Preamble:
What follows is a transcript (run through Otter.ai, with minimal editing - I mostly just tagged the speakers) of the govsg video in the title.
Though speech recognition technology has made leaps and bounds in recent years, it still isn't good enough for very accurate transcripts. So take the below as a free (for you, dear reader, at least) and rough transcript, with no warranty as to accuracy - for convenience instead of an accurate transcript. Nonetheless, I believe this will be helpful, especially for archival purposes.
If anyone wants to do or pay for manual transcription (building on the below or otherwise), that would be great. I'm not going to do 28 hours of manual transcription (with more videos almost certainly on the way).
The official transcripts may well come out publicly later. If they do, please use those instead. In the meantime, you may profit from the following; you can find links to all my COP transcripts at the index post.
Tan Chuan-Jin: 0:00
Let's resume some rounds please invite the witness to come in Thank you? Ganesa
Dennis Tan 1:53
Good afternoon Islam yeah afternoon just now before the before our short break question was put to you by Mr. Tong about the WhatsApp message of eight Agus where Miss rice icon sent a message just to jog your memory sent a message in a group chat track to a her volunteers, Mr. Yudhishthira naarden and Miss Lowe painting. And you were asked about a particular statement in this WhatsApp chat. Maybe, maybe you could just put the WhatsApp chat in front of you?
Sylvia Lim 2:50
It says I have it.
Dennis Tan 2:51
Thank you. Is that 12:41pm? On eighth of August, yes.
So you would have seen that in the chat itself, the message itself. In on the third sentence, she said that I told them what I told you guys, and they've agreed and the best thing to do is to take the information to the grave. Okay. Yes. Miss limb, I think it's quite public knowledge that you were ex police officer? I suppose it is. How many years did you serve in the police? Three years? Sorry? Well, three years, three years. Thank you, given the former police officers and knowing that police to keep their records very carefully. And of course, we know that there will always be the presence of CCTV footage outside police stations. In your in your view, do you think that agreeing to do something like taking the lie that Miss can sit in Parliament on the third of August to bring the information to the grave as in a message would be something plausible, as a police ex police officer?
Sylvia Lim 4:21
I'm not sure what you're asking me. Is that done? Actually, but we never told Miss can any such thing. And what we know from the news, of course, is that after the statement was made on third of August that the police will look into the matter. So I would assume that you know they will pick up all necessary evidence to try to confirm or or disconfirm what was said?
Dennis Tan 4:47
My question is actually that given that that you are an ex police officer and you know that our Singapore Police Force better than those who have not served in it. Would this be would it even be possible Border height set your information for long. Even though
Sylvia Lim 5:06
it's unlikely
Dennis Tan 5:11
Muslim also one, I would also like to ask you in the course of dealing with Miss Khan, including in the couple of months between August 3 of August and to eventual resignation. What is your knowledge of her mental state of mind or the she does she suffers from any mental condition to your knowledge.
Sylvia Lim 5:40
Actually, I got to understand her much more I felt during the time when we were conducting the disciplinary panel work because we had to interact with her both in dealing with her responses, as well as to interviews that we conducted with her. And she submitted as part of the disciplinary panel response, she submitted documents from a psychotherapist saying that she requires some therapy to stabilize herself, I need to look at the document to be very accurate in quoting that. So may I see
Dennis Tan 6:26
this? Which document is
Sylvia Lim 6:27
her reply to the disciplinary panel? invitation for an explanation?
Yes. Okay, so in one of her submissions it was from a clinic. I'm not sure whether I should read it out, actually, because it's medical information. But it was mentioned that she has got certain symptoms of PTSD and that she is undergoing some therapy to try to overcome that. In the course of our interviews with her and perhaps I may refer to my notes
Tan Chuan-Jin: 7:37
whose documents Okay, this one
Sylvia Lim 7:38
was actually the reply, the response by Miss Kahn to to the disciplinary panel, which is submitted by email on the fourth of November. So it's one of the attachments so it's hard document in that sense.
Dennis Tan 7:56
Yes, Miss Lim, you are going on to mention something? Yes.
Sylvia Lim 7:58
So so in the cost of the work in the DPP cites her own tendering of in that sense medical documents to the fact that she may have some mental health issues during the course of our interviews with her as well. We did find that it could be stress related. I don't want to judge anything but the fact is that during our interviews with her um, she was actually extremely fragile and emotional. And I think I did tender my notes typewritten notes to the staff to tender to the Committee during the break.
Dennis Tan 8:41
Would you like to refer to your No, yes.
Sylvia Lim 8:46
Okay, um, if I can refer the committee then to the first interview that we did with her on the eighth of November. Are these your documents these are my typewritten notes, which
Tan Chuan-Jin: 8:56
props which you'd like to submit it to me to take a look and then we can circulate it I'm sorry. Originally this was later your speaker
I think we're in regards to some of the mental health concerns, purchase exercise your judgment as to what needs to be shared or not possible.
Sylvia Lim 11:39
Okay, so I'll just try to stick to the facts as as we observe them rather than any diagnosis or such matters. Okay, so if I could refer the panel to the first interview my notes anyway of the first interview we had with her on the eighth of November. Does the does the committee have the notes?
Edwin Tong 12:08
I just asked one question. Muslim, this were not taken contemporaneously at the DEP meeting itself. Those are my notes. Yes. They were had returned.
Sylvia Lim 12:17
Yes. So so the handwritten ones actually I should tended
Edwin Tong 12:21
to know whether these were prepared contemporary contemporaneously?
Sylvia Lim 12:24
Yes. Yes. Thank you. And I believe that the others may have submitted to you also their notes, I suppose. So. Let's go through. Yes. Okay. So to answer the question of, I guess, I thought processes I just put it that way. So the committee started off on the eighth of November by asking us questions on how the untruth came to be in the speech in the first place. Right. And, and it was put to her mind, Mr. Singh, that, that actually, he had written on the draft that she needed to substantiate that paragraph. And she, she said her response was that she did not possess the gravity of that. And she thought that it was enough that she believed that the anecdote was true. And then she was subsequently asked, What about the part about following the victim to the police station, she said, she did not process it properly, you know, and then of course, restarted, so why the draft was put up so late and so on and so forth. And, you know, we started to look into in a sense, the root causes of why such such a incident happen. Alright, basically, she ignored or was not able to appreciate SGS advice to her and continue with it anyway. Okay, so So to us, that was something of concern, because how likely is that to happen in the future, if such a thing can happen this time. And we also noted that she, she's, she was saying that further down the page that because of hmm, she has imposter syndrome, and that she will not speak unless she's very for sure of something.
Sylvia Lim 14:09
So we also noted from that, that she was trying to attribute her actions to her age. Okay. And then over the page, we did ask her some questions about the fact that, you know, since she says that she's in a psychiatric, I mean, it's, it's it has some psychological needs, that it was important for her to address those issues. So and to ask what she had been doing to address those issues. And we noted that the documents that she submitted to us were actually of a therapist that she had seen in October 2021. So our question was, what about the therapists that you saw prior to that, why are they not producing reports and it's only this most recent one that's producing a report to say that she's sub show symptoms of PT SD. And finally, we also tried to ask her why she feels she needs to stay on. And there'll be the last page of my typewritten notes. She says she can understand why some people think that she should resign. But if she does not show that she can turn the matter around and contribute, there'll be repercussions on her personally, and also how people view minority women. Right. So that is her thinking. Now, if I can move on to the second interview that we did with her, which was on 29th of November, first of all, throughout this interview, she was crying. Most of the time, I can imagine that she's under a lot of stress. But this was the fact. And she started to the meeting, but she called for the meeting, actually the second meeting, so she tried to talk about the work that she had been doing, as an MP on the ground and so on. And if you look at the second page, I mean, we the committee actually wanted to come back to the main issue, too. And therefore, that was why on the second page, we asked her near the top there, why, why was she bringing all this up? And she said that she had to build her confidence and so on.
Sylvia Lim 16:13
Okay, so we then after she finished what she wanted to tell us, we then went to clarifications, again to find out again more about the incident and what caused the incident on the third of August to happen. So she said that she was asked, I mean, the original draft, that she put up of that speech, which was I think, two days before the motion itself, that anecdote was not in the first draft. And then her explanation was that she was dissociated. And she did not realize what she was doing. And she had gone for therapy. So that was a worrying to ask, because what she was basically seeing, as far as we could understand it was that she was doing things without thinking about what she was doing. Then later on, when we went further down the page, on page two, I asked the question whether she has ever accompany any victims to the police in Singapore, because that part to me was not very clear, because she said that she had not accompany that victim that she the anecdote was about but also whether she had accompany any victims to the police in Singapore enhancer was I didn't go with them inside, but I dropped them off. And then they were my friends. And then she went on to say, but this didn't happen in Singapore. But I've done it in Australia, you know, so we were trying to grapple with, really, what should what was the truth? You know, as far as this whole episode was concerned, we were very unclear. The other issue which which cropped up, I think, during this second interview to me was that she appeared to not be very careful about the things that she was doing in general. So for example, she had, apparently, among her teammates talked about the fact that she should not leave the team because if she left there would be a by election triggered.
Sylvia Lim 18:07
And I asked her how she came to that conclusion, she said she was informed by someone that this was the case. And I asked her whether she had checked and she said she had checked and she had her checking review that the prime minister can decide whether a vacancy in a GRC would trigger by election. So we all know, the law on this is quite clear. And this also raised alarm bells with me because, I mean, I think as an MP would be expected to check such a thing before perhaps believing what people tell you or you know, at least do your research. So this this was another area of concern, I wasn't sure of her ability to actually exercise due diligence to check matters and so on. So, she continued. And subsequently, the the part that follows is actually questions about whether she had wanted to resign as an MP or to resign as a cc member earlier on. And initially, she said that she had not told anyone that but electron upon further questioning, it emerged, she agreed that she had actually drafted some messages earlier on intending to wanting to resign for one reason or another, you know, so this was another cause of concern. Mr. Singh highlighted to her that she had messaged him on the fourth of August to ask whether she has a future in the party. So So in that sense, in terms of emotional stability, we felt that there were causes for concern on our side
finally, towards the end of the interview of pages five and six, I just touch base very briefly with her on whether at that time the committee approved Religious at contacted her, and whether she was making any preparations for the committee. So she said that the committee had not contacted her at that point, which was I think 29 on November hanok, contacted her at that point, but she was preparing for the CRP, her lawyer was going through the metal with her.
Sylvia Lim 20:17
And last of all from these notes, I'd like to also highlight on the last page page six, that, and this concerns the third of October meeting which I wasn't present at between Mr. Singh and her. And the question was put to her by Mr. Singh, as follows, it says, 'Before the October session, I met you and I told you that it was your call. Did the need to tell the truth in Parliament occur to you?' And her response was, 'Yes. But I was consumed with guilt and my own experience, and I thought that it wouldn't come up.' That's her response. She, She was consumed with guilt and own experience that she thought that it wouldn't come up. And Mr. Singh says to her, 'You can't lie, right?' And then she says, 'Yes'. So I mean, as far as the third of October meeting, I was not there. But that was her response to the disciplinary panel when asked why she didn't tell the truth before the October sitting. She said she was consumed with guilt and own experience. There was what she, she
Tan Chuan-Jin: 21:16
may just ask quick questions since you raised this. In the last page, you mentioned about, regarding the conversation third October, on the top, where Mr. Pritam Singh said before October session, I met you and told you it was your call. Right. So meaning that it was really up to her to decide
Sylvia Lim 21:34
what to do. I don't know the context, but he phrased it in this way.
Tan Chuan-Jin: 21:38
From this, it would seem to be that it's really for her to decide, which is I guess, to decide if you follow from this, when you say that I will not judge you is that you decide what you want to do. I will not judge you for that. Will that be a fair interpretation?
Sylvia Lim 21:53
I wasn't I wasn't you were not there. I wasn't there. So
Tan Chuan-Jin: 21:56
as from what he is recounted here, as you recorded, and what we know now of what had been said specifically, this will be a reasonable interpretation of it.
Dennis Tan 22:05
Chairman Chairman, I think it will be fair to put to her that deadline comes from which witness? Because there's differing
Tan Chuan-Jin: 22:13
that line came from Mr. Pritam. Singh himself. We said to take ownership responsibility. I will not judge you, if you Yeah. So it's just based on what Mr. Pritam Singh has shared. And given what he said, Now here, would that be a reasonable interpretation that he was really left to?
Sylvia Lim 22:30
Well, I mean, I I don't know what he said, Because I put myself on a news blackout for the last few days. But in any case, I mean, it is recorded as it is recorded. Yes.
Tan Chuan-Jin: 22:39
The line, he said was to take ownership and responsibility, and I will not judge you. So these few lines came out called across clearly as what he conveyed. And I'm just asking you that based on what you've recounted here, it will suggest that the option was left to Mrs. Kahn to decide. But
Sylvia Lim 22:58
I think it also has to be looked at the whole context. Because you know, what we recorded here was that I told you it was your call did the need to tell the truth in Parliament occurred to you? Then she says yes. But I was consumed with guilt and own experience, and I thought it wouldn't come up. Now, of course, she's saying, She's not saying you gave me a choice. So I made that choice. She says I was consumed with guilt and unexperienced and I thought it wouldn't come up. And he says, but you can't lie. Right? And she says yes. So it will be taken, I think in totality to understand, like I said, I wasn't there, but this is what I recorded.
Dennis Tan 23:31
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Miss Lim. Thank you, Miss Lin, for recounting what was shipped to you by Miss Kahn and your own understanding of mental condition. I just I one follow up question on dead. You will recall that before the break that you dispute that Miss suns statement to miss Lo and miss not Mr. Nandan in his in her WhatsApp message on eight August that the three of you namely you, Mr. Singh, and Mr. Faisal, that great with her that the they should take the information to degree right. So having having no now, given your understanding of a mental condition, including dissociation, would you rule out that any other mental condition could have caused her to make this statement in her WhatsApp message?
Sylvia Lim 24:30
I can't rule anything out. Yeah.
Dennis Tan 24:37
Muslim, is there anything else you would like to tell the
Sylvia Lim 24:39
guy just just also to share one more document which I think the staff have provided that the committee did follow up on the response that Miss Khan gave to us when we wrote to her on the second of November on the fourth of November, she replied, she gave some attachments. And we did follow up On one important piece of information, which was that? She said, Because we asked her specifically about the women's survivor group that she attended, and whether she could give us any information about this group. And our reason for asking that is, we wanted to ascertain whether what she had said was untrue, only with regard to the power of accompanying the victim to the police. Or was it the case that the anecdote itself, her having heard it in a women's group, was that part true or not, we wanted to verify that as far as we could. So based on the reply that was sent to us, we did contact the person who was supposed to have been a key organizer of those groups. And I spoke with this person on the phone on the sixth of November. And I confirm what she told me by email. And the confirmation is this, that this person could confirm that she saw misgender. At these sessions that were organized by this group, she saw mishaan there in 2018, and 2019. But the anecdote itself, as to whether it was the case that the survivor shared that anecdote in the in the session, this lady was not able to confirm, because she said that there were too many stories and too many sessions. And it happened some time ago. So she was unable to confirm that part of it. So our conclusion from this is that we should give her the benefit of the doubt, because verification, at least, that she attended these sessions, of course, what is shared in the sessions is confidential. So our ability to check further on this point, I think would come to an end.
Tan Chuan-Jin: 26:45
Thank you. Any other questions?
Edwin Tong 26:50
Mr. the noes have provided I will be grateful this. Sorry, I'll be grateful if mislim could make available the actual contemporaneous handwritten ones? Sure. Sure.
Tan Chuan-Jin: 27:01
I'll be have. Any other questions? And you?
Edwin Tong 27:10
Just one, just one question. The the notes that Muslim had taken us through as you recorded it. Do you recall that this is as close as possible the words used by the individuals with whom you recorded the statements?
Sylvia Lim 27:24
I tried my best to do in a q&a form. Yes.
Edwin Tong 27:29
Yeah. So it seems to suggest that is as far as
Sylvia Lim 27:31
as far as possible. Yes. As far as possible, as close as possible. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. So may I provide original, handwritten?
Tan Chuan-Jin: 27:41
Thank you very much. There are no other further questions. For now. We'd like to thank you muslim, for coming before the committee transcript of the proceedings will be shared with you for verification. So do go through it. And if you have any other minor amendments, do make changes and send the transcripts back to us. Do note that the transcript and any evidence given to the committee are not to be disclosed to anyone or publisher must be kept strictly confidential until the committee has presented the relevant report to parliament. You may withdraw from parliament. We don't think we will be calling you back later today. But should there be a need we'll let you know. Do also provide us if any documents corroborating some of the points you have made, conversations you've had with your fellow team members, etc or anybody else with regards to the particular issue. There being no other matters, our staff will accompany you up to the waiting room. Thank you very much. So gendarmes please accompany the witness stuff. Thank you