Singapore — Former domestic worker Parti Liyani had her application for compensation of S$10,000 against the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) dismissed by the High Court on Monday (Jun 21).

Ms Parti was initially found guilty in March 2019 of stealing more than S$30,000 worth of valuables from former Changi Airport Group chairman Liew Mun Leong and his family when she was working for them.

High Court judge Justice Chan Seng Onn overturned the conviction and acquitted her of all charges in September last year upon her appeal.

She sought compensation for losses after her conviction for theft was overturned.

Last October, Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon granted Ms Parti leave or permission, for an investigation to be conducted into her complaint of misconduct against two prosecutors in her trial.

She sought disciplinary proceedings against legal service officers.

The two deputy public prosecutors who dealt with Ms Parti’s trial are Mr Tan Wee Hao, and Ms Tan Yanying.

During the case proceedings, when Justice Chan Seng Onn submitted his judgment on her acquittal, he outlined several issues with the conviction findings and how the case was handled.

Ms Parti was accused of stealing a DVD player, which she said had been thrown away by the family because it did not work.

Prosecutors later admitted they knew the machine could not play DVDs, but did not disclose this during the trial when it was produced as evidence and shown to have worked in another way.

This earned criticism from Justice Chan that they used a “sleight-of-hand technique… [that] was particularly prejudicial to the accused”.

He added that the condition of the DVD player was neither disclosed to the trial judge nor to Ms Parti. He called the DVD player incident “particularly prejudicial to Ms Parti” as she was not given a chance to test the player until the trial itself.

In addition, Justice Chan also questioned the credibility of Mr Karl Liew as a witness.

Justice Chan also questioned the actions taken by police – who did not visit or view the scene of the offences until about five weeks after the initial police report was made.

The police also failed to offer her an interpreter who spoke Indonesian, and instead offered one who spoke Malay, a different language which Ms Parti was not used to speaking.

In court on Monday (Jun 21), Justice Chan said that she had not succeeded in proving, on a balance of probabilities, that the prosecution against her was “frivolous or vexatious”, a CNA article reported.

See also  Ex-presidential candidate: PM Lee does not realise the problems his 'right policies' has created for Singapore

Justice Chan added that the assertions were mainly related to Ms Parti’s “dissatisfaction with how the deputy public prosecutors conducted the proceedings”.

He noted that this court was “not the correct forum to air grievances about the deputy public prosecutors’ conduct. Mere dissatisfaction with different aspects of how the prosecutors had conducted the proceedings, even if they are numerous, will not, without more, render the prosecution ‘frivolous or vexatious'”.

“After considering the cumulative effect of all of Parti’s assertions, the court found that (Ms) Parti had not proven on a balance of probability that her prosecution was frivolous or vexatious,” Justice Chan said.