What Iswaran's sentence means for those in positions of authority

On the 7th day of last month, former Minister for Transport and Member of Parliament for West Coast GRC, Singapore, Mr S.Iswaran, began serving a twelve month sentence in prison. This is old news, but I was on my annually enforced blogging break. 

Still, I'm going to talk about it today, for a few reasons that I'm about to outline below.

Iswaran as an MP

When I moved to West Coast back in 2014, Iswaran was my MP. That meant that he was in charge of the district. Any issues that I encountered in the neighborhood, with amenities, public areas and services, were supposed to be resolved by him. Barring a chance meeting at a coffeeshop, I did not see him at all in my ten years in West Coast. This was because I encountered no issues at all in these ten years; at least, none I couldn't handle on my own.

Some people will complain that they don't see their MP often. I don't understand that attitude. MPs should be seen and not heard; in fact, they should preferably not be seen either. MPs are public servants. They're not my friends. I don't even want to see my friends every day or even every week, so why would I want to see my MP at all? My MP's job is to fix any issues that I see him about. Iswaran went one better - he made sure I never needed to see him. I never needed to be forcibly reminded of his existence. He did his thing and stayed the hell out of my way.

Give the man his due; by my standards, he did an excellent job.

Deskbound.

People who want to see their MP often are probably the same kind of employers who simply have to see their employees bound strictly to their desks during working hours, doing God-knows-what, but preferably looking busy. How I feel about such nonsense has been well-documented; so suffice to say, this isn't my thing at all.

The other possible explanation could be that these people actually think of their MPs as friends or family, and imagine that their MPS feel the same way. I've got such terrible news for you kids, you're voters and barring becoming family via marriage or adoption, that's all you will ever be.

Also, that "friends" thing is what landed Iswaran in hot water in the first place. I'd be very careful about that.

Relating this case to my professional experience

S. Iswaran pleaded guilty to four charges of obtaining valuable items as a public servant, and one charge of obstruction of the course of justice. He was subsequently sentenced to twelve months jail by the presiding judge Vincent Hoong.

Some people have wondered about the severity of the sentence. It was about double what the prosecutor had requested. Judge Hoong had this to say.

Persons who accept appointments to high office take on the heavy responsibilities of their office along with the associated power and status, and should generally be regarded as having acted with greater culpability in abusing their position to obtain valuable gifts.

Phew. That's a lot of words to say: the higher the office, the more culpable they are. And guess what - in Singapore, at least, Justice Hoong was not wrong. Iswaran should have known better. He was no rank-and-file civil servant. He was Chief of the Ministry of Transport.

The case of Singapore warship RSS Courageous is a good situational study. Back in 2003, she was involved in a high-profile maritime collision with merchant vessel ANL Indonesia. In the ensuing chaos, four servicewomen lost their lives. The Officer of the Watch was a Lieutenant Chua Chue Teng, understudying and supervised by superior officer Lieutenant Ng Keng Yong. At the conclusion of the case, both of these officers were found guilty of "causing death by a negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide" and dealt with accordingly.

But what of the helmsman, who undoubtedly steered RSS Courageous to collision? The name was not even mentioned in court. For one, the helmsman was not the officer of the watch, and therefore not entrusted with the lives and safety of those on board. For another, being rank-and-file, the helmsman's job was to trust the officer of the watch and follow orders. The helmsman wasn't qualified to make independent decisions as to where to steer or how fast to go. Thus, in the event of a mishap due to a bad decision, the blame lies solely with the Officer of the Watch.

The higher up that
totem pole you are...

That's a lesson we should all take something from. The higher up the totem pole you are, the higher the standards you should be held to.

A few years ago, I worked for this jackass who had a very childish habit of leaving profanities and abusive language in the GitHub code base. People thought I was being oversensitive. Do I have anything against profanities? (Bitch, please. You're joking, right?) No, I took exception because the person doing it was also the CTO of the company. I held him to a higher standard, professionally, because he should know better.

This is why I save some pretty scathing criticism for the likes of Elon Musk. Not because I don't admire his chutzpah and accomplishments - I do, in spades. But because I think his online behavior is unbecoming of someone in his position. Do tonnes of other people do the same thing? Yes, of course, but they're not leaders of multi-million dollar tech companies, are they?

Similarly, a public servant of Iswaran's standing and experience cannot claim ignorance where pertinent laws apply. It's like an experienced software dev claiming not to know how to write FizzBuzz. Either that dev is alarmingly incompetent, or just not being entirely honest.

Finally...

While he was ultimately found guilty under the law, it's my opinion that Iswaran acted out of carelessness and complacency rather than avarice or worse, contempt for the law. Ultimately, he conducted himself like a gentleman and has faced his legal responsibilities with dignity. I wish him and his family only the best.

My valuable gift to you (heh heh),
T___T