Her workload would remain the same. But as Margaret (not her real name) approached the statutory retirement age of 62 in 2012 — the same year that re-employment laws took effect in Singapore — the then-civil servant had to sign a new one-year contract with her employer. It entailed a pay cut, a downgrading by one job grade, and a S$500 medical claim limit annually.

While she felt that the terms were not well justified, she felt satisfied enough with them to sign the contract, mindful of the horror stories which she had been hearing about re-employment terms being offered to other employees of her age.

Margaret, now 69, said that at that time, she knew of older workers in the public service who had to take a more drastic pay cut after being downgraded by several rungs, and of supervisors having to step down and work under subordinates although they had not expressed any plans for retirement.

Much has changed since in the public service: Since July 1, 2017, wage adjustments were done away with, and the large majority of re-employed public officers received “no pay cut”, the Public Service Division (PSD) said in response to TODAY’s queries. 

Public officers will continue to receive their last drawn salary if they are re-employed at the same grade, and those who are re-employed are also offered the “prevailing leave and medical benefits schemes, which are aligned to market practice”, PSD added. 

In the private sector, however, some older workers continue to get the short end of the stick.

Take Pamela (not her real name), 67, for example.

Until last year, she had worked as a head of department at a local bank.

Strictly speaking, her employer had abided by the Government’s re-employment rules, which require organisations to offer re-employment up to a stipulated age to eligible employees who reach their retirement age.

But it was the way she was treated towards the end of her second one-year contract with the bank — she was asked when she would be “calling it a day” — that left a sour taste in her mouth.

While the question was “subtly and politely put across”, the “hint was pretty strong”, she said. She left the bank as she felt unwanted by her employers. 

For some older workers, subtle discouragement may come in the form of new employment terms.

A 61-year-old working at a multinational manufacturing firm, who declined to be named, told TODAY that despite having worked at the company for more than four decades, the number of days for her annual leave will be halved from 24 days to 12 days — same as what a fresh hire gets — under her new contract which will take effect in a few months when she turns 62.

Similarly, a 67-year-old who worked in port operations said he was given a S$200 cap for yearly medical claims under his re-employment contract. Previously, there was no such limit as far as he knows.

These employees were among more than a dozen older workers interviewed by TODAY.

To be sure, the employment rate of older workers has gone up since re-employment laws came into force, based on government data. Still, the experiences of those interviewed suggest that mandating employers to rehire eligible workers once they reach retirement age is a work in progress, and it is more often than not an unpleasant experience for these workers — even though the policies aim to protect them and allow them to continue working if they wish to do so.

This is especially so when the older workers feel that they remain healthy and able to perform at the same — if not higher — levels compared with their younger colleagues.

In this regard, the public sector, as well as a few private sector firms, are leading the way by re-hiring older workers, without any changes to their roles and employment terms including salaries.

But the positive examples are too few and far between, as TODAY’s interviews with the older workers show.

Still, experts pointed out the constraints faced by businesses — in particular, the seniority-based wage system that is entrenched in many companies in Singapore.

Workers here expect wages to go up with each passing year, noted Assoc Prof Walter Theseira, a Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) and economist with the Singapore University of Social Sciences.

As a result, over time, there could be a “mismatch between pay and work output” among older workers, he said.

“At some point, work output may plateau or even fall, but pay keeps going up,” he added.

“It is common to paint this as a problem of unfair employers… It is also unfair to younger workers if they produce more output but they are paid much less than a more senior worker,” said Assoc Prof Theseira.

But is there scope to finetune the re-employment laws — say, for example, mandating that the terms offered to the older workers must take into account their health and work performance?

It would be unwise to make the laws more rigid, said several MPs who cautioned that doing so could backfire and put businesses off from hiring older workers.

Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC MP Zainal Sapari, who is also assistant secretary-general of the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC), reiterated that the signing of a new contract during re-employment “gives the flexibility for companies to offer a package that is sustainable for them and at the same time, allow workers to continue”.

Businessman Douglas Foo, who is the founder and executive chairman of Sakae Holdings, noted that should the flexibility be taken away from employers, operational costs could rise.

“That makes our country much less attractive for others to come and invest in the backdrop of a tight workforce,” said Mr Foo, who is also an NMP.

Singapore’s retirement and re-employment ages are back in the spotlight following Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s announcement in his National Day Rally speech that the retirement age will be raised to 63 in 2022, and eventually to 65 by 2030.

The re-employment age will be increased from 67 to 68 in 2022, and eventually to 70 by 2030.

With Singaporeans having the world's longest life expectancy in 2017 with an expected lifespan at birth of 84.8 years, the changes are aimed at helping older workers to continue working and to be more financially independent.

WHAT OLDER WORKERS WISH FOR

The re-employment age — a concept pioneered in Japan — is viewed as a better alternative to raising the retirement age, given the concerns by businesses that a higher retirement age might affect costs and productivity.

When it was introduced in Singapore seven years ago, the objective was not only to protect the interests of older workers but also to create a pro-business environment that would ultimately safeguard jobs.

Older workers, however, told TODAY that they wish their employers can implement the re-employment policies with “a little more heart”.

Pamela said: “Do companies really subscribe to the Government’s thinking and the spirit of re-employing workers, or do they just do it because they are obliged to?”

She could sense the bank’s half-heartedness when it did not offer her any alternative positions, or at least seek out her preferences on continued employment, even though she had worked in the bank for nearly 30 years.

“They only think about crafting career paths for the young ones, but we (older workers) deserve a bit of attention too. The attachment (to the bank) is there. We have a proven track record,” she said, adding that the bank’s human resource (HR) department should have been more proactive in looking for alternative roles for her.

She also lamented how older workers in the bank would only find out whether their yearly contracts would be renewed for another year on their birthday month.

Tripartite guidelines encourage employers to inform employees who do not qualify for re-employment at least three months before retirement, so they can better prepare for retirement or seek other employment opportunities. However, this procedure is not always followed, based on TODAY’s interviews with older workers.

Unsurprisingly, those who were re-hired by their organisations on the same terms, with their roles unchanged, are happy to continue working as long as their health permits.

One of them is Mr Abdul Aziz Abdullah, 64. The head of the logistics and hospitality team at Maybank has been working with the bank for 41 years and counting.

Despite reaching the retirement age a couple of years ago, he continues to lead a team of six relationship managers to manage a loan portfolio comprising hotels, foreign worker dormitories, and office buildings.

“It has never crossed my mind to retire from work when I turned 62 because I still have the passion for my job,” he said.

Likewise, Madam Noreen Wee, 63, is still going strong as the lead writer of insurance policy contracts at Prudential.

In October last year, the insurer abolished the retirement age for its employees, allowing its 1,100 workers to decide when they want to retire.

Mdm Wee, who intends to work till 70, described it as liberating not having to fear when she would be made to call it a day because of her age.

HOW RE-EMPLOYMENT CAME ABOUT  

Given the demographic changes and increasing life expectancy, Singapore’s policymakers first started talking about re-employment in 2007.

It took five years before it became law in 2012, making it mandatory for employers to offer re-employment for workers who have reached the retirement age until they turn 65. This was raised to 67 in 2017.

Meanwhile, since its legislation in 1993, Singapore’s retirement age has been raised only once, from 60 to 62, in 1999.

Back in 2010, then-Manpower Minister Gan Kim Yong said the aim of Singapore’s re-employment laws was to raise the employment rate of older workers, by giving them a “flexible and effective” way to work for as long as they are able to.

At the same time, the laws have also been designed to be pro-business.

Mr Lim Swee Say, who was appointed Manpower Minister in 2015, said in 2017 that tripartite partners — the Government, employers and the unions — had hit the wall after raising the retirement age in 1999. Employers were objecting to a further increase due to the impact on their businesses, and younger workers were also against it because they did not want their career progression to be stalled, Mr Lim said.

So, Singapore began looking to Japan and its re-employment age. “When you raise the retirement age, the expectation is ‘same job, same pay’ ... When Japan introduced the idea of re-employment age, the concept is ‘not necessarily the same job, not necessarily the same pay’,” Mr Lim told Parliament during the 2017 debate to raise the re-employment age from 65 to 67.

VARIED PRACTICES

Observers said that some employers have taken advantage of the flexibility accorded to them, to the detriment of older workers.

Mr Foo criticised such a practice as “an abuse of the whole spirit of what this policy is about”.

Employers should instead make use of the flexibility to tide over an economic downturn or stay agile in the face of disruptive innovations, said Mr Foo, who is also a vice-president of the Singapore National Employers Federation (SNEF).

Still, Mr Alexander Melchers — Mr Foo’s fellow vice president at SNEF — felt that the adjustment of some employee benefits such as annual leave days is fair.

These benefits may be tied to seniority, and some employers may adjust it to make it more equitable with other employees, he said.

“It is not about ageism but about ensuring the employability of our workers in an ageing society,” he added.

TODAY’s checks with several employers revealed varying approaches when it comes to their re-employment policies.

Prior to the re-employment laws coming into force in 2012, the public service had taken the lead by first introducing the Public Service Re-employment Guidelines a year earlier.

Back then, the Public Service had made provisions for wage adjustments in order to encourage private sector employers to re-employ their employees, PSD said.

This was aligned with the national tripartite guidelines on re-employment at that time, it added.

Over the years, it monitored market practices and gathered feedback from the public agencies and the public service unions. Subsequently, PSD decided to remove wage adjustments for all officers by July 1, 2017.

Nevertheless, PSD said that officers “may or may not do the same job when they are re-employed”, citing changes to job scope or the agencies’ needs as the public service transforms itself and builds new capabilities.

Under the PSD’s re-employment guidelines, public agencies will consult officers on re-employment at least six months before retirement in an “open discussion” between supervisors and officers. This is to help “manage expectations as well as understand officers’ concerns and preferences on job arrangements, training opportunities, wages and benefits”, PSD said.

It added: “Any work arrangement, including any changes, are mutually agreed to by the officers and their agencies taking into consideration the officers’ preferences and the availability of suitable positions.”

In cases where the jobs are no longer available, public agencies will provide support to affected officers in terms of reskilling, redeployment, and employment facilitation.

Over in the private sector, TÜV SÜD PSB said it is committed to not cut the pay of any re-employed worker. It also offers options such as part-time employment should older workers wish to reduce their workload.

At CapitaLand Group, its head of group human resources Angeline Oh said its older workers could either work in the same capacity or take on a redesigned role which comes with flexible hours or reduced scope.

CapitaLand, which is a real estate developer, currently re-employs more than 30 individuals. About five employees stayed beyond the mandated re-employment age of 67 years old, Ms Oh added.

Mencast Marine, which makes and repairs ship propellers, re-employ older workers on one-year contracts, renewable up to age 67, with the same employment terms as before. They comprise 7 per cent of the firm's employees. Nevertheless, the firm noted that the older workers’ ability to pick up new skills, such as advanced technical training, “remains a challenge”.

Deloitte’s talent leader Seah Gek Choo said the big-four accounting firm will first hold discussions with interested retirement-age employees on their role, salary, benefits and other employment terms.

Following that, the firm “will look at our business needs and the interests and skills of the individual”, she said. Eligible employees will be offered a yearly contract until they reach 67, or beyond, provided that they show “good work performance” and are certified “fit for work”.

Deloitte currently has about 25 employees on re-employment contracts. Three of them are above 67.

While Ms Seah believes most employers do see the advantage of re-employing older employees, “cost is a consideration”, she said. Government schemes such as the Special Employment Credit provide employers with support to hire older Singaporean workers, but these are “temporary”, she pointed out.

Group insurance for employees also stops at age 70, so organisations “do not have the incentive to employ older workers beyond that age”, she added.

Over at DBS Bank, workers seeking re-employment can choose between working full-time with no pay adjustments, working part time, and taking up a different role with the bank.

Since 2012, the bank has seen a “three-fold increase” in the number of workers aged 62 and above, said Ms Theresa Phua, DBS’ Singapore HR Head.

Over 95 per cent of the bank’s older workers chose to work full-time, while the others opted for flexible work arrangements.

OCBC, meanwhile, said it takes a “long-term view” on employees. It initiates conversations about retirement much earlier, compared to most companies, through a programme catered to employees aged 40 and above.

Through the programme, the older workers are given the option to participate in workshops on financial planning or health and wellness. They can also take part in reskilling or upskilling courses, which could potentially help transition them to other areas of interest, OCBC head of HR planning Jacinta Low told TODAY.

OLDER, BUT ‘ABLE AND WILLING’ 

The number of older workers in Singapore who are able and willing to continue working is set to increase, experts have said.

There is a gap of 12.2 years between the average number of years which Singaporeans are expected to lead healthy lives — known as the Health-Adjusted Life Expectancy (Hale) — and the current retirement age of 62.

Before the recent announcements, retirement age — meant to prohibit employers from dismissing workers younger than 62 due to their age — had remained unchanged for two decades. But based on the Hale benchmark, the average Singaporean can now typically work up till 74.2 of age, an increase of more than seven years from 67.1 in 1990.

For example, Mdm Pow Soh Liew, who turns 62 next month, cannot see herself stopping work at her age.

The production executive at Panasonic Appliances Refrigeration Devices Singapore said she would “not be able to take it” if she had to sit around at home for more than two days.

Mdm Pow, who has three grown-up children, said that if she were to leave her current employers, she would look for work in a supermarket to earn “pocket money” so that she can go on holidays.

Dr Danny Ker, 62, who graduated top of his class last month with a specialist diploma in advanced digital manufacturing at German Institute of Science and Technology – TUM Asia, also has no plans to stop working.

“Sixty-two is still an active working age in my case… 67 years old is also still too young to retire,” said the vice-president for quality management at TÜV SÜD PSB, a testing, inspection and certification service provider.

Adding that his father retired at the age of 85, he said that he would look to start his own business if the day comes that nobody is willing to hire him because of his age.

FIRMS AND WORKERS 'NEED TO BE OPEN WITH EACH OTHER'

Despite the negative experiences of some older workers, experts and observers believe that the re-employment and retirement ages are here to stay, and they serve as important safeguards — even though they are not foolproof.

Senior Minister of State Heng Chee How, who is the deputy secretary-general of NTUC, reiterated that without legislation, firms can unilaterally set lower retirement ages.

“For the foreseeable future, the view of the tripartite partners is that having a statutory retirement age remains a valid and significant safeguard,” said Mr Heng, stressing that there are avenues for older workers — whether they are union members or not — to lodge complaints against errant employers. 

Assoc Prof Theseira also stressed the need for retirement and re-employment laws.

And he believes that older workers need to adjust their expectations. “If wages and work responsibility are inflexible, this could lead to more unemployment among older workers,” he said.

He noted that it is unrealistic for workers in Singapore to expect wages to keep going up.

He sees re-employment as an opportunity for employers to reset the relationship between pay and work output. “It is just that we do not accept… that wages can go down,” he added.

CIMB Private Banking economist Song Seng Wun felt the key is for employers and older workers to have open communications, even if these entail uncomfortable discussions on changes to wages and job roles.

Such discussions could centre around the contributions that the older worker can continue making, with an eye perhaps on gradually scaling back his or her involvement with the firm.

Citing himself as an example, Mr Song, 59, said he would not mind taking a hefty pay cut if this comes up for discussion with his employers. “(For some people,) it’s not really a case of you needing the money, but something to do,” he said.

“It is not a right that because I ended up, at 60, with this amount of salary .. I am entitled to that forever and even more, just because I am still working,” he said.
Read more at https://www.todayonline.com/big-read/big-read-not-foolproof-re-employment-protects-older-workers-leaves-some-bitter-taste-their

So close, yet again

I bought an unlocked iPhone 7 but the seller sent different model which is not unlocked and owed the phone company unpaid installments monies.
How am I to unlock the phone with outstanding payments?
Fortunately, the seller agree do to return.
And it will be my last time to buy phone through Internet.

i was totally wrong this time and the seller changed his mind.
he decided not to return and blamed on us.
we have to refer the case to pay-pal.

and it will be another long waiting time to solve the problem.
and the phone will be useless because i could not unlock the phone although the seller had changed the battery.

it is the lesson well learned. and there will be no more.
3 strikes in a row is no fun and hard-hitting.

Here is Kong’s entire transcript:

“Church, thank you so much for your love and your very warm welcome.

To be perfectly honest I’m just overwhelmed. This is the only time you’ll hear from me for quite a while.
Having been away since 2017, it feels really surreal to be here in this hall and to be home, reunited with my family, especially my parents, my siblings, my in-laws and of course with all of you again.

I’m so grateful for the opportunity to stand before you and to say, today from the bottom of my heart that I’m very sorry for everything that has happened.

I was convicted by the court for criminal breach of trust, I have served my sentence, and today I find myself humbled.

I want all of you to know that I’m so sorry, so sorry for any pain, anxiety, disappointment, or grief that you have suffered because of me. The last few years have just been very difficult and painful for me and for everyone involved.

But these years have also been really precious, I have learnt to love and appreciate God, my family, my friends and the church more than ever before.

I’m so grateful that the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ has been abundantly sufficient and ever present so I want to thank all of you for your unconditional love and for the steadfast support shown towards those who are nearest and dearest to me, always reaching out helping and praying for them.

Thank you for your resilience, your faithfulness, your love toward God in spite of the pain, the trauma/drama and the disappointment you had to go through.

Thank you for not giving up, thank you for staying back to rebuild the church with the leadership, I am forever in your debt.

Please allow me some time to readjust back to a normal life again. My immediate priority at this moment is to reconnect with those at home, I have missed out a significant part of my son’s growing-up years with the long drawn court trial and subsequent incarceration.

My absence has also pained my parents deeply. Now, they are already in their 90’s and I wish to be a filial son, to be around to take care of them, to let them know that I want to catch up for all the time that was lost.

I am also, looking forward very much to renewing my friendship and my fellowship with you soon. I want to thank you all for your very kind understanding and your patience with me so once again I want to say thank you for making me feel so welcome today.

I hope to serve together with you in this house of God in the many many years to come. Thank you for loving me and from the bottom of my heart, I pray for you that God will bless you, and all you love in your family, God will bless all, thank you.”

* Prabu Selvam Pathmanathan, a Malaysian executed on 26 October 2018, at Changi Prison for trafficking in 227.82g of heroin. 

*His last words were "don't get involved in drugs." In Singapore, prisoners who are about to be executed are permitted to have a photograph of themselves

The founder of City Harvest Church (CHC) apologised to its members during his first appearance at the church in its Suntec premises on Saturday (Aug 24).

Pastor Kong Hee, who turned 55 a day before, was released from prison on Thursday (Aug 22) after serving about two-thirds of his three-and-a-half years' jail sentence for his role in misappropriating S$50 million of church funds.

Mr Kong, who appeared with his wife Ho Yeow Sun, also known as Sun Ho, to loud applause from the packed church, took the stage and told the congregation that he was sorry for "everything that has happened".

"This is the only time you’ll hear from me for quite a while. Having been away from 2017, it feels really surreal to be here," he said. "I’m so grateful for the opportunity to stand before you and to say today from the bottom of my heart that I am very sorry for everything that has happened.

"I was convicted by the court for criminal breach of trust. I have served my sentence and today I find myself humbled," said the pastor, who sported a shock of white hair.

"I want all of you to know that I’m so sorry, so sorry, for any pain, anxiety, disappointment or grief that you have suffered because of me," he said. "The last few years have just been very difficult and painful for me and for everyone involved."

He asked the church for "some time to readjust back into a normal life again" and said his immediate priority was to reconnect with his family.

"I have missed out on a significant part of my son’s growing-up years with the long-drawn court trial and subsequent incarceration," he said. "My absence has also pained my parents deeply. Now, they are already in their 90s and I wish to be a filial son, to be around to take care of them."

City Harvest Church founder Kong Hee released from prison

City Harvest Church founder Kong Hee leaves Changi Prison

Notes from inside death row

The Singapore Prison Service (SPS) will investigate a number of articles published by the Malaysian media that were purportedly penned by a Malaysian drug mule on death row here, after the inmate in question, Pannir Selvam A/L Pranthaman, told SPS that he did not write them.

In a statement on Friday night (Aug 23), SPS said the articles had been written in Pannir's name by someone else.

Aug 19 — I was sentenced to death on May 2, 2017. The judge said that even though my involvement was just as a courier, he has no any other choice because the DPP of Singapore did not want to issue the certificate of co-operation.

I saw my family break down with my very own eyes, they couldn’t believe what was happening. 

At that moment, the lowest point of my life, I mustered the strength to stay strong for my family and consoled them by saying, “I can still appeal, there is hope.”

It hurts to see our loved one in this sort of situation. Words can’t describe the burden which I had placed in their hearts. 

All my family ever did was love me for who I am and be there for me and all I have given them is burden and pain that they will carry with them for the rest of their lives. This realisation hurts more than the sentence could ever itself.

I was transferred from B2 TO A1 SHU (Special Housing Unit), the death row. Once I arrived here, the first thing the officer did was to shave my head bald and give me a white T-shirt and shorts to wear. 

They then led me to cell No. 26 and told me that I have to remain in this cell for two more months at least, before they can transfer me to different cell which has a TV.

I was given soap, brush, a small white towel, toothpaste and a bucket. I stumbled into the cell and my mind was just blank, I hadn’t recovered yet at that point. Everything happened so fast that I couldn’t collect my thoughts.

The cell was quite creepy and I felt unsettled, to say the very least. It wasn’t even five minutes yet but I already felt alone. I guess that is the point of this place. 

It’s a very a dark and gloomy place and you can almost see all the sadness, disappointment and loneliness the place bears. It feels like it could even devour you alive.

For someone who’s not on this side of the bar, like the officers or counsellors, they probably don’t really understand how we death row inmates feel; some of them think they do understand or that they know but I beg to differ. 

In here you are only for yourself and only God is your solace if you are a religious person. If you’re not a believer, it’s going to take an immense amount of mental strength and fortitude to find the light of hope in this darkness.

The next day, I was informed that the state will provide a lawyer to do my appeal if I can’t afford one, and if the appeal doesn’t go in my favour, then I can send a petition of clemency and if that too doesn’t go well, then I would be hanged, an estimate of 14-15 months. 

Great! Could any news make me feel "better" than this one? I don’t think so. It makes me feel so much "better" until I can’t sleep at night. 

To think what lies ahead for us (death row inmates) is not something encouraging to do, for you will be torn apart in the war between hope and reality.

For the first two weeks, I was locked down in cell No. 26 with no access to the one-hour yard time. This meant that I stayed inside the cell 24/7, for two weeks, with the lights turned on the whole time 24/7. 

It was very hot and I couldn’t sleep, if you use the floor mat given, you would feel hotter, so I just slept on the floor with the lights on. 

Most of the time I slept not because I wanted to, but because my eyes were too tired to be open any longer. I would wake every one or two hours after I had fallen asleep.

I don’t know why they would give this form of psychological torture to someone who is already sentenced to death, who is already suffering mentally and emotionally. 

I don’t know what joy they take in watching their fellow human being been treated in such a way. Reminds me of the stories I’ve read of the Nazi concentration camps, although the prisoners there would have suffered far, far worse than I have. 

After one week, I got access to newspapers, but still no yard time. Only after two weeks was I allowed to go to the yard. 

I was allowed to keep books which were taken from the yard library. The food is better than before and there are slices of bread available every evening that you can take as much as you can eat. 

The food menu is mostly chicken, egg, sardine, some vegetables, fish and sometimes anchovies. The menu rotates every day. 

The cell is consisted of a toilet and a big iron bar door with four iron rods in between for the air to come in. The cell is just 6 or 7 normal footsteps in length and in width. 

Each cell has a CCTV that runs 24/7 at the top corner of the ceiling where the toilet is. It is not something new, I was living my life for the past five years like this. Doesn’t matter if you’re taking bath or a dump, there were always people watching you. 

Even in B2, as a remand, you would have to strip and get naked five days a week whenever we entered the yard. There will be two officers at the yard’s gate entrance to see your bare body and genitalia twice — in and out — and you will feel humiliated. 

Before they take your life itself, they will try to take everything else they can from you –- your freedom, dignity, rights, dreams, hope, value, and respect. Everything, like a vacuum cleaner, is sucked away before your life is ended. That why I mentioned earlier that the others who are not in our shoes, they don’t know what it is like. 

There are more things that I could describe here but this is a little summary of pretty much most of it.

There isn’t a fan inside the cell, each cell has a fan fixed outside of it. The wall colours are very dull, pale pastel yellow as though it has been purposely chosen so that your brain would become dull too as you are going to see it every day. Oh, and the floors are grey.

I (and all prisoners) was only provided with one floormat and two blankets which look like they’ve been used in World War 2, and no pillows. 

So one blanket becomes a makeshift pillow. One of the most advanced and safest cities in the world, and they can’t even provide us inmates a pillow, most mornings you wake up with a pain in your neck and every day the officers see us as a pain in their ass.

After two weeks on death row I was told that the coming Friday someone was going to be hanged. A guy who was also convicted on a drug case –- a Singaporean — and that Thursday evening, he came to my cell to say his last goodbye. 

I didn’t know what to say to him. It was hard to imagine this healthy young man was going to be hanged the next day. 

Can you imagine seeing someone today, and knowing that tomorrow his/her life will be taken away? This person would cease to exist anymore. I personally didn’t know him but I still can’t imagine how hard it must be for him to go through all this.

I will pray for him, at the very least that’s what I can only do, and pray for his family too. After two months I was transferred to cell 6 which had a TV inside the cell, apart from that, the cell was the same as the previous one.

Fast forward to April 2019, it’s been two years now for me on the death row. My appeal was dismissed on February 9, 2018 as written in my previous article and about all the time and things that I have learned here in death row, about life, passion, freedom and the value of a human life.

I forgot to mention the last time that the prison also provides inmates on death row a canteen list to order some food. It goes by levels. 

Inmates who haven’t done with their appeal get to write canteen for S$12 (RM36) a month, for those who appeal had been dismissed, they get S$40 a month and at last for those who have already submitted their petition of clemency gets S$60 a month.

Before my appeal, I requested to be baptised in prison but I was informed that only those whose appeal have been dismissed would be allowed to be baptised. 

So I would have to wait till the outcome of my appeal. I pray to God, “Lord you know when is the right time for everything, as such I leave this matter to you.” 

As my father is a church pastor, he used to say, “Come learn the course and take the baptism.” He was baptising other church members every now and then but I used to answer, “I will learn the course and take the baptism when I am ready.” This is because I didn’t want to live a double life and take baptism for the sake of just being a Christian.

Miraculously, the only upside to my current predicament is that my relationship with my family and God is being healed and it has been getting stronger past these five years. 

Yes, there were times when I was down, but I got back up, only to fail and stand back up again but all that now, I’ve realised, is a process which I have to go through, to be a better person, to grow in faith and to seek God’s will and purpose in my life.

After my appeal had been dismissed, I did fasting for 40 days in the name of God and prayed. There’s a lot of struggle in that too, as you keep hoping something good will happen — anything that may help to save my life but what I keep getting was disappointments and setbacks.

Back in my mind, I knew time was flying fast, and once I send the petition of clemency, my days are numbered without even me knowing when it will end. 

"In my vision of the dark night, I have dreamed of joy departed but a warning dream of life and light, hathleft me broken hearted." — Edgar Allan Poe.

The above line rings true when you really understand what goes on here. For some inmates (perhaps all), every waking hour reminds us of nothing but pain and regret, and that all these things that we are going through are real and I can’t just write on only what is good and positive. 

How can I be positive all the time, staying in death row and not even being given a chance for redemption?

Up until April 2019, I have seen 22 people hanged, and in many ways it took a toll on the rest of us inmates.  People would change, as the executions would carry on, until it’s their turn. 

They would lose sleep, some heavily rely on medication, some become resentful, reserved and taciturn, some even forget how to laugh, some would lose their minds under pressure. 

They just snap like that as they can’t take it any longer. They start to talk to the wall, hear voices, have nightmares. Some even forget to clean themselves for weeks, lose their appetites (maybe their will to even eat), their social and communication skills fade away and some even refuse to see their own family that came to visit.

Amidst all of this, I have to draw a line, find a balance between everything, between hope and reality, in spirituality, in moral values, in good and the bad, and in almost in everything. 

I have to know where I am standing. If I have failed to find that balance, then whatever I’ve been through or learned these past years would amount to nothing.

In the midst of all these struggles and troubles, I must not lose myself but strive ever harder, to find myself.

Count On Me Singapore - original tv version 1986

Our chosen five key pillars of captive corporate governance are as follows. 

• Independence
• Accountability
• Fairness
• Responsibility
• Transparency

While each of these five holds weight similar to the others in importance, we believe independence should be the key attribute captive insurers focus on.

Independence
While it is true that most captive domicile regulations require captive insurers and risk retention groups to have an independent director on the board, the question arises as to what constitutes "true" independence. First, many state statutes call for the independent director to have residency within the state. While there are many competent independent directors residing in most captive domiciles, the legislative restriction seems too limiting for several reasons.

One, if there is a large number of captives within the state and a limited number of available directors, the result is an independent director serving on multiple boards. Besides the time commitment to fulfill this role in a meaningful way, there is also a potential for conflicts of interest when directors have access to internal information from multiple captives. Two, in many instances the "independent" director may also serve as the general counsel for the captive or as part of the captive management team. While it is true neither individual is directly related to the entities responsible for forming the captive, can a director truly be construed as "independent" when he or she serves multiple roles?

The NACD says an independent director should meet the relevant standards as defined by a self-regulatory organization (SRO). The following composite definition is drawn from various US and non-US SROs. Most SROs provide additional guidance on what they believe comprises "independence."

Independent Director means a director who has no direct or indirect material relationship with the company other than membership on the Board. 

We think the independent director helps ensure that management and the board follow the other four pillars of corporate governance. It is this individual who most likely will ask the truly tough questions.

Accountability

Accountability means having ownership of the strategies and tactics required to attain organizational goals. While accountability can often take on a negative context (i.e., who is to blame if something goes wrong), real accountability should assign both the reward and the risk associated with the attainment of the captive's goals.

For captive insurers, especially those that outsource a significant number of operational functions, a clear delineation of accountability is important. This accountability should be agreed to up front as part of any contract negotiations. Who is ultimately responsible for the decision? The old saying that "success has many fathers, but failure is an orphan" certainly holds true in the context of accountability. Therefore, good corporate governance requires this accountability to be both understood and acknowledged.

Fairness

Fairness means treating all stakeholders reasonably and equitably. For captive insurers, the question of fairness comes into question in many areas including claims handling, pricing, and underwriting. It may even include who is eligible to serve on the board of directors.

Fairness also entails an effective option for addressing perceived or real violations of fairness. For many captive insurers, this redress may include arbitration of any issues that arise between the captive and one of its policyholders. One of the most egregious examples of a breach of fairness, in our minds, is where policyholders are forced to undergo arbitration but the party hearing the appeal is the captive's board of directors. The captive's directors are not disinterested parties in this case and may also be wearing multiple hats representing not only the captive but their own organization as well.

While third-party arbitration certainly may be more expensive, it also is a more equitable alternative than arbitration by the board of directors.

Responsibility

As noted above, accountability entails having ownership for the strategy and tactics of the captive insurer whether as a manager or board member. Responsibility goes hand in hand with accountability. Since both managers and board members are vested with the authority (accountability) for acting on behalf of the captive insurer, they should therefore accept full responsibility for exercising those powers. In the captive, the expression of ideas and implementation of those ideas need to be tempered by preparation so that the actions taken are informed.

Responsibility requires education and awareness of the proposed actions, as well as understanding the consequences of those actions. A "responsible" director will carefully weigh the impact of the proposed actions on all of the various constituents of the captive insurer. This may involve having to make difficult decisions concerning fairness and transparency.

Transparency

This concept, which is now a major part of the corporate vernacular, is a critical component of the five pillars of captive corporate governance. Transparency, such as in the GE article referenced earlier, means management has informed the board there was still a business jet available to the CEO for corporate travel. Transparency in its simplest terms is "having nothing to hide." 

However, transparency in a captive insurer is a more delicate balance. Both management and the board need to recognize that while transparency would suggest full disclosure, there are matters—such as in the handling of claims—where this may not serve the captive well. While transparency is to be encouraged, it also must be weighed in the context of both accountability and fairness. Boards and management teams that have a firm understanding of the principles of good governance will be better prepared to make informed choices concerning how much transparency is necessary and/or required.

like water

The past few weeks has seen a drastic escalation in violence on the streets of Hong Kong. On Tuesday night, a police officer aimed a shotgun at protesters who had gathered outside a police station, while a car launched fireworks into the crowd.

Days earlier, the police fired rubber bullets and tear gas at protesters trying to reach the Chinese government’s office.

And the week before, following a protest of 430,000 people, vigilante thugs, dressed in white and carrying bamboo sticks, beat up democracy protesters at a train station.

This long summer of protests began in response to a proposed extradition bill just days after the 30th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square incident. But now, over eight weeks on, the protesters continue to take to the streets with a broader set of demands – and the confrontations with police are threatening to spiral out of control.

With reports of a build-up of Chinese forces on the Hong Kong border, and no end in sight to the demonstrations, many are now asking - how will this end?

LESSONS FROM THE UMBRELLA MOVEMENT

Protest is a familiar tactic in Hong Kong, but this movement has adopted a series of new approaches from the lessons of other protests over the last 30 years – in particular the failures of the 2014 Umbrella Movement.

In doing so, they are building something that is - at least until now - showing resilience to Beijing's responses.

The current protest movement isn’t a single movement. It has two dominant wings – one is passive, the other more militant. These wings accept and recognise each other’s role.

This is new. In 2014, Hong Kong democracy leaders staged a 79-day occupation to fight for universal suffrage. Called the Umbrella Movement, the occupation had two sets of leaders - older democracy leaders (known as the Occupy Trio) and younger student leaders (notably Joshua Wong and Nathan Law).

Originally, the Occupy Trio had planned a multi-year campaign to build public and political pressure for universal suffrage, but the students were more confrontational. They staged a sit-in at Civic Square on Hong Kong Island and the occupation was off and running.

During the occupation, these different views led to irreconcilable conflict, making it impossible to talk about overall strategy. When the occupation finally ended – without achieving universal suffrage – there was great acrimony between the groups that lasted for years

A NEW SET OF PRINCIPLES

Realising how counter-productive this split was, the protesters were keen not to let strategic differences get in the way this time around.

As organisers made plans for the June 9 rally against the extradition bill, several new principles emerged to define how the different groups could work together and avoid falling into the deep conflict of the past.

They included such maxims as “respect the role of the different groups”, “we all lead”, “no one is left behind” and “be water” (as in, to flow from place to place, building continuous pressure). More than the power of any individual leader, these principles came to define how the movement would function and grow.

The principles reinforced one another. The decision not to have a single leader was born from the experience of the Umbrella movement. 

Every visible leader of that movement was jailed or threatened with jail following the occupation. (Two of the Occupy Trio received 16-month jail sentences this year).

The Extradition movement learned it was too dangerous to have figurehead leaders. If everyone led, what could Beijing do? They couldn’t jail everyone.

And when it came to respecting the role of different groups, this principle allowed those who wanted to pursue a more militant strategy to do so without fear of rebuke. Everyone was encouraged to do what they thought was needed.

On June 9, two movements launched: A peaceful protest of more than 1 million people, as well as a more militant movement of young people.

The confrontational wing was battle-ready. They had re-purposed everyday items like medical masks, plastic wrap, helmets, goggles, umbrellas and towels into tools of protest. The Umbrella occupation had taught them the police would likely use excessive force – so they dressed accordingly.

Hong Kong leader Carrie Lam was unmoved by a million-person march, but did shift her position and suspend the extradition bill when faced with a street confrontation. This sent a loud message to the protesters about what it will take to win under her government - militancy was more potent than passive protest.

Protesters got the message. Every mass protest since then has seen these two protest wings in operation. As an elected member of Hong Kong’s government explained to me, they are “codependent” - they need each other to exist.

The two wings initially unsettled Beijing. Every time there was militancy – most dramatically when the Legislative Council Building was vandalised on July 1 – Beijing thought it could be used to their advantage.

The government aired the violence on television, hoping it would turn public opinion against the protesters and split the movement. Yet, older democracy leaders did not criticise the students, instead reiterating that “everyone in the movement has their place.”

Popular opinion is still with the protesters, and the protests are still enormous.

FROM PROTEST TO PROTEST

Another form of protest also emerged to supplement the two-wing approach – the movement turned “to water”.

The protests now have a flow they didn’t have during the Umbrella occupation. Protesters don’t simply show up for weekly mass marches and then go home; they have begun organising smaller protests in their districts on a daily basis.

“Lennon walls” featuring thousands of protest messages have emerged, for instance, in every one of Hong Kong’s districts. Random Airdrop notifications share details about impromptu protests, such as last week’s sit-in at the airport. With everyone leading and the action constantly flowing from one place to the next, this protest is hard to stop.

The Umbrella movement, in contrast, was physically fixed in three locations and maintained with tents and nightly sleep-outs. The rigidity of the occupation was exhausting and took a toll on the participants.

A government can wait out an occupation, but how do you capture something that is constantly moving?

WHERE WILL IT END?

Its hard to predict where the current protest movement goes next. At the moment, there are no negotiations between the government and protest leaders. 

The protest movement has five key demands that continue to sit on the table, ranging from withdrawing the extradition bill completely to an independent investigation into police brutality to Lam’s resignation.

But it is unclear whether the protests would end even if the demands are agreed to. All the while, Beijing makes infrequent statements in support of Lam, but it also has thousands of troops already stationed in Hong Kong – and a build-up of more across the border.

What is certain is that a long-standing democracy movement has powerfully connected to the next generation. Young students are terrified about their future and feel they have to do everything they can to fight for their rights.

But the stakes are extremely high. Is it possible for water to move so quickly that it escapes the barrel of the gun?