23-8-2023 (SINGAPORE) On Wednesday, August 23, four individuals embroiled in a S$1 billion (US$736 million) money laundering investigation found themselves remanded for an additional eight days. The decision came as prosecutors expressed concerns over possible collusion and evidence contamination if the accused were released.
The prosecution’s argument revolved around indications that the three men and one woman had knowledge of one another and potentially operated within a wider network or syndicate. Their call for extended remand was backed by the presence of “voluminous” evidence and ongoing investigations, with law enforcement agencies working tirelessly around the clock.
The four accused, subjected to the extended remand, are identified as follows: Chen Qingyuan, a 33-year-old Cambodian national; Su Wenqiang, a 31-year-old Cambodian national; Lin Baoying, a 43-year-old Chinese national, and the sole woman among the accused; and Su Baolin, a 41-year-old Cambodian national.
Chen Qingyuan was represented by Mr. Mark Tan from Focus Law Asia, who disclosed that Chen’s wife had approached him for legal representation.
Su Wenqiang’s legal counsel, Mr. Manoj Prakash Nandwani from Gabriel Law Corporation, likewise mentioned that Su Wenqiang’s wife had sought his services to act on Su Wenqiang’s behalf.
Lin Baoying was represented by lawyers Mr. Loo Choon Chiaw and Mr. Chia Foon Yeow from Loo & Partners, following an approach from her sister. Su Baolin’s defense was led by Mr. Sunil Sudheesan and his legal team from Quahe Woo & Palmer.
Regarding Chen Qingyuan, the prosecution emphasized that investigations were still in their early stages. The police had already confiscated three luxury vehicles and one property owned by Chen, with an estimated combined value of approximately S$10 million. Deputy Public Prosecutor Edwin Soh revealed that the police were actively tracing the source of funds linked to these assets and awaiting crucial bank documents from at least six financial institutions, a process integral to their ongoing inquiry.
Chen’s lawyer, Mr. Tan, requested access to his client, emphasizing that he had not yet met him and highlighting Chen’s inability to recognize him on-screen. In response, the prosecution expressed their willingness to grant defense counsel access to the accused a day prior to the next hearing.
Chen also requested permission to make a phone call to his family members, but the prosecution objected. They cited concerns over Chen’s potential ties to others implicated in the money-laundering syndicate, which could lead to collusion and contamination of evidence if he were allowed to make such a call.
Turning to Su Wenqiang, the prosecutor disclosed that the Commercial Affairs Department of the Singapore Police Force had seized two luxury cars valued at approximately S$600,000, registered under his spouse’s name. The CAD was actively working to ascertain the source of funds for these vehicles and awaiting statements from at least two financial institutions under Su Wenqiang’s spouse’s name. Additionally, five mobile phones and two laptops were confiscated from Su Wenqiang and were currently under review.
During his statement via a Mandarin interpreter, Su Wenqiang claimed to possess only three phones and denied having a laptop.
For Lin Baoying, the prosecution revealed that the CAD had seized five properties and two cars registered in her name, with a total estimated value of S$72 million. The CAD required additional time to determine the funding sources for these properties, awaiting bank documents from at least five financial institutions.
The prosecutor stressed the likelihood of “voluminous further evidence to be obtained in this case.”
In the case of Su Baolin, Deputy Public Prosecutor Ng Jean Ting highlighted the seizure of assets, including property and cars, belonging to both Su Baolin and his wife, collectively valued “in excess of S$130 million.” The CAD was awaiting documents from at least nine financial institutions, with ten devices undergoing forensic examination.
Ms. Ng acknowledged Su Baolin’s congenital heart condition, noting that he had been hospitalized for a few days, and a statement had only been taken from him on August 18. She added that investigations had provided additional evidence suggesting connections among the accused individuals.
Given the scale of the offenses under investigation, Ms. Ng argued that remand was necessary to prevent the risk of collusion and contamination of evidence. She requested that Su Baolin be remanded at Changi Medical Centre (CMC) due to his heart condition.
In a bid for his client’s release on bail, Mr. Sudheesan, Su Baolin’s lawyer, emphasized the potential health risks, including tachycardia or an increased heart rate. He contended that the absence of other accused individuals on bail would eliminate the risk of collusion.
However, the prosecution strongly objected, citing information suggesting that the accused were operating within a network. They also noted that the seized properties included those registered in Su Baolin’s wife’s name.
Mr. Sudheesan further requested access to his client, but Ms. Ng explained that the police were diligently working to retrieve and review evidence and that multiple elements were in motion. She assured that statements from Su and the other accused individuals were being recorded as quickly as possible and mentioned the need to accommodate Su Baolin’s health condition.
Ultimately, the judge upheld the prosecution’s objections. Before leaving, Mr. Sudheesan informed his client that he had advised his family not to attend court but assured Su Baolin that his family remained deeply concerned about his situation.
The four accused individuals are scheduled to return to court next week for further proceedings. Meanwhile, the remaining ten individuals charged in connection with this case are slated to appear in court from their respective places of remand later on Wednesday.
