blog
Tönungsfolien
Kevin
petrov petar
joe lawton
Lucky Tan
MakinaIn recent days, much has been said about the unfortunate Li Hongyi, son of PM Lee, whom just before disrupting for his studies at MIT this fall, decided to shoot an unhappy email to just about anyone who is Anyone in the SAF. There was apparently some unhappiness with a particular officer he worked with that went AWOL twice, and Hongyi has apparently expressed his resentment through that ‘ORD email’.
In an interview with the Singapore media, the Ministry of Defense said that Hongyi ‘has been formally charged and administered a reprimand after a summary trial.’ Incidentally, the Ministry also mentioned having investigated Li’s complaints and accordingly disciplined the officers concerned.
As always, it doesn’t hurt to start looking for facts. And in this case, the infamously foul-mouthed blogger Rockson Takumi Tan has come out of his year-long silence to produce what he claims to be the email that started it all.
And quite a shocker, it seems. LTA X’s actions are certainly unprofessional and perhaps even grounds for a dishonorable discharge; on the other hand it seems everyone knows some story of army guys who do all sorts of things and get away with it. How much is urban legend surviving on the coattails of conscriptees’ boredom and how much has a legitimate basis in truth is unknown, but there you have it. Certainly there are real grounds for concern, both for the AWOL officer and his commanding officers for their inaction. However, shooting an email to all sorts of people is probably not the best way to handle the situation.
Has Hongyi overstepped the line? Clearly he has. Even in a civilian context, not toeing the organizational line can be a serious thing. And in a regimented, military situation, the emphasis on chain-of-command cannot be overemphasized: an armed corps is nothing if not but an organization dedicated to rank and file, in a very literal way. To break the chain-of-command is to contravene one of the foundations of military organization, that those of higher rank must have command over those of lower rank. But he does have my sympathies for the frustration he must have felt to have wanted to shoot off such a charged email.
And in a psychological context, what Hongyi has done is quite understandable, perhaps even applaudable. After all, not everything that is legal is necessarily just. (To risk invoking Godwin’s law, it was probably legal to execute Jews in Nazi Germany; it doesn’t necessarily follow, then, that it was moral or ethical to do so.) One just has to be prepared to face the consequences for breaking the law if it were necessary to execute one’s moral calculus. I can quote, for example, Lawrence Kohlberg’s theory of the stages of moral development to justify this interpretation of resolving a conflict between conscience and law and order.
Which just goes to show, doesn’t it. Even if it were, in some sense, his father’s army, Hongyi is not above the rule of law when he oversteps it. Which is probably a good thing for the SAF. Yet at the same time, it is yet another story in the litany of SAF screwups that make it to press that is just clawing at yet more unanswered issues. How many other similar incidents have gone unreported? And more importantly, is anyone in there trying to do anything about preventing such events from recurring?
References
- S Ramesh and Gamar Abdul Aziz, Channel NewsAsia, MINDEF takes PM Lee’s son to task for contravening orders, 2007-07-12.
- Rockson Takumi Tan, Talk Rock, PM son shoot email complain SAF officers fucked up! 2007-07-13. (Claims to reproduce an email dated 2007-06-28 by Li Hongyi.)
A copy of the alleged email follows below the fold:
From: 2LT Li Hongyi, _____ PC, _____
Sent: Thursday, 28 June 2007 9:36 AM
To: ___ ____ ____, Minister, MHQ; MG ______ ____, CDF, CDF Office; BG -___ ____ ____, COA,
COAOFF; COL _______, CSO, _______; zz All in ____, _________
Cc: zz All in ________, _____; zz ALL IN ____, _____; zz All in _____, _____; zz All in ______, ______
Subject: A complaint about the quality control of SAF officers
Dear Sirs and alI,
I am about to disrupt my national service to pursue further studies, and this will likely be my last email sent out for the next half a decade. Unlike the common “ORD letters” that you read, this letter unfortunately cannot be as cheerful. I am using this last opportunity to issue a letter of complaint against the quality control of officers in the SAF, more specifically against LTA X. During my time as his subordinate, LTA X was AWOL on at least 2 counts, attempted bribery, and lied to his subordinates and his superior officer. The battalion HQ has effectively given no punishment, and has not even made these infractions known to the rest of the battalion.
Let me first give you some background. I am the ____ ____ platoon commander from __________. In order to maintain operational readiness my duties are performed at _____ camp where our ops bus and servers are instead of at stagmont camp where our battalion is. The company is structured like so
OC
|
Centre Head
|
PC
The duties are therefore shared between the PC’s, PS’, and the Centre Head. LTA X is the centre head of the __________.
LTA X, was originally supposed to be on duty at _____ Camp as the duty commander for the _______ on the 20th and 22nd of April, a Friday and Sunday respectively. I was on duty on the 21st of April that Saturday, to minimize the changing over, I contacted him and asked if he would like to swap duties for the Saturday and Sunday. To this he agreed, and thus he was to be on duty on the 20th and 21st of April.
On the Friday however, LTA X called to inform me that he was busy during the day, and if I could cover for him until the evening. To this I agreed to do so. At about 1600 hours, I received a call from LTA X, informing me that he was on the way and that I could leave first, thought this would result in a time where there would be no duty commander in camp, he informed me that this had already be cleared with our OC. I therefore left camp.
On Sunday the 22nd of April I arrived back in camp to take over duty from LTA X. After he had left camp the men informed me that he had not arrived in camp on Friday at all, and that he only arrived in camp at 1800 hours on Saturday the 21st of April. On Saturday they had tried to contact him to ask his whereabouts, to which he told them that he was in fact in _____ in ______ camp getting some work done. The men contacted their counterparts in ______ camp to verify this, however no one in______ camp had seen LTA X. 1 further confirmed with the ______ duty personnel on Saturday that none of them had seen LTA X, this was also with confirmed with that day’s BDO.
This news obviously was very distressing, I confronted LTA X regarding this information to which he confirmed that he only arrived in camp on Saturday at 1800 hours, but that he was at _____ for a while then left later to run some errands. Upon learning that I was to bring this information to our OC, LTA X then made an offer to do some of my duties for me to which I declined, his words were “You know if you need me to help you do some of your duties..”
On Wednesday after I had completed my personal investigation and confirmed that these events had indeed transpired, I informed our OC of these offences. Our OC spoke to LTA X regarding these issues, and let him off with a warning.
I would like the story to end here, however LTA RX was again on duty at ____ Camp for _________ on the following Saturday the 28th of April. At 0030 hours on Sunday the 29th of April I received a message from the duty personnel. The duty personnel of the platoon had just spotted LTA X’s car, a white Mitsubishi lancer driving out of camp. I responded by telling them to check all the car parks and look for LTA X in camp. I received a call at about 0115 hours, the duty personnel informed me that they had checked the whole camp, and that LTA X’s car was no where to be found. They also informed me that LTA X was no where to be found, not in any of the bunks nor any of the offices.
On Monday the 20th of April when I arrived back in ______ Camp for work, I confirmed with both the guard commander and the duty officer for Saturday the 28th of April, that at white Mitsubishi lancer had indeed driven out of camp at about 0030 hours on the 29th of April. This latest information was told to our OC.
When confronted by our OC, LTA X told him that indeed it was his car driving out of camp, he claimed however, that it was not him driving the car but that he had lent it to friend to drive out of camp. After checking with the person in question this was established to be untrue. Finally, LTA X admitted that he had lied, and that is was he who had left camp.
I have been informed that LTA X was to be given 10 extra duties, though this may be considered an extremely light punishment there is a further problem. To date, which is to say, 2 months from the incidents, none of the duties have been published in the battalion RO, in addition, LTA X has not served any of the extra duties he was supposedly awarded. In addition, this system of leniency is not consistent throughout the battalion, or even the company. The following was published in the RO on 1 1th of June 2007:
SXXXXXXXX CPL _____ ________ Non-compliance with a lawful duty or order. stoppage of Leave for 7 days
This was the punishment for CPL ______ for leaving camp an hour before he was supposed to. This was published less than a week after his infringement. If you were to calculate the time AWOL alone, LTA X was missing for a minimum of over 20 hours. This does not take into the account the fact that he repeated the crime less than a week after being reprimanded the first time. This does not take into account the lying to his superior officer. This does not take into account the fact that he is an officer, and thus should be even more liable than corporal.
Absence without leave
22. -(1) Every person subject to military law who is absent without leave from service in the Singapore Armed Forces or from the place where he is lawfully required for the time being to be shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction by a subordinate military court to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years or any less punishment authorised by this Act.
(2) It shall be a defence for any person charged under this section to prove that his absence was a result of circumstances over which he had no control.
this is where the report ends and the editorial begins. LTA X’s continued service in the SAF is an embarrassment the entire officer corps. In the SAF we are constantly being told that we have very high standards expected from our officers. As an officer cadet any one of these actions would have you put immediately out of course. Here you have a person who lied to his subordinates, went AWOL, attempted to bribe a civil servant, went AWOL again not even a week after being reprimanded, then lied to cover himself, and tried to implicate another person in these lies. He discarded his second chance just days after being given it because he thought he could get away with it. I how ask you what exactly are these high standard that we speak of? I am realistically asking you how much worse than this can an officer really go? Does a person have to commit armed robbery or murder before he fails these supposedly “high” standards of officers in the SAF? I simply fail to understand how someone who would undeniably fail the standards expected of a cadet or even a private can continue to be an officer.
The decisions of the battalion HQ are equally saddening. How can a lower standard of discipline be expected of officers than of men? In the our society, when a police officer commits a crime he is held to an even higher standard, and given even greater punishment than a normal citizen, this is because he has betrayed the very values it is his duty to uphold.
I was told that one of the reasons this was so was that they did not wish to ruin his career with a summary trial. However the SAF is not a charity organisation and does not owe anyone a career. I feel that as a regular his status as an officer and his career should be under even closer scrutiny than that of an NSF, to intentionally withhold such information is effectively tricking the SAF into continuing to pay someone whom if all is known, has no place in the organisation.
Another reason told to me for LTA X’s lighter punishment was that it is in light of the work he has done for the battalion, I feel this is unacceptable for several reasons. Firstly in our country we do not mitigate punishments based on past achievements, Durai was not excused despite the amount of money he helped NKF raise, and a doctor would not be excused from molestation no matter how many lives he has helped save. Secondly such mitigation is nothing more than justified corruption and no different from a criminal paying off the police to escape arrest, the very thing we fight so hard to keep out of our society, Finally even if the previous two points are conceded, what LTA X did was not a mistake, mistakes are done by accident. What he has demonstrated is a systematic failure of character and unacceptable as an officer.
Even if you attribute the lack of punishment to extreme leniency, the decision to not inform the battalion is even more suspicious. Especially in a _____ unit such as _________ where the importance of being on duty cannot be over emphasized, to not even inform the battalion of the occurrence is to send a signal that there is nothing wrong with his actions. If it was unintentional it shows gross negligence for something which is clearly an important matter, and if intentional shows a level of corruption that I need not elaborate on.
While some might say this is just a small matter, a story of a single bad officer, the fact that it was not dealt with more severely is indicative of a bigger problem. It shows the lack of quality control being practiced for the leaders of the SAF. The following quote was taken from the army’s own intranet homepage:
“In the 3rd Generation SAF, the quality and commitment of our people will continue to be the most important determinant for advancement” - Member of Parliament Ms Indranee Rajah
We can take criticism about having second hand equipment, outdated training methods, and even questionable relevance to modern day operations. But one thing that cannot be tolerated is a reputation for having bad leaders. Such a reputation would compromise Singapore’s defence credibility far more than using refurbished tanks or old training manuals.
While I may only be a 2nd lieutenant, I am a citizen of this country. And as a citizen I have the right to demand high standards from the leaders of the SAF While it is true that high standards are hard to come by and even harder to enforce, for such events to come to light and yet nothing be done about it is to say the very least, unacceptable and disappointing.
Yours Sincerely,
2LT Li Hongyi -
___________ Commander
Defintely not a commando out fit - we sort out our problems in our own regiment - this is obviously idiot who doenst even have any idea of what it really takes to be a inspirational leader. By doing this he has just destroyed the most important glue that binds a regiment together - esprit de corps. Obviously he has brought shame not only to his uniform, country and parents.
[...] Li Hong Yi’s actions. At that point in time I had no knowledge of the exact contents of the email and was relying on what little has been said. However as stated in the last part knowing the [...]
The email is true. I just saw it yesterday in MINDEF. It was sent out on 28 June 07, to Minister for Defence, the service chiefs, and almost the entire of Signals. The email wasn’t sent to EVERYONE, it was just sent to people in the Signals vocation, svc chiefs, and MOD.
I think Li Hong Yi deserve a heavier punishment for his actions than the LTA who went AWOL. Insubordination and inability to abide with the chain of command is a far more serious offence. I too agree his actions have destroyed the most important glue that binds a regiment together - esprit de corps. If he cannot even understand such a simple thing he should be stripped of his rank and given a dishonourable discharge from the force.
Is insubordination a far more serious offence than irresponsibility and attempted bribery? And in this case, what kind of insubordination are we talking about?
Elia, I agree with you that this is an ethical dilemma and that Li Hongyi is brave enough to challenge authority when the occasion calls for it. The method, in cc’ing so many people, may not be the best way.
On first impressions, many might want Hongyi to be penalised for being the PM’s son and for having overstepped rank and order (which is very important in the army). However, I’m surprised that Hongyi apparently did not try to wield the influence that he possesses. To speculate logically, he could have complained to his father or grandfather and perhaps everything would be straightened from the top. Instead, he chose to complain to a few levels higher after having tried to bring up the matter to immediate superiors. Isn’t he still trying to observe rank and order?
Upon second thoughts, I’m also quite curious about one thing. Does Hongyi’s superior know who he is? Assuming that he does (just like almost everyone else), why did he choose to ignore the complaint of the PM’s son and take the side of a much less powerful man? Are there other facts in this incident that are not made known?
Hi Elia,
I would really like to hear the other side of the story. I dont really care what his motivations were, all I know is some poor grunt has been charged so I am not celebrating either way. Only because while we have all heard one side of the story and the other side remains a black hole . I just feel sorry for the other chap, his dad is probably not the PM of singapore, neither did his mummy make it the time list of most influential women in Asia, all I know is this, when I was in the army for jungle training, my buddies found me. Good leadership is abt making sure every one crosses the line, not abt nitpicking and finger pointing, you wouldnt even make for 5 min in a real platoon, in a real battle fighting real soldiers. This guy seriously needs to talk to someone besides his parents. Sorry no roses here.
Two supervising officers were issued letters of warning for administering inappropriate punishment.
Think about that.
This means at least two senior officers were aware of the problem and had decided to ignore 2LT Li Hongyi’s complaint.
If 2LT Li had followed the “proper channel”, what makes you think the 3rd senior officer up the chain of command will do anything?
MINDEF needs to clarify what it means by “proper channels”.
Will Li Hongyi be charged if he merely sent his letters to everyone directly above him (ie, Defense Minister, CDF, CoA, Chief Signal Officer, etc)?
The problem with that approach is that all these senior guys may still decide to ignore his complaint. What can he do then? In my opinion, his letter to everyone (including the unit storemen, cook, etc) directly causes the AWOL LTA to be court-martialed.
Cos the SAF leaders are now aware that justice must be seen to be done. Otherwise, they cannot no longer maintain effective discipline among the men.
is all a show.he said past contribution cannot be use as mitigation, my young boy go and see how different people are given different punishment with same offences, dont be so naive
isn’t he supposed to be LEE not lihongyi?
I really feel sorry for all the people involved in this laughable matter. But whether or not the punishment was severe or not or whether vertain people deserved what they got is not what i am concerned about. What really shocked me is that our dear PM’s son was quoted in Today as saying “However the SAF is not a charity organisation and does not owe anyone a career”. This comment was made with reference to the fact that the superior officers knew what was going on but did not want to ruin someone’s career because of this matter.
To be very honest with you people, anyone who has been in the army will know that things like this (AWOL) happen all the time. Unless the person AWOL for several weeks, most of the time, it is overlooked. Not to mention a lot of other things that are overlooked.
As to owing someone, anyone, a career. You, We, don’t. But then again, do we go around destroying people’s propects for a promotion or even a contract extension? No, we don’t. Its’ not “nice”
What I am very concerned about is if he brings this attitude the what he becomes when he “grows up”. Can you imagine PM Li (god forbid - another one) saying that the poor people don’t deserve any sympathy because “the government does not owe them a living”. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
My question to all of you out there is this. Who says Elitism is dead?
And I think if our dear Li Hongyi wants to complain about how Mindef chooses senior officers. I want to complain about how the SAF chooses officers to begin with. I think that the email showcases one and only one thing. Social Incompetency, he looks down on people - elitist. Is this what the SAF looks for in officers? Elitists? Simply put, he is a disgrace to all the officers of the SAF out there.
I think that a lot of you who think that he did the right thing, are probably justified. Heck, even I could somewhat sympathise with his actions. But then again, was he really trying to right a wrong? I question the attitude and the motive driving his act. If anything, his actions as he described in the email is nothing short of vindictive.
What I am trying to say is that his attitude really sucks
I am also a citizen of Singapore. I have also served NS. I have only one simple request. Get rid of Elitism. Does it happen? NO. I rest my case.
I have read the letter. I speak from the standpoint of being a NS SAF officer now currently in MR. I am only a junior officer (i.e. LTA).
The contents of the letter was NOT ok for general distribution. The email described his unit’s location, his unit structure and also disclosed information such that it was possible to infer his unit’s role! This disclosure is even more grave considering that this unit is a “special”, not your bread-and-butter regular fighting battalion! If I was a aggressor, I will now know one additional location to put in my first strike.
Broadcasting the email to all parts of the SAF is definitely NOT the right thing to do. Not everyone in the distribution list is cleared for such communication. Not everyone was in the “need-to-know” for this type of information. And maybe not everyone in the SAF works exclusively for the SAF! The wider the distribution, the higher the probability of leak. We don’t want our potential enemies to know our problems, weaknesses, structure or true capabilities! The emailer’s emotions got the better of his discipline. I believe the reprimand he deservedly got was for “broadcasting” the email.
SAF is not a democracy. In this instance, there is no reason to broadcast the email to everyone. Are you trying to gather support and pressure the CDF to punish someone? Is the email implying that the CDF is not going to do what is right without the pressure of scrutiny from the rest of SAF? The implication is most disrespectful. CDF is final authority because he is ultimately responsible for the organization’s performance. Also, when you are in service, you are bound by articles of law pertaining to the SAF. It would be best not to consider yourself a civilian or member of the public. The emailer’s “citizenly demand of high standard” is not quite appropriate. You are a soldier until otherwise. Where are your own high standards?
Considering all of the above, the emailer should be thankful that he wasn’t additionally charged with security indiscipline, insubordination, disrespect to senior officers (COA, CDF) etc. There was merit in his email, so all-in, a reprimand is probably a fair punishment.
I would like to think that it is probably alright to email higher authority if there is reason to believe that there is a corrupt conspiracy or incompetence at the lower levels. But beware, escalating the email, directly implies that there IS corruption or incompetence at the lower levels.
Maybe one possible solution would be to send TO: [Next-Higher-Commander], CC: [Higher, higher, higher ups, up to CoA, CDF].
The emailer made the mistake distributing via..
TO: CoA, CDF, Minister, etc.., CC: [Rest_Of_SAF_Signals??].
It is a moot point as to whether the email eventually reaches public domain. I say it again.. maybe not everyone in the SAF works exclusively for the SAF. Be prudent.
Anyway, having the email out in the open public did not help the emailer. His father is in public office, there would have been a big brouhaha if the son’s trespass had gone unpunished.
The email was a letter of complaint. It can be seen that frustration and unhappiness permeated throughout the letter. The emailer seems determined to get at the errant officer. The reader may be lead to suspect a personal vendetta between the two. It makes for a unprofessional looking letter. It would probably have been better if he just emailed his concerns in an emotionally unbiased manner and quote specific instances without naming names. Instead of a “complaint against someone”, he could have wrote on “concern of discipline standards”. Tackle the issue rather than target the person. He can supply the names, unit, details if asked for in subsequent emails.
The fact that he is in a privileged position probably emboldened him to be brash in his email. So guys, don’t make him too big a hero. i.e. It is easier to be charitable when you are rich, easier to be brave when you are powerful.
On the other hand, he is young and idealistic. Hopefully he will learn and do better next time. Don’t make him too bad a villian. Give him a break, I have seen full grown adults doing much worst.
Credit to the SAF for being impartial enough to mete out the fair punishment of all culpable.
If you are currently serving, whether you are Commisioned, NCO, Other Ranks, regular or NS, I would like to urge you this, let’s get things solved, but let’s keep things quiet. I would like to think that the Chiefs and officers are interested in all SAF issues but make sure you inform them in the right way. Do the right things first and do it right!
esprit de corps cannot be upheld if corruption is involve. the single most importantfactor for singapore to succeed all this year is our minister & officials, in all gov department, including the SAF, are the least corrupt among this reagion. if we are to condon any form of corruption in the SAF then it will be the beginning of the end of a credible SAF.
obey order you must but not blindly. pls don’t just look at the black & white of the SAF to sacntion immoral practice for it rotten and it will rot to the core, slowly.
I think perhaps, i have another view, the people already know what happens in the SAF, comon, we all have to serve, however, perhaps this could be part of a long term agenda, for instance, didnt his father, the current PM, serve as a ‘brigadier general’ i use that term in inverted commas, since he’s currently the world record holder for a general without combat experience.
now would people look back when his son is up for elections and thing ‘hey isnt that the guy who blew the whiste, etc etc?
long term propaganda is what i think it is, if anyone else did that, it would be instantly covered up and made to disappear….
now i wonder who is going to be the PAP front man in a couple of years?
think about that. you may support him now for his ‘valiant actions’ but for all you know, it may be a ruse, the news media in singapore is known to be an agent of the government, giving props to the current ruling party for years, and showing the opposition in a poor light.
in this country of not so free press and lack of civil liberties, perhaps we are just all part of a long term plan to keep the lee family in power for years to come.
First off, I agree with the people above who mentioned that 2LT Li has to be punished for the unnecessarily widespread dissemination and the excessively emotional tone of the email. A more targeted email to CO and/or Chief of Signals is probably sufficient. I can maybe detect a little of the arrogance/elitism that this gutsy mass email originated from.
But to those who couldn’t see pass his family background: would you have given the same reply and denounce 2LT Li if this guy was some poor mono-intake LCP writing in bad english complaining about his officer?
Lets not lose sight of the main issue here. Where does esprit de corps come from if Other Ranks have to perform duty but Officers don’t? When WOSEs are summary trialed but Offrs walk away with verbal warnings? In my time in NS, I witnessed so much unfairness in the system that I believed was inherent in any military. There was an NSF officer who didn’t give a shit as to what the OC or CO says, especially when his ORD was near. He repeatedly defied orders, left camp during his duty and brought beer back to bunk/duty room to drink, during duty. He was given gazillions of 21x extra DOO duties, but nothing stops him from leaving camp during his weekend duties (who could stop him, since he is the highest rank in camp anyway). The battalion CO would sometimes call the duty room to check for his presence in camp, but the duty personnel would frequently cover up for him, making excuses for his absence (he went to clear arms, he just left for the guardroom, he just left to take a shower etc…). The officers could only wring their hands at him, and pray that his ORD comes soon so they wouldnt have to deal with him again. The matter was raised to the Service Chief, but AFAIK, only oral disciplinary actions were meted out. There was some talk of charging him, stripping him of his rank, sending him to DB for a couple of days. But in the end, nothing happened. He walked, scot-free, to become a LTA(NS).
What would happen if this was a Other Rank? Its unimaginable. A couple years DB? The officers in my unit then was fierce to our men, for ours was a mono-intake unit of ah beng ah sengs whom they felt require tough punishments to keep them in line. Extra duties, SoL and DB are commonplace.
And should I be surprised that these incidents happen elsewhere as well? I believe that my experiences are hardly unique to my unit.
And to the poster GP (post #11) who picked the quote “the government does not owe them a living”. I agree with you that the govt has the responsibility to take care of the people. Therefore, support nets must be present both in our society as well as in our Army. If the LTA has personal issues that affect his work performance, it must be noted and he should be given help. Give him less duties if he has a sick mother to take care of at home, anybody can understand that. However, the courts of law is blind and must punish those who break the law. What happens if some accident happens in camp? Is the NSF 3SG supposed to stand in for his duty?
It was reported that 2LT Li was given a reprimand. What was not mentioned was what happened to LTA X and his commanders. I hope they got the punishment they deserve.
that’s right ex-red beret : Esprit de Corp. Someone must die before any questions are asked. Preferably drowning in a very small puddle of water.