If you’ve been reading my blog over the last 15 months, I’ve been singing a familiar refrain – Police Commissioner (CP) Ng Joo Hee should either be resign or be replaced. You can read some of them here,here and even here, which also has a 2nd part. Therefore it’s with pleasure that I greeted the following news:
http://news.asiaone.com/news/crime/current-police-commissioner-ng-joo-hee-head-pub-jan-2015
Finally after 5 mistake ridden years, we will see the back of CP Ng as head of the Singapore Police Force (SPF) in January. He’s gonna take over as CEO of PUB – the national water agency as well as a position in the ministry. His current boss – Home Minister and DPM Teo Chean Hean issued a statement today thanking CP Ng for his service and listed his achievements over the past 5 years. CP Ng also issued a statement expressing his pride for his ’29′ years of service. Of course it would be fairer to list his failures which I mentioned in previous articles as well, but okay, let’s not kick a man too much when he’s down.
In some ways it might even be a promotion, CP Ng might draw a higher pay as CEO, but generally many would view it as a demotion – from commanding the principal law enforcement agency of 12,000 men and having extensive powers prescribed by law, to head a water agency where he’s not top dog, just a CEO who answers to a Chairman.
But before we close this sorry chapter, there seems to be an oversight in describing his service and that of his replacement, DC Hoong Wee Teck. CP Ng, 48, is listed as having ’29′ years of service in the SPF while the 51 year old DC Hoong only has 27. Let’s examine this more thoroughly.
Let’s begin by ignoring this 5 (or 6) year tenure as CP. Let’s go back to when he was appointed at age 43. He was described then as being a 24 year veteran. DC Hoong will be a 27 year veteran. Okay so we say someone with over 20 years service is a good choice for CP. But did CP Ng really serve the full 24 years when he took command? If we subtract the years – he would be only 19 when he joined! Wow did he actually grow from teenager to top dog? No. He was awarded a scholarship at Oxford. He also did further studies during the intervening period. So if we subtract all the years spent studying and pursuing his honours and post-graduate studies – we end up somewhere from 14-17 years in actual service. Then he served 2 years in Cambodia as part of a UN Peacekeeping Mission and around 2-3 years as Director Prisons. In real life terms of service, he probably only served in Singapore as a Senior Police Officer for around 10 years before becoming CP. Is this sufficient for promotion to the top job? Perhaps, we can argue it depends on the quality not the quantity of service.
If so then we must look at the number of appointments he had – all short term stints and when we look at the performance these past 5 years, it’s a glaring fact that he was unprepared and learning on the job. The end result? We had a lack of supervision of a number of key police officers – SAC Ng Boon Gay, SAC Soh Wai Wah and Eric Tan (who were promoted to head CPIB).
All 3 of them performed poorly in their posts and brought a degree of disrepute to the organisations they headed. Then we had serving police officers charged and convicted in court culminating with the blackest day last year when a serving officer is alleged to have committed double murder (The Kovan Murders). If that was the worst, barely a few months later another equally shameful incident happened – the Little India Riots. Again the fault lay squarely with the senior management.
Now let’s look at DC Hoong. He’s 51, not 43. He has 27 years of nearly full uninterrupted service – maybe he took some post-graduate studies, but even then we’d still have around 25 years. Those 25 years involved many years as an investigator on the ground, key positions including commanding a division and of course sterling work as Director CID – the principal investigation bureau. Unlike CP Ng, he’s served in every senior rank starting from Inspector and wasn’t so easily given accelerated promotions every other year. He earned his promotions on merit, not because he was a scholar. Is this the right candidate for the job? Of course.
With the introduction of the Elected Presidency, the President has final say on the appointment of the Head of the Police Force, CPIB and key positions in the military. It’s important therefore, that the President not simply take the recommendation of the PM or Minister when appointing a Commissioner at face value. He should study the background of the candidate, look at his service, his experience and his ability to lead all aspects of the SPF. CP Ng was too inexperienced, he was too junior and did not have the necessary clout needed to supervise the other key officers in the SPF. President Nathan simply took the recommendation at face value and rubber stamped it. Maybe President Tony Tan is doing the same, but at least we know that DC Hoong or even the other deputy – DC Rajakumar, both have enormous experience and leadership ability and either would be fitting for the job.
President should be given 2 or 3 names to choose from
Maybe the next time when such key appointments become open, the President should not just accept 1 nominee but ask for 2 or 3 names and while studying the recommended choice, is able to look at other potential candidates and decide which one he thinks is most suitable, if he disagrees with the recommendation. If you are going to give him the ability to reject a nominee, then you should also provide alternatives. We simply cannot afford another situation when someone like CP Ng is appointed because ‘on paper’ his record looks sterling and he has the necessary ‘experience.’
Let me end though by wishing CP Ng well. While I disagreed with his appointment as CP at age 43, if he had been considered now after serving 5 years as DC like Messrs Hoong or Rajakumar, I might say perhaps it’s alright. He was just the wrong man at the wrong time. But this does not mean we should rubbish his overall service. In the other positions he served, he served his country sometimes with great distinction – especially in Cambodia and as head of the STAR Unit which he founded and formed. That we have today a more operationally ready and professional SWAT team is in no small way down to him. And even though he failed to take responsibility and apologise for some of the missteps during his tenure, I can salute his vociferous defense of his men. A good leader defends his men, although sometimes one must accept responsibility when things go wrong.
I wish him well in his new endeavours and thank him for his ’29′ years of public service. I hope the 5 years as head of the SPF has given him sufficient pause, experience and ability to lead the PUB. So goodbye and good-luck.
Sir Nelspruit
* The author blogs at http://anyhowhantam.blogspot.sg