Public Prosecutor v Cao Sifen

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Terence Tay
• Judgment Date: 30 May 2018
• Neutral Citation: [2018] SGDC 152
• Court: District Court (Singapore)
• Docket Number: DAC-936581-2016 and others; MA-9048-2018-01
• Published date: 13 November 2018
• Year: 2018
• Hearing Date: 09 February 2018,15 November 2017,03 January 2018,14 November 2017
• Plaintiff Counsel: ICA Assistant Superintendents Wong Weng Hong Toby & Syed Mubarak Immigration & Checkpoints Authority
• Defendant Counsel: Mr Wee Hong Shern Ong &Co. LLC & Mr Chai Ming Kheong Joseph JC Law Asia LLC
• Citation: [2018] SGDC 152

District Judge Terence Tay: INTRODUCTION

The accused claimed trial to 3 charges under section 57(1)(k) of the Immigration Act (Cap 133, Rev Ed 2008) (the “Act”) for: obtaining a Visit Pass for herself on 24 June 2013 by making a false statement in the “Annex to Application for a Visit Pass” (the “Annex”)¹ that her residential address was Block 147 Yishun Street 11, #06-75, Singapore 760147 (the “Address”) and that she had been residing at the Address with her sponsor for 4 years and 2 months (the “First Charge”); attempting to obtain an Entry Permit for herself on 24 April 2015 by making a false statement in the “Application for Permanent Residence in Singapore” form (the “PR Form”)² that her residential address was the Address and that she had been residing at the Address with her sponsor for 5 years and 1 month (the “Second Charge”); and obtaining a Visit Pass for herself on 11 April 2016 by making a false statement in the “Long-term Visit Pass Application Form For Spouses of Singapore Citizens” (the “LTVP Form (2016)”)³ that her residential address was the Address and that she had been residing at the Address with her sponsor for 5 years and 10 months (the “Third Charge”).

The punishment prescribed in section 57(1)(vi) of the Act for each of the charges was a fine not exceeding $4,000 or imprisonment not exceeding 12 months or both.

The offences in the First Charge and the Third Charge took place at the Visitor Services Centre (the “VSC”) of the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (the “ICA”), ICA Building, 10 Kallang Road, Singapore. The offence in the Second Charge took place at the Permanent Resident Services Centre (the “PRSC”) of the ICA.

The sponsor in each of the charges was Mr Ng Kwan Seng (the “Sponsor”).

The prosecution and the defence agreed to the following statement of agreed facts (the “SOAF”)⁴

The Accused is Cao Sifen (FIN: …). She is a People’s Republic of China (PRC) national, 33 years of age. On 11 March 2010, the Accused solemnized her marriage to a Singaporean named Ng Kwan Seng … (henceforth known as “Ng”) at 24 Raffles Place #02-19 Singapore 048621. After the marriage solemnization, Ng and the Accused received a marriage certificate from the marriage solemniser bearing the serial number 849293.

2 On 24th of June 2013, the Accused made an application for a Long Term Visit Pass using the Application for a Visit Pass (Long Term)(Form 14) under the sponsorship of Ng. The purpose of the application was to allow the Accused to reside on a long term basis in Singapore. The application was made at the Visitor Services Center (“VSC”) of Immigration & Checkpoints Authority (“ICA”). The application was subsequently approved with a validity period from 28th June 2013 till 28th June 2016. 3 On 11th April 2016, the Accused made an application for a Long Term Visit Pass using the Application for a Visit Pass (Long Term)(Form 14) under the sponsorship of Ng. The purpose of the application was to allow the Accused to reside on a long term basis in Singapore. The application was made at the Visitor Services Center (VSC) of ICA. The application was subsequently approved with a validity period from 11th April 2016 till 11th April 2021. 4 On 24th April 2015, the Accused made an application for Permanent residence in Singapore using the Application for Permanent Residence in Singapore (Form 4) under the sponsorship of Ng. The purpose of the application was to allow the Accused to reside on a long term basis in Singapore. The application was made at the Permanent Residents Services Centre (PRSC) of ICA. The application was subsequently rejected. 5 On 29th September 2016, the Accused and Ng were referred to Investigation Branch of ICA for investigations into offences under Sec 57(1)(k) of The Immigration Act Cap 133. The investigations against the Accused were into the offences of having made false statements to obtain Visit Passes on her ‘Application for Permanent Residence in Singapore (Form 4)’, ‘Annex to Application for a Visit Pass (Form 14)’ and on her ‘Long Term Visit Pass Application Form for spouses of Singapore citizens (Form 14B). 6 Subsequently, both Ng and Accused were each charged for 3 counts under Sec 57(1)(k) of the Immigration Act Cap 133. On 1st October 2016, Ng was convicted of one count under Sec 57(1)(k) of IA with 2 other counts taken into consideration. He was sentenced to 8 weeks imprisonment for making false statements as Accused’s sponsor in Accused’s ‘Long Term Visit Pass Application Form for spouses of Singapore Citizens (Form 14B)’. 7 The following exhibits are undisputed by the Defence and the Prosecution and will be tendered in Court for the purposes of the trial. a) Copy of marriage certificate belonging for the marriage solemnized between Cao Sifen and Ng Kwan Seng bearing serial number 849293 b) Original Form 14 ‘Application for Visit Pass (Long Term)’ dated 24th June 2013. c) Original Form 14B ‘Long Term Visit Pass Application Form for Spouses of Singapore Citizens dated 11th April 2016. d) Original Form 4 ‘Application for Permanent Residence in Singapore’ dated 24th April 2015.

The Annex and the related application form dated 24 June 2013 for a Visit Pass (Long Term) (“LTVP”), collectively, were item “b” referred to in paragraph 7 of the SOAF (the “LTVP Form (2013)”).

The PR Form and the LTVP Form (2016) were items “d” and “c”, respectively, referred to in paragraph 7 of the SOAF.

At the end of the trial, I found the accused guilty of all 3 charges and convicted her accordingly.

I imposed a sentence of 9 weeks’ imprisonment for each of the charges and ordered the sentences for the First Charge and the Second Charge to run consecutively. Therefore, the global sentence was 18 weeks’ imprisonment.

THE PROSECUTION’S CASE

The prosecution called a total of 7 witnesses, namely:

PW1:	The Sponsor, who resided at the Address.
PW2:	Mdm Hee Chuey Leng (“Mdm Hee”), the Sponsor’s mother, who resided with the Sponsor at the Address.
PW3:	Ms Zhang Xuerong (“Ms Zhang”), an employee of Chuang Hao Business Services Pte Ltd (“Chuang Hao”), whose job scope was to assist customers to complete ICA application forms for visa, LTVP, permanent residence (“PR”) and citizenship.
PW4:	Ms Mak Huiting (the “PR Officer”), ICA Assistant Superintendent from the PRSC who processed PR applications.
PW5:	Mr Patrick Ng Kian Wee (the “LTVP Officer”), ICA Assistant Superintendent from the VSC who was in charge of processing long-term visitor pass applications and who also oversaw the day-to-day operations of the VSC.
PW6:	Mr Leon Tan Zhaofeng (the “Intelligence Officer”), ICA Assistant Superintendent from the ICA intelligence operations branch.
PW7:	Mr See Kean Chong (the “IO”), ICA Checkpoint Inspector (2) who was the investigation officer.

The marriage between the Sponsor and the accused

Sometime in 2010, the Sponsor told his friend, Mr Loh Wei Lun (“Mr Loh”), that he wanted to earn extra cash. As such, Mr Loh arranged for a meeting between the Sponsor and one Ah Liang (the “First Meeting”).⁵

At the First Meeting, Ah Liang told the Sponsor that there were many people from China who wanted passes to stay in Singapore. Ah Liang proposed a scheme for the Sponsor to help someone extend her stay in Singapore and to apply for Visit Passes for her to stay in Singapore in return for a lump sum of $3,000 and a monthly payment of $500 over a period of 2 years (the “Scheme”). The Sponsor agreed to participate in the Scheme even though Ah Liang had not told him whom he was supposed to help.⁶

About 1 or 2 months prior to the marriage solemnization between the Sponsor and the accused, the Sponsor met Ah Liang for the second time (the “Second Meeting”). At the Second Meeting, the Sponsor was told that Ah Liang had found someone to marry the Sponsor and the Sponsor registered for the marriage based on Ah Liang’s instructions:⁷

A	The next time I met Ah Liang was around 1 or 2 months before the marriage date. Because he met up with me and told me that he already found someone to marry with me and he asked me to log in my SingPass to arrange the registration of marriage.
Q	And what else was discussed in this second meeting with Ah Liang?
A	He roughly tell me the procedures of the registration of marriage, like, where to meet, then what time we have to be there after we arrange the appointment already. Then he also roughly tell me that I---we have to solemnise after that and then after that, after solemnisation and collection of the marriage cert, then we have to go down to ICA building to extend her stay.

On 11 March 2010, the Sponsor met the accused for the first time when the Sponsor went with Mr Loh to meet Ah Liang and the accused at the Registry of Marriages at Fort Canning Park (the “Third Meeting”). They collected the marriage certificate and proceeded to a café at Funan the IT Mall to solemnize the marriage before a solemnizer and the witnesses.⁸

The Sponsor did not invite other friends or family members to the marriage solemnization because he did not want them to know about the marriage.⁹ Accordingly, as far as Mdm Hee was concerned, the accused was never married.¹⁰

The relationship between the Sponsor and the accused

The Sponsor testified that he and the accused “were not actual husband and wife” and that the accused was only his “wife on paper”:¹¹

Q	And can you just elaborate further what do you mean by “just got together by signing on marriage cert”? What---is there any arrangement to it?
A	Yes. Actually, we are arranged by an agent named Ah Liang. So he is the one that arrange us to meet up and he said that I’m supposed to help this lady, Cao Sifen, to stay in Singapore by getting into a marriage with her.
…

...