Court upholds jail term for SAF captain who ordered NSF Liu Kai to overtake Bionix in fatal accident

SINGAPORE — A High Court judge has dismissed appeals by both the prosecution and the defence against the jail sentence of a Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) captain, whose rash act caused a full-time national serviceman (NSF) to be crushed to death by an armoured vehicle.

Justice See Kee Oon told a packed courtroom on Tuesday (May 9) that having considered arguments from both parties carefully, he saw “no cogent reasons to interfere” with the original sentence imposed by a district judge on Ong Lin Jie, 32.

“The sentence of five months’ imprisonment was neither manifestly excessive nor inadequate,” Justice See said. “Accordingly, both the appellant’s and prosecution’s appeals are dismissed.”

Justice See on Tuesday also dismissed the defence’s appeal against Ong’s conviction, noting that the rash act in question was a substantial cause of the fatal accident and as such, he found that the appeal against the conviction had “no merit”.

In April this year, the defence appealed against both Ong’s conviction and sentence, and sought to have the jail term reduced to three months, pointing the finger of blame at an alleged failure in communications.

At the same time, the prosecution, led by Deputy Public Prosecutor Hay Hung Chun, asked for Ong to be jailed for nine months, because it found the five-month jail sentence inadequate.

The prosecution argued that Ong’s order for Liu Kai to overtake a Bionix armoured vehicle was a rash act that placed the Land Rover both men were in in dangerous proximity to the armoured vehicle. This caused the collision and Liu’s death, it said.

ABOUT THE CASE
On Feb 24 last year, Ong was sentenced to five months’ jail by a district court, after he was convicted in November 2021 for a rash act that led to Liu’s death.

Liu was killed in November 2018 after a Bionix armoured vehicle mounted the Land Rover he was driving during a military exercise, meant to train a company’s operational capabilities, near Sungei Gedong Camp.

Ong had ordered Liu to overtake the Bionix without first communicating with the driver of the armoured vehicle.

At the time, Ong was a platoon trainer, tasked to ensure adherence to safety procedures.

He was also the vehicle commander of the Land Rover that had been assigned to him, which helped facilitate his movement as a platoon trainer.

APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION NO MERIT
On Tuesday, Justice See said that the appeals raised some key issues for consideration such as whether there was factual and legal causation.

In essence, factual causation relates to whether one party did cause harm to the other, while legal causation relates to whether one party should be held liable for harm to the other party.

He also said that it brought into question whether Ong’s conduct was rash or not, and whether his sentence was inadequate or excessive.

Justice See said that Ong had, among other things, raised a fresh argument about an “inherent drift, together with excessive left steer”, which raised doubts as to the Bionix’s fitness for use.

However, the judge said that this is not supported by an inspection report of the armoured vehicle, which made it clear that the mere fact that vehicle may have drifted marginally more than its specifications did not make the vehicle unfit for use.

“In any event, the drift issue had no appreciable impact on the appellant’s liability,” Justice See said.

Ong’s lawyers also blamed a communication lapse, in part due to faulty equipment, as a contributing factor for the accident.

Justice See said that such a scenario would be “entirely at odds” with the testimony of the Bionix’s crew members, who testified that they could hear the communications during the extrication drill and right before the collision.

A third contributory factor that the defence had relied on for the appeal was what Ong had characterised as the Bionix driver “reversing blind”, which was a breach of the Singapore Armed Forces’ Training Safety Regulations.

Justice See said that there was a sergeant among the crew that acted as the rear guide while the driver began to reverse the armoured vehicle.

The judge noted that the driver’s actions were not in breach of the training safety regulations and were correctly executed. Several witnesses attested to that.

As to whether Ong had committed a rash act, Justice See found that the district judge presiding over Ong’s case had not erred in law in concluding that Ong was rash in the circumstances.

And because the rash act in question was a substantial cause of the fatal accident, Justice See said he was “of the view… that the appeal against conviction has no merit”.

“In the overall analysis, I see no cogent reasons to interfere with the sentence imposed by the district judge.”

Justice See granted an application from Ong’s lawyer, Mr Thrumurgan Ramapiram of Trident Law, for his client to begin serving his sentence on May 23.

Ong, who is still serving with the Singapore Armed Forces, is out on a S$15,000 bail.

In response to TODAY’s queries, the Ministry of Defence said that Ong had been suspended from service pending the outcome of the court proceedings.

“As Captain Ong has now been convicted… for causing death by a rash act, the Singapore Armed Forces will initiate further actions against him, which may include discharging him from service.”