Last July, a police officer was found dead at the foot of a Yishun HDB block. Shortly before his death, the victim, Sergeant Uvaraja Gopal, penned a Facebook post containing damning allegations against the Singapore Police Force (SPF).
On Tuesday (6 Feb), Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam delivered a Ministerial Statement addressing these claims, following an investigation into the incident.
The allegations can be broadly broken down into the following:
Source: MCI Singapore on YouTube
In a detailed address that took about 40 minutes, Minister Shanmugam told Parliament that all the allegations made by Uvaraja were looked into.
He would have preferred not to go into the details out of respect for his family, but he has no choice but to “set out the facts” with some regret, said Mr Shanmugam.
After thorough investigations, Mr Shanmugam said some allegations were found to be true.
There had been investigations at the time the complaints were made, and actions were taken then — officers were disciplined or punished.
That said, some allegations were untrue, he added. The police’s internal investigations were later reviewed by the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) and found to be satisfactory; the AGC determined that no further actions were needed.
One of Uvaraja’s complaints had been about racially inappropriate language used against him in 2015.
Internal investigations conducted found that the officers were talking among themselves and the remarks were not directed at Uvaraja.
Nonetheless, Mr Shanmugam acknowledged that the remarks were “not acceptable at all”. Supervisors made this clear to the team at the time, stressing that such language cannot be used even as a joke.
The officer who made the remark also apologised to Uvaraja in the presence of the entire team.
Uvaraja subsequently turned down an offer to lodge an official complaint regarding the incident.
Mr Shanmugam also said following this incident, the police has developed a framework of approach for these cases.
“Cases involving racial slurs or casual racism will be investigated as possible misconduct, as a disciplinary breach. This is to ensure that there is a record of such an incident and that disciplinary action would be taken and the officer’s subsequent behaviour will be closely monitored.”
Uvaraja also alleged that in 2019, his superior had shredded his leave form and uploaded a video of him doing so in a group chat.
Providing context to the situation, Mr Shanmugam shared that Uvaraja had applied for discretionary time off at the time, which doesn’t require any forms to be submitted.
Uvaraja submitted his application at the last minute when other officers’ leave was already approved. This was not the first time he had done so. In the past, other officers who were on leave had to be recalled to cover the manpower shortfall.
Source: MCI Singapore on YouTube
Uvaraja’s superior decided to speak to him on how he has inconvenienced the team with his actions.
Nonetheless, Uvaraja was adamant about his application and asked his superior to “end their conversation” in their personal chat.
The superior then shredded the leave form and sent a video of him doing so in the team group chat.
When asked about his actions, the superior said that the form was not required. He added that it contained confidential information and had to be disposed of properly.
Mr Shanmugam acknowledged that the superior’s actions were “not professional”, even though his unhappiness was understandable.
Uvaraja later surfaced the matter up the chain of commands and the superior in question was given a reprimand.
Uvaraja was temporarily assigned to another unit, allowing both officers to “cool off”.
However, allegations on the use of abusive language by different superiors were found to be untrue. They had responded to him professionally when he directly messaged or called them, said Mr Shanmugam.
On Uvaraja’s allegations that his complaints about officers vaping were covered up, Mr Shanmugam said this was untrue.
Uvaraja had filed the complaint about other officers vaping within police compounds to his superiors in 2021.
Upon receiving his complaint, his commander arranged for an independent superior from another unit to conduct a surprise check.
Mr Shanmugam said that even though Uvaraja’s complaint was only directed at a few officers, checks were performed on all lockers and personal belongings within the police compound.
In the end, Uvaraja’s complaint was “not made out” and the independent superior and officers concerned were not aware that he was the whistleblower.
Uvaraja had lodged a similar complaint in January 2023 on officers smoking within a different police compound. Investigations did find evidence of this, said Mr Shanmugam, and they were referred to the police’s Internal Affairs Office and disciplined.
Referring to Uvaraja’s allegation that he was unfairly held back in his career and given unfair performance appraisals, Mr Shanmugam said these were untrue.
According to Mr Shanmugam, Uvaraja was given opportunities to apply for postings, similar to other officers in the Police Land Divisions. Where possible, his superiors would facilitate and accede to his transfer requests.
In fact, Uvaraja was transferred to six different units within nine years at his request — significantly above the norm.
Additionally, Mr Shanmugam said that Uvaraja’s performance grades were a “fair assessment” of his contributions at work.
On Uvaraja’s claim that he was treated like an “outcast” and that officers from his team had “boycotted” his wedding, Mr Shanmugam said this was untrue.
Uvaraja, he said, had only invited his officer-in-charge, who initially accepted the invitation.
However, he fell ill that day and was unable to attend the ceremony. He also apologised to Uvaraja for his absence.
Uvaraja also informed his commanding officer about his wedding, but did not follow up with an invitation.
Nonetheless, the commanding officer reportedly congratulated him in front of his teammates.
During his parliamentary speech, Mr Shanmugam also documented the multiple personal issues Uvaraja faced during his time with the SPF.
These include personal stresses, chronic insomnia, anxiety, and depressive symptoms.
Additionally, Uvaraja seemingly had a “tense” relationship with his wife and family. In April 2023, for instance, Uvaraja’s wife called the police after they had a domestic dispute and he refused to let her leave their home. In July, multiple police reports were lodged against Uvaraja by his family.
There were three criminal and disciplinary investigations into Uvaraja at the time of his death.
Mr Shanmugam said the SPF had given Uvaraja professional support through “substantial” time off, psychological counselling, and coaching.
From 2014 to 2023, Mr Shanmugam shared that Uvaraja took an average of 120 days of leave annually — “much more” than the leave allocation typically given to a police officer.
In the years 2016, 2017, and 2021 to 2023, he took several days of medical leave ranging from 56 days to 80 days.
Furthermore, in 2015 and 2022, Uvaraja was granted more than 100 days of no-pay leave after exhausting his medical and annual leave.
Mr Shanmugam shared that while Uvaraja’s colleagues were saddened by his passing, they were disappointed by the “untrue claims” made against SPF.
One officer who partnered him recalled encouraging him to leave his past grievances behind and start afresh when he was assigned to a new unit.
However, she was disappointed when Uvaraja frequently did not show up for work.
Another officer shared how he had attempted to motivate Uvaraja by arranging one-on-one chats and sending birthday greetings.
Other officers also attempted to help care for him, for instance by covering his shifts when he was absent.
They were thus saddened that despite their efforts, Uvaraja had “externalised many of his issues” onto his colleagues and SPF as a whole, added Mr Shanmugam.
Non-Constituency Member of Parliament (NCMP) Leong Mun Wai sought clarification on why an internal investigation was conducted instead of an independent Committee of Inquiry (COI).
Mr Shanmugam pointed to the United Kingdom’s police force, saying there’s extremely low morale among officers there due to “endless inquiries” arising from public allegations. “Every time there’s an allegation, there’d be a Committee of Inquiry (COI),” he said, adding that police officers are “hung out to dry”, which deters many from joining the force.
Instead of following a system like the UK’s, he said, “perhaps you can tell me which part of the explanation do you disagree with or you find questionable?”
Mr Leong reiterated that he did not find the investigation questionable, he simply wanted to clarify on this particular incident as it has been a unique one.
Responding to Workers’ Party chief Pritam Singh’s question on whether the trust in and morale of SPF policers have been impacted after this episode, he said morale is extremely high because “they know the Government does the right thing by them”.
Stressing that more than 90% of Singaporeans trust the Singapore Police Force, Mr Shanmugam said: “You don’t get that in other countries”.
The Government’s transparency in dealing with officer matters is why there’s this level of trust, he explained.
“We don’t make police the scapegoats every time there are inconvenient questions. We come out, we tell the truth; we defend them where they ought to be defended, we admit when something has gone wrong.”
Have news you must share? Get in touch with us via email at news@mustsharenews.com.
Featured image adapted from MCI Singapore on YouTube.
One of the vehicles was transporting two children in the backseat.
A miracle, given the car's condition after the crash.
Its shortest teleconsultation was conducted in one second.
May he have a restful leave.
The fierce fight involved items like plates, bottles, containers and a chair.
LTA urged members of the public to avoid using these services for their own safety.