Lawyer paints generous picture of former chairman, while casting former vice-chairman in bad light

'He had finger in every pie'
POWERFUL DECISION-MAKER?
- Refused to promote nurse because she had body odour
- Made decision to conceal Mr Durai's salary
- Misreported fund-raising costs
WELL-MEANING VOLUNTEER?
- Donated aircon system to NKF, but ended up paying $10,000 from own pocket
- Sacrificed time for NKF activities without being paid
By Leong Ching
January 14, 2007

RICHARD Yong good guy, Alwyn Lim not so good guy - this was the picture that lawyer Chia Boon Teck painted in court yesterday.

Mr Chia is acting for Mr Yong, NKF's former chairman and Mr Loo Say San, NKF's former treasurer.

While portraying Mr Yong as a conscientious, well-intentioned director and chairman who devoted 18 years to the charity, Mr Chia accused Mr Lim, the former vice chairman, of having his 'finger in every pie'.

He told the court that Mr Lim, 64, had been the chief backer of former NKF chief T T Durai and had 'on many occasions directed and/or instructed Mr Durai'.

He defended Mr Durai's high salary and saw no need for it to be disclosed, jet-setted around the world on NKF funds and agreed to the purchase of first-class tickets.

He was also involved in negotiations with Singapore Press Holdings on the terms of a settlement for a defamation suit, at one point describing the final draft prepared by SPH's lawyer as 'a piece of sh..'.

He had a say in staff remuneration and was even involved in such day-to-day matters as blocking the promotion of a nurse, said Mr Chia.

The lawyer produced a letter written by Mr Lim on 14 Apr 2000 to NKF's nursing manager, informing her that he had turned down the promotion of a candidate to senior staff nurse.

'I turned down (her application) in spite of her technical competence and strong recommendation by her supervisor because she exuded a terrible body odour.

'To be fair to her, I have directed that her promotion be deferred for a month to allow her the time to improve. Upon confirmation by her supervisor and your independent verification that she is odour-free, she can be promoted.'

This statement evoked some laughter among the public and lawyers in what was otherwise a lacklustre day.

Yesterday was day four of the NKF trial, which sees the charity suing its former directors for breach of duties. It is hoping to recover some $12 million from five parties - Mr Durai (who has conceded), former board member Ms Matilda Chia, Mr Yong and Mr Loo, as well as Mr Pharis Aboobacker, Mr Durai's business partner.

Yesterday, Mr Chia presented a rebuttal to Senior Counsel K Shanmugam's hard-hitting opening statements.

He said that his clients had acted at all times with 'good faith, integrity, honesty and due diligence'.

Mr Yong, he said, was a volunteer who performed his role as a director and chairman to the best of his ability.

He had spent 18 years at the charity, without any remuneration whatsoever, 'sacrificing evenings, weekends, public holidays and family time, tending to the many official functions and meetings for fund raising and networking'.

At one time, he tried to donate an air-conditioning system to the NKF, only to be out of pocket for $10,000 in transport and storage costs.

This happened in 2001, when he was in the process of scaling down the premises of one of his companies, and decided to donate the existing air-conditioning units to the NKF.

Mr Durai said that he would use them for dialysis centres but, 11 months later, declared that NKF had no use for them and asked for them to be taken away.

Mr Yong paid some $5,000 to transport the units and another $5,438.40 for the storage over 11 months.

Mr Chia also said that neither of his clients had wanted to keep the CEO's pay secret.

'Both Mr Yong and Mr Loo had no strong sentiments over whether Mr Durai's remuneration package was publicly disclosed or not. This issue was left largely to vice-chairman Mr Alwyn Lim to deal with as he deemed fit,' he said.

Mr Lim saw no need for salaries to be revealed. Indeed, he had advised Mr Durai not to be a director, so that his pay could be kept secret, said Mr Chia.

As the Finance Committee chairman, Mr Lim was also the person who consistently reported that NKF's fund-raising costs never exceeded 30 per cent, a fact which is now known to be untrue.

His clients, said Mr Chia, had no reason to doubt Mr Lim's reports.

Summing up his arguments, Mr Chia said that all the directors were involved in all issues and matters in one way or another.

The NKF, however, had 'for reasons best known to themselves' chosen to sue Ms Chua, Mr Loo and Mr Yong' and not the rest.

Mr Shanmugam protested that this was not relevant. 'Whatever will be Mr Lim's role I'm not sure how that affords a defence to the claim NKF brings... I am trying to make sure that we don't get lost in a series of alleyways and byways and lose focus on the main issue,' he said.

Judicial Commissioner Sundaresh Menon then explained this formed part of Mr Chia's argument that there were proper governance structures in place, and that there were other people involved in these structures.

After lunch, Mr Patrick Daniel, the editor-in-chief of the English-Malay Newspapers Division at Singapore Press Holdings testified to the chain of events which led to the SPH defamation suit.

The trial continues on Monday.

THE CASE SO FAR
ALTHOUGH Mr T T Durai - the main defendant in the NKF trial which was originally scheduled to run for eight weeks - had thrown in the towel, at least three of the other four defendants will fight on.

They are former NKF chairman Richard Yong, former honorary treasurer Loo Say San and former board member Matilda Chua.

Mr Pharis Aboobacker, Mr Durai's friend and business associate, has not responded to the suit, although the writ has been served in India.

The new NKF had hauled the five of them to court for alleged breaches of duty.

This, the NKF claimed, caused it to suffer losses and damages.

They are seeking a return of at least $12 million.

Mr Durai had, on the third day, agreed to judgment and to pay legal costs.

An assessment of the damages will likely come only after about a year.

Meanwhile, Mr Durai still faces criminal charges and that trial has been set to start from 28 Feb. That's about the time the civil suit is expected to end.

He is accused of intending to deceive the NKF by approving payments to two companies for sevices that were apparently not rendered.

The other board members have also been charged in the criminal courts, and will face criminal proceedings after the end of the current trial.

Concede? No, they'll stay on to fight

By Leong Ching
January 13, 2007

THE lawyers of at least three of the four defendants are ready to battle on.

Mr Chia Boon Teck, the lawyer for former NKF chairman Richard Yong and former treasurer Loo Say San, told The New Paper last night: 'Tomorrow, we will be rebutting the plaintiff's opening statement.'

Any possibility of giving in?

'No,' said Mr Chia flatly.

On Wednesday, Mr Durai caved in and stepped out of the ring.

He and four others are being sued by the new board of the NKF for breach of duties towards NKF as directors and fiduciaries.

The trial was originally scheduled to run for eight weeks.

However, the proceedings may be shortened, with four defendants left - Mr Yong, Mr Loo, as well as former NKF director Matilda Chua and Mr Pharis Aboobacker, a business partner of Mr Durai.

What will they do?

The New Paper tried to contact the two lawyers, since Mr Pharis Aboobacker has not appointed a lawyer to act for him.

Ms Chua is represented by Mr Cheah Kok Lim from Ang and Partners, who could not be contacted yesterday.

NKF's lawyer, Senior Counsel K Shanmugam, said that Mr Durai's decision to concede was relevant to how he would carry on the case.

'It helps to the extent that we have something which helps us prove our case,' he said.
He declined to comment on whether his game plan has changed. All he would say was: 'It would be interesting to run through their defences now.'

Mr Leong Yung Chang, a lawyer who has been observing the case closely, agreed.
He added: 'I think Durai did the clever thing.'

He noted that much has already been aired in public and people have made their own judgments.

'Rather than have more evidence come out in a public arena, might as well concede and fight the assessment of damages.'

Mr Leong, who works in Veritas Law Corporation, said that such assessment is usually done in chambers and not in open court.

'Of course, NKF could apply for the assessment to be done in open court - I won't be surprised if they do,' Mr Leong added.

Another lawyer, who declined to be named, wondered if Mr Durai conceded because he did not want to take the stand.

NO ESCAPE
Could it be he didn't want a repeat of the experience during his defamation suit against SPH, where he was grilled in court by SPH's lawyer, Mr Davinder Singh?

But there is no escape because the remaining defendants could very well ask the court to order him to get on the stand again, the lawyer noted.

So what is the defence likely to do?

Two things have already been hinted at during the small exchanges between Mr Shanmugam and the lawyer for Mr Durai, Senior Counsel Chelva Rajah, in the first two days of the trial.

For example, Mr Chelva conceded that it was Mr Durai who signed the credit card, which recorded spending of more than $2.3 million over eight years.

But he hinted that Mr Durai was perhaps not the only person whose expenses went on the card.
Could the others have had a hand in spending the money too?

It is understood that NKF's lawyers will not go after Mr Durai to recover his share of these credit card expenses because he conceded judgment before the statement of claims had been amended. So this means that the $2.3m spending, if recoverable, will be from Mr Loo, Mr Yong and Ms Chua.

Second, Mr Durai's computer. Mr Chelva conceded that some of the e-mails which had been forensically recovered had been deleted by someone using Mr Durai's password.

He was very careful in his phrasing. Could the person be someone other than Mr Durai himself?
These are questions which are likely to surface as the three defendants press on with their case.

Durai's 'special friends' turn on their ex-colleague Lim

Ansley Ng ansley@mediacorp.com.sg

FORMER chief executive T T Durai has thrown in the towel, but a new figure was thrown into the spotlight at the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) civil suit hearing on Friday.

The lawyer for former chairman Richard Yong and ex-treasurer Loo Say San launched an all-out attack at Mr Alwyn Lim — another former board vice-chairman who had originally not been sued by NKF. His point? Mr Lim should also be held accountable for his role in the affair.

Mr Chia Boon Teck, who is representing Mr Yong and Mr Loo, first touched on the issue of Mr Durai's salary, which has drawn so much fire.

"Throughout their tenure in the NKF, Mr Yong and Mr Loo were neutral towards the public disclosure of Mr Durai's remuneration package although Mr Alwyn Lim was always against it," he said.

He also pointed to the fact that Mr Lim was the head of NKF's finance committee. "He packed the committee with his friends and business associates," said Mr Chia.

Repeatedly stressing that Mr Lim should not be allowed to get away with his role in the saga, Mr Chia said that it was he who had consistently reported that the NKF's fundraising costs never exceeded the Ministry of Health's (MOH) guidelines.

The MOH had ruled that the cost of raising funds should not be more than 30 per cent of the proceeds. Earlier in the week, NKF's Senior Counsel K Shanmugam had made the shocking disclosure that the NKF got around this cap with the help of a "slush fund".

Mr Chia also suggested that Mr Lim, an accountant by training, had played a part in the awarding of bungled IT contracts, which the NKF claims cost it millions of dollars, to the firm of Mr Durai's associate, Mr Pharis Aboobacker.

On occasion, the attacks got personal. To giggles in the packed courtroom, Mr Chia read out an April 2000 letter from Mr Lim to a nursing manager in the NKF, explaining that he had deferred promotion for one of her staff because the nurse in question had body odour.

Mr Lim was not in court on Friday. Though he was not sued by the NKF, he and three others have been dragged into the case by Mr Yong and Mr Loo.

To show that Mr Lim had a possible conflict of interest, Mr Chia said he had never declared his senior advisory role in Shanghai Intelligence Consultants, a firm that provided HR consultancy services to the NKF in 2005.

After nearly two hours, other lawyers in the courtroom started questioning Mr Chia's line of argument.

Mr Shanmugam interrupted Mr Chia to tell the court that the focus on Mr Lim had little to do with the claims against Mr Yong and Mr Loo.

"I am trying to make sure we don't get into a series of alleyways and byways and lose focus of the main issues," said Mr Shan-mugam.

Mr K Ramesh, lawyer for Professor Lawrence Chia — one of the third parties along with Mr Lim — also protested about how "the second and fourth defendants' opening was liberally spiced with references to Mr Alywn Lim's involvement in various transactions".

Mr Chia responded: "If the plaintiffs claim there was a breach of corporate governance ... the defendants' case, among other things, is how can it be that you choose some and not all of the directors to answer to your claims?"

The hearing will resume on Monday morning with former and current NKF employees taking the stand.

Former vice-chairman fingered for contributing to mismanagement of NKF

By May Wong, Channel NewsAsia Posted: 12 January 2007 1505 hrs

SINGAPORE: The National Kidney Foundation (NKF) civil suit resumed on Friday after a day's break, after former NKF CEO TT Durai threw in the towel for the trial.

Ex-NKF vice-chairman, Alwyn Lim, came under the spotlight for contributing to the mismanagement of the charity.

Friday's court proceeding also saw two witnesses take the stand to testify against NKF's former CEO and ex-board members.

Alwyn Lim, who is one of the third parties in the trial, did not turn up in court on Friday.

The lawyer for two of the defendants fingered Lim for influencing Durai in many NKF matters.

Lawyer Chia Boon Teck, acting for former NKF chairman Richard Yong and ex-NKF treasurer Loo Say San, pointed out that Lim was the one who coaxed Durai into preventing a Health Ministry official from sitting in the Executive Committee as an observer.

Mr Chia said Lim wrote a letter to Durai which said an MOH representative is sent to "keep an eye" on the NKF.

That, Lim wrote, would be more of a "hindrance rather than a help to NKF".

Mr Chia cited an instance of Lim allegedly playing a big role in managing NKF.

Lim chaired its finance committee and packed it with his own friends and business associates.

Lim also instructed Durai on many NKF issues.

Mr Chia said Yong and Loo were not aware of the magnitude of Lim's involvement in so many NKF matters.

Mr Chia added that Lim was also the one who denied a senior staff nurse of getting a promotion because she had a "terrible body odour".

The lawyer said this showed Lim "had his finger in every pie".

NKF's lawyers later called on the first witness of the trial, Patrick Daniel from the Singapore Press Holdings, to testify how Durai refused to agree on a settlement out of court.

Durai had wanted to sue the press firm for articles it published.

And the key disagreement in not coming to a settlement - SPH had wanted to hand in information, like Durai's salary, to the authorities but the former CEO disagreed.

So the matter was taken to court.

Another witness, a former assistant manager of the IT department in NKF, was also called upon to testify about how NKF was overcharged for extra work ordered on a new computer software.

The trial will see more witnesses take to the stand to testify on Monday.

The new NKF is expected to bring about 20 witnesses to the stand to testify against Durai and the three other defendants, Richard Yong, Loo Say San and Matilda Chua. - CNA/ir

Durai's cave-in hurts trio's case

Evidence Act means NKF can use ex-CEO's admission against former colleagues
Ansley Ng ansley@mediacorp.com.sg

NOW that he has conceded the civil suit against him, former National Kidney Foundation (NKF) chief T T Durai may be out of the limelight, at least until he is called to the stand.

Today, the NKF's lawyers will be turning their attention to Mr Durai's ex-colleagues turned co-defendants — former chairman Richard Yong, ex-treasurer Loo Say San and former Board member Matilda Chua. Together with Mr Durai, the trio are accused of breaching their duties as directors and fiduciaries, causing the NKF to suffer loss and damages.

NKF lawyers, led by Senior Counsel K Shanmugam, now have to convince Judicial Commissioner Sundaresh Menon that the trio are liable as well.

The suit, which started on Monday, took a surprise turn when Mr Durai thew in the towel and admitted to the many charges that the NKF levelled against him.

In doing so, he was admitting to many allegations, including those of abusing his power for improper purposes and using NKF funds for lavish travels. It also means leaving his three co-defendants to carry on fighting the suit themselves. But a little-known section of the Evidence Act might make the trio's task more difficult.

Mr Yong, Mr Loo and Ms Chua will now have to overcome Mr Durai's confession because the Evidence Act allows the NKF to use his admission against them.

Should JC Menon rule against the defendants, there is also the issue of assessing damages.

In its statement of claims, the NKF is claiming about $12 million from Mr Durai and his co-defendants that was allegedly wasted on salary increments, failed contracts and loss of donations. The NKF believes it may have lost $4 million in donations following a public outcry against Singapore's biggest charity scandal, that happened mid-2005.

The figure could rise or fall, depending on JC Menon's findings.

Lawyers told Today it would be difficult for the NKF to determine how much donation money it had lost.

"Firstly, (NKF) would have to show a clear link that the acts the NKF has complained against him — and which he has conceded — resulted in the lost future donations," said lawyer Vijai Parwani. "Next, it would be not be easy to prove this exact amount as calculating the loss of future donations is not an exact science ..."

At the assessment hearing, likely to take place within 12 months, the court will decide the amount of damages the defendants will have to pay.

But it is up to the NKF to decide who pays what.

Under a "joint and several liabilities" rule, a plaintiff who receives a favourable judgment from a court will decide which of the defendants it wants to claim the money from.

This means the NKF — if it wins — can divide the sum among all the parties, or claim the entire sum from one party, understandably the one with the deepest pockets.

NKF CHAIRMAN PLEASED WITH DURAI'S DECISION TO CONCEDE

Law firm to donate fees back to NKF
By Leong Ching
January 12, 2007

THEY worked on the case for months, though the law firm was taking no fees.

In a statement yesterday, National Kidney Foundation chairman Gerard Ee described how its legal team laboured to prepare its case against its ex-CEO, Mr T T Durai.

'(They) have worked tirelessly over the last eight months. I personally know that they worked about 24/7 right through December including Christmas and the New Year,' he said.

'They spent months painstakingly tracing and assembling the evidence and then making sense of it. They also chased after every lead and managed to recover vital information through computer forensics technology.'

The NKF is represented by Senior Counsel K Shanmugam and a team of lawyers from Allen & Gledhill.

The law firm is donating its fees back to the NKF.

The firm had accepted the case after NKF was turned down when it approached two other law firms in late 2005. It was told by the other lawyers that it did not have a good case.

It was only in May last year that it found Mr Shanmugam who felt it did have a good case - and he went into it with his trademark aggressiveness.

Though it was expected to be a long and complex trial against Mr Durai, NKF was determined to pursue the case, said Mr Ee.

'On 15 July 2005, the new Board members were appointed. As a charity that is answerable to the public, we had to look into the conduct of the old management,' he said.

On the third day of the NKF trial, Mr Durai gave up the fight.

Even Mr Shanmugam, when asked if he was surprised at the Mr Durai's surrender yesterday, said: 'I did not expect it at this stage.'

He said he had fought the case 'in the most effective way' by establishing liability first, and then debating about damages later.

He also told the judge: 'I told Your Honour that I would take a longer time with my opening, in the hopes of shortening the trial. That proved to be prescient.'

Early in the day, before the court was filled, reporters approached one of Mr T T Durai's lawyers, Mr Moiz Sithawalla, for a copy of the text of their opening statements. He declined to hand it out.

Why not?

'I am not at liberty to say,' he said.

It transpired, of course, that he didn't need to say anything.

Indeed, only one lawyer, Mr Shanmugam, spoke yesterday. And even then briefly.

At 5.30 pm, after a day of meeting in chambers, Mr Shanmugam stood up in court and said that Mr Durai had 'conceded judgment, with costs.'

The four left standing are former chairman Richard Yong, former treasurer Loo Say San, former board member Matilda Chua and Durai's business associate, Mr Pharis Aboobacker.

BLINK?
Why did Mr Durai blink first?

Perhaps it was because he had sat through the Singapore Press Holdings defamation action and knew what it entailed. Public scrutiny, intense media attention, and a daily dose of strong language from the lawyer.

He would have known what it was going to be like.

With Mr Durai's admission, the trial may be shorter than the eight weeks originally planned.

One reason for Mr Durai's decision could be the pressure of the past two days, when he had to sit in court and listen to the accusations thrown at him.

Mr Shanmugam is ordinarily a soft-spoken man.

Outside the court, reporters have to struggle to make out what he is saying.

But on his feet, and in front of the judge, he was loud and clear. And 'hypocrite', 'liar', 'living in gilded fiefdom', 'snout completely in the trough' - these were some of the choice phrases he flung at the defendants.

Everything he said in court had been known, both to Mr Durai and his lawyers.

But it was buried in the 20,000 pages of documents Mr Durai's lawyers received and thus might not have struck with the same force.

In July 2005, Mr Durai withdrew his suit against SPH after being cross-examined.

Perhaps he did not want to go through something like that again.

FIGHT GOES ON?
With the main man out, who will keep on fighting?

Ms Matilda Chua's demeanour was quite different at a tea break yesterday, compared to her chirpy mood earlier. (See report on Page 4.)

Lawyers Peter Low and Chia Boon Teck, who are acting for Mr Yong and Mr Loo, have said that they will keep their options open.

One key issue must surely be cost. Part of the suit implicates third parties Alwyn Lim, Lawrence Chia, Kweh Soon Han and Chow Kok Fong, former NKF directors whom they hold as being part of the decision-making process.

If the defendants are found liable, these four could be held liable as well.

Now these four 'third parties' have their own lawyers, who will fight their case against these accusations.

If the four defendants in the NKF suit lose both against the NKF and the third parties (Mr Lim, Prof Chia, Mr Kweh and Mr Chow), their bills could be very large indeed.

They have one day to make up their minds - court will continue on Friday.

WHAT'S NEXT?
The lawyers are likely to meet again in a year's time, some observers say, when they have to debate on how much Mr Durai will have to pay. For now, NKF is claiming $12 million against all five defendants.

In the meantime, Mr Durai, Mr Yong, Mr Loo and Ms Chua have also been charged with various criminal offences, and the trial has been set to start just three days into the week after the civil suits are expected to end.

Mr Durai faces two charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act of intentionally deceiving the NKF by submitting false documents.

Such offences carry a penalty of up to five years in jail or a fine of up to $100,000 or both.

Former NKF CEO's admission to impact criminal trial

By May Wong, Channel NewsAsia Posted: 11 January 2007 2139 hrs

SINGAPORE: Lawyers observing the NKF civil trial say the former CEO's concession will have an impact on the criminal case, but the question on how much of an influence remains to be seen.

In fact, a criminal trial may not even take place.

Many are wondering if the NKF civil trial will see another twist when court proceedings resume on Friday, after a break on Thursday, as lawyers sort out their documents.

Now that the former CEO TT Durai has thrown in the towel, will the three other defendants follow suit?

"I supposed they've taken a day to think back on whether or not his concession would affect their case adversely, whether it's worth going on their own defences but that's the first thing we'll find out when we come back tomorrow," said Shashi Nathan, Lawyer, Harry Elias Partnership.

Another thing to look out for is whether a criminal trial will indeed take place and for how long.

Lawyers say the civil and criminal suits are very different.

For a civil case, the parties have to show enough evidence to put forward their case. But for a criminal case, it's about proving beyond any reasonable doubt that a person is guilty. The penalties too are different.

"Throwing in the towel on this whole matter really means paying sums of monies in the form of damages. How much of this is yet to be seen, but throwing in the towel in a criminal matter really means losing his liberty, one going to jail. So the considerations of how one decides to progress with the charges against him in the criminal matter is completely different," said Krishnan Nadarajan, Lawyer, Tan, Lim and Wong.

A criminal trial after the civil one may also stretch over a long period of time.

"Unlike a civil trial, there's no affidavit evidence. Evidence will have to be elicited orally from all the witnesses. There's no discovery in a criminal trial. So either the prosecution or the defence, if they want to introduce a document, they would have to introduce it, as the evidence was solicited. So it would take somewhat longer to go through and plough through all the documents in a criminal trial," said Shashi Nathan.

Durai may likely have to fork out about $4m of donations which NKF might have lost because of this, over $5m which NKF paid out for services it never received and over $550,000 for Durai's lawyers after his concession.

Lawyers say there may be more when an assessment of damages is done at a later stage. - CNA /dt

Not over yet for TT Durai

By Loh Chee Kong, TODAY Posted: 11 January 2007 0942 hrs

He ran the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) like a fiefdom, but for the second time in successive court appearances, Mr T T Durai could not take the heat.

This time, he did not even bother to take the witness stand or subject himself to another grilling. A strident opening statement by the NKF's Senior Counsel K Shanmugam that stretched across two days — Mr Durai could bear to sit through only one-and-a-half days of it — was all the pain that the former charity chief could endure.

At 5.30pm on Wednesday, after another Durai no-show, endless adjournments and wild rumours, Mr Shanmugam told the court what some of the lawyers involved in the case had known as early as 8.30am: Mr Durai had caved in, conceding the NKF's civil suit against him.

Mr Shanmugam could not resist taking a final dig at Mr Durai. "Sir, when I asked for Your Honour's indulgence to do a longer-than-usual opening, I was promising in return a shortening of the trial. Sir, I think I had been more prescient than I expected.

"We are happy to tell Your Honour, as we indicated in chambers, that the first defendant, Mr T T Durai, is consenting to judgment and has agreed to pay costs on the statement of claim as amended."

To this, Mr Durai's lawyer, Senior Counsel Chelva Rajah, merely stood up and said: "Agreed."

In other words, only the damages that Mr Durai must pay needs to be established. The NKF had demanded some $12 million from Mr Durai and his associates — including former NKF functionaries such as Mr Richard Yong, Mr Loo Say San and Ms Matilda Chua — for the losses they caused the organisation.

Though he did not show up in court, Mr Durai picked up the phone on Wednesday evening when TODAY called him. After this reporter identified himself, Mr Durai said in a calm, crisp voice: "Hold on, please." He then passed the phone to his son, who said: "He doesn't want to comment. I really don't think he wants to answer anything."

But if the former NKF chief had hoped to slip out of the public glare and away from courtrooms, he could be in for a shock. Mr Yong, Mr Loo and Ms Chua appeared determined to fight on.

Lawyer Chia Boon Teck, who was acting for Mr Yong and Mr Loo, told reporters: "If he intended to remove himself from the spotlight, he may find himself back at square one. There's nothing to stop us from calling him back to court as a witness."

It is not a position that Mr Durai will enjoy. In July 2005, when he sued Singapore Press Holdings over a news report that alleged that the NKF had gold taps in its bathrooms, Mr Durai took the stand in an effort to claim substantial damages. Instead, he was put through the wringer by SPH lawyer Davinder Singh, who asked him about his large salary, fat bonuses, first-class travel and expensive hotel stays, eventually forcing Durai to withdraw the suit and step down from the NKF.

Still, his latest retreat took most people by surprise and raised the question: Why?

"I had not expected it," admitted Mr Shanmugam. "I've just done my opening statement. I've not called in my witnesses nor led any evidence."

Still, he felt that the case he had put forward in his opening statement must have been "compelling" enough for Durai to concede.

Over two days, he spoke of how Durai spent more than $1 million over seven years on hotel stays alone; he talked of the slush fund that was set up to get around restrictions on fundraising; he revealed how donors' money was wasted on botched IT deals agreed to between Durai and his friends. Mr Shanmugam also stressed on how the former NKF chief rewarded his favourites, like ex-director Matilda Chua, extravagantly with 12-month bonuses. He indicated that he had retrieved evidence that Durai had tried to destroy on his computer.

One observer felt that if all this were brought into the open, through witnesses and cross-examination, it would probably have embarrassed Durai further and hurt his family.

Said a lawyer following the case: "One reason why people capitulate is that they may suffer more damage to their reputations. There is also the issue of cost. The longer a case drags, the more costs you may have to end up paying if you lose."

Mr Chia, meanwhile, said he was "surprised and disappointed" with Durai's decision. It could weaken the position of the remaining defendants who are accused of colluding with Durai.

Said Mr Chia: "We just have to fill the void left by Durai. Some issues that only Durai could have answered, we must now think of who else we can get to answer them." Failing that, Durai could be brought back to the stand.

Even if he isn't, he still faces a criminal trial, along with Yong, Loo and Chua, for their role in the NKF saga.

Meanwhile, the civil suit will resume on Friday, even without its central figure. The judge has given the other defendants a day off to reorganise their defences. — with additional reporting by Ansley Ng - TODAY/st

New NKF pleased its claims have been accepted by Durai

By Hasnita A Majid, Channel NewsAsia Posted: 10 January 2007 2255 hrs

SINGAPORE : The new National Kidney Foundation has reacted to the twist in the NKF trial.

It said it was pleased that the claims made against TT Durai had been accepted by the former NKF head.

But the new NKF will continue its action against the other defendants.

They are former Chairman Richard Yong, former board member Matilda Chua, former treasurer Loo Say San, and Durai's business associate Pharis Aboobacker, as well as third parties Alwyn Lim, Lawrence Chia, Kweh Soon Han and Chow Kok Fong.

In a statement signed by current NKF Chairman Gerard Ee, NKF said it was very grateful to the legal team from law firm Allen & Gledhill, led by Senior Counsel K Shanmugam and Edwin Tong.

Mr Shanmugam, it said, saw that the NKF had a very strong case against the old management and proceeded, when two other law firms had advised that it did not have a good case.

The NKF said the team of lawyers worked tirelessly for the last eight months, chased after every lead, and managed to recover vital information through computer forensics technology.

The law firm has said that it does not want to profit from this action and will donate all its fees to the NKF.

The NKF added that it looked forward to putting the past behind them, learn the lessons and focus on the future.

The charity now has just over 2,000 kidney failure patients. - CNA/ms

What was he doing in Disneyland?

By Leong Ching January 10, 2007

HE preached cost control and careful spending, but in reality Mr T T Durai was spending $11,600 a month for eight years on hotel bills alone.

He spent $4,800 on a single visit to Disneyland in California. And thousands more at hotels in New York, Geneva, Mumbai and Shanghai.

Senior Counsel K Shanmugam said this when touching on the former National Kidney Foundation (NKF) chief's alleged excesses in his opening statement of a civil suit yesterday.

The new NKF is trying to recover $12 million from Mr Durai, former chairman Richard Yong, former treasurer Loo Say San, former board member Matilda Chua and the absent Mr Pharis Aboobacker, an Indian national who was behind several botched NKF deals.

Mr Shanmugam told the court: 'Whenever there was any allegation that he travelled first class, Durai's approach had always been that such allegations had to be challenged.

'Otherwise... public sympathy and crucial donations vital to (NKF's) operations would diminish.'

In reality, however, there was a 'serious subversion of proper governance at all levels'.

For example, there was no proper remuneration policy, so Mr Durai's pay increases could be backdated for a year - something which Mr Shanmugam did not think was possible at a charity organisation.

The audit committee, which was supposed to have a watchdog role, did not meet for three years.
The lawyer also released a list of Mr Durai's expenses, which included $1m spent on hotels alone from 1998 to 2005.

In the six months from June to December 2004, he travelled to places such as Beijing, Shanghai, London, Dublin, Geneva, Vienna and Disneyland in California.

And he did not stint on the hotels. He stayed at ones like the Sheraton, Hyatt and MGM Grand.
Mr Shanmugam also portrayed Mr Durai as someone who pulled all the strings at the former NKF.

Behind the scenes, Mr Durai wielded so much power in the NKF that he should be considered a de facto director or shadow director, he told the court.

Beyond that, he also succeeded in misleading the NKF board and the authorities with 'smoke and mirrors'.

He even sought to mislead the public by directing NKF staff to 'ghost-write' letters to the press on such issues as his salary and management transparency. (See report on facing page.)

The lawyer took the first day of what's expected to be an eight-week trial to list Mr Durai's alleged excesses and how he tried to cover his tracks, especially after his fall from grace.

This came after his failed defamation suit against Singapore Press Holdings (SPH) in July 2005.

The packed courthouse was rivetted by Mr Shanmugam's allegation of how Mr Durai had 'sat through the night' destroying computer files and documents after NKF dropped the suit following disclosures of Mr Durai's generous pay and perks, which included first-class air travel.

Mr Shanmugam said the destroyed files were linked to Mr Durai's connections with companies run by Mr Aboobacker.

And it was clear that Mr Durai and his inner circle knew that they had something to hide.

'INNER CIRCLE'
The lawyer named the three NKF co-defendants as members of Mr Durai's 'inner circle'. He even called them 'cronies', until Judicial Commissioner Sundaresh Menon told him to stop.

The NKF's case is that the four had breached their duties as directors, using the charity to their own advantage and causing it to pay out more money than it should.

Mr Shanmugam said that Mr Durai's power was so great that he should have been subject to the responsibilities that directors have under the Companies Act.

In fact, this responsibility was more onerous, given that he was running a charity dependent on public donations.

He alleged that, as CEO, Mr Durai had put his personal interests before the charity's. ''First, Mr Durai systematically set about taking complete control by subverting all the organs of the company,' he said.

'Then, secondly, he put up a shield against all external authority, such that the company, the charitable foundation, became his sole fiefdom, and then used it for personal advantage and profit.'

He decided how much information to disclose to the NKF Exco, and was not above lying, Mr Shanmugam alleged.

One instance was when the Exco was kept in the dark about SPH's bid to settle the defamation suit instead of going to court.

It was also not told of a Queen's Counsel's advice that a trial was risky as financial management issues would form part of SPH's scrutiny.

Instead, they were told the NKF had a good case, for which Mr Durai was hoping to get $20 million in damages, an unprecedented sum in Singapore courts.

Mr Durai also fought off attempts to put the NKF under closer scrutiny and orchestrated mass campaigns to champion his stance that the NKF was transparent and accountable to the regulatory authorities.

He also set up an internal audit committee with much fanfare, but this was just so much 'smoke and mirrors', said Mr Shanmugam.

The audit committee did not meet for almost three years because Mr Durai would not back its recommendations.

Letters were sent in support of old NKF. But e-mails from former PR head showed: She's behind letters from 'public'

January 10, 2007

WHEN you send a letter to newspapers, it reflects a genuine point of view, your real feelings, right?

Well, not every letter the press receives comes from readers like you.

The National Kidney Foundation (NKF), it appears, has in the past, sent 'ghost-written' letters to newspapers as well as the Feedback Unit of the Government. These were signed off by people purporting to be concerned donors and patients.

But the letters were actually initiated by NKF staff.

DECEIVING THE PUBLIC
This was revealed in the NKF trial yesterday, when lawyer K Shanmugam charged the old NKF board with deceiving the public.

He said: 'The NKF, under Durai, sought to hide information... or choose only certain types of information to disclose.'

E-mails from Ms Michelle Ang, a former reporter who was in charge of public communications at NKF, showed how it went about doing this.

For example, she marshalled staff from NKF's patient admissions and marketing communication departments to ghost-write letters to the newspapers, with the same basic point - that the public does not need to know about the salary of NKF's CEO, Mr TT Durai.

One of her e-mails, dated 29 Sep 2004, to her colleague, Mr Job Loei, included this bit.
'Then there is the issue of disclosure of salaries. I am curious to know how much my pastor earns as his pay comes from the church fund, to which I dutifully contribute each month. But I never ask him that, simply because I respect and trust him.

'He is my leader. Furthermore, he has a church council to ensure that things are done properly....'

NKF used the same line of defence when refusing to disclose Mr Durai's salary - that it answered to its board and was thus accountable.

Ms Ang also took care to make sure that the letters not only made the point NKF wanted but also sounded genuine. Her e-mails to NKF colleagues included the following nuggets of advice:

'Hi Job,' she wrote. 'Pls avoid phrases like 'everything possible', or 'everything possible and more' or 'everywhere, anywhere'.'

These were known to be among Mr Durai's favourite phrases. So the idea was to not inject any flavour of the man in these letters.

'Do not give editors or the feedback unit any ammo to say that we penned the letters. Do not establish any patterns for them, or the readers, to see.'

The NKF also left in some grammatical errors. 'Edited for points, not language. Let imperfections show,' wrote Ms Ang.

To protest against the implementation of the IPC (Institution of Public Character) Code, which would place restrictions on how charities behaved, Mr Durai arranged for letters to be ghost-written to the press, purportedly on behalf of NKF 'patients'. Ms Ang wrote: 'The letters must sound real. Not an academic exercise.'

Hence, some of the letters were heartfelt, but badly phrased: 'I simply do not understand these buzz about putting restrictions to IPCs.'

'Don't you know your recommendations will only incur more running cost to sustain our life saving program... One thing we must bring out is please... please considering our outcomes.'

All these letters were part of a propaganda effort, Mr Shanmugam argued, to mislead the public.
Some of the letters also contained false information, such as the number of patients NKF treated and the reserves NKF had.

So how were the letters generated? How did NKF get people to write in to the press? Well, wait for my next letter as NKF's Job Loei is called to the stand.

Durai said to have given out contracts to companies he had interests in

By Hasnita A Majid, Channel NewsAsia Posted: 09 January 2007 2144 hrs

SINGAPORE : During the proceeding, the court was also told that Durai gave out contracts to companies which he had interests in.

One of them, Global Net Relations or GNR, was a business venture between him and former NKF board member Matilda Chua.

TT Durai and Matilda Chua set up GNR together in late 1999.

Chua was its CEO and both of them were shareholders and also directors of the company.

GNR later had dealings with Protonweb Solutions - a company belonging to Pharis Aboobaker - whom Durai met in Chennai.

Pharis also owns another company, Forte.

NKF lawyer K Shanmugam told the court Durai awarded an IT contract to Forte and entered into a call services outsourcing agreement with Protonweb Solutions - amounting to some $5 million - without the proper tender process - a clear violation of NKF's tender protocol.

The IT software, called Cradle, was later marketed by GNR, using the NKF as advertisement in its sales pitch both locally and overseas.

Mr Shanmugam said that although Durai had interests in GNR and Protonweb Solutions, those interests were never disclosed.

He also said that Durai and Matilda caused the NKF to go into contracts that would bring profit to them, but which is causing the charity to pay out against its interests.

The court was told Durai also tried to hide evidence of his links with GNR, by selling his shares and transferring the money to Chua, destroying documents and deleting emails on GNR. - CNA /dt

Durai deleted evidence from computer, didn't reveal settlement offer

By Ansley Ng, TODAY Posted: 09 January 2007 1011 hrs

It was July 13, 2005, the night before T T Durai was to step down as the chief of the National Kidney Foundation. Still, the man reputed to be a workaholic, was busy in his office at the charity's Kim Keat headquarters.

But this was no ordinary evening.

Amid the rumblings that were gathering pace across the island over his handsome remuneration and the shadow of the investigation that was to follow, Durai was cleaning up traces of "a fraud that he perpetrated".

"He sat through the night deleting items from his computer and destroying documents in the office," Senior Counsel K Shanmugam said on the opening day of a civil suit.

The NKF hopes to recover some $12 million allegedly wasted on benefits, salaries and failed contracts from Durai and several Board members.

Others dragged into the case are former chairman Richard Yong, former treasurer Loo Say San and Mr Durai's enigmatic friend and business associate Pharis Aboobacker.

"They were going out of their way to hide it, including deleting items from their computers," said Mr Shanmugam, who is representing the NKF.

He painted the picture of one man manipulating an organisation along with his "cronies" on the board - a suggestion that offended the defendants' counsel. Once his "cronies" offered him an eight-month bonus which he modestly slashed to a "mere" $25,000.

Mr Shanmugam spoke of a man who flew first-class and brazenly lied to his executive committee about it. A man who did not want the NKF to be governed either by the Ministry of Health or by the National Council of Social Service (NCSS).

Above all, he spoke of a man who would do anything to get his own way.

At the heart of the matter was Durai's dispute with the Singapore Press Holdings (SPH) which eventually resulted in the court case that led to his ouster.

"SPH had made a very reasonable offer to pay damages and give an apology," said Mr Shanmugam revealed.

But Durai was spoiling for a fight. He did not mention the SPH offer to the exco.

He claimed lawyers had told him that NKF had a very good case. "This was inaccurate," said Mr Shanmugam.

A lawyer had also warned of risk if the case against SPH was pursued. Again, Durai did not reveal this.

In fact, he said that SPH had filed its defence when in truth it was asking for more time to come up with a settlement.

To this, the chairman, Mr Yong, responded by proposing that Durai's legal costs in the SPH action be borne by NKF.

Mr Shanmugam also touched on Durai's manipulation of the media.

When there were reports on a code to make charities more accountable, NKF staff were asked to "ghost-write" letters against the move.

In an email sent to her colleagues, NKF's deputy director of communications Michelle Ang wrote: "Just got off the phone with Mr Durai. We'll need to pump out some letters to send to each of three (news)papers on the recommended IPC code ... The letters must sound real ... The letters - three a day - should go out to the media. We'll need a sustained campaign, so it's all hands on deck."

As Mr Shanmugam spelt out his case, Durai sat impassively, flanked by his son, Yong and Loo.

The courtroom itself presented a strange sight, with stacks of files in shelves lined up behind Judicial Commissioner Sundaresh Menon. Much of this huge body of evidence is expected to come up for discussion.

As for Mr Shanmugam, he has barely waded through 40 pages of his 90-page opening statement.

CRONIES OR ...
(It began when Mr Shanmugam repeatedly referred to Durai's co-defendants as his "cronies".)

Chia Boon Teck (for Loo and Yong): I let it go once, I let it go twice, but until this court makes a finding of fact, that the defendant directors are cronies, may I ask my learned friend to stop labelling them as such?

Judicial Commissioner Sundaresh Menon: I think it's a fair point. The gentlemen in question are entitled to be treated with respect and dignity. I am not suggesting that you intend anything else.

K Shanmugam (for NKF): Yes sir, if I put it this way, my understanding of the duty of counsel in an opening is to state the case that he intends to prove. This is the case that I intend to prove.

JC Menon: Yes.

Mr Shanmugam: As long as I don't put it any higher than what I reasonably intend to prove, I am entitled to call them cronies.

JC Menon: I think we can avoid the use of these terms at this stage.

Mr Shanmugam: I will use a longer form of words every time I refer to them - the people who completely abdicated their responsibility and behaved completely dishonourably - I will say that every time.

JC Menon: Yes.

(Eventually, Mr Shanmugam referred to them as Durai's "special friends") - TODAY/st

Defamation suit ends up in $12m civil suit against TT Durai and old NKF Board

By Noor Mohd Aziz, Channel NewsAsia Posted: 08 January 2007 1936 hrs

SINGAPORE: The new NKF's attempt to recover at least $12m from its former chief executive officer Mr T T Durai and four other former board members has begun in the High Court.

They are former chairman of the NKF Mr Richard Yong, treasurer Mr Loo Say San, board member Ms Matilda Chua and Mr Pharis Aboobacker, a friend of Mr Durai.

It is suing them for alleged breach of duty resulting in losses and damages.

The $12m sum which the new NKF wants to recover includes monies it says were improperly spent or paid out in salaries, benefits and failed contracts.

It also includes the more than $2m in remuneration paid out to Mr Durai and more than $500,000 in legal costs paid out to Singapore Press Holdings.

Although the new NKF under Mr Gerard Ee is suing only these five defendants, Mr Yong and Mr Loo have dragged in four other former directors as third parties, arguing that all directors should be held liable.

The others are Mr Alwyn Lim, Associate Professor Lawrence Chia, Mr Kweh Soon Han and Mr Chow Kok Fong. As third parties, the defendants could claim for damages against these four former directors in the event they lost the case.

As for Mr Aboobacker, an Indian national, a conflict of interest was alleged in the dealings between his firm, Mr Durai and Ms Chua.

The whole saga started with an article in The Straits Times on April 19, 2004 which led to Mr Durai suing Singapore Press Holdings for defamation.

During the trial, about one and a half year ago, details about his pay and perks were released and eventually resulted in the resignation of the entire old NKF board.

Subsequently, the management practices at the old NKF came to light after a six month investigation by KPMG, an audit firm.

After this civil case is over, Mr Durai will have to be present in court at the end February to face two criminal charges.

During the three week trial, he will have to answer to charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

He has been charged with intent to deceive NKF by submitting false documents.

Other than Mr Durai, who is currently out on a $50,000 bail, Ms Chua, Mr Yong and Mr Loo also face criminal charges. - CNA /dt