SINGAPORE, Feb 27 — To get NTUC FairPrice to buy more of his seafood, Lim Poh Heng gave several of the supermarket chain’s employees at least S$86,780 (RM308,430) over 10 years as bribes.
Yesterday, the 71-year-old was sentenced to eight months’ jail and a S$2,000 fine for three charges of corruptly giving gratifications. These charges relate to S$48,600 of the bribes.
Another six similar charges — involving the other S$38,180 — were taken into consideration during sentencing.
Lim will begin his jail term on March 11 after he applied for a deferment due to medical appointments and other matters, which were not disclosed in court.
Three former NTUC FairPrice employees who were involved in this case — Andrew Lim Kian Kok, 48, See Hock Lam, 70, and Chua Teow Hym, 61 — have been charged and sentenced.
Supermarket employee asked for money
Lim Poh Heng was a partner of fish wholesaler Kiang Huat Sea Products Co (1998) and one of his major customers was NTUC FairPrice.
Andrew Lim and See were part of the night-buying operations team of the supermarket chain.
Andrew Lim, in particular, was tasked to buy fresh fish and seafood from suppliers for all of the supermarket’s outlets. The prices were pre-determined between NTUC and the suppliers, but he could pick the supplier and how much to buy from each.
He could also buy suppliers’ excess stock for cheap, and could determine how much to buy on behalf of the supermarket.
The court heard that sometime in 2014, Andrew Lim asked Lim Poh Heng for money in exchange for him to buy more fish from the accused’s firm.
Obliging, Lim Poh Heng paid Andrew Lim S$500 and from then on, he would pay S$500 monthly, before increasing the sum to S$2,000 in 2018.
Occasionally, See would remind him to pay Andrew Lim, and Lim Poh Heng made these payments up until October 2020.
He would place the cash in an envelope and give it to Andrew Lim in person at Jurong Fishery Port.
Between 2010 and 2015 on at least three occasions during Chinese New Year, Lim Poh Heng would also give Chua red packets.
These red packets would each contain at least S$200, and the court heard that he did this to have a “good working relationship” with Chua.
This was because Chua, a storekeeper with NTUC FairPrice, was in charge of receiving stock from suppliers and would decide how much weight to deduct from the bagged stock to account for the ice packaged to chill the seafood.
From November 2016 and February 2017, Lim Poh Heng sent WhatsApp messages to Chua to buy more of certain types of fish and Chua obliged.
‘Sustained period’ of offence
Yesterday, Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Tan Pei Wei sought a total sentence of 10 to 14 months’ jail, pointing out the amount of gratification involved.
DPP Tan also stressed that Lim Poh Heng had done this for over 10 years.
Lim Poh Heng’s lawyer, Desmond Ong of law firm Solitaire LLP, sought a lighter sentence, saying that his client is advanced in age and a “traditional Chinese man” who is “not very educated”.
Ong also said that his client is an active grassroots leader and part of a committee in his housing district to encourage seniors to stay active and age gracefully. It is unclear if Pang is still involved in these activities.
“For someone who has not had brushes with the law before, once he knew of the investigations, he corporated fully,” the lawyer added.
District Judge Janet Wang, however, dismissed the mitigation that Lim Poh Heng should be treated as a first-time offender, noting that he had committed the offences over a “sustained period of almost 10 years”.
As for the sentencing options, she noted that the prosecution had sought a sentence that was higher than the sentence for each charge that Andrew Lim had received and disagreed that should be the case.
This is because Andrew Lim had actively procured the bribe and had oversight on purchasing decisions and was thus more culpable, the judge added.
Andrew Lim received eight or nine months’ jail for each charge, for a total global sentence of 53 months’ jail, or four years and five months’ jail.
Each charge of the corruption offence attracts a fine of not more than S$100,000 or a jail term of up to five years, or both. — TODAY
