CHC members not given full picture of Crossover Project: Prosecution
Judges at the appeal have asked if the Crossover Project, using church co-founder Ho Yeow Sun’s (right) secular pop music to evangelise, was endorsed by the general body of the church. Photo: Nuria Ling
SINGAPORE — As the prosecution made its arguments for harsher sentences for the six present and former City Harvest Church (CHC) leaders in court on Wednesday (Sept 21), the judges presiding over the hearing for their appeal questioned the level of support from church members for the Crossover Project, which aimed to use church co-founder Ho Yeow Sun’s secular pop music to evangelise.
Judge of Appeal Chao Hick Tin, one of the three judges, noted that there is evidence to suggest that the Crossover Project was “generally endorsed” by the body of the church, but pointed out that “what is wrong here was the manner in which the church went about funding” the project. “Can we not, therefore, say that actually they were doing something in pursuance of what they thought was church purpose, only they took the wrong route or the wrong means?” he asked.
Justice Chan Seng Onn said that there are cheaper ways to evangelise, such as having a Korean-pop concert, prompting laughter from the packed courtroom. “Kong Hee can (go) to the concert and then preach,” Justice Chan said, referring to CHC’s founder-pastor and Ho’s husband, who is one of the six appealing. “You can attract (a) bigger crowd, probably cheaper if you get an events manager.”
Justice Chan posed the question of whether church members were asked if they supported the project’s objective or the way the church was going to carry out the project.
Prosecutors are seeking longer sentences of five to 12 years’ jail for the six, who were sentenced to between 21 months’ and eight years’ jail for criminal breach of trust and falsification of accounts.
All six — Kong, his former second-in-command Tan Ye Peng, former church board member John Lam, former church fund manager Chew Eng Han and former church finance managers Serina Wee and Sharon Tan — are appealing against their convictions and sentences. Their lawyers and Chew, who defended himself, have said they had acted in the church’s best interests and had no intention of causing wrongful loss to the church.
Earlier, Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Christopher Ong asked if church members supported the project because they had not been given the “full facts” about how it was going to work. Using an analogy, the DPP said that a person might take a Ferrari car if it was free, but if he had to use his own money to pay for it, then he may not be so supportive of the idea of taking the car.
“So Your Honour, that’s the point I’m trying to make, that any support that the church members demonstrated for the Crossover (Project) must be viewed in the context of what they were told about (it) ... They were told everything good about the (project), everything good that they were trying to achieve ... but they were not told about who would be paying the bill.”
The Crossover Project was financed with S$24 million from the church building fund through sham bonds, while another S$26 million was used to cover up the move.
In wrapping up the prosecution’s case, DPP Ong said that “regardless of their religious beliefs, committing crime in the name of your religion is not a defence”.
Judge of Appeal Chao said that given the “voluminous evidence” during the appeal, the judges would have to “give careful consideration” and would “need time to run through” it. “We can only promise you a judgment ASAP,” he added, drawing laughter from the audience in court.
