMMENTS -+

Ministry of Defence Budget http://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/data/budget_2014/download/25%20MINDEF%202014.pdf accessed July 2, 2014

MoD, Defence spending http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_spending.html accessed July 2, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: MINDEF/SAF has revealed a more detailed breakdown of our expenditure, especially in regard to R&D. In Mar 04, then-Minister for Defence Mr Teo Chee Hean said in the Committee of Supply speech that MINDEF sets aside 1% of the defence budget for experimentation, over and above the 4 to 5% set aside each year for research & development. This was reiterated in Mar 07 and Mar 08, and also by then-Second Minister for Defence Dr Ng Eng Hen in his Committee of Supply speech in Mar 06.

MINDEF also updates the public on costs of large scale multi-year programmes. In May 14, Minister for Defence Dr Ng Eng Hen revealed to Parliament that implementing the recommendations of Committee to Strengthen National Service will cost $4.5b over the next decade.

Source:
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/nr/2004/mar/15mar04_nr2/15mar04_fs.html#.VUheWNKqqko
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/nr/2007/mar/05mar07_nr.html#.VUhS-dKqqko
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/nr/2006/mar/06mar06_nr2.html#Research
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2014/29may14_speech.html#.VUg5XNKqqko

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

12A.
score
2

Is there a legislative committee (or other appropriate body) responsible for defence budget scrutiny and analysis in an effective way, and is this body provided with detailed, extensive, and timely information on the defence budget?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The first step of budget scrutiny involves the &quoute;Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) on Defence and Foreign Affairs&quoute;. The MoD claims that scrutiny by the Defence and Foreign Affairs GPC acts as an independent feedback mechanism, but it is not publicly known whether the defence budget information received by the GPC is detailed. However, GPCs are appointed by the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) and they are essentially Party organs (Mauzy and Milne, 2001). As a result, the political influence of the PAP on the GPCs is high and this undermines the credibility of the claim regarding their independent nature.

After the defence bill is finalised by the cabinet it is submitted to the Parliament.

It is then passed to the Budget Debate and Committee of Supply sessions where MPs have the opportunity to scrutinise the budget. The parliament of Singapore is controlled by the People's Action Party by a vast majority. There are indications of a debate taking place and occasional objections or different opinions raised. However, there is no evidence that the parliament can influence decision making. The proceedings are public (available online in video or text form).

After the bill is voted there are mechanisms for oversight. The parliament has a permanent Public Accounts Committee (PAC), which scrutinizes all government expenditure, including the military budget.

It should be noted however, that only PAP MPs sit in the PAC and noopposition MPs. Also, other MPs only receive information regarding the defence budget in an aggregated manner as the copy made available through the MoF website illustrates (source 2). In addition, the Auditor General conducts independent annual audits of MoD/SAF expenditure and submits reports to the Parliament.

Response to Government Reviewer and Peer Reviewer 1.

Some evidence has been provided of the GPC capacity to influence decision-making. The Government Reviewer has also pointed out that the PAC in close cooperation with the AGO conducts audits, which are an important form of scrutiny. However the weak autonomy of the GPC-DFA, and the highly aggregated nature of the defence budget means there is a lack of evidence to justify a score of 3 or 5. Evidence of more detail on budget lines, with stronger institutional measures to ensure the GPC-DFA is capable of carrying out defence budget scrutiny and analysis without any interference by the ruling party and/or the executive would be necessary.

Score changed from 1 to 2.

COMMENTS -+

Four Government Parliamentary Committees to get new chairmen and deputies, The Straits Times, May 15,2014 http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/four-government-parliamentary-committees-get-new-chairmen-and-deputies accessed July 2, 2014

Worker's Party (opposition) speeches on defence budget and security issues http://www.wp.org.sg/index.php?s=defence+budget accessed July 2,2014

Most MPs back high level of defence spending, Today, March 6, 2014http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/most-mps-back-high-level-defence-spending accessed July 2,2014

'defence Spending', MoD website http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_spending.html accessed July 2, 2014

Singapore Budget 2014 website http://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/budget_2014/home.aspx accessed July 2, 2014

Speech by Dr Ng Eng Hen, Minister for Defence, at Committee of Supply Debate 2014
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2014/06mar14_speech.html#.U7aB6qiazZ4 accessed July 2, 2014

Mauzy, Diane K., Milne, R.S 'Singapore politics under the People's Action Party' (London: Routledge, 2002)

Interview with Source 2, July 2014 (full anonymity requested), email communication

&quoute;Economic outlook, healthcare challenges among issues to be raised in Budget debate&quoute;, Channel News Asia, Feb 2013, http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/economic-outlook-healthc/195154.html

&quoute;Written Reply by Minister for Defence Dr Ng Eng Hen to Parliamentary Question on Rationale for Relocation of Central Manpower Base&quoute;, MINDEF Press Release, 2014, http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/ps/2014/04nov14_ps.html#.VUhncNKqqko

&quoute;Reply by Minister for Defence Dr Ng Eng Hen to Parliamentary Question on Tender for English Language Course for Foreign Officer&quoute;, MINDEF Press Release, Nov 2014, http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/ps/2014/05nov14_ps.html#.VUhontKqqkp

Parliamentary Debate on Committee of Supply, March 2015, http://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/report.jsp?currentPubID=00007404-WA

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: Empirically speaking, the GPC has the ability to reject procurement decisions, or at least influence them to the point where the proposal has to be reformulated.

Source: interview with member of SAF.

Suggested score: 2

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: It is unclear how the assessor had concluded that our GPC-DFA is not effective. The GPC-DFA is an independent body and its members frequently file Parliamentary Questions querying the Minister on various aspects of defence policy, ranging from costs, personnel policies, foreign partnerships, national service, among others. GPC-DFA members have raised questions on the Defence Budget in Parliament each year, so that issues on defence spending can be discussed openly in Parliament, for public accountability. In addition, information on proposed defence expenditures is provided to the GPC-DFA in a timely manner, for their scrutiny, before they are submitted for Parliament’s approval.

In Feb 12, the GPC Chairman for Defence and Foreign Affairs, then-Chairman Dr Lim Wee Kiak said one question he wanted to discuss is whether money allotted to Defence matters is being put to good use (see source 1).
In Nov 14, NMP Mr Pritam Singh asked as a Parliamentary Question the cost of relocating the Central Manpower Base (CMPB) (see source 2).
In Nov 14, NMP Mrs Lina Chiam asked in a Parliamentary Question about the provision of an English Language course for one People's Liberation Army officer (see source 3).
In Mar 15, the GPC member for Defence and Foreign Affairs, Dr Lim Wee Kiak raised a query in Parliament as to what MINDEF was doing to ensure that these resources, both fiscal and manpower, are adequately and properly deployed (see source 4).

MINDEF Departments and SAF Units are subjected to audit by the Auditor-General's Office (AGO). Every year, the Auditor-General will submit to the President the Report of the Auditor-General, giving an account of all audits conducted, including all the significant findings. The report is published and made available to the public.

Parliament also appoints a Select Committee, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) comprising Members of Parliament, to work closely with the AGO to conduct regular scrutiny of the Government’s expenditure and accounts, including MINDEF’s defence budget. The PAC does this regularly and puts up its report and recommendations annually to President. Through the Auditor-General’s Annual Reports and the PAC Report, the public is informed of audit findings including lapses detected in the Singapore Government’s procurement practices. Any lapses reported in the Auditor-General’s findings will be looked into by the PAC. Thereafter, the PAC will make recommendations in their report, where appropriate, to prevent recurrence. The report of the PAC is also made readily available publicly, demonstrating the Singapore Government’s openness and accountability to the public.
1.tSource: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/economic-outlook-healthc/195154.html
2.thttp://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/ps/2014/04nov14_ps.html#.VUhncNKqqko
3.thttp://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/ps/2014/05nov14_ps.html#.VUhontKqqkp
4.thttp://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/report.jsp?currentPubID=00007404-WA

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

12B.
score
2

Is the approved defence budget made publicly available? In practice, can citizens, civil society, and the media obtain detailed information on the defence budget?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The defence budget is available to the public through www.singaporebudget.gov.sg .

However the budget is not very detailed. Some expenditure (training and personnel is offered in a detailed manner) but all other areas of military expenditure (arms procurement, acquisitions, R&D) are grouped together under the title 'Military Spending'. As a result, the public cannot obtain detailed information on how the defence budget is allocated. For instance, the total budget for 2014 is 12,566 billion SGD of which 12,113 billion SGD refers to 'Military Spending'.

Response to Government Reviewer:

In addition to the comments above, it should be noted that neither the MINDEF nor the DSTA feedback services provide strictly upheld and clear provisions that allow citizens, civil society, and the media to request detailed information on defence budgets. Access to information requested by the public is entirely at the government's discretion.

COMMENTS -+

Ministry of defence Budget http://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/data/budget_2014/download/25%20MINDEF%202014.pdf accessed July 2, 2014

MoD, defence spending http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_spending.html accessed July 2, 2014

Interview with Interviewee 1, Journalist, July 20, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: There are many avenues, such as the MINDEF Feedback Unit, that allows citizens, civil society, and the media to request information on defence budgets. MINDEF will assess the request and provide expenditure information if it does not impact our security concerns on such information. For example, in Jul 14, the International Institute for Strategic Studies, a British think tank in the area of international affairs, requested through Ministry of Foreign Affairs – London Mission for a breakdown of defence spending into categories such as personnel, operations, equipment and R&D. MINDEF had then provided current and past defence expenditure figures.

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

13.
score
3

Are sources of defence income other than from central government allocation (from equipment sales or property disposal, for example) published and scrutinised?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The SAF is completely dependent on the government for its annual budget. All revenue from defence related sources and activities goes to the Consolidated Fund of Singapore's Government. The MoD/SAF is financed by the Consolidated Fund. The Auditor General audits all sources of revenue.

Certain (specified by law) categories of MoD/SAF - related revenue is allocated to the SAF Central Welfare Fund, a fund for welfare services for MoD/SAF staff.The Welfare Council submits annual statements to the Armed Forces Council which are scrutinised annually by the Internal Audit Department of the Ministry of Defence and are subject to audit by the Auditor-General. Payments from the CWF require the approval of the Minister of Finance. Reports on audits by the Auditor General are published but they only focus on problematic areas and do not offer an overview of the Fund. Still, controls and scrutiny mechanisms exist.

Although all income appears to be from the consolidated fund, the DSTA is responsible for the disposal of military assets (see Q23), and information on the proceeds of these disposals was not publicly available, so a score of 4 could not be awarded.

COMMENTS -+

Constitution of Singapore, Financial Provisions, Consolidated Fund http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=139fe114-a3d9-4db8-a2fe-6e326f65ec64;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22cf2412ff-fca5-4a64-a8ef-b95b8987728e%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0#pr145-he-. accessed July 2, 2014

Singapore Armed Forces Act, Singapore Armed Forces (Central Welfare Fund) Regulations http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;page=0;query=DocId%3A%2201c19fee-782b-4249-a6c4-eae6d28e5f86%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0#pr4-he-. accessed July 2, 2014

Ministry of Defence system of Audits http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/system_of_audits.html accessed July 2, 2014

Auditor General Year reports http://www.ago.gov.sg/publcatn.html accessed July 2, 2014

Tan Tai Yong, 'The armed forces and politics in Singapore' in Mietner, Marcus (ed) The Political Resurgence of the Military in Southeast Asia (NY: Routledge, 2011) p 154-5

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

14.
score
3

Is there an effective internal audit process for defence ministry expenditure (that is, for example, transparent, conducted by appropriately skilled individuals, and subject to parliamentary oversight)?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There is a comprehensive framework for audits of defence expenditure that involves the Parliament and the Auditor-General.

The MoD's system of internal audits is comprised by the MoD Audit Committee (MAC) and the Internal Audit Department (IAD) and audits are conducted by appropriately skilled individuals (MoD System of Audits website). According to Senior Minister of State for Defence Mr Chan Chun Sing at the Committee of Supply Debate 2013, IAD's audit reports and the follow-up actions are reviewed by the MINDEF Audit Committee chaired by the Permanent Secretary (Defence Development), which meets every two months. He also describes an annual report that grades how MINDEF and the SAF agencies perform which is submitted by the IAD to the Minister for Defence.These internal reports are also used as part of the external audits, but are not publicly available (explained in more detail in Q15).

All government accounts and budgets, including military spending, are scrutinised by the Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee (PAC). Although internal audit reports are not publicly available, cases of corruption are made known as evident by the prosecution of military officers. The AGO and the PAC reports are made public.

The prosecution of military officers and the inclusion of anti-corruption efforts in speeches of the civilian leadership of the SAF offer evidence that the government takes the findings of internal audit processes into account.

COMMENTS -+

Ministry of Defence system of Audits http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/system_of_audits.html accessed July 2, 2014

Auditor General Year reports http://www.ago.gov.sg/docs/default-source/report/e774db1b-584a-4710-9cc0-8852ec114080.pdf accessed Sept, 2015

Constitution of Singapore, Financial Provisions, Consolidated Fund http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=139fe114-a3d9-4db8-a2fe-6e326f65ec64;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22cf2412ff-fca5-4a64-a8ef-b95b8987728e%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0#pr145-he-. accessed July 2, 2014

Speech by Senior Minister of State for Defence Mr Chan Chun Sing at the Committee of Supply Debate 2013, 12 March 2013, http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2013/12mar13_speech2.print.img.html accessed July 2 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

15.
score
3

Is there effective and transparent external auditing of military defence expenditure?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: In addition to the MoD's system of internal audits, the Auditor General conducts independent annual audits of MoD/SAF expenditure and submits reports to the Parliament. The AGO's independence is constitutionally established and there has been no evidence of it being partial in its audits.

The parliament also has a permanent Public Accounts Committee (PAC), which scrutinizes all government expenditure. The findings are largely transparent and published on government websites. The findings of the PAC and AGO lead to criminal investigations as well as disciplinary measures against military officers by the MinDef and SAF leadership.

These cases are made public in government websites (CPIB) and in the press, but there is some space for improvement in the reporting of audit results in MINDEF/SAF/DSTA. The AGO and PAC reports offer summaries of certain cases. More information on these cases as well as on follow up measures taken in subsequent years would improve transparency. In addition, AGO annual reports could add more information on the auditing process and results even for years when major irregularities in defence were not identified (for example in 2014/15).

COMMENTS -+

Singapore Armed Forces Act, 1972 (2000)

Ministry of Defence system of Audits http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/system_of_audits.html accessed July 2, 2014

Auditor General Year reports http://www.ago.gov.sg/publcatn.html accessed July 2, 2014

Defence Management Group http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/dmg/index.html
accessed July 2, 2014

Parliament of Singapore, Public Accounts Committee, http://www.parliament.gov.sg/public-accounts-committee accessed July 2, 2014

Auditor General Year reports http://www.ago.gov.sg/publcatn.html accessed July 2, 2014

Auditor General - Audit Authority http://www.ago.gov.sg/ourrole.html accessed July 2, 2014

Constitution of Singapore, http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22cf2412ff-fca5-4a64-a8ef-b95b8987728e%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0 accessed July 2, 2014

2013 report of the Public Accounts Committee http://www.news.gov.sg/public/sgpc/en/media_releases/agencies/parl/press_release/P-20140401-1/AttachmentPar/0/file/Third%20Report%20of%20the%20Public%20Accounts%20Committee.pdf accessed July 2, 2014

2012 report of the Public Accounts Committee http://www.news.gov.sg/public/sgpc/en/media_releases/agencies/parl/press_release/P-20120412-1/AttachmentPar/0/file/Report%20of%20the%20Public%20Accounts%20Committee%20%28Parl%20Paper%202%20of%202012%29.pdf accessed July 2, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: MINDEF Departments and SAF Units are subjected to audit by the Auditor-General's Office (AGO). The Auditor-General is appointed by the President under Article 148F of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (1999 Revised Edition) to audit and report on the accounts of the Government Ministries, Organs of States and Statutory boards. In addition, President is directly elected by the people, enabling him to serve as a check against the Government. Every year, the Auditor-General will submit to the President the Report of the Auditor-General, giving an account of all audits conducted, including all the significant findings. The report is published and made available to the public.

Source: http://www.ago.gov.sg/publications

Parliament also appoints a Select Committee, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) comprising Members of Parliament, to work closely with the AGO to conduct regular scrutiny of the Government’s expenditure and accounts, including MINDEF’s defence budget. The PAC does this regularly and puts up its report and recommendations annually to President. Through the Auditor-General’s Annual Reports and the PAC Report, the public is informed of audit findings including lapses detected in the Singapore Government’s procurement practices. Any lapses reported in the Auditor-General’s findings will be looked into by the PAC. Thereafter, the PAC will make recommendations in their report, where appropriate, to prevent recurrence. The report of the PAC is also made readily available publicly, demonstrating the Singapore Government’s openness and accountability to the public.

Source:
http://sprs.parl.gov.sg/SelectCommittee/resource/pdf/2015/FOURTH%20REPORT%20OF%20THE%20PUBLIC%20ACCOUNTS%20COMMITEE%202015.pdf

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

16.
score
4

Is there evidence that the country's defence institutions have controlling or financial interests in businesses associated with the country's natural resource exploitation and, if so, are these interests publicly stated and subject to scrutiny?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Singapore does not have natural resources due to its small size. The government has plans to increase its renewable resources through the use of solar and wind power but the Singapore Armed Forces have no interests in this (or any other) industry as the government maintains the monopoly of the SAF's financing.

Response to Government Reviewer:

The original assessment was N/A due to the absence of natural resources but it is fair to acknowledge that there are clear provisions in this regard.

Score changed from N/A to 4.

COMMENTS -+

'Structure of Singapore's Economy 2013', Miinistry of Trade and Industry http://www.mti.gov.sg/ResearchRoom/Pages/Structure_of_Singapore_Economy_2013.pdf?cat=Research%20Room accessed June 27, 2014

NATURAL RESOURCE ASPECTS OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN SINGAPORE, UN - Agenda 21, http://www.un.org/esa/agenda21/natlinfo/countr/singapor/natur.htm#energy accessed June 27, 2014

'Resource Scarcity Drives Singapore to Sustainability Leadership ', Bloomberg, Jan 22, 2013 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-22/resource-scarcity-drives-singapore-to-sustainability-leadership.html accessed June 27, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: All defence institutions are, by statutory or constitutional means, entirely removed from having controlling or financial interests in businesses associated with the country’s natural resource exploitation.

We note that TI has assessed that the SAF has no interest in natural and renewable resources like solar or wind power or any industry in Singapore

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

17.
score
3

Is there evidence, for example through media investigations or prosecution reports, of a penetration of organised crime into the defence and security sector? If no, is there evidence that the government is alert and prepared for this risk?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Although there is sporadic evidence of involvement of army officers in criminal activities such as smuggling, usually controlled by organised crime groups, there is no evidence of penetration of criminal organisations (such as local secret societies or transnational mafia networks) into the defence and security sector of Singapore.

Singapore has effective policing organisations and specialised units (PCIB, the Singapore Police Force-Specialised Crime Division, and the Military police) to deal with this issue either from the military or from the organised crime end of the problem.

Online information regarding the work of the Military Police Command is limited and could be improved.

COMMENTS -+

Interview with Interviewee 1, Journalist, July 20, 2014

CPIB Media releases, http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=1106 accessed June 27, 2014

Singapore Police Force Media Releases, http://www.spf.gov.sg/mic/2010/06/20100611_cidops.html accessed June 27, 2014

CPIB cases involving military officers: http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=1225

Military Police Command Website: http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/safmpc/about_us.htmlaccessed June 27, 2014

Terence Lim, 'Military Police - Bastion of law and order', Cyberpioneers, 2006, link via MoD: http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/resourcelibrary/cyberpioneer/topics/articles/features/2006/oct06_cs.print.noimg.html accessed June 27, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: While there certainly are gang members within the military, an unavoidably by-product of a national system of conscription, this tends to occur at lower levels. Additionally, there is no evidence to suggest organised criminal activity within the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF). The Military Security Department and the Military Police Command, empirically speaking, are especially sensitive to indicators of gang activity in the SAF.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

18.
score
4

Is there policing to investigate corruption and organised crime within the defence services and is there evidence of the effectiveness of this policing?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There is strong legislation and independent policing to deal with corruption and prevent organised crime within the defence establishment. Singapore has effective policing organisations and specialised units (PCIB, the Singapore Police Force-Specialised Crime Division, and the Military police) to deal with this issue either from the military or from the organized crime end of the problem and anti-corruption is part of their mandate.

Evidence of the effectiveness of policing exists in the form of cases made public by the government and/or the media.

COMMENTS -+

Singapore Armed Forces Act, 1972 (2000)

Penal Code (2008), Chapters IX-X http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=e40d5913-c2dc-4284-bf68-eb315c55c8fa;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22025e7646-947b-462c-b557-60aa55dc7b42%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0#legis

Singapore Armed Forces (DXO — Disciplinary Proceedings and Miscellaneous Powers) Regulations 2002 (2004)

Tan Boon Gin, 'The Law on Corruption in Singapore' (Singapore: Academy Publishing 2007) pp 126-130

Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act 1992 (2000)
accessed June 27, 2014

CPIB cases involving military officers: http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=1225
accessed June 27, 2014

'Sex-for-contracts trial: 6 months' jail for former Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) chief Peter Lim', The Straits Times, Jun 13, 2013, http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/sex-contracts-trial-6-months-jail-former-scdf-chief-peter-lim-20130613#sthash.Yvw2ImzJ.dpuf accessed June 27, 2014

'Army transport warrant officer jailed for corruption', The Real Singapore, 26 Aug 2013 http://therealsingapore.com/content/army-transport-warrant-officer-jailed-corruption accessed June 27, 2014

CPIB Media releases, http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=1106 accessed June 27, 2014

MoD website http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/anti_corruption_policy.html accessed June 27, 2014

Speech by Senior Minister of State for Defence Mr Chan Chun Sing at the Committee of Supply Debate 2013, 12 March 2013
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2013/12mar13_speech2.print.img.html accessed June 27, 2014

Singapore Societies Act, 1967 [2014]

Andreas SCHLOENHARDT, Fighting Organized Crime in the Asia Pacific, Asia Law Institute, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore. url: http://law.nus.edu.sg/asli/pdf/WPS022.pdf accessed Feb 13, 2015

Interview with Interviewee 1, Journalist, July 20, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

19.
score
1

Are the policies, administration, and budgets of the intelligence services subject to effective, properly resourced, and independent oversight?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Overall, the polices and administration of intelligence services are supervised only by the executive and there is limited judicial and parliamentary oversight of certain aspects of the work of intelligence services.

Parliamentarians can question the intelligence services, which they have done before, for example when Mas Selamat Kastari escaped from ISD detention. (see sources above for more details)

Singapore's National Security Coordination Secretariat is in charge of coordinating national security work of intelligence and other services (police, border control etc.). The Security and Intelligence Division under the MoD is in charge of external intelligence.

The Internal Security Department under the Ministry of Home affairs is Singapore's internal intelligence agency. The policies and administration of both agencies are controlled by the executive and there are provisions for judicial oversight of their work, as for example in counter-terrorism.

The budgets of the MoD and MoH are examined by the parliament but intelligence expenses are not presented to MPs in a detailed manner (Interviewee 2).

COMMENTS -+

National Security Coordination Secretariat http://app.nscs.gov.sg/public/home.aspx accessed June 28, 2014

Internal Security Department, Ministry of Home Affairs website http://www.mha.gov.sg/isd/main.htm accessed June 28, 2014

http://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/data/budget_2014/download/37%20MHA%202014.pdf accessed June 28, 2014

http://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/data/budget_2014/download/25%20MINDEF%202014.pdf accessed June 28, 2014

Official Secrets Act 1935 (2012)

Internal Security Act 1960 (1987)

Criminal Procedure Code

Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act

Murray Hunter, 'Is Singapore western intelligence's 6th eye in Asia?', Online Opinion, December 9, 2013 http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=15809 accessed June 28, 2014

Overview of the Mas Selamat Kastari case, including the debate in the Parliament of Singapore. http://www.asiaone.com/specials/nextphase/

Interview with Source 2, 2014 (full anonymity requested), E-mail communication, July 27, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

20.
score
3

Are senior positions within the intelligence services filled on the basis of objective selection criteria, and are appointees subject to investigation of their suitability and prior conduct?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The National Security Coordination Secretariat is headed by the Permanent Secretary (National Security and Intelligence Coordination). Permanent Secretaries are appointed by the PM in accordance with Article 34 of the Constitution, and they are public officers. Their career development depends on performance in the civil service; as a result there are efficiency and suitability-related criteria involved in their appointments. The profiles of those appointed in the head of the NSCS show that they are highly experienced public officers with past experience of high-level jobs and academic qualifications.

According to the constitution, all public officers are appointed or confirmed through the Public Service Commission or by personnel boards. The appointments of the SID (MoD) and ISD (MoHA) heads are not exempt from this rule. Overall, formal procedures exist and there is evidence that appointees are suitable for the roles with long experience in the civil service and/or the military. Nevertheless, there is still secrecy regarding their selection and no information provided on shortlisted candidates.

It should be noted that the Parliament is not involved in the appointment process of senior intelligence leaders. (Source 2).

Response to Peer Reviewer 1:

There is no evidence of impartiality/third party intervention, however the lack of transparency over the process including a lack of public evidence that there is a full investigation into the candidates's suitability justifies a score of 3.

COMMENTS -+

Constitution of Singapore, http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22cf2412ff-fca5-4a64-a8ef-b95b8987728e%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0 accessed June 28, 2014

Singapore Cabinet Website, http://www.cabinet.gov.sg/content/cabinet/appointments/mr_teo_chee_hean.html accessed June 28, 2014

'About the NSCS', Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers website, 'http://www.appsno.net/nscs.html accessed 28 June 2014

National Security Coordination Secretariat http://app.nscs.gov.sg/public/home.aspx accessed June 28, 2014

Internal Security Department, Ministry of Home Affairs website http://www.mha.gov.sg/isd/main.htm accessed June 28, 2014

Interview with Source 2, 2014 (full anonymity requested), E-mail communication, July 27, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: While the selection of senior positions within the intelligence services are a mystery to a greater public, the selection processes are very transparent internally. Selection boards and pre-selection vetting are conducting with equal vigour as they would be in the selection of pinnacle military appointments.

Suggested score: 4

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

21.
score
2

Does the government have a well-scrutinised process for arms export decisions that aligns with international protocols, particularly the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT)?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Singapore signed the ATT in December 2014 and is now in the process of harmonising legislation. Singapore has been an advocate for a global arms trade treaty and voted for the ATT, which passed with an overwhelming majority by the United Nations General Assembly. During the preparatory process Singapore advocated for minimum obligations regarding the implementation of ATT, which should be decided on a national level.

There is no evidence on arms exports being subject to serious parliamentary approval and debate.

The core of the legal provisions in relation to Arms exports are: The Strategic Goods Control Act The Arms and Explosives Act articles 7,9,13; The Arms and Explosives (Arms) Rules 11,12; Arms and Explosives (Explosives) Rules 43-46.

The relevant legislation does not contain rules that correspond to ATT's provisions on international anti-corruption cooperation (articles 7.1.iv, 11.5, and 15.6) . Rather, the general provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act apply.

Singapore is not listed as a participating state in the Wassenaar Arrangement.

Response to Government Reviewer:

Singapore has not ratified the ATT and the legislation cited by the Government Reviewer does not contain provisions on cooperation with other states. Still Singapore has a robust set of rules and regulations which create a strong arms control legal framework. In addition there is no evidence of non-compliance with the ATT's anti-corruption provisions.

The assessment of score 1 was based on the score description which states: 'The country has signed the ATT but not ratified it, and there is evidence of non-compliance with ATT anti-corruption provisions. Upcoming arms exports are unlikely to be subject to serious parliamentary approval and debate.'.

Higher scores require either the ratification of the ATT or evidence that upcoming arms exports are subject to parliamentary approval and debate. The assessor has not been able to find evidence that parliamentary approval and debate takes place on arms exports. In addition, the government reviewer has also not provided with relevant information on this issue. Still, given the robustness of national legislation and the fact that there is no evidence of Singapore violating the ATT anti-corruption provisions, a score change to 2 can be justified.

COMMENTS -+

Singapore signs UN Arms Trade Treaty in support of eliminating illicit weapons, Straits Times http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/more-singapore-stories/story/singapore-signs-un-arms-trade-treaty-support-eliminating#sthash.qfS3ukdA.dpuf accessed 15 February 2013

Fact Sheet: Arms Trade Treaty, MinDef website http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/nr/2014/dec/06dec14_nr/06dec14_fs.html#.VN49EMbNXlc accessed 15 February 2013

Singapore delegate statement in the ATT preparatory committee http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/ATTPrepCom/Documents/Statements-MS/PrepCom3/2011-July-15/2011-07-15-Singapore-E.pdf

Arms and Explosives Act, 1913 (2003) http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;orderBy=relev accessed June 29, 2014

Arms and Explosives (Arms) Rules, 2006 (2007) http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;orderBy=relevance;page=0;query=CompId%3A402ce5b6-7dc9-4acb-b131-9b24ea31fdf8%20ValidTime%3A20140701000000%20TransactionTime%3A20140701000000;rec=0;resUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fstatutes.agc.gov.sg%2Faol%2Fsearch%2Fsummary%2Fresults.w3p%3BorderBy%3Drelevance%3Bpage%3D0%3Bquery%3DContent%253AMilitary%2520Content%253Aexports%2520MajorSubject%253A%2522arms%2520and%2520explosives%2522 accessed June 29, 2014

Arms and Explosives (Explosives) Rules, 2006 (2007) http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;orderBy=relevance;page=0;query=CompId%3Aed52e49d-aada-49de-b1c2-a4c8986a04b9%20ValidTime%3A20140701000000%20TransactionTime%3A20140701000000;rec=0;resUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fstatutes.agc.gov.sg%2Faol%2Fsearch%2Fsummary%2Fresults.w3p%3BorderBy%3Drelevance%3Bpage%3D0%3Bquery%3DContent%253AMilitary%2520Content%253Aexports%2520MajorSubject%253A%2522arms%2520and%2520explosives%2522 accessed June 29, 2014

Prevention of Corruption Act, http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=029a5950-d96e-4e96-bf0e-15a6d8cf4365;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22ba9a8115-fb33-4254-8070-7b618d4fd8d1%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0#pr36-he-. accessed June 26, 2014

Singapore Customs, Strategic Goods Control Act http://www.customs.gov.sg/NR/exeres/D333CD52-E3AE-4643-9AE8-8223DF976EB1%2cframeless1181.html?NRMODE=Published
accessed June 29, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: Given that our policy on arms export controls has not changed, it is unclear how the assessor had concluded that our arms exports system has become less effective in addressing corruption. Singapore has been a strong supporter of and party to international protocols on arms control and exports, such as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Chemical Weapons Convention, the Proliferation Security Initiative which aims to control the spread of weapons of mass destruction, as well as international efforts to combat illicit trade in small arms and light weapons (SALW), such as the Programme of Action (PoA) and the International Tracing Instrument (ITI).

Singapore’s arms controls are nationally governed by the framework under the Strategic Goods Control Act, which stipulates guidelines, controls and approval processes over the transfer and brokering of strategic goods, strategic goods technology, goods and technology capable of being used to develop, produce, operate, stockpile or acquire weapons capable of causing mass destruction, and missiles capable of delivering such weapons.

Sources:
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/nr/2014/dec/06dec14_nr/06dec14_fs.html#.VVFzHdKqqko
http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;page=0;query=DocId%3A8d44f21d-61d4-49f4-8c91-25e89bd16305%20Depth%3A0%20Status%3Ainforce;rec=0

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Risk management 60
22.
score
2

How effective are controls over the disposal of assets, and is information on these disposals, and the proceeds of their sale, transparent?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The Defence Science and Technology Agency (DSTA) is responsible for managing &quoute;the disposal of old stocks and equipment, for the Ministry of Defence&quoute;. There is no publicly available information regarding the exact disposal process. However, there is no indication (in media or government reports) that control over the disposal of assets is ineffective, especially since the institutional control over procedures in the DSTA is high.

It should also be noted that the DSTA is independent from the MinDef and under civilian control. In addition to comprehensive internal audits, the Auditor General conducts independent annual audits of DSTA finances (including sales of new equipment and disposal of assets) and property and provides detailed reports to the Parliament.

There is no publicly available information on the proceeds of the disposals, but there is evidence that cases of mismanagement would be revealed and dealt with.

Response to Government Reviewer and Peer Reviewer:

According to the Defence Science and Technology Agency Bill article 6 (i) the DSTA's duties include:&quoute; managing contracts for the purchase of defence systems, spares and services, maintain a catalogue of stocked items, and manage the disposal of old stocks and equipment, for the Ministry of Defence&quoute;.

However, the interview cited by the peer reviewer demonstrates that despite the presence of a comprehensive legal framework, there is perhaps a lack of clarity on which aspect of asset disposal falls under the DSTA and which under MinDef. The fact that there is highly abbreviated public information on procedures/controls/financial results of asset disposals is also an issue and a higher score cannot be justified.

COMMENTS -+

Singapore Armed Forces Act, 1972 (2000)

Ministry of Defence System of Audits http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/system_of_audits.html June 30, 2014

Auditor General Year reports http://www.ago.gov.sg/publcatn.html accessed June 30, 2014

Defence Management Group http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/dmg/index.html
June 30, 2014

Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA)

Defence Science and Technology Agency Act

DSTA website, www.dsta.gov.sg accessed 13 February 2015

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Not Qualified

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: It is unclear why the assessor had concluded that our disposal of assets is not effective in addressing corruption. The Defence Science and Technology Agency (DSTA) is responsible for all aspects of the defence procurement process such as contract preparations, pricing and risks, identification of contractors, as well as the evaluation of tenders received, and the subsequent contract award. Most of the procurement functions undertaken by DSTA involve implementing rigorous regulatory measures (which are aligned with Ministry of Finance’s Instruction Manuals) to ensure the efficiency and integrity of the process.

The DSTA also ensures the accountability in the management of assets and defines the responsibilities for the detection, reporting, investigation and mitigation of asset losses. MINDEF/SAF and DSTA have clear guidelines and controls to ensure that disposal of assets is conducted in an efficient manner and write-offs are properly approved and adequately documented. Such information are emphasised to MINDEF/SAF staff through General Orders, Directives and circulars.

Such measures include but are not limited to the following requirements:
•tAny asset disposal, condemnation or write-off must be properly raised and approved by specified authority before any asset could be disposed. All related documents must be kept for audit purposes.
•tPersonnel are appointed to oversee and witness the disposal of assets to ensure approved disposals are physically disposed, and that the correct items are disposed.
•tAt a minimum, there shall be segregation of duties between the functions of asset disposal and approval for asset disposal/condemnation.

Source: http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=9dc06951-1d66-4c78-a4e2-e1fe73f502ba;page=0;query=Id%3A%22211faf12-0a80-4cc4-9097-ce6362b0a159%22%20Status%3Apublished;rec=1
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_procurement.html

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: I have interviewed a senior DSTA official, currently seconded to MINDEF, and from what he told me separately, the assessor's statement that the Agency is responsible for managing &quoute;the disposal of old stocks and equipment, for the Ministry of Defence&quoute; is inaccurate or in fact, wrong. It is MINDEF that is responsible for managing the disposal of old stocks and equipment under its charge. The DSTA does not have a hand in the matter.

As such, I suggest a score of '1' since there are no external controls outside of MINDEF on asset disposals. I am sure there is an internal unit covering this responsibility but I do not have information on what this unit is.

Q: Are planned disposals are known in advance?
A: No.

Interview with source at DSTA, May 2015 (full anonymity requested), telephone communication.

Suggested score: 1

Peer Reviewer-+

23.
score
3

Is independent and transparent scrutiny of asset disposals conducted by defence establishments, and are the reports of such scrutiny publicly available?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The Defence Science and Technology Agency (DSTA) is responsible for managing &quoute;the disposal of old stocks and equipment, for the Ministry of Defence&quoute;. There is evidence of a system of internal (DSTA) and external (Auditor General's Office) audits that protects the integrity of the asset disposal process. There is also evidence of their capacity to expose and punish cases of mismanagement or the misappropriation of assets as the reports by the Auditor General are made public.

However, reports by DSTA (on asset disposal) and MinDef Audit (on the personal wealth of personnel) are circulated internally only.

Response to Government Reviewer:

Although the AGO provides summaries of cases where malpractice has been identified, routine audit reports are not made publicly available and the AGO annual report is not detailed. Transparency in this regard could be improved.

COMMENTS -+

Singapore Armed Forces Act, 1972 (2000)

Audit Act (1999)

Financial Procedure Act (2012)

Ministry of Defence System of Audits http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/system_of_audits.html accessed June 30, 2014

Auditor General Year report shttp://www.ago.gov.sg/publcatn.html accessed June 30, 2014

Defence Science and Technology Agency Act

DSTA website, www.dsta.gov.sg accessed 13 February 2015

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: Where the Auditor General Office (AGO) has audit findings on inappropriate asset disposal, these are disclosed in AGO’s report. As TI acknowledges, MINDEF/SAF has a system in place to govern the disposal of assets and this process of disposal of asset is subjected to internal audit's check as well as external audit's check by Auditor-General Office (AGO).

Sources:

http://www.ago.gov.sg/docs/default-source/report/b5d6839c-4be5-459b-8dde-e61b28a18da7.pdf
http://www.ago.gov.sg/docs/default-source/report/e92b9c3d-7671-45f4-8f19-dc86ff067fa4.pdf



Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: Once again, from my own interview with a senior DSTA official, currently seconded to MINDEF, and from what he told me separately, the assessor's statement that the Agency is responsible for managing &quoute;the disposal of old stocks and equipment, for the Ministry of Defence&quoute; is inaccurate or in fact, wrong. It is MINDEF that is responsible for managing the disposal of old stocks and equipment under its charge. The DSTA does not have a hand in the matter.

Interview with source at DSTA, May 2015 (full anonymity requested), telephone communication.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

24.
score
0

What percentage of defence and security expenditure in the budget year is dedicated to spending on secret items relating to national security and the intelligence services?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The percentage is not publicly available. The budgets of the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Ministry of Defence, the hosts ministries of the intelligence services, and the National Security Coordination Secretariat website do not contain detailed information on Intelligence expenditure. Defence analysts estimate that Singapore spends around 10% of its defence budget on intelligence annually (IP digest).

COMMENTS -+

National Security Coordination Secretariat http://app.nscs.gov.sg/public/home.aspx accessed June 30, 2014

Internal Security Department, Ministry of Home Affairs website http://www.mha.gov.sg/isd/main.htm accessed June 30, 2014

Ministry of Home Affairs budget http://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/data/budget_2014/download/37%20MHA%202014.pdf accessed June 30, 2014

Ministry of Defence budget http://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/data/budget_2014/download/25%20MINDEF%202014.pdf accessed June 30, 2014

Singapore Budget website http://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/budget_2014/home.aspx

Revelation of U.S.-Singapore Intelligence Cooperation Won’t Hurt Regional Ties, International Policy digest, url: http://www.internationalpolicydigest.org/2014/01/15/revelation-of-u-s-singapore-intelligence-cooperation-wont-hurt-regional-ties/ accessed February 14 2015

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: While the overall value of the military budget is made available to the public, there is a notable absence of detail in such documents. For example, under the projected expenditure for FY2015 which totalled $13,122,000,000, a single item took up the lion's share of the budget. 'Military expenditure', without further substantiation, was estimated at 12,601,273,500.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

25.
score
0

Is the legislature (or the appropriate legislative committee or members of the legislature) given full information for the budget year on the spending of all secret items relating to national security and military intelligence?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Government expenses are audited by the Auditor General and are reviewed by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the Parliament. However, there is no available information regarding PAC oversight of secret items spending for national security and military intelligence. According to Interviewee 2, other, non-PAC parliamentarians do not receive detailed information on secret items.

COMMENTS -+

Parliament of Singapore, Public Accounts Committee, http://www.parliament.gov.sg/public-accounts-committee accessed July 1, 2014

Auditor General Year reports http://www.ago.gov.sg/publcatn.html accessed July 1, 2014

Auditor General - Audit Authority http://www.ago.gov.sg/ourrole.html accessed July 1, 2014

Constitution of Singapore, http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22cf2412ff-fca5-4a64-a8ef-b95b8987728e%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0 accessed July 1, 2014


2013 report of the Public Accounts Committee http://www.news.gov.sg/public/sgpc/en/media_releases/agencies/parl/press_release/P-20140401-1/AttachmentPar/0/file/Third%20Report%20of%20the%20Public%20Accounts%20Committee.pdf accessed July 1, 2014

2012 report of the Public Accounts Committee http://www.news.gov.sg/public/sgpc/en/media_releases/agencies/parl/press_release/P-20120412-1/AttachmentPar/0/file/Report%20of%20the%20Public%20Accounts%20Committee%20%28Parl%20Paper%202%20of%202012%29.pdf accessed July 1, 2014

Interview with Source 2, (full anonymity requested), E-mail communication, July 27, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

26.
score
0

Are audit reports of the annual accounts of the security sector (the military, police, and intelligence services) and other secret programs provided to the legislature (or relevant committee) and are they subsequently subject to parliamentary debate?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There are legal provisions for parliamentary oversight and evidence of debate on defence issues but not on secret items. Budgets and audits are discussed in the parliament but these discussions do not include secret items.

Non Public Accounts Committee MPs receive some information on military and defence budgets and audits (through the AGO reports) but no information on secret programs is provided, according to Interviewee 2. Public information in this area is almost non-existent.

COMMENTS -+

Parliament of Singapore, Public Accounts Committee, http://www.parliament.gov.sg/public-accounts-committee accessed July 1, 2014

Auditor General Year reports http://www.ago.gov.sg/publcatn.html accessed July 1, 2014

Auditor General - Audit Authority http://www.ago.gov.sg/ourrole.html July 1, 2014

Constitution of Singapore, http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22cf2412ff-fca5-4a64-a8ef-b95b8987728e%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0 accessed July 1, 2014

Ministry of Home Affairs budget http://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/data/budget_2014/download/37%20MHA%202014.pdf accessed July 1, 2014

Ministry of Defence budget http://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/data/budget_2014/download/25%20MINDEF%202014.pdf accessed July 1, 2014

Workers' Party Singapore, MP speeches (Debate on President’s Address 2014) http://wp.sg/category/parliamentary-speech/ accessedJuly 1, 2014

Speech by Dr Ng Eng Hen, Minister for Defence, at Committee of Supply Debate 2014 http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2014 accessed July 1, 2014/06mar14_speech.html#.U7U3haiazZ4 accessed July 1, 2014

Supply Committee, Parliamentary debate on defence issues http://www.gov.sg/government/web/content/govsg/classic/subsite/cos2014/theme2 accessed July 1, 2014

'BUDGET DEBATE 2014 - Steady defence spending will continue', Singapolitics website Mar 6, 2014http://www.singapolitics.sg/news/steady-defence-spending-will-continue accessed July 1, 2014

2013 report of the Public Accounts Committee http://www.news.gov.sg/public/sgpc/en/media_releases/agencies/parl/press_release/P-20140401-1/AttachmentPar/0/file/Third%20Report%20of%20the%20Public%20Accounts%20Committee.pdf accessed July 1, 2014

2012 report of the Public Accounts Committee http://www.news.gov.sg/public/sgpc/en/media_releases/agencies/parl/press_release/P-20120412-1/AttachmentPar/0/file/Report%20of%20the%20Public%20Accounts%20Committee%20%28Parl%20Paper%202%20of%202012%29.pdf accessed July 1, 2014

Interview with Source 2, (full anonymity requested), E-mail communication, July 27, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

27.
score
4

Off-budget military expenditures are those that are not formally authorised within a country's official defence budget, often considered to operate through the 'back-door'. In law, are off-budget military expenditures permitted, and if so, are they exceptional occurrences that are well-controlled?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: According to the Constitution, all expenditure needs to be included in the Supply Bill (budget) for a given fiscal year (&quoute;There shall be in and for Singapore a Consolidated Fund into which, subject to the provisions of any law for the time being in force in Singapore, shall be paid all revenues of Singapore not allocated to specific purposes by any written law&quoute;). Extra-budgetary expenses that may occur during a financial year are recorded in the Supplementary Supply Bill or the Final Supply Bill. Audit reports by the Auditor-General and scrutiny by the Public Accounts Committee act as safety-valves.

As a result all defence related expenditures are recorded in the official defence budget.

COMMENTS -+

Constitution of Singapore, Financial Provisions, article 142-148H, accessed July 1st, 2014

Ministry of defence http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_spending.html accessed July 1st, 2014

Bernard FW Loo, 'Singapore’s Defence Spending Under Scrutiny', RSIS website, February 18, 2011 http://rsismilitarystudies.wordpress.com/2011/02/18/singapores-defence-spending-under-scrutiny/ accessed July 1, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

28.
score
N/A

In practice, are there any off-budget military expenditures? If so, does evidence suggest this involves illicit economic activity?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There is no evidence of any off-budget military expenditures. Singapore has a unitary and centralised budget under civilian authority. All military expenditure is covered by the government's budget and there are no alternative sources of financing that could be used for off-budget military expenditures. According to the Constitution, all expenditure must go through parliamentary scrutiny.

COMMENTS -+

Constitution of Singapore, Financial Provisions, article 142-148H http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=1df2a585-e723-4b0d-bd95-273bf0962687;orderBy=relevance;query=Content%3Aconstitution;rec=0;resUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fstatutes.agc.gov.sg%2Faol%2Fsearch%2Fsummary%2Fresults.w3p%3BorderBy%3Drelevance%3Bquery%3DContent%253Aconstitution#pr148-he-. accessed July 1st, 2014

Ministry of defence http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_spending.html accessed July 1st, 2014

Bernard FW Loo, 'Singapore’s Defence Spending Under Scrutiny', RSIS website, February 18, 2011 http://rsismilitarystudies.wordpress.com/2011/02/18/singapores-defence-spending-under-scrutiny/ accessed July 1, 2014

Auditor General Year reports http://www.ago.gov.sg/publcatn.html accessed July 1, 2014

Also surveyed the Auditor General's reports for 2006-2013 and media websites for related news.

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: As the Country Assessor indicates, there are no indications of off-budget expenditures as the SAF's resources are allocated to them through the national budget.

Suggested score: 4

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: We note that TI’s assessment is that “there is no evidence of off-budget military expenditures”, which meets fully TI’s criterion for this question. In addition, MINDEF/SAF has clarified that all government expenditures, including military expenditure, are budgeted for and submitted to Parliament for approval every year. This is made publicly available. According to the Constitution, all expenditure needs to be included in the Supply Bill (budget) for a given fiscal year. Extra-budgetary expenses that may occur during a financial year are recorded in the Supplementary Supply Bill or the Final Supply Bill. Audit reports by the Auditor-General and scrutiny by the Public Accounts Committee act as safety-valves.
.

Source:
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_spending.html
http://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/data/budget_2015/download/25%20MINDEF%202015.pdf

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

29.
score
3

In law, are there provisions regulating mechanisms for classifying information on the grounds of protecting national security, and, if so, are they subject to effective scrutiny?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Although the relevant regulations are not made public, there is evidence that they exist and are implemented effectively (Official Secrets Act, Protection of Secrecy Act, SAF Act). There is only sporadic evidence regarding scrutiny of classification on national security grounds (refer to first source - PQ Reply).

There is no evidence of individuals or agencies influencing decisions in a manner that exceeds their formal duties and area of responsibility. More related information needs to be disclosed on the matter.

Response to Government Reviewer

The assessment on this question cannot be based on a classified document that is not publicly available.

[Assessor changed score to 3 on based of internaal comment from Peer Reviewer 1

Although the relevant regulations are not made public, there is evidence that they exist and are implemented effectively (Official Secrets Act, Protection of Secrecy Act, SAF Act). There is only sporadic evidence regarding scrutiny of classification on national security grounds (refer to first source - PQ Reply).

There is no evidence of individuals or agencies influencing decisions in a manner that exceeds their formal duties and area of responsibility. More related information needs to be disclosed on the matter.



Q: Are there provisions made for who can request information to be classified on the grounds of protecting national security, and how?
A: There probably are but there is no evidence to corroborate this. One would need to talk to the right MINDEF officials in the senior echelons to get a sense of this; merely raising such questions can ring alarm bells!

Q: Are there provisions for the oversight of such regulations?
In practice, is oversight effective? Is there evidence of the regulations being bypassed or of individuals or agencies influencing decisions? If so, how frequently does this take place?
A: As above.]

Score?

COMMENTS -+

PQ Reply on Measures to Prevent Classified Information or Communications from Falling into Unauthorised Hands, Following the Wikileaks Incident, 10 January 2011 http://www.mha.gov.sg/news_details.aspx?nid=MTkzNw%3D%3D-UNR1oOTXf14%3D accessed July 1, 2014

MoD, Defence Procurement, http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_procurement.html accessed July 1, 2014

Official Secrets Act

Statutory Bodies and Government Companies (Protection of Secrecy) Act (Cap 319)

Singapore Armed Forces Act http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=b7633b10-75f1-4225-9879-f783c3e179c6;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22f7446be9-daef-4a09-bb63-8e8da8b61f4c%22%20Status%3Apublished%20Depth%3A0;rec=0#pr13-he-.

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: There is a tiered system for security classification that is rigidly adhered to in the SAF. This is enforced by individual unit security officers, and broadly supervised by the Military Security Department.

Suggested score: 3

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: In addition to the Official Secrets Act, SAF Act and the Protection of Secrecy Act, the General Orders of MINDEF (GOM) are sets of stipulated directives that govern the actions of all personnel within MINDEF/SAF which include providing direction on the classification and handling of information. There is an entire chapter in the GOM dedicated to security classification of information (Chapter 2, 14 Pages) which spells out the different security classification levels and criterion for classifying information, as well as the appropriate personnel who can allocate such classifications. These GOMs, while classified RESTRICTED, are available on the INTRANET, which is freely accessible by all personnel within MINDEF and the SAF.

It is unclear why the assessor had concluded that the provisions for classifying information have become less effective in addressing corruption. As TI notes, there is “no evidence of individuals or agencies influencing decisions in a manner that exceeds their formal duties and areas of responsibility”.

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

30.
score
4

Do national defence and security institutions have beneficial ownership of commercial businesses? If so, how transparent are details of the operations and finances of such businesses?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: In order to safeguard civilian control over the Armed Forces, the government has ensured that the MoD/SAF is entirely dependent on the government for its budget, and the MoD/SAF do not have beneficial ownership of commercial businesses.

The biggest defence industry companies are fully or partially owned by commercial entities in which the government is the biggest shareholder (notably Temasek). The defence industry in Singapore was developed under state initiative to supply the SAF. Under the government's plan of commercialisation of state owned industries, over the years the ownership of the Ministry of Defence companies passed to Sheng Li Holdings (later Singapore Technologies) and now belong to Temasek, a commercial investment holding company owned by the government of Singapore.

COMMENTS -+

Singapore Infopedia: 'Singapore Technologies' http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/SIP_1042_2011-03-29.html accessed June 30 2014

Singapore Technologies Engineeging shareholders http://www.stengg.com/investor-relations/shareholding-statistics accessed June 30 2014

Temasek company profile http://www.temasek.com.sg/abouttemasek/faqs accessed June 30 2014

Philip Nalliah Pillai, 'State Enterprise in Singapore: Legal Importation and Development' NUS Press, 1983 pp 89-90

Federation of American Scientists http://fas.org/irp/nic/battilega/singapore.pdf accessed June 30 2014

Ministry of Defence Budget http://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/data/budget_2014/download/25%20MINDEF%202014.pdf accessed June 30, 2014

Tan Tai Yong, 'The armed forces and politics in Singapore' in Mietner, Marcus (ed) The Political Resurgence of the Military in Southeast Asia (NY: Routledge, 2011) p 154-5

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

31.
score
N/A

Are military-owned businesses subject to transparent independent scrutiny at a recognised international standard?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: As per answer in question 30, the MoD/SAF do not have beneficial ownership of commercial businesses. The Army does not possess its own source of income and is entirely dependent on the government for its budget.

COMMENTS -+

Singapore Infopedia: 'Singapore Technologies' http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/SIP_1042_2011-03-29.html accessed June 30 2014

Singapore Technologies Engineeging shareholders http://www.stengg.com/investor-relations/shareholding-statistics accessed June 30 2014

Temasek company profile http://www.temasek.com.sg/abouttemasek/faqs accessed June 30 2014

Philip Nalliah Pillai, 'State Enterprise in Singapore: Legal Importation and Development' NUS Press, 1983 pp 89-90

Federation of American Scientists http://fas.org/irp/nic/battilega/singapore.pdf accessed June 30 2014

Ministry of defence Budget http://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/data/budget_2014/download/25%20MINDEF%202014.pdf accessed June 30, 2014

Tan Tai Yong, 'The armed forces and politics in Singapore' in Mietner, Marcus (ed) The Political Resurgence of the Military in Southeast Asia (NY: Routledge, 2011) p 154-5

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: We note TI’s assessment that MINDEF does not have any military owned businesses.

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

32.
score
4

Is there evidence of unauthorised private enterprise by military or other defence ministry employees? If so, what is the government's reaction to such enterprise?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There is sporadic evidence of such activities and SAF or MoD employees involved are punished (please refer to CPIB cases involving military officers). Such cases have been addressed effectively and those found guilty have been punished accordingly (Interviewee 1).

The government has strict and detailed regulations (Prevention of Corruption Act, Penal Code, SAF Act) in place against such unauthorised private enterprise by SAF or MoD staff. Penalties are strong and there is evidence that they are applied.

Response to Peer and Government Reviewer:

The question comes down to whether there are robust sanctions in place to deal with offenders, and whether they are enforced. So while there are cases, it's clear from the sources above, that cases are addressed effectively.

Score changed from 3 to 4.

COMMENTS -+

Singapore Armed Forces Act, 1972 (2000)

Penal Code (2008), Chapters IX-X http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=e40d5913-c2dc-4284-bf68-eb315c55c8fa;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22025e7646-947b-462c-b557-60aa55dc7b42%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0#legis

Prevention of Corruption Act 1960 (1993)

CPIB cases involving military officers: http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=1225
accessed June 27, 2014

Interview with Interviewee 1, Journalist, July 20, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: The Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) requires all its personnel to ratify an Annual Declaration, in which all personnel are required to declare that they are not currently undertaking private enterprise whilst contracted to the SAF. Certain clauses within the General Orders of Mindef stipulate against private enterprise, on pain of court-martial.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: There has been no change to our checks and balances on unauthorised private enterprises since the previous TI report. Hence, it is unclear how the assessor had concluded that the government’s system to detect and punish such enterprises has become less effective.

We would like to raise the point that cases of corruption and illicit activities are not the same as cases of unauthorised private enterprise. We also take issue with the criterion that there must not be any of such cases coming to light in order for our anti-corruption system to be fully effective. The fact that such cases are detected and the necessary disciplinary actions are being taken, should surely be taken as a validation the armed forces’ willingness to be transparent, and a country’s stand against corruption.

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Policies & codes 90
34.
score
4

Do the Defence Ministry, Defence Minister, Chiefs of Defence, and Single Service Chiefs publicly commit - through, for example, speeches, media interviews, or political mandates - to anti-corruption and integrity measures?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Civilian and military leadership are publicly committed to fighting corruption as evident in regular speeches, articles and announcements. Apart from interviews and public statements by leading officials, the CPIB, the Ministry of Defence and other government agencies make regular announcements reaffirming this commitment. Singapore's public sector attributes a lot of emphasis on integrity (which forms part of its official slogan) and this is regularly reaffirmed in official public discourse.

COMMENTS -+

MoD website http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/anti_corruption_policy.html accessed June 26, 2014

'Speech by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong at CPIB's 60th Anniversary' Prime Minister's Office http://www.pmo.gov.sg/content/pmosite/mediacentre/speechesninterviews/primeminister/2012/September/speech_by_prime_ministerleehsienloongatcpibs60thanniversaryceleb.html#.U6xYxaKLUYs accessed June 26, 2014

The Straits Times, 'It's people, not the system, that will keep graft out: PM Lee', Mar 29, 2014
http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/its-people-not-the-system-will-keep-graft-out-pm-lee-20140329#sthash.tnDgoL72.dpuf accessed June 26, 2014

Tan H., 'Singapore PM says will not tolerate corruption', Associated Press, Sep. 19, 2012
url: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/singapore-pm-says-will-not-tolerate-corruption accessed June 26, 2014

'Most think Singapore will deal with corrupt officials: Poll' - Straits Times, May 2, 2014 http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/more-singapore-stories/story/most-think-singapore-will-deal-corrupt-officials-poll-20#sthash.D880O7q6.dpuf accessed June 26, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

35.
score
4

Are there effective measures in place for personnel found to have taken part in forms of bribery and corruption, and is there public evidence that these measures are being carried out?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There are effective measures to deal with cases of bribery and corruption involving low and high ranking Army and MoD officers. The Singapore Armed Forces Act, the Prevention of Corruption Act, the Penal Code and the General Orders of MinDef offer a clear framework for dealing with misconduct. Convictions result in dishonorable discharges and public prosecutions. There is ample public evidence that relevant sanctions are applied.

Various cases are made public (please refer to sources provided) and there is evidence that the general public's perception regarding the effectiveness of the mechanisms in place is positive (please refer to sources). There is no evidence that these measures are not consistently applied.

COMMENTS -+

Singapore Armed Forces Act, 1972 (2000)

Singapore Armed Forces (DXO — Disciplinary Proceedings and Miscellaneous Powers) Regulations 2002 (2004)

Tan Boon Gin, 'The Law on Corruption in Singapore' (Singapore: Academy Publishing 2007) pp 126-130

'Most think Singapore will deal with corrupt officials: Poll' - The Straits Times, May 2, 2014 http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/more-singapore-stories/story/most-think-singapore-will-deal-corrupt-officials-poll-20#sthash.D880O7q6.dpuf accessed June 26, 2014

Transparency International Singapore corruption profile: http://www.transparency.org/country/#SGP accessed Feb 11, 2015

'Army transport warrant officer jailed for corruption', The Real Singapore, 26 Aug 2013 http://therealsingapore.com/content/army-transport-warrant-officer-jailed-corruption accessed June 26, 2014

CPIB Media releases, http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=1106 accessed June 26, 2014

'Sex-for-contracts trial: 6 months' jail for former Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) chief Peter Lim', The Straits Times, Jun 13, 2013, http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/sex-contracts-trial-6-months-jail-former-scdf-chief-peter-lim-20130613#sthash.Yvw2ImzJ.dpuf accessed June 26, 2014

CPIB cases involving military officers: http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=1225
accessed June 27, 2014

Jermyn Chow, 'SAF officer faces court martial: The alleged offence is believed to involve a female subordinate', republished from The Straits Times accessed June 26, 2014

&quoute;Former SAF medic jailed 12 weeks for corruption at detention barracks&quoute; The Straits Times, 10 March 2015, http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/courts-crime/story/former-saf-medic-jailed-12-weeks-corruption-detention-barrack-2015&quoute;

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: Cases of corruption in the Singapore Armed Forces, regardless of rank, are put in the public spotlight. According to the General Orders of Mindef, corruption convictions can and will result in dishonourable discharges and public prosecutions.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

36.
score
3

Is whistleblowing encouraged by the government, and are whistle-blowers in military and defence ministries afforded adequate protection from reprisal for reporting evidence of corruption, in both law and practice?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There is currently no stand-alone, all-encompassing whistleblowing legislation in Singapore.

Whistleblowing is strongly encouraged by the government both in cases of graft and B2B corruption. Both the CPIB, the MinDef and individual government departments have whistleblowing hotlines, with politicians publicly encouraging people to report cases of corruption. Nation-wide information campaigns take place frequently.

Legislation exists and offers protection of whistleblowers' identity. However, according to the CPIB, under the Prevention of Corruption Act (Chapter 241) it is an offence &quoute;to knowingly give or cause to be given any false or misleading information to the CPIB. The punishment is an imprisonment of up to 12 months or a maximum fine of $10,000, or both&quoute;.

Mitigation of punishments is offered when whistleblowers are sentenced but there is no separate legislation on the subject. There is a debate in Singapore regarding expanding whistleblowing protection through a separate Act that will also include specific mitigation provisions for whistleblowers.

A 2014 case involving animal cruelty demonstrated that whistleblower protection in the Army may be insufficient - a 19-year old who the MoD promised would not be sanctioned for exposing an incidence of animal cruelty at a barracks was later punished by them. There is no other publicly available information on this subject.

Response to Government Reviewer:

The Government Reviewer has provided strong evidence of the MinDef encouraging whistleblowing, but no clear evidence that whistleblowers would be rigorously protected. There is no overarching whistleblower law in Singapore, meaning there is no statutory protection afforded to employees who may lodge complaints against their supervisors and lose their jobs as a consequence. A recent report from EY also shows that that 62 percent of respondents to a 2015 survey were willing to use a whistleblowing hotline if necessary, a drop from 62 percent in 2013 - so more evidence on the steps that the MinDef is taking to ensure protection of whistleblowers would be needed to justify a score of 4.

Score maintained.

COMMENTS -+

Prevention of Corruption Act, article 36 ''Protection of informers'' http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=029a5950-d96e-4e96-bf0e-15a6d8cf4365;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22ba9a8115-fb33-4254-8070-7b618d4fd8d1%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0#pr36-he-. accessed June 26, 2014

Tan Boon Gin, 'The Law on Corruption in Singapore' (Singapore: Academy Publishing 2007) pp103-8

Eugene Ang, Whistleblowers – To Protect or Not?, Singapore Law Review, 2/07/2010, http://www.singaporelawreview.org/2010/12/whistleblowers-%e2%80%93-to-protect-or-not/#sthash.8P34i3r1.dpuf accessed June 26, 2014

Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau website, Reporting centre http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgId=216 accessed June 26, 2014

Personal Data Protection Commission, http://www.pdpc.gov.sg/contact-us/whistleblowing-line/faqs-on-whistleblowing-line accessed June 26, 2014

Infocomm Development Protection Commission, Whistleblowing hotline http://www.ida.gov.sg/Whistleblowing-Line accessed June 26, 2014

Singapore Code of Corporate Governance http://www.mas.gov.sg/regulations-and-financial-stability/regulatory-and-supervisory-framework/corporate-governance/corporate-governance-of-listed-companies/code-of-corporate-governance.aspx accessed June 26, 2014

Defence, Science and Technology Agency - Our Procurement Principles and Governance: http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/defence-procurement/our-procurement-principles-and-governance accessed 26 June 2014

Defence, Science and Technology Agency - Law: http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/defence-procurement/the-law accessed 26 June 2014

&quoute;Fight graft by making whistleblowing easier, Today, March 2015, http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/fight-graft-making-whistleblowing-easier

Singapore - Business ethics and anti-corruption – Asia Pacific laws, Norton Rose Fulbright – September 2014 http://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/files/singapore-121191.pdf accessed February 14, 2015

&quoute;Fewer Singaporeans willing to whistleblow&quoute;, CNBC, June 2015, http://www.cnbc.com/2015/06/11/fewer-singaporeans-willing-to-whistleblow.html

MINDEF GOES BACK ON THEIR WORD NOT TO PUNISH WHISTLEBLOWER IN DOG ABUSE CASE, the Real Singaporean, February 25, 2014 http://therealsingapore.com/content/mindef-goes-back-their-word-not-punish-whistleblower-dog-abuse-case accessed February 14, 2015

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: Given that there is no change to MINDEF/SAF’s system for the public and our servicemen to seek redress, it is unclear how the assessor had concluded that our systems have become less effective in addressing corruption. MINDEF/SAF allows its servicemen to seek redress on all matters concerning the SAF through the chain of command which includes the Armed Forces Council, which is chaired by the Minister for Defence, the MINDEF/SAF Feedback Unit, and the SAF Counselling Centre. Complaints and allegations will be thoroughly investigated by the Military Police Command. These proper procedures - set out in the General Orders of MINDEF - need to be adhered to in a military organisation, in order to maintain discipline, uphold morale, and protect confidential information.

The example cited by the Peer Reviewer on a 2014 case involving animal cruelty where MINDEF had punished the 19-year has no bearing with regard to defence corruption. MINDEF had earlier clarified that the soldier was punished entirely because he had violated camp security regulations that prohibit unauthorised photography in camp and disclosed information to persons outside of the SAF.

Source:

The Singapore Army Facebook (Official Channel)
https://www.facebook.com/oursingaporearmy/photos/a.10151854067221063.1073742019.409430851062/10152243960491063/

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

37.
score
4

Is special attention paid to the selection, time in post, and oversight of personnel in sensitive positions, including officials and personnel in defence procurement, contracting, financial management, and commercial management?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There is special attention in the form of thorough DSTA-relevant legislation and a high level of transparency regarding rules of conduct, oversight, terms of service (including rotation), punishments and frequent audits for personnel (and their families) involved in the defence procurement cycle, including public sector employees involved in contracting, financial management, and commercial management.

Personnel in sensitive positions in the DSTA (the Agency responsible for procurement) receive anti-corruption training. There is no evidence of regular sessions for all other MoD and SAF employees, but this does not mean that they do not take place.

There are publicly available rules of conduct for DSTA personnel (refer to Code of Ethics and legislation referenced in sources).

COMMENTS -+

Competition Act, 2004: http://www.ccs.gov.sg/content/ccs/en/Legislation/Competition-Act.html accessed 26 June 2014

Penal Code (2008), Chapters IX-X http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=e40d5913-c2dc-4284-bf68-eb315c55c8fa;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22025e7646-947b-462c-b557-60aa55dc7b42%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0#legis

Official Secrets Act, 1935 (2004): http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;page=0;query=DocId%3A%223bc8b443-65c7-4c42-a4c3-49b650267c16%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0 accessed 26 June 2014

Sedition Act, 1948 (2013) http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;page=0;query=DocId%3A%221f6d9e4b-1cf1-4575-9480-da4bdeff9ef4%22%20Status%3Apublished%20Depth%3A0;rec=0
accessed 26 June 2014

Statutory Bodies and Government Companies (Protection of Secrecy) Act ()http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/printView.w3p;page=0;query=Type%3Auact,areved%20Content%3A%22casino%22%20Cap%3A%22319%22;rec=0
accessed 26 June 2014

MoD - Defence Procurement: http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_procurement.html accessed 26 June 2014

MoD - System of Audits: http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/system_of_audits.html accessed 26 June 2014

Defence, Science and Technology Agency - Code of Ethics: http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/defence-procurement/our-code-of-ethics accessed 26 June 2014

Defence, Science and Technology Agency - Our Procurement Principles and Governance: http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/defence-procurement/our-procurement-principles-and-governance accessed 26 June 2014

Defence, Science and Technology Agency - Law: http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/defence-procurement/the-law accessed 26 June 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: Personnel shortlisted for sensitive positions are exposed to a thorough vetting process by the Military Security Department before they may be permitted to take up the role.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

38.
score
2

Is the number of civilian and military personnel accurately known and publicly available?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: With the exception of national servicemen, the number of permanent civilian and military personnel is not made public by the government and the defence establishment. Still, the sophistication and high level of professionalism of the MoD / SAF (Huxley, 2000) leaves little space for doubt that the exact numbers of personnel and details per rank are known internally.

All available information online that is provided by non-Singaporean sources is based on estimates.

COMMENTS -+

CIA World Factbook, Singapore profile, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/sn.html accessed June 30, 2014

Global Firepower website http://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.asp?country_id=singapore accessed June 30, 2014

Defence Management Group, SAF http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/dmg/about_us/Mission_Vision.html accessed June 30, 2014

Dhara Ranasinghe, 'Singapore, the tiny state with military clout', CNBC, 9 Feb 2014 http://www.cnbc.com/id/101393982#. accessed July 8, 2014

Tim Huxley, Defending the Lion City, Allen & Unwin, 2000

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

39.
score
2

Are pay rates and allowances for civilian and military personnel openly published?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Information on the pay rates and allowances of military and civilian personnel of the MoD and the SAF is publicly available for junior-middle rank officers, for the purposes of recruitment / attracting talent. Information for salaries and allowances for senior personnel is either not public or not presented in a detailed manner.

Response to Government Reviewer:

The Government Reviewer has provided clear details relating to more junior personnel, but not to the pay of senior personnel, so there remain gaps. A higher score cannot be justified.

COMMENTS -+

Information on starting salaries and benefits for officers, warrant officers, military experts and contract service personnel via the Army careers website: http://www.mindef.gov.sg/arc/careers.html#careers=officer&sub=career-proposition accessed June 30, 2014

Description of benefits and pay rates (not detailed) for civilian personnel:
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/dxo/dxoscheme_benefits.html accessed June 30, 2014

SAF Intelligence salary and pay scale
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/careers/job_opportunities/io/officer/salaryscale.html accessed June 30, 2014

Ranks of civilian personnel in MoD / SAF http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;page=0;query=Id%3A%222d36e3f7-0c9f-474e-abab-924ab335e857%22%20Status%3Ainforce;rec=0 accessed June 30, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: Pay rates are publicly available for the junior officer and specialist ranks, for the purposes of recruitment. The pay of senior personnel is not open source material. However, the 1994 White Paper on Competitive Salaries for Competent and Honest Government established 2 private sector salary benchmarks to peg the salaries of Ministers and Administrative Officers, providing a ballpark figure for the salaries of senior personnel.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: There is comprehensive and reliable information on starting pays, allowances, bonuses and employee benefits on the recruitment websites of the three Services and the MINDEF Human Resources Department (for Defence Executive Officers). This information is organised to meet the target audiences of students and parents. In addition to website information, recruitment seminars and advertising conducted throughout the year include official briefings, physical brochures and posters listing detailed and comprehensive information on pay rates and allowances. Most of these include starting pay, organised usually according to Officer (A Level), WOSE and MDES (ITE and Diploma):

Source:
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/join_us/careers/saf_career_schemes.html#.VVQuGLAcRMs

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/arc/our-careers-officer.html#salary

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/navy/careers/careers/naval-officers/#officers-benefits

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/rsaf/careers/careers/career-schemes.html

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/careers/job_opportunities/io/officer/salaryscale.html

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

40.
score
4

Do personnel receive the correct pay on time, and is the system of payment well-established, routine, and published?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The MoD/SAF have professional and effective institutions for logistical and financial affairs and there is no indication that the system of payments is unreliable, or that it operates in a discretionary manner. There is information available online regarding the salaries and benefits of servicemen.

There are no reports regarding delayed payments and, given the high level of sophistication and professionalism of the SAF, irregularities in the system of payments seem highly unlikely.

COMMENTS -+

Defence Management Group, SAF http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/dmg/about_us/Mission_Vision.html accessed June 30, 2014

DMG Finance Management, http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/dmg/Business/Manpower_Management.html accessed June 30, 2014

Defence Finance Organisation website http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/dmg/about_us.html accessed June 30, 2014

Support for NSmen, MinDef website http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/topics/nsmatters/nsmen/support_for_nsmen.html accessed February 14, 2015

Tim Huxley, Defending the Lion City: The Armed Forces of Singapore (Allen & Unwin, 2001)

For Army, see all respective links under: http://www.mindef.gov.sg/arc/our-careers-officer.html
For Air Force, see all respective links under: http://www.mindef.gov.sg/rsaf/careers/career_officer.html
For Navy, see all respective links under: http://www.mindef.gov.sg/navy/careers/careers/naval-officers/index.html

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

41.
score
3

Is there an established, independent, transparent, and objective appointment system for the selection of military personnel at middle and top management level?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There is a formal and well established system of appointments, based on objective job descriptions (advertised through the MoD and government careers' portals) and meritocratic criteria for selection. Senior appointments are controlled by the executive with no provisions for independent or parliamentary scrutiny (Interviewee 2). Academic credentials, a record of successful training in SAFTI and performance are prerequisites for promotions, which are decided by the Armed Forces Council, in which both civilian and military leaders participate.

Provisions for independent oversight exist for civilian personnel but relevant provisions for military appointments are not published. There is no indication or other reason to believe that the system of appointments is not adhered to in practice, though a score of 4 would require evidence that senior appointments are subject to independent oversight.

COMMENTS -+

Singapore Armed Forces Act, 1972 (2000), Articles 7 - 10C, 208,209

MoD Careers website http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/army/careers.html accessed June 30, 2014

Public Service Careers http://www.careers.gov.sg/ accessed June 30, 2014

Teh Hua Fung, 'The Soldier and the City-State: Civil-Military Relations and the Case of Singapore', Journal of the Singapore Armed Forces, 2005 Vol 31 http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/publications/pointer/journals/2005/v31n3/features/feature4.html accessed June 30, 2014

SAFTI Military Institute http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/saftimi/home.html accessed June 30, 2014

Penal Code (2008)

Prevention of Corruption Act (1993)

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: Meritocracy is stressed in the assessment of personnel for higher ranks. Personnel are extensively reviewed by the military hierarchy for red flags before nominated for senior positions. Pinnacle appointments such as the service chiefs require the approval of the Prime Minister. The assessment processes are not made known publicly, but are well established internally.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

42.
score
3

Are personnel promoted through an objective, meritocratic process? Such a process would include promotion boards outside of the command chain, strong formal appraisal processes, and independent oversight.

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Personnel appointments in the MoD/SAF follow an objective and meritocratic process.

Academic credentials, a record of successful training in SAFTI and performance are prerequisites for promotions, which are decided by the Armed Forces Council, in which both civilian and military leaders participate. There are promotions boards for personnel promotions, though public information on this is scarce.

There have been no cases in the media speculating on specific promotions not going through due process.

Senior promotions are controlled by the executive with no provisions for independent or parliamentary scrutiny (Interviewee 2).

Response to Government Reviewer:

A score of 4 would require evidence that the decisions of promotion boards are under independent scrutiny (outside the chain of command) and that promotions to senior ranks are open to scrutiny by independent personnel.The degree of transparency and independent oversight required for a high score is simply not present. The requirement for approval by the president for senior appointments cannot be considered as equivalent to independent oversight across the whole system.

Score maintained.

COMMENTS -+

Singapore Armed Forces Act, 1972 (2000), Articles 7 - 10C, 208,209

Teh Hua Fung, 'The Soldier and the City-State: Civil-Military Relations and the Case of Singapore', Journal of the Singapore Armed Forces, 2005 Vol 31 http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/publications/pointer/journals/2005/v31n3/features/feature4.html accessed June 30, 2014

Promotions: An Affirmation and Inspiration, MoD news, 02 Jul 2010, http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/army/army_news/News_Archive/2010/jul2010/APC2010.html accessed June 30, 2014

'515 SAF personnels to be promoted this July', AsiaOne http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/515-saf-personnels-be-promoted-july accessed June 30, 2014

Ranks of the SAF http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/topics/ranks/index.html accessed June 30, 2014

Officer Cadet School http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/saftimi/units/ocs/home.html accessed June 30, 2014

SAFTI Military Institute http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/saftimi/home.html accessed June 30, 2014

Interview with Source 2, (full anonymity requested), E-mail communication, July 27, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: All personnel go through an Annual Feedback Report exercise, where consistently good performance will translate to an opportunity to be put before a promotion board. Most senior promotion boards are kept within the purview of the military, except for pinnacle appointments such as service chiefs, where ministerial approval is required.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: There has been no change to our checks and balances on the promotion of personnel since the previous TI report, and we also note TI’s assessment that “personnel appointments in MINDEF/SAF follow an objective and meritocratic process”. Hence, it is unclear how the assessor had concluded that our deployment and promotion system has become less effective in addressing corruption.

There is a formal and well established system of appointments, based on objective job descriptions (advertised through the MoD and government careers' portals) and meritocratic criteria for selection.

The appointment to Senior Command positions such as Chief of Defence Force, Chief of Army, Chief of Air Force and Chief of Navy requires the approval of the President who is outside of the command chain and should be viewed as independent of the Executive Arm of the Government. Such senior appointments are made public by way of press releases. Appointments to Colonel appointments and above are also made known to all staff of MINDEF/SAF.

Source: Part II of the Singapore Armed Forces Act

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

43.
score
4

Where compulsory conscription occurs, is there a policy of not accepting bribes for avoiding conscription? Are there appropriate procedures in place to deal with such bribery, and are they applied?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Conscription, in the form of national service, exists in Singapore, and the laws against avoiding it (through falsifying disability/illness or corrupt practices) are very clear. Procedures are thorough and effectively monitored through an online system. Very few cases of Singaporeans avoiding NS have emerged in the media, and in these cases, the individuals involved have been punished.

COMMENTS -+

Enlistment Act 1970 (2001), articles 33-36: http://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl-nat.nsf/0/c46ce6bf7db4681ec1256a79004b41b1/$FILE/ENLISTMENT%20ACT.pdf accessed June 27, 2014

Penal Code (2008), Chapters IX-X http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=e40d5913-c2dc-4284-bf68-eb315c55c8fa;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22025e7646-947b-462c-b557-60aa55dc7b42%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0#legis

MoD Enlistment Process http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/army/About_BMT/Enlistment_Process.html accessed June 27, 2014

National Service Website http://www.ns.sg/nsp/web/home?_afrLoop=113984448444233&_afrWindowMode=0&_afrWindowId=1477qnlni3_1#%40%3F_afrWindowId%3D1477qnlni3_1%26_afrLoop%3D113984448444233%26_afrWindowMode%3D0%26_adf.ctrl-state%3D1477qnlni3_9 accessed June 27, 2014

Singapore Armed Forces Act, 1972 (2000)

'MINDEF, SAF investigating boast on how Singaporean avoided serving NS', Yahoo Newsroom, Jun 16, 2014 https://sg.news.yahoo.com/mindef--saf-investigating-boast-on-how-singaporean-avoided-serving-ns-050724411.html accessed June 27, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

44.
score
4

With regard to compulsory or voluntary conscription, is there a policy of refusing bribes to gain preferred postings in the recruitment process? Are there appropriate procedures in place to deal with such bribery, and are they applied?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Singapore has conscription in the form of national service and the use of bribes either to evade serving or gain preferential postings during this time is strictly forbidden.

Administrative mechanisms such as NS bureaucrats specifically tasked with carrying out conscription, and computerised systems for notification and monitoring, help to secure the integrity of the process, and legal instruments to punish offenders are in place. Singapore's climate of anti-bribery and corruption is well established, which also increases the likelihood that any attempts to circumvent the system through corruption would be reported.

There is no evidence suggesting that the effectiveness of these mechanism is compromised.

COMMENTS -+

Enlistment Act 1970 (2001), articles 33-36: http://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl-nat.nsf/0/c46ce6bf7db4681ec1256a79004b41b1/$FILE/ENLISTMENT%20ACT.pdf accessed June 27, 2014

Penal Code (2008), Chapters IX-X http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=e40d5913-c2dc-4284-bf68-eb315c55c8fa;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22025e7646-947b-462c-b557-60aa55dc7b42%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0#legis

MoD Enlistment Process http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/army/About_BMT/Enlistment_Process.html accessed June 27, 2014

National Service Website http://www.ns.sg/nsp/web/home?_afrLoop=113984448444233&_afrWindowMode=0&_afrWindowId=1477qnlni3_1#%40%3F_afrWindowId%3D1477qnlni3_1%26_afrLoop%3D113984448444233%26_afrWindowMode%3D0%26_adf.ctrl-state%3D1477qnlni3_9 accessed June 27, 2014

Singapore Armed Forces Act, 1972 (2000)

'MINDEF, SAF investigating boast on how Singaporean avoided serving NS', Yahoo Newsroom, Jun 16, 2014 https://sg.news.yahoo.com/mindef--saf-investigating-boast-on-how-singaporean-avoided-serving-ns-050724411.html accessed June 27, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: The conscription process is a bureaucratic and almost entirely automated process, leaving little room for exploitation as conscripts essentially have nobody to bribe.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

45.
score
4

Is there evidence of 'ghost soldiers', or non-existent soldiers on the payroll?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There is no evidence of ghost soldiers, nor of any opportunity for ghost soldiers' payments to take place in the SAF's centralised payroll system. The level of sophistication of the SAF's computerised systems of conscription and payroll is high, involving ID cards, monitoring software and direct payments.

The interviewee was not aware of any cases and explained that it is highly unlikely that there have been any.

COMMENTS -+

Singapore Armed Forces (Pensions) Regulations

Prevention of Corruption Act, http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=029a5950-d96e-4e96-bf0e-15a6d8cf4365;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22ba9a8115-fb33-4254-8070-7b618d4fd8d1%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0#pr36-he-. accessed June 26, 2014

Singapore Army Recruitment Center website http://www.mindef.gov.sg/arc/m_index.html accessed June 26, 2014

Interview with Interviewee 1, Journalist, July 20, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

46.
score
4

Are chains of command separate from chains of payment?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The MoD and SAF have a centralised system of payments which is separate from the chain of command.The Defence Finance Organisation, under the Defence Management Group within the Ministry of Defence is in charge of payroll and allowances, and the organisational structure is clearly visible on the DFO website.

COMMENTS -+

Defence Finance Organisation Website http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/dmg/about_us.html

Singapore Armed Forces Act, 1972 (2000)

Singapore Armed Forces (Premium Plan) Regulations 2001

Singapore Armed Forces (Pensions) Regulations

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

47.
score
4

Is there a Code of Conduct for all military and civilian personnel that includes, but is not limited to, guidance with respect to bribery, gifts and hospitality, conflicts of interest, and post-separation activities?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: All civil servants in Singapore are required to observe a code of conduct that explicitly refers to all types of misconduct covered in the score description - bribery, gifts and hospitality, conflicts of interest, and post-separation activities. There is also a military Code of Conduct and the SAF Core Values which stress discipline, integrity and professionalism. In addition there is a separate Code of Ethics for Defence Science and Technology Agency personnel which explicitly covers bribery, gifts and hospitality, conflicts of interest.

Both codes are backed with strong legislation and they cover all military and civilian personnel. Oversight over the codes is carried out by the SAF, MoD and DSTA internal mechanisms and, in cases of suspected corrupt practices, the CPIB.

Response to Government Reviewer:

The Government Reviewer has provided additional publicly available detail of the comprehensive nature of the code of conduct and evidence that oversight mechanism are effective.

Score changed from 3 to 4 and sources added.

COMMENTS -+

Code of Conduct http://www.mindef.gov.sg/dam/publications/eBooks/More_eBooks/ourArmyCustomsTraditions.pdf (page 15) accessed June 29, 2014

Defence, Science and Technology Agency - Code of Ethics: http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/defence-procurement/our-code-of-ethics accessed 29 June 2014

Republic of Singapore, Public Administration Country Profile, UN Document Management System http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan023321.pdf accessed February 16, 2014

Singapore Armed Forces Act, 1972 (2000)

Government Procurement Act, 1997 (1998)

Penal Code (2008), Chapters IX-X

Prevention of Corruption Act 1960 (1993)

See also:

https://www.cpib.gov.sg/education/preventive-measures

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/dam/publications/eBooks/wospec/army_wospec_guidebook.pdf

https://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/defence-procurement/our-code-of-ethics

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/saftimi/units/cld/keyideas/corevalues.html

https://www.cscollege.gov.sg/Knowledge/Documents/eBooks/Upholding%20Integrity%20in%20the%20Public%20Service.pdf

http://www.gov.sg/government/web/content/e0a6eb80417ba2648e1eaeb278553835/Factually+Misconduct.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

http://www.mof.gov.sg/news-reader/articleid/716/parentId/59/year/2012?category=Forum%20Replies

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: On top of the Code of Conduct and SAF Act that govern MINDEF/SAF staff, MINDEF/SAF has a list of almost 30 general orders on hospitality, gifts, conflicts of interest, activities outside of MINDEF/SAF, private investment and ownership, and other issues that MINDEF/SAF does not condone like gambling and other unbecoming behaviour that calls into question the high standards of integrity and excellence that are expected of them. Publicly available sources are stated below. The principles in these general orders are implemented through a series of controls such as mandatory declarations, assigned supervisory responsibilities, and punitive action will be taken where there are violations.

In addition, the “Dos & Don’ts” listed by CPIB comprehensively covers bribery, gifts and hospitality and conflicts of interest which is publicly available. Public servants are also subject to the Government Instruction Manual, which states that persons have to report any case where gratification is offered, accepted or demanded. Disciplinary action may be taken against a person who fails to do so. Further, the Public Service Division’s Singapore Civil Service Code of Conduct sets out the principles underlying the behaviour expected of all public officers.

Source:
https://www.cpib.gov.sg/education/preventive-measures
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/dam/publications/eBooks/wospec/army_wospec_guidebook.pdf
https://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/defence-procurement/our-code-of-ethics
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/saftimi/units/cld/keyideas/corevalues.html

Upholding Integrity in the Public Service/Code of conducts

https://www.cscollege.gov.sg/Knowledge/Documents/eBooks/Upholding%20Integrity%20in%20the%20Public%20Service.pdf
http://www.gov.sg/government/web/content/e0a6eb80417ba2648e1eaeb278553835/Factually+Misconduct.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

Conflict of interest to declare:

http://www.mof.gov.sg/news-reader/articleid/716/parentId/59/year/2012?category=Forum%20Replies

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

48.
score
4

Is there evidence that breaches of the Code of Conduct are effectively addressed ,and are the results of prosecutions made publicly available?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There is evidence that both low and high level breaches of the relevant Codes (civil service, SAF, DSTA) are addressed. Offenders are identified, investigated and, depending on how severe the case is, administrative or legal punishments are applied.

There is transparency regarding the proceedings and results of such cases as they are being publicly known in the country's media (some of which are cited above).

COMMENTS -+

CPIB Media releases, http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=1106 accessed June 29, 2014

Singapore Police Force Media Releases, http://www.spf.gov.sg/mic/2010/06/20100611_cidops.html accessed June 29, 2014

CPIB cases involving military officers: http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=1225 accessed June 29, 2014

Military Police Command Website: http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/safmpc/about_us.htmlaccessed June 29, 2014

'Sex-for-contracts trial: 6 months' jail for former Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) chief Peter Lim', The Straits Times, Jun 13, 2013, http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/sex-contracts-trial-6-months-jail-former-scdf-chief-peter-lim-20130613#sthash.Yvw2ImzJ.dpuf accessed June 29, 2014

'Army transport warrant officer jailed for corruption', The Real Singapore, 26 Aug 2013 http://therealsingapore.com/content/army-transport-warrant-officer-jailed-corruption accessed June 29, 2014

Former SAF medic jailed 12 weeks for corruption at detention barracks,&quoute; The Straits Times, 10 March 2015, http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/courts-crime/story/former-saf-medic-jailed-12-weeks-corruption-detention-barrack-2015

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

49.
score
3

Does regular anti-corruption training take place for military and civilian personnel?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Anti-corruption training takes place in the Civil Service College, which is the institution in charge of public employees' training. The PCIB also organises lectures and seminars. Personnel in sensitive positions (such as in the DSTA) receive anti-corruption training but there is no evidence of regular sessions for all other MoD and SAF employees.

Response to Government Reviewer:

The MinDef/SAF needs to provide more information to the public regarding its anti-corruption training in order to be able to justify a score of 4. The government reviewer's comments are very useful but more publicly available sources are needed.

Score changed from 2 to 3.

COMMENTS -+

MoD anti-corruption policy http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/anti_corruption_policy.html accessed June 29, 2014

SAFTI Military Institute, overview of courses offered http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/saftimi/home.html accessed June 29, 2014

Civil Service College https://www.cscollege.gov.sg/Programmes/Pages/Default.aspx accessed June 29, 2014

DSTA, Understanding the Law and Practice of defence Procurement in Singapore http://www.dsta.gov.sg/docs/publications-documents/dh2008_11_contractingbymindef.pdf?sfvrsn=2 accessed June 29, 2014

&quoute;Strong Anti-Corruption Law/Administrative Measure&quoute;, CPIB, https://www.cpib.gov.sg/education/strategic-considerations/strong-anti-corruption-lawadministrative-measure

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: Anti-corruption briefs take place, but anti-corruption training is limited only to specific branches.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: MINDEF organises seminars on various aspects of professional ethics for all officers. There are corporate governance course modules on ethics, audit, corruption, and personnel vetting in the compulsory introductory level courses that all SAF and civilian officers must go through. As a norm, MINDEF Officers attend at least one of the following talk/seminar/course per year: (a) Internal Audit Department’s (IAD) talks on professional ethics and corruption-related topics for service personnel and (b) modules conducted by IAD at various military courses such as, Defence Senior Managers Programme, Logistics Finance Officers Course, and other modules at military courses such as Professional Military Education and Training (PMET) course targeted at Junior Military Officers and Finance Foundation Course organised by Ministry of Finance.

The Defence Finance Organisation, which promulgates and regulates financial protocols within the Ministry, has also introduced several aids to help MINDEF/SAF personnel to understand financial policies better. These aids promote greater finance procedure awareness and allow officers to avoid lapses and tighten system integrity as a whole.
Such aids include:

-Finance “Infographics” that explains the policy rationale and teach application in various scenarios
-“Finance Chronicles” – e-newsletters that share audit findings and faulty practices
- FAQ database on MINDEF Intranet that consolidates FAQs by policy
-Finance community portal where best practices are shared and personnel can ask questions
-Regular finance advisory updates to clarify policy grey areas and application principles

CPIB also runs an active public outreach programme reaching out to students, government agencies and businesses through preventive education talks, visits, seminars, workshops and the media to instil a culture of zero tolerance against corruption and to encourage the reporting of corrupt activities to the CPIB. There is particular emphasis on reaching out to new officers from government agencies, and those whose work may expose them to opportunities for bribery and corruption. As part of its outreach programme, CPIB gives corruption prevention talks to MINDEF/SAF personnel upon request.

Source: https://www.cpib.gov.sg/education/strategic-considerations/strong-anti-corruption-lawadministrative-measure

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

50.
score
4

Is there a policy to make public outcomes of the prosecution of defence services personnel for corrupt activities, and is there evidence of effective prosecutions in recent years?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Article 103 of the Singapore Armed Forces Act stipulates that:

&quoute;(1) Subject to any other provisions of this Act, a subordinate military court shall sit in open court in the presence of the parties and, to the extent that accommodation permits, the public shall be admitted to the trial.
(2) Every judgement or finding of a subordinate military court shall be pronounced in open court.&quoute;

In addition, there is no evidence of attempts to suppress information regarding the prosecution of defence services personnel for corrupt activities. The SAF, MoD and CPIB offer relevant information on such cases that attract media attention (sources included above).

COMMENTS -+

Singapore Armed Forces Act

CPIB Media releases, http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=1106 accessed June 29, 2014

Singapore Police Force Media Releases, http://www.spf.gov.sg/mic/2010/06/20100611_cidops.html accessed June 29, 2014

CPIB cases involving military officers: http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=1225 accessed June 29, 2014

Military Police Command Website: http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/safmpc/about_us.htmlaccessed June 29, 2014

'Sex-for-contracts trial: 6 months' jail for former Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) chief Peter Lim', The Straits Times, Jun 13, 2013, http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/sex-contracts-trial-6-months-jail-former-scdf-chief-peter-lim-20130613#sthash.Yvw2ImzJ.dpuf accessed June 29, 2014

'Army transport warrant officer jailed for corruption', The Real Singapore, 26 Aug 2013 http://therealsingapore.com/content/army-transport-warrant-officer-jailed-corruption accessed June 29, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

51.
score
4

Are there effective measures in place to discourage facilitation payments (which are illegal in almost all countries)?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Facilitation payments for all public servants (including MoD and SAF personnel) fall under the provisions of the PCA and of the Penal code and are considered bribery. Legislative and policy measures (audits, clear guidelines for companies) are in place to check this, and there is no evidence to question their effectiveness.

Cases of corruption involving, among others, facilitation payments to SAF officers have been identified and dealt with accordingly, as cited above.

COMMENTS -+

Singapore Armed Forces Act, 1972 (2000)

Penal Code (2008), Chapters IX-X http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=e40d5913-c2dc-4284-bf68-eb315c55c8fa;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22025e7646-947b-462c-b557-60aa55dc7b42%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0#legis

Prevention of Corruption Act,1960 (1993)

Anti-Corruption Laws in Asia-Pacific, Norton Rose, 2012 http://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/files/anti-corruption-laws-in-asia-pacific-63559.pdf accessed June 27, 2014

Tan Boon Gin, 'The Law on Corruption in Singapore' (Singapore: Academy Publishing 2007) pp 126-130

CPIB cases involving military officers: https://www.cpib.gov.sg/cases-interest/cases-involving-public-sector-officers/public-servants accessed June 27, 2014

'Sex-for-contracts trial: 6 months' jail for former Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) chief Peter Lim', The Straits Times, Jun 13, 2013, http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/sex-contracts-trial-6-months-jail-former-scdf-chief-peter-lim-20130613#sthash.Yvw2ImzJ.dpuf accessed July 3, 2014

'Army transport warrant officer jailed for corruption', The Real Singapore, 26 Aug 2013 http://therealsingapore.com/content/army-transport-warrant-officer-jailed-corruption accessed July 3, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Training 60
52.
score
1

Do the armed forces have military doctrine addressing corruption as a strategic issue on operations?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Although the Singapore Armed Forces are subject to anti-corruption laws and there is awareness of the problem as an aspect of governance, there is no explicit doctrine on this subject. The descriptions of the courses offered for commanders on operations by the SAFTI military institute do not indicate that corruption as a strategic issue is addressed.

COMMENTS -+

MoD anti-corruption policy http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/anti_corruption_policy.html accessed June 29, 2014

Singapore Armed Forces Act, 1972 (2000)

Penal Code (2008), Chapters IX-X

Prevention of Corruption Act

Code of Conduct http://www.mindef.gov.sg/dam/publications/eBooks/More_eBooks/ourArmyCustomsTraditions.pdf (page 15) accessed June 29, 2014

SAFTI Military Institute, overview of courses offered http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/saftimi/home.html accessed June 29, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: There are internal general orders and directives which hold all military and civilian personnel within the MoD accountable for adhering to detailed guidelines dealing with the relationship between service personnel and MoD/SAF contractors, solicitation by service personnel from contractors, as well as the acceptance of gifts from the public, other agencies as well as foreign governments. However, these are piecemeal, and there is no known strategic doctrine that deals with corruption in the military. Indicators of corruption are monitored, but overall guidance is sought from the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

53.
score
0

Is there training in corruption issues for commanders at all levels in order to ensure that these commanders are clear on the corruption issues they may face during deployment? If so, is there evidence that they apply this knowledge in the field?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Singapore's Armed Forces are aware of the problem of corruption in operations, as evidenced in their official and publicly available anti-corruption policy (MoD Anti-corruption policy) but there is no evidence of systematic training in corruption issues for commanders other than occasional participation in seminars (held in Singapore or by the UN or INGOs).

In addition, there is no publicly available information on whether corruption issues have been faced on the field during deployment and how they have been handled.

Response to Government Reviewer:

Publicly available information on this topic is extremely limited. There is evidence that the SAF understands corruption issues in general but not on deployment in particular. There is also no evidence of application of this knowledge on the field.

COMMENTS -+

MoD anti-corruption policy http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/anti_corruption_policy.html

Singapore Armed Forces Act, 1972 (2000)

Penal Code (2008), Chapters IX-X

Prevention of Corruption Act

Code of Conduct http://www.mindef.gov.sg/dam/publications/eBooks/More_eBooks/ourArmyCustomsTraditions.pdf (page 15) accessed June 29, 2014

SAFTI Military Institute, overview of courses offered http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/saftimi/home.html accessed June 29, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: While ground commanders are made aware of the dangers of corruption, there is no available training curriculum provided with regard to corruption issues. However, personnel seeking higher security clearances are subjected to anti-corruption briefs.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: It is unclear how the assessor had concluded that anti-corruption training is not effective in addressing corruption. All MINDEF/SAF personnel undergo training on professional ethics and corruption as mentioned in question 49. General orders, directive and circulars are updated periodically to inform commanders on changes to policy. Commanders also have to comply with directions from the Director of Manpower on allegations of corruption and investigations by CPIB. Where such issues of corruption occur, these are investigated by CPIB and subject to full extent of law. Commanders and their men additionally receive pre-deployment briefings which outlines behaviour expected of them.

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

54.
score
1

Are trained professionals regularly deployed to monitor corruption risk in the field (whether deployed on operations or peacekeeping missions)?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There is no evidence in relevant government websites (MoD, MoFA, CPIB), media reports and UN websites that Singapore deploys such monitors. UN peacekeeping operations occasionally deploy such monitors but the UN measures in this regard have also received criticism.

Response to Government Reviewer:

There is no publicly available information to substantiate the deployment of corruption monitors, more evidence / sources are needed to justify a higher score.

COMMENTS -+

Singapore Miinistry of Foreign Affairs website http://www.mfa.gov.sg/content/mfa/international_issues/intl_peace_keeping_efforts.html accessed June 30, 2014

'Corruption & peacekeeping: Strengthening peacekeeping and the UN', Transparency International Defence and Security Programme, http://www.ti-defence.org/publications/128-dsp-pubs-corruption-pk accessed June 30, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: It is unclear how the assessor had concluded that our systems to address corruption during deployments are less effective. Servicemen serving in country or on overseas deployment are subject to the same robust anti-corruption framework. Servicemen additionally receive pre-deployment briefings which outline behaviour expected of them. Commanders have to comply with directions from the Director of Manpower on allegations of corruption and investigations by CPIB. Where such issues of corruption occur, these are investigated by CPIB and subject to the full extent of the law.
t
MINDEF/SAF also works closely with CPIB on cases involving MINDEF officers who are found or are suspected to be involved in corrupt practices. Over the years, there have been cases of MINDEF/SAF personnel prosecuted by CPIB under the Prevent of Corruption Act and some of these were published in the local media

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

55.
score
1

Are there guidelines, and staff training, on addressing corruption risks in contracting whilst on deployed operations or peacekeeping missions?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Comprehensive guidelines on addressing corruption risks in contracting exist, though they do not explicitly refer to deployed operations or peacekeeping missions. Staff training takes place for preventing corruption in contracting and in the defence procurement cycle in general.

Response to Government Reviewer:

The Government Reviewer has stated that the military is subject to the same robust frameworks on anti-corruption as they are when in country or on deployments governed by CPIB, and they are made aware through the general orders. A higher score for this question would require guidelines and staff training which relate explicitly to deployed operations or peacekeeping missions.

COMMENTS -+

Contracting by MINDEF and DSTA, http://www.dsta.gov.sg/docs/publications-documents/dh2008_11_contractingbymindef.pdf?sfvrsn=2 accessed June 29, 2014

MoD - Defence Procurement: http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_procurement.html accessed 29 June 2014

MoD - System of Audits: http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/system_of_audits.html accessed 29 June 2014

Defence, Science and Technology Agency - Code of Ethics: http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/defence-procurement/our-code-of-ethics accessed 29 June 2014

Singapore Armed Forces Act, 1972 (2000)

Government Procurement Act, 1997 (1998)

Penal Code (2008), Chapters IX-X

Singapore Prevention of Corruption Act 1960 (1993)

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: It is unclear how the assessor had concluded that our comprehensive guidelines on addressing corruptions are ineffective whilst on deployments. Our servicemen are subject to the same robust frameworks on anti-corruption as they are when in country or on deployments governed by CPIB, and are made aware through the general orders. Personnel deployed on operations or peacekeeping missions are expected to adhere to the SAF Code of Conduct as briefed and trained during their pre-deployment training. The code of conduct highlights the high standards of integrity and excellence that are expected of all servicemen.

Personnel on deployment are not involved in contracting. Any contracts and procurement of commercial services have to go through the usual approval processes by MINDEF/SAF and are subject to the stringent processes articulated in question 22.


Source: https://www.cpib.gov.sg/education/preventive-measures
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/dam/publications/eBooks/wospec/army_wospec_guidebook.pdf

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

56.
score
4

Private Military Contractors (PMCs) usually refer to companies that provide operational staff to military environments. They may also be known as security contractors or private security contractors, and refer to themselves as private military corporations, private military firms, private security providers, or military service providers.

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There is no evidence that Singapore employs PMCs in the overseas missions of its Armed Forces (including in Iraq, Afghanistan and East Timor) or domestically. The government is encouraging the use of PMCs by shipping companies for anti-piracy protection, especially in the Malacca strait and the Gulf of Aden. The conduct of PMCs is regulated by the Private Security Industry Act and special Shipping Circulars.

Regulations include a code of conduct and a system of licenses for firearms and permitted activities. A system of sanctions (both administrative and penal) are in place and anti-corruption legislation applies in full. There have been publicly known cases of PMCs' corrupt conduct (small and large scale corruption), mainly involving Certis CISCO Security Private Limited personnel, Singapore's biggest private security services provider, and there is evidence that sanctions have been applied (please refer to sources for specific cases).

Response to Government and Peer Reviewer:

Agree with comments and clarifications.

Score changed from 3 to 4 and sources added.

COMMENTS -+

Police Licensing & Regulatory Department (PLRD) website http://www.spf.gov.sg/licence/frameset_PI.html accessed June 28, 2014

Private Security Industry Act, http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=a9802433-6cf2-4ace-b8f8-11f40f218dc1;page=0;query=CompId%3Aa9802433-6cf2-4ace-b8f8-11f40f218dc1;rec=0;resUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fstatutes.agc.gov.sg%2Faol%2Fbrowse%2FtitleResults.w3p#legis accessed June 28, 2014

Private Security Industry Regulations - -Code of Conduct 2009 http://www.spf.gov.sg/licence/PI/others/Code%20of%20Conduct.pdf accessed June 28, 2014

Shipping Circular No. 15 of 2012, Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore http://psm.du.edu/media/documents/national_regulations/countries/asia_pacific/singapore/singapore_shipping_circular_no15-2012.pdf accessed June 28, 2014

Singapore Mercenary Position Paper 2010, Committee: Disarmament and International Security Council, UN http://www.scribd.com/doc/60472068/Singapore-Mercenary-Position-Paper-2010 accessed June 28, 2014

MoD, Overseas Operations http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/overseas_operations.html accessed June 28, 2014

The SAF’s Experiences in Peace Support Operations, MoD Website, http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/publications/pointer/journals/2004/v30n4/features/feature4.print.html?Status=1 accessed June 28, 2014

'Cisco officer charged with corruption', Today Online, May 9, 2014 http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/cisco-officer-charged-corruption accessed February 19, 2015

Ex-Cisco Certis security officer jailed a week for getting $10 &quoute;coffee money&quoute; from maid, Straits Time, May 16, 2014, url: http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/courts-crime/story/ex-cisco-certis-security-officer-jailed-week-getting-10-coffee-mon#sthash.HlJaHIfN.dpuf accessed February 19, 2015

'CPIB-SIR Joint operation at Woodlands Checkpoint cripples illegal smuggling syndicate with arrests of a CISCO Officer and3 Malaysians', Immigration and Checkpoints Authority, July 8, 1999 http://www.ica.gov.sg/news_details.aspx?nid=8701 accessed February 19, 2015

Cases on Immigration Related Corruption, CPIB https://www.cpib.gov.sg/cases-interest/cases-immigration-related-corruptionaccessed February 19, 2015

'Ex-CNB chief leaves Cisco board', Corruption.net http://corruptionarchive.net/public-service-corruption/ex-cnb-chief-leaves-cisco-board/01636 accessed February 19, 2015

&quoute;Private Sector Cases&quoute;, CPIB, https://www.cpib.gov.sg/cases-interest/private-sector-cases accessed Sept 2015

&quoute;How We Do Sourcing&quoute;, DSTA, https://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/our-procurement-procedure/how-we-do-sourcing accessed September 2015

&quoute;A guide for suppliers&quoute;, Ministry of Finance, Sept 2014, https://www.gebiz.gov.sg/scripts/doc/Supplier_Guide_Detailed.pdf

&quoute;ST Engineering says ex-chief of marine arm charged with corruption - See more at: http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/st-engineering-says-ex-chief-marine-arm-charged-corruption#sthash.Tj3piPL8.dpuf&quoute;, Asia One, Dec 2014, http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/st-engineering-says-ex-chief-marine-arm-charged-corruption

&quoute;Former president of ST Marine charged with corruption; fourth high-level exec charged&quoute;. Strait Times, December 2014, http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/courts-crime/story/former-president-st-marine-charged-corruption-fourth-high-level-ex

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: PMCs in the context of the Singapore Armed Forces service to augment administrative functions to free up manpower for combat roles. For instance, Certis Cisco has been contracted to conduct fitness training for military personnel, a role that was previously occupied by combat-ready national servicemen. Another example would be the fact that the management of rifle ranges has been contracted to external vendors.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: MINDEF/SAF does not employ PMCs in overseas missions. However, MINDEF/SAF hires contractors to provide mainly administrative & logistics support (e.g. supply of ration, accommodation, maintenance & servicing of deployed systems/weapons) for overseas missions. These contractors are subject to a code of ethics. Sanctions will be taken against contractors found guilty of corruption, and the contractor will be liable for debarment and court prosecution. Contractors are subject to a standard Conditions of Tender (COT). The COT contains instructions to tenderers on the tender and the structure of the tender proposals for submission. DSTA conducts briefings to these contractors to inform them on the necessary security undertakings and conditions under the COT

CPIB also investigates corruption in both the public and private sector, to help encourage fair business practices. The offences of corruption in Singapore under sections 5 and 6 of the Prevention of Corruption Act do not distinguish between public sector and private sector corruption, and the elements of the offences in both instances are similar. Further, it is legislatively recognised that the impact of the offence on public trust is more severe when it involves a contract with the Government or any public body. Such cases are prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and some case studies are put on the CPIB website for deterrence. For instance, CPIB had investigated allegations of corruption against Singapore Technologies Marine in Dec 2014 and personnel were prosecuted accordingly. (Note: This case did not involve the Singapore’s Ministry of Defence’s acquisition.)

Contractors who have access to classified information are subject to the Official Secrets Act (Cap 213) and the Sedition Act (Cap 290) which safeguard against the potential for classified information in evaluating tenders to be revealed to potential suppliers, to avoid the possibility of suppliers &quoute;gaming the system&quoute;. In addition, the application of confidentiality applies equally to government bodies, its employees and agents under the Statutory Bodies and Government Companies (Protection of Secrecy) Act (Cap 319).

Sources:
https://www.cpib.gov.sg/cases-interest/private-sector-cases
https://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/our-procurement-procedure/how-we-do-sourcing
https://www.gebiz.gov.sg/scripts/doc/Supplier_Guide_Detailed.pdf
http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/st-engineering-says-ex-chief-marine-arm-charged-corruption
http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/courts-crime/story/former-president-st-marine-charged-corruption-fourth-high-level-ex

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Personnel 50
57.
score
4

Does the country have legislation covering defence and security procurement and are there any items exempt from these laws?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The SAF is under civilian control and its budget and procurement are regulated by the general procurement legislation, while the Armed Forces Act stipulates additional penalties for offences committed by military personnel. There are no exemptions in legislation for any items and there are provisions against corruption which are supported by a comprehensive system of internal and external audits of the procurement cycle.

Single-sourcing for high tech weaponry is allowed and takes place as a result of bilateral agreements (mainly with the US) but anti-corruption regulations and scrutiny applies as normal. Cases of corruption involving officers in the procurement process have been reported and sanctions have been applied (please refer to sources).

COMMENTS -+

Legislation: Singapore Armed Forces Act, Government Procurement Act, Government Contracts Act, Prevention of Corruption Act, Penal Code

DSTA, Understanding the Law and Practice of defence Procurement in Singapore http://www.dsta.gov.sg/docs/publications-documents/dh2008_11_contractingbymindef.pdf?sfvrsn=2 accessed June 29, 2014

MoD - Defence Procurement: http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_procurement.html accessed July 8, 2014

Tim Huxley, 'Defence Procurement in Southeast Asia', 5th workshop of the Inter-Parliamentary Forum on Security Sector Governance (IPF-SSG) in Southeast Asia http://ipf-ssg-sea.net/5th_WS/defence_procurement_overview_Tim+Huxley.pdf accessed July 8, 2014

CPIB cases involving military officers: http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=1225
accessed July 3, 2014

'Sex-for-contracts trial: 6 months' jail for former Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) chief Peter Lim', The Straits Times, Jun 13, 2013, http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/sex-contracts-trial-6-months-jail-former-scdf-chief-peter-lim-20130613#sthash.Yvw2ImzJ.dpuf accessed July 3, 2014
t
'Army transport warrant officer jailed for corruption', The Real Singapore, 26 Aug 2013 http://therealsingapore.com/content/army-transport-warrant-officer-jailed-corruption accessed July 3, 2014

CPIB Media releases, http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=1106 accessed July 3, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

58.
score
3

Is the defence procurement cycle process, from assessment of needs, through contract implementation and sign-off, all the way to asset disposal, disclosed to the public?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Military procurement announcements are circulated through the GeBiz portal. In regard to routine procurement (non-weaponry) the visitor of the GeBiz portal can follow the cycle of procurement from the justification offered in the relevant announcement to the final decision regarding the winning bidder. There is no information regarding delivery of the procured item, however.

Regarding procurement of weaponry, there is little information on assessment of needs as the planning process of defence purchases is not transparent. Further, an unknown percentage of weaponry procurement is conducted through single-sourcing with very limited publicly available information on the procurement cycle. Overall, although certain elements of the defence procurement cycle are disclosed in detail; other elements are only summarised and the government does not provide detailed information (source 1).

Response to Government Reviewer:

This available evidence does not demonstrate a lack of effectiveness in the procurement cycle, but there is still a lack of transparency over certain aspects, as described above.

Score maintained.

COMMENTS -+

Defence Science and Technology Agency website http://www.dsta.gov.sg/programmes/procurement/effecting-an-integrated-workforce accessed July 8, 2014

DSTA, Understanding the Law and Practice of defence Procurement in Singapore http://www.dsta.gov.sg/docs/publications-documents/dh2008_11_contractingbymindef.pdf?sfvrsn=2 accessed July 8, 2014

GeBiz portal https://www.gebiz.gov.sg/scripts/main.do?select=pasttenderId accessed July 8, 2014

GeBiz portal, procurement regime https://www.gebiz.gov.sg/scripts/main.do?select=pasttenderId accessed July 8, 2014

Interview with Interviewee 1, Journalist, July 20, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: MINDEF/SAF’s default procurement approach is open sourcing. In line with Singapore Government's procurement guidelines, MINDEF and its procurement entities adopt two main procurement methods – the Invitation-to-Quote and Invitation-to-Tender. The competition through these two methods facilitates the Singapore Government's efforts to secure the best deal available in the open market. Where there are limited suppliers because of the specialised nature of advanced military weaponry, the SAF’s unique requirements, or to preserve operational security over knowledge on Singapore’s defence capabilities against those that wish us unwell like terrorists, the SAF adopts a limited tender. But this is only after careful consideration and with the necessary approvals sought on this procurement approach.

The Singapore Government has taken major steps in recent years to strengthen public sector procurement rules and capabilities such as the extension of the minimum opening period for suppliers to submit bids for quotations from four to seven working days, and the introduction of further checks to ensure single bids offered competitive terms.

Given the above and the relatively low numbers of single-sourcing opportunities, it is unclear how the assessor had concluded that the defence procurement life cycle is ineffective.

Source:
http://www.mof.gov.sg/news-reader/articleid/99/parentId/59/year/undefined?wmode=transparent
http://public.spendmatters.eu/2014/10/20/transparency-international-reports-on-military-single-source-procurement/
http://issuu.com/tidefence/docs/140910_single_sourcing

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

59.
score
4

Are defence procurement oversight mechanisms in place and are these oversight mechanisms active and transparent?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The military procurement process is scrutinised internally by the Internal Audit Department of the Ministry of Defence. In addition, the MoD and SAF expenditures are externally audited by the Auditor-General's Office (AGO) and are scrutinised by the Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee (PAC).

Formally, the system of oversight covers most aspects but the exact processes are not fully transparent. Although mechanisms and processes exist, are active and applied in a routine manner, there is only publicly available information on the outcomes and not on the practical implementation of oversight and control. It is also worth noting that the leverage of the government on the parliament is significant due to Singapore's political system which is dominated by the ruling PAP.

Response to Government Reviewer:

The Government Reviewer is right that there are independent oversight mechanisms in place. The 2013/14 Report of the AGO for example does also demonstrate that it is active on defence, and transparent about findings.

Score changed from 3 to 4.

COMMENTS -+

Legislation: Singapore Armed Forces Act, Government Procurement Act, Government Contracts Act, Prevention of Corruption Act, Penal Code

Defence Science and Technology Agency, How we do sourcing, http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/our-procurement-procedure/how-we-do-sourcing accessed July 8, 2014

DSTA, Understanding the Law and Practice of defence Procurement in Singapore http://www.dsta.gov.sg/docs/publications-documents/dh2008_11_contractingbymindef.pdf?sfvrsn=2 accessed July 8, 2014

GeBiz portal https://www.gebiz.gov.sg/scripts/main.do?select=pasttenderId accessed July 8, 2014

GeBiz portal, procurement regime https://www.gebiz.gov.sg/scripts/main.do?select=pasttenderId accessed July 8, 2014

Ministry of defence system of Audits http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/system_of_audits.html accessed July 8, 2014

Auditor General Year reports http://www.ago.gov.sg/publcatn.html accessed July 8, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: The fact that the ruling PAP dominates the parliament, cannot be viewed as a reason for potentially &quoute;weakening&quoute; the oversight mechanisms. As mentioned before, MINDEF Departments and SAF Units are subjected to audit by the Auditor-General's Office (AGO). Every year, the Auditor-General will submit to the President the Report of the Auditor-General, giving an account of all audits conducted, including all the significant findings. The report is published and made available to the public.
Parliament also appoints a Select Committee, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) comprising Members of Parliament, to work closely with the AGO to conduct regular scrutiny of the Government’s expenditure and accounts, including MINDEF’s defence budget.

Hence procurement oversight mechanisms, which are formalised and transparent, are in place.

Source:

http://www.ago.gov.sg/publications

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

60.
score
4

Are actual and potential defence purchases made public?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There is a policy to disclose defence purchases. First, military procurement announcements are circulated through the GeBiz portal. In addition, future plans are occasionally discussed in parliament and referred to in official speeches. In March 2014, the Minister of Defence laid out plans for the 2030 SAF; the speech offers detailed information on the systems that the MoD wishes to purchase and upgrade. In addition, announced purchaces are later verified through audits.

However, plans on future heavy weaponry acquisition are made public once a political decision to acquire them has been taken already. The planning process of potential defence purchases is not transparent. In addition, the method of single-sourcing is often used in weaponry procurement with little information on the cost involved.

COMMENTS -+

Ong Hong Tat, 'Dr Ng showcases SAF 2030 at budget debate',CyberPioneer (SAF publication), http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/resourcelibrary/cyberpioneer/topics/articles/news/2014/mar/07mar14_news.html#.U7vpvqiazZ4 accessed July 8, 2014

Speech by Dr Ng Eng Hen, Minister for Defence, at Committee of Supply Debate 2014
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2014/06mar14_speech.html#.U7aB6qiazZ4 accessed July 8, 2014

defence Science and Technology Agency website http://www.dsta.gov.sg/programmes/procurement/effecting-an-integrated-workforce http://www.dsta.gov.sg/programmes/procurement/effecting-an-integrated-workforce accessed accessed July 8, 2014

GeBiz portal https://www.gebiz.gov.sg/scripts/main.do?select=pasttenderId accessed July 8, 2014

GeBiz portal, procurement regime https://www.gebiz.gov.sg/scripts/main.do?select=pasttenderId accessed July 8, 2014

A Comparison of the Defence Acquisition Systems of Australia, Japan, South Korea, Singapore and the United States, Defence Systems Management College, Virginia, 2000 http://www.dau.mil/research/researchdocs/acq-comp-pac00.pdf accessed July 8, 2014

Tim Huxley, 'Defence Procurement in Southeast Asia', 5th workshop of the Inter-Parliamentary Forum on Security Sector Governance (IPF-SSG) in Southeast Asia http://ipf-ssg-sea.net/5th_WS/defence_procurement_overview_Tim+Huxley.pdf accessed July 8, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: While single sourcing is generally practised by the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) with especial emphasis on weaponry procurement, this is due to a commitment to supporting local defence industry. As goods that can be produced at a lower per unit cost domestically without unacceptable losses of quality, it is implicitly recognised in purchasing decisions that most weaponry procurement decisions can be undertaken domestically, via single sourcing.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: MINDEF/SAF frequently updates Parliament and our public of our potential future purchases at the Committee Of Supply and other platforms like SAF Day. This is institutionalised as a practice, with recent years’ announcements on Singapore’s defence policy and acquisitions. MINDEF also makes ad hoc announcements at appropriate junctures at points of contract signing and capability operationalization.

Recent years’ announcements include:

COS 2015 – Replacement for Super Pumas, New Littoral Mission Vessels & New Protected Response Vehicles
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2015/05mar15_speech.html

COS 2014 – Plan for F-16 upgrade, Type 218SG Submarines, Multi-Role Tanker Transport
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2014/06mar14_speech.html

COS 2013 – Updates on JSF, HIMARs, replacement for Challenger-class submarines
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/content/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2013/12mar13_speech.html

In July 2014, during SAF Day 2014, Minister for Defence talked about the need for a Joint Multi-Mission Ship.
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/resourcelibrary/cyberpioneer/topics/articles/news/2014/jul/01jul14_news.html

In Jan 2014, MINDEF released a statement on RSAF’s F-16 Upgrade.
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/mq/2014/16jan14_mq.html

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

61.
score
2

What procedures and standards are companies required to have - such as compliance programmes and business conduct programmes - in order to be able to bid for work for the Ministry of Defence or armed forces?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Singapore's procurement cycle puts emphasis on contractual compliance with relevant Anti-Corruption and Government Procurement legislation and regulations which impose strict anti-corruption clauses for companies in all types of state procurement (civil and defence).

In order for a company to take part in procurement it has to go through a licensing and registration process that is centrally controlled and under civilian oversight.

In case of companies engaging in illicit activities, including corruption, the government can cancel its registration as a government supplier and delete it from the Government’s Register, in effect barring it from future bidding. Strict regulations targeting the companies' supply chain are in place.

Response to Government Reviewer:

The Government Reviewer has provided useful information on how contractors’ supply chains are factored into procurement decisions. However the information does not contain evidence that compliance programmes are explicitly required.

COMMENTS -+

Government Procurement Act, 1997

Government Procurement (Application) Order, 2002

Government Procurement Regulations 2014

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1960 (1993)

APPLICATION GUIDELINES FOR GOVERNMENT SUPPLIER REGISTRATION, https://www.dsta.gov.sg/docs/default-document-library/epu_guidelines.pdf?sfvrsn=2 accessed July 11, 2014

'Code of Ethics', DSTA website, http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/defence-procurement/our-code-of-ethics accessed July 11, 2014

'Procurement Principles', DSTA website, http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/defence-procurement/our-procurement-principles-and-governance accessed July 11, 2014

'The Law', DSTA website, http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/defence-procurement/the-law accessed July 11, 2014

Defence Science and Technology Agency, How we do sourcing, http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/our-procurement-procedure/how-we-do-sourcing accessed July 11, 2014

DSTA, Understanding the Law and Practice of defence Procurement in Singapore http://www.dsta.gov.sg/docs/publications-documents/dh2008_11_contractingbymindef.pdf?sfvrsn=2 accessed July 11, 2014

GeBiz portal https://www.gebiz.gov.sg/scripts/main.do?select=pasttenderId accessed July 11, 2014

GeBiz portal, procurement regime https://www.gebiz.gov.sg/scripts/main.do?select=pasttenderId accessed July 11, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: Contractors’ supply chains are factored into MINDEF/SAF’s procurement decisions. Early on in the tender process, before issuing the standard Conditions of Tender (COT), DSTA does financial checks on the contracted company, their supply chain and an assessment of their ability to deliver the requirements, i.e. suppliers need to have the valid registration, licenses and financial standing to obtain the necessary Government Registration that is managed by MOF.

The COT contains instructions to tenderers on the tender and the structure of the tender proposals for submission, without which suppliers are unable to submit bids. Details provided also include the basis of the arrangements, the amount and duration of payments for such agency services and the extent to which provision has been made for such payments to be recovered, however indirectly, in the prices tendered.

Corruption offences by companies are investigated by the CPIB and, where appropriate, would be recommended to the Standing Committee on Debarment (SCOD), for debarment action or otherwise. This would happen as soon as possible after the court decision which establishes that the contractor or any of its employees, directors, partners or its sole proprietor had bribed a public sector officer or another person, in connection with a government agency or contract, is available.

Debarment is necessary to protect the interests of the Government against errant suppliers. Suppliers may be debarred from being awarded future Government contracts (for a period of time) if they have infringed any of the following debarment grounds:
(Continued from Qn 61)
1. Abandonment/ termination of contract
2. Withdrawal of tenders before award
3. Withdrawal of tender after award
4. Use of sub-standard materials and short supply/ cheating/ attempted cheating
5. Giving false information
6. Corruption
7. Poor performance reports
8. Unauthorised sub-contracting
9. Novation of contract
10. Defaulting repeatedly
11. Violation of safety regulations or safety requirements or debarment by MOM for poor safety record
12. Compromise of national security or public interest

13. Bid-rigging

The debarment applies to the following persons/associated companies:
(i) Contractors involved in corruption
(ii) Directors/partners/sole proprietors of the debarred companies/businesses who are involved in corruption
(iii) Other companies/ businesses on which the directors/partners/sole proprietors sit.
(iv) Existing and new subsidiaries of the principal offending company (that is, companies in which the principal offending company has 50% or more ownership directly or indirectly).

Source:
https://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/business-opportunities
https://www.dsta.gov.sg/docs/default-document-library/epu_guidelines.pdf?sfvrsn=2
https://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/our-procurement-procedure/how-we-do-sourcing

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

62.
score
4

Are procurement requirements derived from an open, well-audited national defence and security strategy?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Military procurement reflects Singapore's national defence and security strategy, which gives emphasis on a highly sophisticated and integrated defence force (See MoD, 3rd Generation SAF). However, Singapore's defence policy is published in a general form (please refer to MinDef resources cited above) and although audits exist to ensure integrity in the procurement cycle, it is left on the government's initiative and goodwill to explain exactly how procured military equipment actually serves Singapore's strategic goals. Having said that, a robust system of audits gives confidence that procured equipment serves specific security and strategic considerations.

COMMENTS -+

Ong Hong Tat, 'Dr Ng showcases SAF 2030 at budget debate',CyberPioneer (SAF publication), http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/resourcelibrary/cyberpioneer/topics/articles/news/2014/mar/07mar14_news.html#.U7vpvqiazZ4 accessed July 8, 2014

Speech by Dr Ng Eng Hen, Minister for Defence, at Committee of Supply Debate 2014
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2014/06mar14_speech.html#.U7aB6qiazZ4 accessed July 8, 2014

Dhara Ranasinghe, 'Singapore, the tiny state with military clout', CNBC, 9 Feb 2014 http://www.cnbc.com/id/101393982#. accessed July 8, 2014

defence Science and Technology Agency website http://www.dsta.gov.sg/programmes/procurement/effecting-an-integrated-workforce accessed July 8, 2014

MoD, Military Procurement, http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_procurement.html accessed July 8, 2014

Tim Huxley, Defending the Lion City, Allen & Unwin, 2000

MoD, 3rd Generation SAF, http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/3rd_generation_saf.html accessed February 20, 2015

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: All procurement decisions are subject to intense scrutiny by the Auditor-General's (AG) office. While the results of the AG's work is not immediately available to the public, there does exist a rigorous auditing process which has resulted in widespread public confidence in the incorruptibility of procurement decisions. Additionally, such purchases are subject to the final approval of the Government Parliamentary Committee for Defence and Foreign Affairs, another layer of safeguards that add to the confidence level in purchases.

Suggested score: 4

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: MINDEF/SAF’s defence policy is articulated publicly each year at the Committee of Supply budget debates. Where possible, the Minister for Defence outlines the acquisition programmes for the next few years by its twin pillars of deterrence and diplomacy. All acquisitions take reference from this national strategy. For instance, plans to replace the patrol vessels were announced as early as COS 2011 and the public has been updated regularly on the Littoral Mission Vessels, which will be operationalised later this year.

This is complemented by ad hoc public announcements on acquisitions, which are still drawn back to the national defence strategy, for instance, during the steel cutting of the Littoral Mission Vessels in 2014. Please also see qn 60.

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

63.
score
3

Are defence purchases based on clearly identified and quantified requirements?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Detailed and quantified military procurement announcements are available on the GeBIZ Portal, an electronic procurement portal of the Singapore Government. The MoD is using a sophisticated system (Analytic Hierarchy Process) to identify its procurement needs and ensure that relevant equipment and services are procured in a cost-effective manner. Different international studies on Singapore's procurement system cited above, have praised its comprehensiveness and efficiency.

Information on certain pieces of high tech weaponry procurement (fighter jets), usually conducted through single-sourcing from the US (please refer to Singapore Air Force website above), is not made public in a similarly detailed manner however. The MinDef also needs to provide more information on how the weaponry procured is based on clearly identified requirements and why certain systems are preferred over others.

COMMENTS -+

GeBiz portal https://www.gebiz.gov.sg/scripts/main.do?select=pasttenderId accessed July 8, 2014

GeBiz portal, procurement regime https://www.gebiz.gov.sg/scripts/main.do?select=pasttenderId accessed July 8, 2014

A Comparison of the Defence Acquisition Systems of Australia, Japan, South Korea, Singapore and the United States, Defence Systems Management College, Virginia, 2000 http://www.dau.mil/research/researchdocs/acq-comp-pac00.pdf accessed July 8, 2014

Tim Huxley, 'Defence Procurement in Southeast Asia', 5th workshop of the Inter-Parliamentary Forum on Security Sector Governance (IPF-SSG) in Southeast Asia http://ipf-ssg-sea.net/5th_WS/defence_procurement_overview_Tim+Huxley.pdf accessed July 8, 2014

Analytic Hierarchy Process in Singapore's defence procurement http://www.dsta.gov.sg/docs/publications-documents/using-analytic-hierarchy-process-with-operations-analysis-in-project-evaluation.pdf accessed July 8, 2014

Defence Science and Technology Agency website, procurement process http://www.dsta.gov.sg/programmes/procurement/generating-competition-for-greater-value accessed July 8, 2014

'defence Spending', MoD website http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_spending.html accessed July 8, 2014

'Defence Procurement' MoD wesite http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_procurement.html
accessed July 8, 2014

'Defence Procurement in Singapore', Chinniah Manohara, Director, Defence Science and Technology Agency http://www.disam.dsca.mil/pubs/v.23_1/manohara.pdf

Singapore Air Force, Assets http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/air_force/assets.html

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

64.
score
2

Is defence procurement generally conducted as open competition or is there a significant element of single-sourcing (that is, without competition)?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The government of Singapore has a centralised system of procurement for civilian and SAF acquisitions. Procurement for acquisitions over, approximately, 57000 USD involves either open competition or direct sourcing. The latter refers to specialised products, considered of importance for Singapore's national security priorities (sophisticated defence systems such as fighter jets).

For weapons procurement, a thorough evaluation of potential suppliers and a system of licensing are in place but a survey of past and present invitations to quote and tender demonstrated that advanced weaponry (the most expensive items of defence procurement) is often bought via singe-sourcing.

Regarding low-value procurement, according to GeBiz: ''small Value Purchase, for items of goods or services with estimated value of up to $3,000 [2420,USD], may be carried out directly by the authority by buying off-the-shelf or purchasing directly from known sources.'' There is no exact percentage available regarding the extent of such single sourcing but the maximum amount allowed for this type of purchases is very small (2420USD).

The defence budget and available figures render an evaluation of the actual percentage impossible as the figures provided are not detailed enough, for example providing information as per weapon system acquired. However, given Singapore's advanced system of defence procurement using open market processes, it is unlikely that single-sourcing for weaponry far exceeds the global average of 50%. More transparency in this regard is needed.

Response to Government Reviewer:

The Government Reviewer offers more evidence to underpin the assessment that single-sourcing is unlikely to exceed the global average, but without greater transparency a higher score cannot be justified.

COMMENTS -+

GeBiz portal https://www.gebiz.gov.sg/scripts/main.do?select=pasttenderId accessed July 8, 2014

GeBiz portal, procurement regime https://www.gebiz.gov.sg/scripts/main.do?select=pasttenderId accessed July 8, 2014

A Comparison of the Defence Acquisition Systems of Australia, Japan, South Korea, Singapore and the United States, Defence Systems Management College, Virginia, 2000 http://www.dau.mil/research/researchdocs/acq-comp-pac00.pdf accessed July 8, 2014

Tim Huxley, 'Defence Procurement in Southeast Asia', 5th workshop of the Inter-Parliamentary Forum on Security Sector Governance (IPF-SSG) in Southeast Asia http://ipf-ssg-sea.net/5th_WS/defence_procurement_overview_Tim+Huxley.pdf accessed July 8, 2014

Analytic Hierarchy Process in Singapore's defence procurement http://www.dsta.gov.sg/docs/publications-documents/using-analytic-hierarchy-process-with-operations-analysis-in-project-evaluation.pdf accessed July 8, 2014

Defence Science and Technology Agency website, procurement process http://www.dsta.gov.sg/programmes/procurement/generating-competition-for-greater-value accessed July 8, 2014

'Defence Procurement' MoD wesite http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_procurement.html
accessed July 8, 2014

Singapore Special Report, Flight Global, http://www.flightglobal.com/features/singapore-special/defence/
accessed February 20, 2015

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: MINDEF/SAF’s default procurement approach is open sourcing. In line with Singapore Government's procurement guidelines, MINDEF and its procurement entities adopt two main procurement methods – the Invitation-to-Quote and Invitation-to-Tender. The competition through these two methods facilitates the Singapore Government's efforts to secure the best deal available in the open market. Where there are limited suppliers because of the specialised nature of advanced military weaponry, the SAF’s unique requirements, or to preserve operational security over knowledge on Singapore’s defence capabilities against those that wish us unwell like terrorists, the SAF adopts a limited tender. But only after careful consideration and with the necessary approvals sought on this procurement approach

In Aug 2014, Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam outlined major steps that have been taken in recent years to strengthen public sector procurement rules and capabilities such as the extension of the minimum opening period for suppliers to submit bids for quotations from four to seven working days, and the introduction of further checks to ensure single bids offered competitive terms. As a nation, the percentage of quotations receiving single bids had decreased, from 15 per cent in 2012 to about 4 per cent in 2013.

Given the relatively low numbers of single-sourcing opportunities, it is unclear how the assessor had concluded that the defence procurement life cycle is ineffective in addressing corruption.
.

Source:
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_procurement.html
https://www.dsta.gov.sg/programmes/procurement
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/specialreports/parliament/news/major-steps-in-place-to/1296424.html

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

65.
score
4

Are tender boards subject to regulations and codes of conduct and are their decisions subject to independent audit to ensure due process and fairness?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: DSTA/MoD tender boards are subject to government procurement and anti-corruption regulations and codes of conduct [Government Procurement Act, 1997 (1998) Defence Science and Technology Agency Act 2000 Audit Act (1999)]. The private wealth of personnel participating in tender boards and of their family members are audited frequently and there are provisions for rotation. The decisions of tender boards are audited both internally by the MoD and externally by the Auditor General Office's. The results of these audits are not automatically published, though relevant information may appear occasionally on the AGO's annual reports.

Response to Government Reviewer:

The AGO only publishes audit results for problematic cases. Routine publication of all audits would improve transparency in this regard. But nonetheless, results can be said to be published openly, and there are examples of problematic procurement being picked up by the AG.

COMMENTS -+

Government Procurement Act, 1997 (1998)

Defence Science and Technology Agency Act 2000

Audit Act (1999)

Ministry of defence system of Audiits http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/system_of_audits.html accessed July 10, 2014

Auditor General Year reports http://www.ago.gov.sg/publcatn.html accessed Sept, 2015

MoD website, 'Defence Procurement' http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_procurement.html accessed Sept, 2015

DSTA, Understanding the Law and Practice of defence Procurement in Singapore http://www.dsta.gov.sg/docs/publications-documents/dh2008_11_contractingbymindef.pdf?sfvrsn=2 accessed July 10, 2014

GeBiz portal, procurement regime https://www.gebiz.gov.sg/scripts/main.do?select=pasttenderId accessed July 10, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: The point that “the results of these audits are not automatically published, though relevant information may appear occasionally on the AGO's annual reports” is not correct. AGO provides audit oversight of Government to the President and Parliament to ensure the Government’s accountability to Parliament. AGO’s reports are made public as well. The independent audits carried out by AGO help give assurance that basic standards of governance are met in the areas audited and there has been proper use of public funds and resources by ministries and statutory boards.
Given how these audit reports are addressed in the Report of the Auditor-General, is presented to Parliament and made available to the public, it is unclear how the assessor had concluded that our tender board system is prone to corruption.

To ensure checks and balances in the procurement process, MINDEF has regulations stipulating that an officer(s) evaluating the bids must be different from the officer(s) approving the award of the bid. This applies for both quotations and tenders. Quotations are approved by at least one officer while tenders are approved by a tender board of at least three officers.

The approving authority of tenders and quotations considers the recommendation and justifications, and may seek clarifications from the evaluating officer(s) before accepting the recommendation.

An award notice with the name of the supplier awarded the contract, as well as the contract sum awarded, will be published on GeBIZ (www.gebiz.gov.sg).
Source:
http://www.mof.gov.sg/Policies/Government-Procurement/Procurement-Process
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_procurement.html
http://www.ago.gov.sg/docs/default-source/publication/68b41542-49ed-4117-92d6-563f53d12b38.pdf
http://www.ago.gov.sg/publications

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

66.
score
4

Does the country have legislation in place to discourage and punish collusion between bidders for defence and security contracts?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Companies participating in military procurement need to abide with anti-collusion requirements as stipulated in Singapore's Competition Act (Cap 50B) Articles 34-53 and in the Prevention of Corruption Act. The relevant legislation allows for the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau to get involved in investigations on collusion. The Competition Commission (independent and under civilian control) is in charge of investigating cases of companies which employ collusion tactics. In addition, Singapore has adopted an e-procurement system (GeBiz) which according to various studies increases competition among bidders and reduces the possibility of collusion.

Sanctions against corrupt/illegal practices (including collusion) are generally divided into two categories, the administrative ones (including debarment of companies or individuals and fines) and the legal proceedings against individuals (company employees, owners and agents) that engage in any form of corrupt activities, and may lead to imprisonment.

COMMENTS -+

Legislation: Competition Act, Prevention of Corruption Act

'Collusion and Corruption in Public Procurement 2010', OECD p.333-8 http://www.oecd.org/competition/cartels/46235399.pdf accessed July 8, 2014

Arjun Neupane, Jeffrey Soar, Kishor Vaidya and Jianming Yong, ' ROLE OF PUBLIC E-PROCUREMENT TECHNOLOGY TO REDUCE CORRUPTION IN GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT', 2012 International Public Procurement Conference https://eprints.usq.edu.au/21914/1/Neupane_Soar_Vaidya_Yong_PV.pdf accessed July 8, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

67.
score
4

Are procurement staff, in particular project and contract managers, specifically trained and empowered to ensure that defence contractors meet their obligations on reporting and delivery?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The Defence Science and Technology Agency is in charge of military procurement in Singapore. Its employees are highly educated professionals and are subject to rotation. The DSTA Academy offers and develops sophisticated procurement training programs, including e-procurement.

Although the relevant curriculum is not available in detail, there are various online references to training, workshops, seminars and staff development activities, and the sources provided demonstrate that the high degree of professionalism in the process.

COMMENTS -+

DSTA, 'How we do sourcing - Offsets' http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/our-procurement-procedure/how-we-do-sourcing accessed July 10, 2014

DSTA, careers http://www.dsta.gov.sg/careers/overview accessed July 10, 2014

DSTA Academy http://www.dsta.gov.sg/programmes/dsta-academy accessed July 10, 2014

Analytic Hierarchy Process in Singapore's defence procurement http://www.dsta.gov.sg/docs/publications-documents/using-analytic-hierarchy-process-with-operations-analysis-in-project-evaluation.pdf accessed July 10, 2014

Defence Science and Technology Agency website, procurement process http://www.dsta.gov.sg/programmes/procurement/generating-competition-for-greater-value accessed July 10, 2014

'Defence Procurement' MoD wesite http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_procurement.html accessed July 10, 2014

Reference on the Knowledge Based Procurement Training Framework: http://www.wiztango.com/ap/3226-Procurement-Process-Execution-and-Accountability- accessed July 10, 2014

DSTA E-procurement presentation: http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CD8QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fsiteresources.worldbank.org%2FINDIAEXTN%2FResources%2F295583-1089728793550%2F473208-1155279470616%2Fe-GPinSingapore.ppt&ei=MLS_U7SnA8bfOqyagKAO&usg=AFQjCNF33mmaszAbxX7xJdVxjJ21EUkPjg&bvm=bv.70810081,d.ZWU

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

68.
score
4

Are there mechanisms in place to allow companies to complain about perceived malpractice in procurement, and are companies protected from discrimination when they use these mechanisms?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The government of Singapore has established a comprehensive e-procurement website where companies can request information on procurement decisions and submit complaints in case of malpractice. The Government Procurement Act, Government Procurement (Challenge Proceedings) Regulations, Government Procurement Regulations, Government Procurement (Application) Order and Government Procurement Act (commencement) Notification 2002, the Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act constitute the legal framework for the complainant's protection. In addition the DSTA, the CPIB and the Auditor General's Office provide channels for reporting malpractice.

This framework appears solid enough to assume that the danger of discrimination is low.

COMMENTS -+

The Government Procurement Act

Government Procurement (Challenge Proceedings) Regulations

Government Procurement Regulations

Government Procurement (Application) Order

Government Procurement Act (commencement) Notification 2002,

Penal Code

Prevention of Corruption Act

'Reporting Suspected Financial Irregularities to AGO', AGO website http://www.ago.gov.sg/whistle_blow.html
accessed July 10, 2014

'Reporting/Providing Information on Corruption Offences', CPIB website, http://app.cpib.gov.sg/cpib_new/user/default.aspx?pgID=216 accessed July 10, 2014

MoD website, 'Defence Procurement' http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_procurement.html accessed July 10, 2014

DSTA, Understanding the Law and Practice of defence Procurement in Singapore http://www.dsta.gov.sg/docs/publications-documents/dh2008_11_contractingbymindef.pdf?sfvrsn=2 accessed July 10, 2014

GeBiz portal, procurement regime https://www.gebiz.gov.sg/scripts/main.do?select=pasttenderId accessed July 10, 2014

&quoute;Anti-corruption policies in Asia and the Pacific: Thematic review on provisions and practices to
curb corruption in public procurement - Self-assessment report Singapore&quoute;, ADB/OECD Anti-Corruption Initiative for Asia and the Pacific, The Secretariat http://www.oecd.org/site/adboecdanti-corruptioninitiative/policyanalysis/35054589.pdf accessed July 10, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: Singapore openly encourages whistle-blowing and members of public or companies may approach CPIB through the following methods to register their complaints;

a. Come personally to CPIB to lodge a complaint to the Duty Officer
b. Write an anonymous letter to CPIB.
c. Make a phone call to the CPIB Duty Officer at any time of the day to make the complaint; or
d. E-mail to CPIB through the CPIB internet website

CPIB also allows complainants to check on the status of their complaints through its website.

As for complaints that are raised through the command chain of MINDEF/SAF, the Director of Manpower will immediately refer these cases to CPIB , who would then launch independent investigations immediately and persons found guilty of corruption are subject to the full extent of the law. MINDEF Feedback Unit will also keep members of the public who write in to surface complaints updated on MINDEF’s follow-ups.

Source:
https://www.cpib.gov.sg/eservices/reportingproviding-information-corruption-offences/how-cpib-deals-corruption-complaints

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

69.
score
4

What sanctions are used to punish the corrupt activities of a supplier?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Singapore has a centralised system of procurement which is regulated by a strict and comprehensive legal framework. Corruption offences are investigated by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB). Sanctions are generally divided into two categories, the administrative ones (including debarment of companies or individuals and fines) and the legal proceedings against individuals (company employees, owners and agents) that engage in any form of corrupt activities, and may lead to imprisonment.

There is evidence (media sources included above) that these measures are effectively applied in practice.

COMMENTS -+

The Government Procurement Act

Government Procurement Regulations 2014

Government Procurement (Challenge Proceedings) Regulations

Government Procurement Regulations

Government Procurement (Application) Order

Government Procurement Act (commencement) Notification 2002,

Penal Code

Prevention of Corruption Act

The Companies Act

Jones, D. S. (2002). Procurement Practices in the Singapore Civil Service: Balancing Control and Delegation. Journal of Public Procurement, 2 (1), p 41-42 accessed July 10, 2014

REPORT OF THE AUDITOR-GENERAL FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2012/13 http://www.ago.gov.sg/doc/ar-1213.pdf accessed July 10, 2014

MoD website, 'Defence Procurement' http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_procurement.html accessed July 10, 2014

DSTA, Understanding the Law and Practice of defence Procurement in Singapore http://www.dsta.gov.sg/docs/publications-documents/dh2008_11_contractingbymindef.pdf?sfvrsn=2 accessed July 10, 2014

GeBiz portal, procurement regime https://www.gebiz.gov.sg/scripts/main.do?select=pasttenderId accessed July 10, 2014

&quoute;Anti-corruption policies in Asia and the Pacific: Thematic review on provisions and practices to
curb corruption in public procurement - Self-assessment report Singapore&quoute;, ADB/OECD Anti-Corruption Initiative for Asia and the Pacific, The Secretariat http://www.oecd.org/site/adboecdanti-corruptioninitiative/policyanalysis/35054589.pdf accessed July 10, 2014

Government Contracts Cancelled Due To Unethical Conduct, Parliamentary Sitting Date: 10 July 2012, Ministry of Finance website accessed July 10, 2014

'8 debarment cases due to corruption involving public officers, contracts' Channel NewsAsia, July 10, 2012 http://news.xin.msn.com/en/singapore/article.aspx?cp-documentid=250396746 accessed July 10, 2014

MOF and ACRA Invite Public Feedback on Additional Proposed Amendments To The Companies Act, 23 October 2013http://app.mof.gov.sg/newsroom_details.aspx?type=press&cmpar_year=2013&news_sid=20131023950874402407 accessed July 10, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

70.
score
N/A

When negotiating offset contracts, does the government specifically address corruption risk by imposing due diligence requirements on contractors? Does the government follow up on offset contract performance and perform audits to check performance and integrity?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There is evidence that the MoD has abandoned the use of offsets as past experience was judged not to be cost-effective and difficult to regulate and monitor.

In particular, the former Minister of State for Defence and National Development, at the Committee of Supply Debate 2005 explained that:

&quoute;We have since discarded the practice of offsets and have no plans to re-introduce it. Straightforward, clean and clear contracts ensure that we get good value for money. In this way, our contractors could be held accountable for the primary product that they are to deliver and would not be distracted by trying to fulfil peripheral offset requirements. Additionally, waste and leakages from complicated and obscure offset arrangements are also avoided.&quoute;

Indeed there have been no announcements on offset contracts since then.

In addition, the DSTA has a policy that discourages offset proposals:

&quoute;DSTA has no requirement for any offsets as part of a tender. Hence, the tenderer shall not factor any effort or cost associated with the said offsets in a tender. In the event that the tenderer propose offsets, it will not be taken into consideration as part of tender evaluation. DSTA shall view this proposal as the tenderer's business decision with no cost impact to the tender.

In the event that there is a requirement such as for local engineering or maintenance capability relating to system purchases, this requirement will be explicitly and separately stated in the tender and DSTA shall pay for such requirements if the offers are accepted.&quoute;

The Government Procurement Regulations (2014) in regard to offsets are harmonised with the WTO Government Procurement Agreement, of which Singapore is a signatory member. The Agreement allows for defence offsets. According to Singapore's legislation:

&quoute;(1) A contracting authority shall not seek, take account of, impose or enforce any offset.
(2) In this regulation, “offset” means any condition or undertaking that encourages local development, or improves the Government’s balance‑of‑payments accounts, by means of —
(a)domestic content; (b) licensing of technology; (c) investment; (d) counter-trade; or (e) other similar action or requirement.&quoute;

Although defence offset agreements are not banned by law, there is strong evidence that they have been abandoned as a policy.

COMMENTS -+

Speech by Mr Cedric Foo, Minister of State for Defence and National Development, at the Committee of Supply Debate 2005 http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2005/07mar05_speech.print.img.html accessed July 8, 2014

DSTA, 'How we do sourcing - Offsets' http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/our-procurement-procedure/how-we-do-sourcing accessed July 8, 2014

Government Procurement Regulations 2014, Article 9 http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;orderBy=relevance;query=Content%3AGovernment%20Content%3AProcurement%20Content%3ARegulations%20Content%3A2014;rec=0;resUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fstatutes.agc.gov.sg%2Faol%2Fsearch%2Fsummary%2Fresults.w3p%3BorderBy%3Drelevance%3Bquery%3DContent%253AGovernment%2520Content%253AProcurement%2520Content%253ARegulations%2520Content%253A2014;whole=no#pr9-he-. accessed July 8, 2014

Government Procurement Act, Article 7

Revised Agreement on Government Procurement, http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/rev-gpr-94_01_e.htm accessed July 8, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: Military procurement is predicated on 3 principles: need, concept and prudence. Offsets do not feature in procurement considerations in the SAF. Observers might point to logistics/training arrangements in the case of certain major purchases that might be considered as offsets - the F15SG, for instance. However, in such cases, the vendor is the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) and the responsibility for such arrangements necessarily rests on them.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

71.
score
N/A

Does the government make public the details of offset programmes, contracts, and performance?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There is evidence that the MoD has abandoned the use of offsets as past experience showed that this practice is not cost-effective and is also difficult to regulate and monitor.

In particular, the former Minister of State for Defence and National Development, at the Committee of Supply Debate 2005 explained that:

&quoute;We have since discarded the practice of offsets and have no plans to re-introduce it. Straightforward, clean and clear contracts ensure that we get good value for money. In this way, our contractors could be held accountable for the primary product that they are to deliver and would not be distracted by trying to fulfil peripheral offset requirements. Additionally, waste and leakages from complicated and obscure offset arrangements are also avoided.&quoute;

Indeed there have been no announcements on offset contracts since then.

In addition, the DSTA has a policy that discourages offset proposals:

&quoute;DSTA has no requirement for any offsets as part of a tender. Hence, the tenderer shall not factor any effort or cost associated with the said offsets in a tender. In the event that the tenderer propose offsets, it will not be taken into consideration as part of tender evaluation. DSTA shall view this proposal as the tenderer's business decision with no cost impact to the tender.
In the event that there is a requirement such as for local engineering or maintenance capability relating to system purchases, this requirement will be explicitly and separately stated in the tender and DSTA shall pay for such requirements if the offers are accepted.&quoute;

The Government Procurement Regulations (2014) in regard to offsets are harmonised with the WTO Government Procurement Agreement, of which Singapore is a signatory member. The Agreement allows for defence offsets. According to Singapore's legislation:

&quoute;(1) A contracting authority shall not seek, take account of, impose or enforce any offset.
(2) In this regulation, “offset” means any condition or undertaking that encourages local development, or improves the Government’s balance‑of‑payments accounts, by means of —
(a)domestic content; (b) licensing of technology; (c) investment; (d) counter-trade; or (e) other similar action or requirement.&quoute;

Although defence offset agreements are not banned by law, there is strong evidence that they have been abandoned as a policy.

COMMENTS -+

Speech by Mr Cedric Foo, Minister of State for Defence and National Development, at the Committee of Supply Debate 2005 http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2005/07mar05_speech.print.img.html accessed July 8, 2014

DSTA, 'How we do sourcing - Offsets' http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/our-procurement-procedure/how-we-do-sourcing accessed July 8, 2014

Government Procurement Regulations 2014, Article 9 http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;orderBy=relevance;query=Content%3AGovernment%20Content%3AProcurement%20Content%3ARegulations%20Content%3A2014;rec=0;resUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fstatutes.agc.gov.sg%2Faol%2Fsearch%2Fsummary%2Fresults.w3p%3BorderBy%3Drelevance%3Bquery%3DContent%253AGovernment%2520Content%253AProcurement%2520Content%253ARegulations%2520Content%253A2014;whole=no#pr9-he-. accessed July 8, 2014

Government Procurement Act, Article 7

Revised Agreement on Government Procurement, http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/rev-gpr-94_01_e.htm accessed July 8, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

72.
score
N/A

Are offset contracts subject to the same level of competition regulation as the main contract?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: There is evidence that the MoD has abandoned the use of offsets as past experience showed that this practice is not cost-effective and is also difficult to regulate and monitor.

In particular, the former Minister of State for Defence and National Development, at the Committee of Supply Debate 2005 explained that:

&quoute;We have since discarded the practice of offsets and have no plans to re-introduce it. Straightforward, clean and clear contracts ensure that we get good value for money. In this way, our contractors could be held accountable for the primary product that they are to deliver and would not be distracted by trying to fulfil peripheral offset requirements. Additionally, waste and leakages from complicated and obscure offset arrangements are also avoided.&quoute;

Indeed there have been no announcements on offset contracts since then.

In addition, the DSTA has a policy that discourages offset proposals:

&quoute;DSTA has no requirement for any offsets as part of a tender. Hence, the tenderer shall not factor any effort or cost associated with the said offsets in a tender. In the event that the tenderer propose offsets, it will not be taken into consideration as part of tender evaluation. DSTA shall view this proposal as the tenderer's business decision with no cost impact to the tender.
In the event that there is a requirement such as for local engineering or maintenance capability relating to system purchases, this requirement will be explicitly and separately stated in the tender and DSTA shall pay for such requirements if the offers are accepted.&quoute;

The Government Procurement Regulations (2014) in regard to offsets are harmonised with the WTO Government Procurement Agreement, of which Singapore is a signatory member. The Agreement allows for defence offsets. According to Singapore's legislation:

&quoute;(1) A contracting authority shall not seek, take account of, impose or enforce any offset.
(2) In this regulation, “offset” means any condition or undertaking that encourages local development, or improves the Government’s balance‑of‑payments accounts, by means of —
(a)domestic content; (b) licensing of technology; (c) investment; (d) counter-trade; or (e) other similar action or requirement.&quoute;

Although defence offset agreements are not banned by law, there is strong evidence that they have been abandoned as a policy.

COMMENTS -+

Speech by Mr Cedric Foo, Minister of State for Defence and National Development, at the Committee of Supply Debate 2005 http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2005/07mar05_speech.print.img.html accessed July 8, 2014

DSTA, 'How we do sourcing - Offsets' http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/our-procurement-procedure/how-we-do-sourcing accessed July 8, 2014

Government Procurement Regulations 2014, Article 9 http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;orderBy=relevance;query=Content%3AGovernment%20Content%3AProcurement%20Content%3ARegulations%20Content%3A2014;rec=0;resUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fstatutes.agc.gov.sg%2Faol%2Fsearch%2Fsummary%2Fresults.w3p%3BorderBy%3Drelevance%3Bquery%3DContent%253AGovernment%2520Content%253AProcurement%2520Content%253ARegulations%2520Content%253A2014;whole=no#pr9-he-. accessed July 8, 2014

Government Procurement Act, Article 7

Revised Agreement on Government Procurement, http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/rev-gpr-94_01_e.htm accessed July 8, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

73.
score
4

How strongly does the government control the company's use of agents and intermediaries in the procurement cycle?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The Prevention of Corruption Act stipulates punishments for &quoute;corrupt transactions with agents&quoute; (article 6). Other relevant legislation also regulates the conduct of agents. In addition the Defence Science and Technology Agency, the agency in charge of government procurement, has to approve the use of an agent.

The DSTA signs contracts only with the company involved in the procurement process and not with its agents. Further, the DSTA regulates the transparency of company-agent interactions in defence procurement. In particular according to the DSTA website: &quoute;Details provided should include the basis of the arrangements, the amount and duration of payments for such agency services and the extent to which provision has been made for such payments to be recovered, however indirectly, in the prices tendered.&quoute;

The conduct of agents is limited and regulated under this legal framework.

COMMENTS -+

Prevention of Corruption Act
Regulation of Imports and Exports Act
Defence Science and Technology Agency Act 2000

DSTA, 'How we do sourcing' http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/our-procurement-procedure/how-we-do-sourcing accessed July 8, 2014

DSTA, Understanding the Law and Practice of defence Procurement in Singapore http://www.dsta.gov.sg/docs/publications-documents/dh2008_11_contractingbymindef.pdf?sfvrsn=2 accessed July 8, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

74.
score
3

Are the principal aspects of the financing package surrounding major arms deals, (such as payment timelines, interest rates, commercial loans or export credit agreements) made publicly available prior to the signing of contracts?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Major weapons acquisitions are exclusively financed by the defence budget and the financing package (presented in full detail) is approved by the parliament and made public through the government gazette. Still, the full details of the finance package as described above is not made public prior to the signing of the contracts in the press or via the Official Reports Department.

COMMENTS -+

MoD, Fact Sheet: Heron 1 Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV), 02 Mar 2011
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/nr/2011/mar/02mar11_nr3/02mar11_speech/02mar11_fs1.print.noimg.html accessed July 9, 2014

MoD, Fact Sheet: ASTER - 30 Missile System and 3 rd Generation Networked Air Defence System http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/ps/2013/16sep13_ps/16sep13_fs.html#.U72hJKiazZ4 accessed July 9, 2014

MoD, MINDEF Signs Contract to Acquire Two Submarines
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/nr/2013/dec/02dec13_nr.print.img.html accessed July 9, 2014

MoD, F-15SG Fact Sheet http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/nr/2013/sep/18sep13_nr/18sep13_fs.html#.U72mr6iazZ4 accessed July 9, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: Financing details are essentially absent both in the mass media and in Hansard.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: DSTA does not seek export credit financing or any other forms of financing arrangements in the tender. Instead, major acquisitions are financed directly from the defence budget which requires Parliament’s approval.

Given that, it is unclear how the assessor had concluded that our process of financing defence acquisitions is ineffective in addressing corruption.

Source:
https://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/our-procurement-procedure/how-we-do-sourcing

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

75.
score
3

Does the government formally require that the main contractor ensures subsidiaries and sub-contractors adopt anti-corruption programmes, and is there evidence that this is enforced?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: The Prevention of Corruption Act and procurement-related regulations require the main contractor to ensure that its agents, subsidiaries and sub-contractors will not engage in corrupt activities. The DSTA has relevant clauses in the typical contract forms it is using for procurement and subcontracting. There is no evidence to suggest that these clauses are not enforced or that shortcomings exist. These clauses along with other scrutiny mechanisms and audits create confidence on the system's ability to regulate the conduct of subcontractors.The few military procurement corruption cases that have surfaced usually involve local contractors engaging in small-scale bribery and use of gifts.

Nevertheless, the government can still improve upon the available public information on enforcement.

COMMENTS -+

Prevention of Corruption Act

Government Procurement Regulations

DSTA, 'How we do sourcing' http://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/our-procurement-procedure/how-we-do-sourcing accessed July 8, 2014

DSTA, Understanding the Law and Practice of defence Procurement in Singapore http://www.dsta.gov.sg/docs/publications-documents/dh2008_11_contractingbymindef.pdf?sfvrsn=2 accessed July 8, 2014

MoD anti-corruption policy http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/anti_corruption_policy.html accessed July 8, 2014

'Defence Procurement' MoD wesite http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_procurement.html
accessed July 8, 2014

Tim Huxley, 'Defence Procurement in Southeast Asia', 5th workshop of the Inter-Parliamentary Forum on Security Sector Governance (IPF-SSG) in Southeast Asia http://ipf-ssg-sea.net/5th_WS/defence_procurement_overview_Tim+Huxley.pdf accessed July 8, 2014

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

76.
score
4

How common is it for defence acquisition decisions to be based on political influence by selling nations?

Researcher + Peer Reviewer4003: Singapore's defence procurement is based on its defence policy objectives and is well grounded on operational considerations. Strict oversight mechanisms of the procurement process are in place.

Defence and diplomatic cooperation with the US is close, and the bulk of foreign defence acquisitions come from American companies. There is no evidence of US political influence directing procurement decisions. Since there is no evidence to the contrary (media, NGO or research reports) it can be assumed that Singapore's preference for American weaponry is based mainly on technical and operational grounds.

However, due to Singapore's long policy of maintaining close foreign and military relations with the US, a certain degree of US influence in this regard cannot be ruled out.

Response to Government:

Although the possibility of political influence cannot be ruled out, there is no evidence that this is the case, though there is not a great deal of independent assessment on need either. But overall the evidence cited by the government, including of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, demonstrates that strong objective evaluation processes are in place. Alongside this, defence trade and acquisition websites indicate that Singapore is a very prudent buyer of equipment. For example, it has chosen to upgrade its existing fleet of F-16s after weighing this option against the decision to acquire the F-35s. See http://www.defenceindustrydaily.com/singapores-steps-modernizing-the-rsafs-f-16-fleet-017430/

Score changed from 3 to 4.

COMMENTS -+

Defence Procurement', MoD http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/key_topics/defence_procurement.html accessed June 28, 2014

Defence Science and Technology Agency website http://www.dsta.gov.sg/programmes/procurement/effecting-an-integrated-workforce accessed June 28, 2014

Tim Huxley, 'Singapore and the US: not quite allies', The Strategist, http://www.aspistrategist.org.au/singapore-and-the-us-not-quite-allies/ accessed June 28, 2014

Ali Mustafa, 'Singapore: Small state, big weapons buyer', 28 Mar 2014
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2014/03/singapore-small-state-big-arms-purchases-2014320922191312.html accessed June 28 2014

Interview: Ng Eng Hen, Singapore defence Minister, defence News, Apr. 9, 2012 http://www.defencenews.com/article/20120409/DEFREG03/304090002/Interview-Ng-Eng-Hen-Singapore-defence-Minister

SOURCES -+

Opinion: Agree with Comments

Comment: The defence procurement process is robust and comprehensive: it is one that begins the identification of need by ground units and ends with the thorough discussion of any purchase at the ministerial level. Procurement is spearheaded by the Defence Science and Technology Agency (DSTA), which is subject to extensive regulatory policies that extend to the Statutory Bodies and Government Companies (Protection of Secrecy) Act.

In recent years, large-ticket purchases have included the Leopard tank, the Formidable-class frigates and the F-15SG. These purchases indicate a diversity of sources that reflect the MoD's emphasis on military need rather than political necessity.

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+

Opinion: Disagree

Comment: MINDEF/SAF’s acquisitions and procurements are aimed at satisfying our operational needs and requirements and there are no political or foreign relations considerations.

Evaluation of offers received is carried out in a fair and objective manner which is in line with the principles of Government procurement. For high-value projects, the Analytic Hierarchy Process is used to score the benefits. Attributes of competing proposals, such as performance and capability parameters, system availability, growth potential, programme risk, supplier’s track record and financial standing, are scored through a systematic pair-wise comparison to establish the relative benefits of the proposals.

Our close and longstanding relationship with the US is based on shared strategic perspectives for a stable Asia-Pacific region that fosters growth and prosperity for all nations and does not influence our procurement processes.

Source:
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2009/12feb09_speech/12feb09_speech3.html
http://www.dsta.gov.sg/docs/publications-documents/dh2008_11_contractingbymindef.pdf?sfvrsn=2
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/clarification/30jan13_clarification.html
On evaluation –
https://www.dsta.gov.sg/business/our-procurement-procedure/how-we-evaluate-offers
https://www.dsta.gov.sg/docs/publications-documents/using-analytic-hierarchy-process-with-operations-analysis-in-project-evaluation.pdf?sfvrsn=0

Singapore’s relationship with US:
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/sp/2013/14dec13_speech.html#.VVAcVNKqqko

Suggested score: 4

Government Reviewer-+

Opinion: Agree

Comment:

Suggested score:

Peer Reviewer-+