Currently browsing category

From Mr. Chew Eng Han, Page 2

Personal Statement From Mr. Chew Eng Han

Mr. Chew Eng Han Self Represents

Today marks yet another major crossroad of my life. I have discharged my lawyer Mr Michael Khoo and the court has officially acknowledged it. More significantly, I have decided to represent myself in court henceforth.

This decision comes after much thought and deliberation as well as prayer and counsel. Mr Khoo has been a great help as well as a supportive friend to me, but I have a deep personal conviction that I need to speak and deliver my defense in person. It isn’t easy for most to understand this move, but I believe it is the right thing to do. The prosecution has delivered its case, and the honorable judge has decided there is a case to answer. Now is the time for me to answer and I feel that i need to answer for and by myself.

The next tranche starts on July 14th and from now till then it will be an intensive time of self preparation. It is a big step of faith, and the road ahead will be rough, but I trust in the Lord that He will guide me through.

Proverbs 3:5-6 “Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding; In all your ways acknowledge Him, and He shall direct your paths.”

Chew Eng Han
28 May 2014

Chew Eng Han Statement – Meeting with Dr AR Bernard

Subsequent to a skype conference call on Aug 1 2013 with Dr AR Bernard, I have requested and been granted a meeting with him when he visits Singapore in the coming weeks.  Dr Bernard is the chairman of the advisory board of City Harvest Church.  The objective of this meeting, as conveyed to Dr Bernard, is to abide by the biblical process of dealing with spiritual and moral issues which I have with the church leadership.  Dr Bernard is a highly respected figure in his home base in the US, as well as in Singapore, and I have reason to hope that he will deal with the issues at hand with utmost seriousness and responsibility.

 

For His kingdom
Chew Eng Han

COC’s response to written submissions

Mr. Chew Eng Han’s statement 1 Aug 2013
Re: COC’s response to written submissions

The Commissioner of Charities (“COC”) has written to my counsel to inform that it had received requests from seven of the suspended individuals (except myself) and the Governing Board of the City Harvest Church (“CHC”), to defer the removal proceedings until after the conclusion of the criminal trial.  Hence all suspended individuals, except myself (this is moot now anyway) have voluntarily undertaken to refrain any management and/or executive roles with CHC, and also to extend their suspension from positions contained in their respective suspension orders, until 6 months after the conclusion of the criminal trial.  Further, CHC has also undertaken that it would not engage any of the suspended individuals (including myself, again moot) for any management and/or executive role within CHC.

Having taken into account all relevant considerations, the COC has decided to defer the removal proceedings for all suspended individuals.  They will defer mine as well even though I have made full submissions of written representations and indicated my readiness to appear before the COC board.  The COC has stated that it will consider my written submissions carefully and thoroughly before making a decision, which it now appears will be done only after the trial.

As a point of clarification, even though the removal actions are irrelevant now given my exit from CHC, I am nevertheless contesting them on the grounds that the allegations were in the first place without basis.  I trust that in due course COC will give a favourable decision upon reviewing my representations.

Chew Eng Han – Statement re Submissions to COC ( 20 July 2013)

As many would have already read, the deadline for making submissions to Commissioner of Charities (COC) passed on 13 July 2013, with only myself and one other person meeting the deadline. The remaining six have applied for extension time to submit their objections to their removal from office. For some, they have asked to extend till as far as the end of the criminal trial, likely to be in 2014.

My counsel Michael Khoo has sturdily laid out my grounds as to why I should not be held to account for any misconduct or mismanagement of the charity. I do not see any reason to delay such submissions. A man should clear his name and defend his integrity at the soonest opportunity possible, and this submissions process is the most opportune platform, aside from the time when I take the defence stand in the ongoing criminal trial.

The COC has on 19 July 2013 offered to defer the removal proceedings till six months after the conclusion of the trial, on condition that I sign a consent form for further suspension. My counsel has been instructed to kindly decline this offer. I have already stated in my submissions on 12 July that I am fully prepared at any time to go before the COC board to have my case heard.

Proverbs 22:1 NKJV
“A good name is to be chosen rather than great riches, Loving favor rather than silver and gold.”

Article Contributed by Mr. Chew Eng Han

Read COC’s response to written submissions

Chew Eng Han’s response to CHC’s statement

In response to CHC’s Board’s response to my Personal Statement on my departure from CHC, the following are my replies:

1. Firstly I refer to the para which states:

“While we do not understand the reasons for his current sentiments, we wish nothing but the best for Eng Han and his family, and thank him for all his contributions.”

My query to the Board is whether they have been made aware of a four and a half hour meeting between Pastor Kong, Sun, myself and my wife? Are they also aware of some of the issues which I raised and whether there were sincere corrective actions taken since that meeting 3 months ago?

2. Secondly I refer to the para which states:

“The Board knows and believes that the senior leadership has always walked in integrity, adhering to Biblical principles through the leading of the Holy Spirit. We maintain our full confidence in the leadership.”

My query is how many of the board members made a conscious effort to read the COC Inquiry Report which was made accessible to them? And if they did, was then a diligent internal inquiry held in-house, to determine if there was any wrongdoing on the part of the alleged wrongdoers? Has the board done an inquiry on the issues named by COC, and satisfied itself fully that there has been no compromise of integrity? If the board has not done so, it cannot state that it knows and believes in the integrity of the senior leadership.

3. The board is probably unaware of many other issues, especially those on the pastoral angle, in terms of the manner of conduct of some of their pastors and senior leaders.  Without such information, it is not equipped to issue a board statement of confidence.

The church statement is a mere attempt to unite the church with a spiritual tone, but lacks substance in dealing with the real issues of truth and integrity.

Dated 22 June 2013