2SG HU ENHUAI (Compensation to family and disciplinary action against personnel involved)

Column No : 1025

2SG HU ENHUAI:

(Compensation to family and disciplinary action against personnel involved): 14.

Prof. Ivan Png Paak Liang asked the Minister for Defence if he will brief the House on any compensation and disciplinary action taken in the August 2003 "Commando dunking" saga, specifically, (a) whether the family of Sergeant Hu En Huai has taken legal action and, if so, the outcome; (b) what compensation has been paid to the family of Sergeant Hu; and (c) what disciplinary action has been taken against the responsible military personnel who were not subject to criminal penalties and those who were subject to criminal penalties.

The Minister for Defence (Mr Teo Chee Hean): Mr Speaker, Sir, I will first answer the question of compensation to the family of 2SG Hu Enhuai.

MINDEF has a framework for compensation which provides for fair and reasonable compensation for a serviceman who suffers injury or death which is attributable to service. Let me explain the various components of this framework. First, the SAF (Pensions) Regulations provide for a National Serviceman and his family to be compensated in line with the compensation scheme set out in the Workmen's Compensation Act, which provides for compensation of up to S$111,000 in the event of death. Beyond this, as I informed Parliament at the Committee of Supply debate last year, MINDEF has decided to treat National Servicemen on par with regular soldiers for the purpose of compensation. This means that for deaths due to military service, we will provide an additional lump-sum payment of a minimum of one year's pay for a regular of the same rank. MINDEF can also grant additional compensation where the circumstances merit such additional compensation. The principles that MINDEF applies in computing the compensation amount are consistent with the legal principles applied by the civil courts in assessing compensation for deaths.

In the case of 2SG Hu Enhuai, MINDEF had offered a comprehensive package of financial compensation to his family in line with the above principles. 2SG Hu's family has accepted this compensation, and has not taken any legal action. It would not be appropriate for MINDEF to disclose the amount of the compensation that has been made to 2SG Hu's family.

Our servicemen are also encouraged to join the SAF's Group Insurance Scheme. 2SG Hu was insured under this scheme and the insurance was paid to his family in 2003. This scheme provides affordable coverage at premiums of $16 per month for every $100,000 of coverage. The maximum amount of coverage is $400,000. 2SG Hu's family also had access to the SAF Welfare Fund, which assists with funeral expenses and provides benevolent funds.

Prof. Png has also asked about the disciplinary action that has been taken against the SAF personnel connected to the death of 2SG Hu. Following the completion of the cases in the criminal court, MINDEF has since completed the disciplinary actions against all those involved to bring this tragic case to a close.

First, I would like to explain that the Attorney-General's Chambers has primary jurisdiction over whether to proceed with criminal charges. The Attorney-General's Chambers decided to proceed with criminal charges against four servicemen, and they were all subsequently convicted - two of causing death by a rash act and the other two of abetment of a rash act causing death. LTA Divanand and LTA Ng Chin Fong were sentenced to nine months' imprisonment each. CPT Pandiaraj and 2WO Balakrishnan appealed against their conviction but their appeals were recently dismissed by the Chief Justice, and CPT Pandiaraj was sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment while 2WO Balakrishnan was given six months' imprisonment.

Following their sentencing by a district court on 14th January 2005, the SAF discharged LTA Divanand and LTA Ng Chin Fong from service with effect from 3rd March 2005, after the deadline for them to file an appeal expired. The cases for the discharge of CPT Pandiaraj and 2WO Balakrishnan from the SAF are now being processed.

Apart from the four servicemen who were dealt with in the criminal court, the investigations had revealed that three other servicemen had committed military offences directly connected to this case. These three were court-martialled on 15th April 2005. They pleaded guilty to negligently performing their duties. The court martial was presided over by a district judge, and there are two other members who are SAF officers. LTA Ryan Toh and LTA Shashi Kumar were fined $1,500 each, and SSG Tan Tian Huat was fined $900.

The investigations had also found shortcomings in the performance of seven other servicemen in relation to the supervision or the conduct of the Combat Survival Training course as a whole, but not directly related to the actions against 2SG Hu. Disciplinary action, ranging from fines to Letters of Warning, was taken against them.

Prof. Ivan Png Paak Liang: I thank the Hon. Minister for his detailed reply. I have two supplementary questions. First, I thank the Hon. Minister for the explanation on the compensation scheme. I wonder if the Ministry can take into account that NSmen are there on a compulsory basis. And while it does seem good to treat them on the same basis as regular servicemen, this is not the NSmen's career of choice. That man may well become an engineer, a lawyer or even a Minister in the future. So, maybe, the basis of compensation is not quite right, and the Ministry may like to reconsider it.

I thank the Minister for the explanation on the charges taken against the servicemen who are not charged in criminal court. It does seem to me a bit odd that their charge was "negligence". From all accounts, this was a deliberate act and it was not a negligent act. I appreciate the Minister's comment on that.

Mr Teo Chee Hean: Sir, if I may explain the principles of compensation. When I said that we treat a National Serviceman on the same basis as a regular, what I was referring to was for the purposes of pensions. Because a regular, when he serves in the Armed Forces, if he were to pass away, there will be certain pension benefits due to him because of his service. Therefore, we treat a National Serviceman on that basis. However, on the overall compensation that is provided, the principles are consistent with the legal principles applied by the civil court in assessing compensation for deaths. So the other factors that Prof. Png brought up will be taken into consideration in that overall compensation.

With regard to what charges to be preferred against the individuals, as I explained, the Attorney-General's Chambers has primary jurisdiction, and the Attorney-General decided who to prosecute and on what charges. As regards the remaining cases, these cases were prosecuted according to the facts of the case that were available.