The reply from GD Express regarding my complaint

The picture of the receipt: here

From: Sosamma (HQ - SQU) <sosamma@gdexpress.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2019 4:32 PM
To: medp1128@hotmail.com <medp1128@hotmail.com>
Cc: HQ - Services Quality Unit <squ@gdexpress.com>
Subject: Complaint about illegal activities

Dear Mr Yan Jun,

With reference to the above matter, we have reviewed all information and finding revealed that the said CN 8418519756 dated 4th October 2019 was collected by your housemate Mr Yap Foo Beng accordingly on 11th October 2019. Our Skudai branch had visited and confirmed with Mr Yap Foo Beng  that he collected the shipment base on your request. Thus, we had handover the shipment to Yap Foo Beng since he had brought the sorry card along. Furthermore, according to Yap Foo Beng that you have collected the shipment on 15th October 2019 and left due to your expired permit. For further clarification please do contact Mr Yap Foo Beng on the said matter. Kindly do refer to our proof that shipment has been collected accordingly.

 
We will continuously make quality improvements in our services to serve our valued customer better in future.

Your kind understanding and invaluable feedback on this matter is greatly appreciated.

Thank You.

Best Regards,

HQ - Sosamma (SQU)
GD Express Sdn Bhd
Tel (Gen): 603-77872222 (Ext. 5605)
Fax (Direct): 603-77820575
Email: sosamma@gdexpress.com
Website: www.gdexpress.com

**Our New Customer Service Hotline for HQ (03-64195003) JHB (07-2668006) & PEN (04-3717802)**

NOTICE

If you are not the authorized recipient of this e-mail, please contact GD Express Sdn Bhd (Company No: 347624-X) immediately by return e-mail or by telephone on 03-7787 2222. In this case, you should not read, print, re-transmit, store or act in reliance on this e-mail or any attachments, and should destroy all copies of them. This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and the copyright of the material belongs or licensed to GD Express Sdn Bhd or third parties. You should only re-transmit, distribute or commercialize the material if you are authorized to do so.

Attachments to this e-mail may contain software viruses that could damage your computer system. Whilst we take reasonable precautions to minimize this risk, we do not accept liability for any damage which may result from

software viruses. You should carry out your own virus checks before opening these attachments.

Please note that errors can occur in electronically transmitted materials. We do not accept liability for any such errors. If verification is required please ask for a hard copy.

This notice should not be removed.


*****************************

Attachment: Call Logs

From: Yan Jun
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2019 12:49 AM
To: GD Express Help Desk
Cc: He Wan Lian He Wan Bao; He Zao Zao Bao; Shin Min Daily; The Independent (Singapore); The Online Citizen (Singapore); The Straits Times; Today; Daily Sing tao; Hong Kong Journalists Association; Ming Pao (mingpao@mingpao.com); Oriental Daily News (news@odn.on.cc); SCMP; The Standard (editor@thestandard.com.hk); Taiwan news; United Daily News; Apple Daily; Asia Times; Jon Fasman (Economists) ; Keith Bradsher (New York Times); Linus Chua (Bloomberg); Philip Bowring (The South China Morning Post); Reporters Without Borders (RWB); Rico Hizon (BBC); Roberto Coloma (Agence France-Presse); Seiff Abby (Freelance Corrrespondent); gdexsku@gdexpress.com; Kwok Ping Express; AGC (AGC@agc.gov.sg); SUPCOURT QSM (SUPCOURT); newscentre@chinapress.com.my; editor.sh@sinarharian.com.my; editorial@sinchew.com.my; estherng@thestar.com.my; editor@malaysiakini.com; Russia Embassy (russian_embassy@singnet.com.sg); US Embassy (singaporeusembassy@state.gov)
Subject: Complaint about illegal activities

Dear GD Express Sdn Bhd,

Parcel tracking number: 8418519756

I am writing to complain of the poor service I received from your company on Oct 11, 2019 and request for a comprehensive investigation of my complaint.

The facts
On Sep 26, I requested Princess International Express to deliver a parcel from Shenzhen of China to a terrace house at No. 1, Jalan Perintis 1/1, Taman Nusa Perintis, 81550 Gelang Patah, Johor, Malaysia. The parcel contained a printer cartridge, a backpack, a key holder and a wallet.  I bought these items from an online shopping site Taobao.  

3 failed delivery attempts
According to your online tracking system, the parcel arrived at Skudai Branch of Johor on Oct 5. The 1^st delivery was made on Oct 8 but was surprisingly taken back. The 2^nd delivery was made on Oct 9 but failed again so the delivery officer left a sorry card to remind me of the self-pickup at Skudai branch. The 3^rd delivery was made on Oct 10 but failed for the 3^rd time so the parcel was taken back to the office. The 4^th delivery was made on Oct 11 and the parcel was “Delivered to Consignee” at 19:00.

On Oct 8, I was in the house for the whole day but didn’t receive any parcel or phone call. On Oct 9, I went out of town for Kuala Lumpur and missed a call (017-7724039) at 3:41pm. After getting back on Oct 10, I did call back several times but no one answered the phone. I didn’t see any notice from GDex.

On Oct 11 at 12:14, I called GDex hotline (07-2668006) and was told the parcel was held in Skudai. At about 13:30, I sent a letter of complaint to GDex and subsequently received a call from Skudai Branch (07-5112817) at15:01. To show that they did come to the house, this officer told me the delivery officer talked to an Ah Yap (Yap Foo Beng, a Malaysian), a tenant in the house, but didn’t give the parcel to him. This officer didn’t tell me his name.

At 18:40, I called Skudai Branch for a next-day delivery on Oct 12 but was told it could only be done on Oct 14. At 19:12, officer Dianna from Johor Bahru branch (07-3530413) told on the phone me that they had already arranged to deliver the parcel to me on Oct 12 before 13:00.

On Oct 12, I waited for a whole day but didn’t get the parcel or a call.

Violation of the Code of Ethics
On Oct 14 at 9:14, I called Johor Bahru branch and was told the parcel had already been delivered on Oct 11. I asked Yap Foo Beng whether he had talked to the delivery officers from GDex about my parcel. He denied he did so. After he found that GDex talked about him, Yap Foo Beng looked surprised and explained he that forgot to tell me about the unsuccessful delivery. About 10 minutes later, he came to my room and apologized to me for his poor memory.

At 12:00, I called GDex hotline and was told my parcel was already collected on Oct 12. At 12:36, I called Skudai branch and was replied that they would look into my complaint. At 15:45, I called Skudai branch again and talked to customer service officer Shira. She explained that on the morning of Oct 12 a Yap Foo (or Soo) Beng came to Skudai office and collected my parcel from customer service officer Aimen. She added that Aimen had already resigned from GDex on Oct 12, and asked whether I was familiar with Yap Foo Beng.

At 19:56, Shira told me on the phone that my parcel was actually collected by Yap Foo Beng at 3pm or 4pm on Oct 11 with a sorry card, and Yap claimed he was my friend. She further explained that Johor Bahru branch did inform her to deliver the parcel to me on Oct 12 but she later found it was already collected by Yap.

I wouldn’t accept her explanation. At about 3pm of Oct 11, I had already requested the Skudai branch on the phone for a next-day delivery, so Skudai branch was not in a position to issue the parcel to a so-called friend of mine over that period of time. 

Shira hoped that I simply accepted her apology after she got back my parcel and delivered it to me. She declined to report this matter to the police.

My complaint
It is evident that the tenant Yap Foo Beng had maliciously picked up my parcel on Oct 12, 2019 from GDex Skudai office by the help of customer service officer Aimen. GDex should find out why the company didn’t deliver the parcel to me when I was in the house on Oct 8 and Oct 11.

Given the fact that my name and contact information were pasted on the parcel, customer service officer Aimen and Shira had clearly violated the code of professional ethics for failing to check the receiver’s identity.

As for Aimen, he most likely has got involved in carefully planned criminal activities. It is self-evident that GDex ought to take responsibility of for this incident.

Why to inform the media
I will copy this email to the media and Singapore government because the facts set out above serve as conclusive evidence of secret operations conducted by a government. 

On Oct 9, I went to Kuala Lumpur to handle an urgent matter which would greatly facilitate my social activities in Singapore. I failed to get my job done on that day because I encountered 3 suspicious persons including a Grab drive (JNN7051, Maheran Bin Abu Yamin), a ticket officer at Gelang Patah Sentral Bus Terminal, and a bus driver. On the afternoon of Oct 9, Strait Times announced that former US President Barack Obama was coming to Singapore to give talks on Dec 16, 2019.

On Oct 11, I complained about the bus driver to the manager of Kwok Ping Express Sdn Bhd at swsam@ymail.com. After a very careful consideration, I didn’t copy that complaint letter to the media but posted it on my blog. Looking back, I made a mistake because it was still big news if a former US president was found in any connection with secret operations.

I don’t know whether the media is interested in my two stories. 

My request
I would request the GD Express to carry out a comprehensive investigation into my complaint and ask for a written reply. 

My two-month contract will end on Oct 16, 2019. After your company gets back my parcel, please do not deliver it to the Gelang Patah house but give me a call instead. 

Thank you.

Regards,

Yan Jun
(Singapore NRIC: S7684361I)

HP: 011-31627802; +65-82456386

Complaint Letter to GD Express

From: medp1128@gmail.com <medp1128@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, 11 October, 2019 13:37
To: helpdesk@gdexpress.com
Cc: gdexsku@gdexpress.com
Subject: Complaint: unnecessary delay (#8418519756 )
Importance: High

Dear GDex,

Tracking number: 8418519756

I refer to my package with the tracking number set out above.

The package arrived at Skudai on Oct 5 and has been held there since then. While I was in the house (No. 1, Jalan Perinitis 1/1, Taman Nusa Perinitis, 81550 Gelang Patah) for the whole day on Oct8, your employee put in the record that “08/10 20:18:11, Undelivered due to Hold for Reattempt Date; 09/10 19:42:19, Undelivered due to Sorry Card; 10/10 112:35/43; Undelivered due to Held Back in Office”.

One week has passed wince the package got to Skudai. I missed only one call on Oct 9 at 3:41pm from 017-7724039 when I was out of town. Please call me to let me know the time you deliver the package to my place. I prefer to wait at him for my packages.  

I lodge this complaint and hope you improve your professional skills.

Regards,

Yan Jun

(HP:011-31627802)

Complaint letter to Kwok Ping Express about a driver

Attachment: Bus ticket_GP to KL

From: Yan Jun

Sent: Friday, October 11, 2019 5:16 PM

To: swsam@ymail.com <swsam@ymail.com>

Subject: Complaint about a driver

Dear Kwok Ping Express,

I would like to lodge a formal complaint about a driver in your company over his malice towards me. On Oct 9, 2019, the driver drove the bus with plate number BLK 1888 from Gelang Patah Sentral Bus station (GP Sentral terminal) to Shah Alam bus terminal.

The fact

On Oct 9 at 8:50am, I bought a ticket from GP Sentral terminal to Terminal Bersepadu Selatan (TBS) of KL for a bus departing at 9am. My intention was to take the bus of Sin Yong Express that departed at 9:30am because the end of this bus route was TBS. The ticket officer ignored my request but advised me to take the bus departing at 9am instead.   

When the driver found that I was to go to the toilet before boarding the bus, he ordered me to put my luggage in the bus first. I was a little annoyed at his rudeness but didn’t lose my temper because I needed to attend an urgent matter in KL. After I came back, I showed him my ticket but he didn’t even bother to take a look at it. It was self-evident that my destination was TBS. In fact, only two passengers were on the bus when it left the terminal at 9am.

At about 9:40am, the bus stopped at Larkin terminal so I decided to go to the toilet again. This driver deliberately stopped me from getting off the bus on the grounds that I had just gone to the toilet, but I insisted on getting off the bus and finally did so. In fact, the bus stayed in Larkin for at least 20 minutes to pick up passengers.  

At about 2:40pm, the bus arrived at a place full of buses where I thought it was TBS. The driver did stop the bus at an overpass for a minute or two to let two passengers alight. However, this driver didn’t inform passengers it was TBS. While I thought he would stop at a formal bus terminal of TBS later on, this driver headed to Shah Alam Bus Terminal, which was 32.5km away from TBS. When I finally questioned him whether the terminal was TBS, he simply answered he already dropped passengers off at TBS.

At about 4pm, I reported the matter to one officer at Shah Alam Bus Terminal Seksyen 17, and was replied that this driver must have been aware that my destination was TBS.  He agreed to lodge my complaint to Kwok Ping Express and informed me of the company official email address (swsam@ymail.com). However, he was unable to find out the name of the driver.

Why the driver was wrong

A driver has a duty to ensure that each passenger gets off bus at the right stop in accordance with his ticket. While my ticket showed clearly that my destination was TBS and the driver was fully aware of it, he deliberately took me to Shah Alam Bus Terminal.

The net result was that I didn’t attend to my matter in KL on time as I had planned.

If he were an irresponsible person, he shouldn’t have ordered me to put my luggage in the bus in the first place because he wouldn't have taken any responsibility even if I had missed the bus at 9am.

His malice is demonstrated by the fact that this driver deliberately took me to Shah Alam while he was clear that I was supposed to get off the bus at TBS. It cannot be justified by reason of negligence.

My request

I would request Kwok Ping Express to look into my complaint and give me a reply as soon as possible.

Regards,

Yan Jun

(Singapore NIRC: S7684361I) 

My 12th letter to PM Lee Hsien Loong_Government's plan for GE 2019

 Attachment: Government's plan for GE 2019

From: Yan Jun
Sent: Wednesday, 11 September, 2019 07:20
To: Lee Hsien Loong (PM) <lee_hsien_loong@pmo.gov.sg>
Cc: AGC (AGC@agc.gov.sg) <AGC@agc.gov.sg>; CHEE Yam Cheng (Singapore Medical Council) <yam_cheng_chee@ttsh.com.sg>; Desmond Chin (SPS) (desmond_chin@pris.gov.sg) <desmond_chin@pris.gov.sg>; Eng Chye Tan (uprsec@nus.edu.sg) <uprsec@nus.edu.sg>; FAISAL Bin Mustaffa (faisal_mustaffa@pris.gov.sg) <faisal_mustaffa@pris.gov.sg>; Gan Kim Yong (Minister for Health) <gan_kim_yong@moh.gov.sg>; Hong Choon Chua (hong_choon_chua@imh.com.sg) <hong_choon_chua@imh.com.sg>; Jean Paul THIERY (bchtjp@nus.edu.sg) <bchtjp@nus.edu.sg>; K Shanmugam (Minister for Home Affairs) <k_shanmugam@mha.gov.sg>; KOO Boon Wah (SPS) <koo_boon_wah@pris.gov.sg>; Kumar Gupta Dhanesh (gmsdk@nus.edu.sg) <gmsdk@nus.edu.sg>; Lee Chien Earn (CGH) <lee.chien.earn@singhealth.com.sg>; Lim Wei Kiat (SPS) <lim_wei_kiat@pris.gov.sg>; Looi Wei Hao (SPS) <looi_wei_hao@pris.gov.sg>; Mandarin Self Storage (hougang@mandarinselfstorage.com.sg) <hougang@mandarinselfstorage.com.sg>; Middle East Institute (contact.mei@nus.edu.sg) <contact.mei@nus.edu.sg>; PM Office (pmo_hq@pmo.gov.sg) <pmo_hq@pmo.gov.sg>; QSM_STATE (STATECOURTS) (STATECOURTS_QSM@StateCourts.gov.sg) <STATECOURTS_QSM@StateCourts.gov.sg>; SUPCOURT QSM (SUPCOURT) <SUPCOURT_QSM@supcourt.gov.sg>; Tan Bin Kiat (SPS) (tan_bin_kiat@pris.gov.sg) <tan_bin_kiat@pris.gov.sg>; Chief Executive's Office_HK (ceo@ceo.gov.hk) <ceo@ceo.gov.hk>; HK Customs and Excise Department (customsenquiry@customs.gov.hk) <customsenquiry@customs.gov.hk>; Alejandro Ponce (The World Justice Project) <aponce@worldjusticeproject.org>; Sofie Arjon Schutte (U4 Anti-corruption resource centre) <sofie.schuette@cmi.no>; Yuri Fedotov (United Nations Office on Drug and Crime) <yury.fedotov@unodc.org>; 'Buscaglia Edgardo (Columbia University)' <ebuscaglia@law.columbia.edu>; 'Garry Rodan (Murdoch University)' <G.Rodan@murdoch.edu.au>; Matthew Stephenson (mstephen@law.harvard.edu) <mstephen@law.harvard.edu>; 'S.T. Quah Jon (National University of Singapore)' <jonstquah@gmail.com>; 'Silverstein Gordon (Yale University) ' <gradpro.law@yale.edu>; 'Susan Rose Ackerman (Yale University)' <susan.rose-ackerman@yale.edu>; 'Freedom House' <info@freedomhouse.org>; Human Rights First (feedback@humanrightsfirst.org) <feedback@humanrightsfirst.org>; info@article19.org; mail@globalwitness.org; 'Mickey Spiegel (Human Right Watch)' <spiegem@hrw.org>; 'Phil Robertson (Human Right Watch)' <RobertP@hrw.org>; Yu Hah Ming (mingyu.hah@amnesty.org) <mingyu.hah@amnesty.org>; 'Elizabeth Andersen (American Bar of Association)' <elizabeth.andersen@americanbar.org>; 'Gail Davidson (Lawyers Rights Watch Canada)' <lrwc@portal.ca>; 'International Association of Judges' <Judicial.Independence.wp@gmail.com>; 'Talia Dove (International Bar Association)' <talia.dove@int-bar.org>; Australia High Court (jsmart@hcourt.gov.au) <jsmart@hcourt.gov.au>; Federal Court of Malaysia (webmaster@kehakiman.gov.my) <webmaster@kehakiman.gov.my>; Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal (cfaenquiries@hkcfa.hk) <cfaenquiries@hkcfa.hk>; Supreme Court of Canada (reception@scc-csc.ca) <reception@scc-csc.ca>; Supreme Court of India (supremecourt@nic.in) <supremecourt@nic.in>; Supreme Court of New Zealand (supremecourt@justice.govt.nz) <supremecourt@justice.govt.nz>; Supreme Court of South Africa (PaMyburgh@justice.gov.za) <PaMyburgh@justice.gov.za>; The Privy Council (enquiries@supremecourt.uk) <enquiries@supremecourt.uk>; Lian He Wan Bao (wanbao@sph.com.sg) <wanbao@sph.com.sg>; news@theindependent.sg; Online Citizen (Singapore) (theonlinecitizen@gmail.com) <theonlinecitizen@gmail.com>; Shin Min Daily (shinmin@sph.com.sg) <shinmin@sph.com.sg>; Straits Times (stforum@sph.com.sg) <stforum@sph.com.sg>; Today (voices@mediacorp.com.sg) <voices@mediacorp.com.sg>; Zao Bao (zblocal@sph.com.sg) <zblocal@sph.com.sg>; Hong Kong Journalists Association (hkja@hkja.org.hk) <hkja@hkja.org.hk>; Ming Pao (mingpao@mingpao.com) <mingpao@mingpao.com>; Oriental Daily News (news@odn.on.cc) <news@odn.on.cc>; SCMP (letters@scmp.com) <letters@scmp.com>; Singtao Daily (localnews@singtao.com) <localnews@singtao.com>; The Standard (editor@thestandard.com.hk) <editor@thestandard.com.hk>; Taiwan news (service@taiwannews.com.tw) <service@taiwannews.com.tw>; United Daily News (newspro@udn.com) <newspro@udn.com>; Indonesia Embassy (info@indonesianembassy.sg) <info@indonesianembassy.sg>; Laos Embassy (laoembsg@singnet.com.sg) <laoembsg@singnet.com.sg>; Myanmar Embassy (ambassador@myanmarembassy.sg) <ambassador@myanmarembassy.sg>; Philippines Embassy (philippine.embassy.singapore@gmail.com) <philippine.embassy.singapore@gmail.com>; Thailand Embassy (thaisgp@singnet.com.sg) <thaisgp@singnet.com.sg>; Vietnam Embassy (vnemb.sg@mofa.gov.vn) <vnemb.sg@mofa.gov.vn>; Argentina Embassy (consulares_eisia@mrecic.gov.ar) <consulares_eisia@mrecic.gov.ar>; Brazil Embassy (brasemb.cingapura@itamaraty.gov.br) <brasemb.cingapura@itamaraty.gov.br>; Russia Embassy (russian_embassy@singnet.com.sg) <russian_embassy@singnet.com.sg>; Saudi Arabia Embassy (sgemb@mofa.gov.sa) <sgemb@mofa.gov.sa>; South Africa Embassy (singapore.consular@dirco.gov.za) <singapore.consular@dirco.gov.za>; South Korea Embassy (korembsg@mofa.go.kr) <korembsg@mofa.go.kr>; Turkey Embassy (embassy.singapore@mfa.gov.tr) <embassy.singapore@mfa.gov.tr>; Australia Embassy (enquiries-sg@dfat.gov.au) <enquiries-sg@dfat.gov.au>; Canada Embassy (spore@international.gc.ca) <spore@international.gc.ca>; German Embassy (info@singapur.diplo.de) <info@singapur.diplo.de>; Italy Embassy (ambasciata.singapore@esteri.it) <ambasciata.singapore@esteri.it>; Japan Embassy (infoculture@sn.mofa.go.jp) <infoculture@sn.mofa.go.jp>; US Embassy (singaporeusembassy@state.gov) <singaporeusembassy@state.gov>
Subject: Government's plan about GE 2019

Dear PM Lee Hsien Loong,

I refer to my email dated Feb 28, 2019 about my protest at Raffle Place MRT station. I was sentenced to 35 weeks on Apr 17, and was released on Aug 13, 2019.

The upcoming General Election (GE) 2019

On Sep 4, 2019 at 4:46pm, I sent an email to the media about the PAP government’s plan for the upcoming General Election (GE) 2019. On the same day at 5:02pm, the mainstream newspaper Straits Times reported that PM Lee had convened the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee (EBRC), the first step towards the upcoming GE.

It is evident that there was a causal connection between my disclosure of the government’s secret plan and the announcement of EBRC, as the GE is not a light matter. 

In the email, I claimed that the PAP government was scared of my continued protests so planned to end my protest for good by holding a GE before Chinese President Xi Jinping’s reciprocal state visit to Singapore later this year. I explained this plan in great detail in the attached file.

To that end, two preparations were made. One preparation was the announcement of PM Lee’s stepping down under the guise of an interview with Nikkei Asian Review in the context of G20 Osaka Summit, which served as a bait to lure me into going on a protest after the announcement of the GE.

The other preparation was my appeal hearing scheduled for Jul 26, 2019, which was meant to release me from the court and to make my February protest public through mainstream newspapers.

If I protested shortly after Parliament was dissolved, the government would arrest me and then proceeded with nomination and voting activities. If Parliament were dissolved at the end of September, the GE would be held in October. President Xi’s visit were expected to take place after the GE. It was meant to counter the destructive effect produced by my protests on the PAP government by showcasing good relations between Singapore and China.

In the attached file, I provided conclusive evidence of the direct involvement of Supreme Court by a forced appeal hearing in this political intrigue. Since judicial independence is protected by the Constitution of Singapore, I am wondering what punishment the government will mete out to Senior Judge Chao Hick Tin, the No. 1 legal officer in Singapore.

Despite the fact that people generally believe that there is no pure form of totalitarian regime in this world due to the difficulty in controlling a large number of populations meticulously, the PAP government made it by its successful rule under the shield of the law and in the name of justice.

Abuse of psychiatry in the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) and Changi Prison

In my blog post Abuse of psychiatry in IMH and Changi Prison, I gave a detailed account of the physical and mental torture I suffered after my February protest.  

On the one hand, Dr. Cheow Enquan of IMH on Mar 14 diagnosed me with a delusional disorder of persecutory type; on the other hand, he certified that I was in sound mind. Although Dr. Cheow made his diagnosis based on his phone interview with Chao Shen Lin, my former-landlord of a Tampines flat; he deliberately ignored my report about espionage activities in the Tampines flat to Minister for Home Affairs K Shanmugam on Nov 17, 2018, to PM Lee on Dec 31, 2018, to Attorney-General Lucien Wong on Dec 14, 2018, Jan 7, 2019 and Feb 8, 2019.  

It is evident that the examination of the truthfulness of espionage allegations is outside the knowledge and experience of a psychiatrist. I would request Dr. Chua Hong Choon, the CEO of IMH, to justify how IMH was in a position to assess my allegations of judicial corruption, Terrex conspiracy and a series of espionage activates. The PAP government hasn’t denied my allegations so far. 

Prison psychiatrist Dr. Lim Chee Min was fully aware of Dr. Cheow’s diagnosis and the certificate, however, he had forcibly interviewed me, arbitrarily diagnosed me with a mental illness and stubbornly persuaded me to take a medication, or Olanzapine. After release, I found Olanzapine was used to treat certain mental/mood conditions such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder. At this this moment, I still have no idea what Dr. Lim’s diagnosis was. On my release date (Aug 13), Dr. Lim even made a direction to send me to IMH for no reason.

I later found Dr. Lim Chee Min was from Changi General Hospital (CGH). I would request Dr. Lee Chien Earn, the CEO of CGH, to justify the malice on the part of Dr. Lim Chee Min in his malpractice. In my letter to PM Lee dated Nov 7, 2017, I had already complained against Dr. Ling Tiah of CGH about a forced blood draw done on Jul 17, 2017. I think it is necessary for Dr. Lee Chien Earn to look into this matter and to find out whether the idea of forced transportation was made by Supt. Faisal Mustaffa. Another prison psychiatrist who had engaged in malpractice was Dr. Rajesh Jacob.

It is evident to the world that IMH and Changi Prison are abusing psychiatry by malicious diagnosing and detaining healthy persons to cover up PAP government’s political scandals. For this reason, I will copy this email to World Psychiatric Association (WPA), who already received on email to PM Lee dated Nov 7, 2017.

I also hope the Mr. Gan Kim Yong, the Minister for Health, and Prof Chee Yam Cheng, the president of Singapore Medical Council, can pay attention to the medical malpractice in Singapore.

Prisoner abuse

In my blog post Why Changi Prison is a Slave Camp, I set out three reasons to explain why Changi Prison was a slave camp: prison officers’ questionable competence and integrity; a lack of accountability mechanism, and the unfair justice system. 

It is not possible for Changi Prison to transform inmates into law-abiding citizens because it cannot provide a morally pure environment for inmates to improve their moral fibre. Innocent inmates have to “go bad” to survive gang-controlled conditions in the prison. Justice has failed in Changi Prison so inmates have no choice but to build up alliance with other inmates.

I once asked Deputy Superintendent Louis Woo, the person in charge Housing Unit 4 of Institution B4, how to be a model prisoner. His said he didn’t know, and I believed no one knew the answer. If inmates are locked up in a cell for 23 hours a day, one inmate can do whatever another inmate can do. It is hard to imagine that some officers genuinely believed what inmates needed was mercy but not justice. They didn’t even know the principle underlying rehabilitation programs. 

The fundamental principle governing both inmates and prison officers is not virtue or honor but fear. I was deeply impressed by the standards of morality that most prison officers had, because they had to loss their sense of justice and to obey whatever order from higher management. There were a number of petty dictator officers who were dependent on their immediate senior. OC Lim Wei Kiat and RO Ahmad Naufal are petty dictators in HU2 of B4. 

The biggest dictator in B4 is Supt. Faisal Mustaffa, who had absolute power in B4. He was quite willful so always competed against me by abusing his power. He was cowardly so had maliciously taken away all my notes including drafts of my complaint letters in the hope to stop me from reporting his misconduct to the PM.

Supt. Faisal Mustaffa was cold-blooded and cruel. On May 23, 2018, I complained against his abuse of power to Commissioner Desmond Chin and requested for a transfer to Institution B2. Supt. Faisal Mustaffa calmly watched me going on hunger strikes for 3 days (from Apr 20 to 23, 2018 in PI cell 725 of HU4), 5 days (Jun 29 to Jul 4, 2018 in a PI cell in DHU) and 7 days (Aug 24 to 28 in cell 116 of HU1, Aug 28 to Aug 30, 2018 in a PC cell in DHU) for the transfer and waited for me to end my strike voluntarily. Supt. Faisal flatly rejected my request for a transfer to B2 because in his opinion, there was absolutely no abuse of power in Changi Prison.

On the afternoon of Jun 29, 2018, Supt. Faisal threw me in a PI cell of DHU to isolate me from other inmates in case they could copy me and went on a strike again. In response, I began a hunger strike. While I was supposed to be released from the PI cell after a provost officer took my statements on the morning of Jul 2, Supt. Faisal deliberately tested my willpower by ordering me to serve 3 days’ imprisonment in the same cell from the noon time of Jul 2 to Jul 4. On Jul 2, I did take the opportunity of document submission to Supreme Court and put SOS on my appeal documents. There was no response from court at all.

Supreme Court was cold-blooded as well. On Aug 27, I was taken to the Supreme Court to attend my appeal. I asked for some bread on the grounds of my hunger strike against prison officers. The appeal hearing was postponed for half an hour but I didn’t get any bread.

On Mar 18, 2019, Supt. Tan Bin Kiat of Institution B2 arbitrarily ordered me to see Dr. Lim Chee Min against my will after I told him the office certificate. On May 28, Supt. Faisal directed Chief Warder Ng Bee Teng and Chief Warder Lieow to ask me to take psychiatric medication Olanzapine because I blamed a female trainer for humiliating me.

On Jul 26, Supt. Faisal used excessive force to take me to the Supreme Court after I submitted a notice of withdrawal of my appeal to Supreme on Jul 25. The SPEAR officer even carried an assault rifle with them during the operation. On Jul 29, he even pressed a formal charge against me for refusing to attend the appeal on Jul 26. On Aug 13, Supt. Faisal ordered to forcibly transport me to IMH.

From Jul 27 to Aug 10, inmate Ang Han Boon (S064922018) in HU2 had repeatedly harassed me every day by shouting “China Dog, Go back to China”, “I will kill you on Aug 13” and “I will break your legs after I get out of the jail”. He deliberately humiliated me on the evening of Aug 9 when the national anthem was played on TV, and quite a few inmates supported him. I had to remind him to think about the image of Singapore and Changi Prison.

In response to my numerous verbal and written complaints to B4 management against inmate Ang in cell 408 and my cellmates Pravin Kumar, Steven Ng and Kelvin Chuan (L020192018) in cell 407, OC Lim Wei Kiat maliciously gave contradictory excuses in order not to take my complaints. Right before my release date, he claimed that there was not racial discrimination and harassment at all. Supt. Faisal’s strategy was to ignore all of my complaints and blamed me for not getting along with other inmates. Inmate Lee Wen Jun (L200282017) who harassed me in 2018 was even got a promotion to work as a cooki, an inmate working outside their cells as an errand boy to help prison officers reduce their workload.

In addition to widespread racial discrimination, harassment and lack of justice, there is a problem of forced drugging in prison, which was in connection with an inmate’s death at HU2 of B4 on Apr 17, 2019. It is a fact that Changi Prison categorically rejects inmates’ complaints about prison doctors and their malpractice.

It is both necessary and appropriate for me to call for the resignation of Minister for Home Affairs K. Shanmugam and Commissioner Desmond Chin at Raffle Place.

My requests

It is clear that the PAP government has made use of Nikkei Asian Review and Chinese President Xi Jinping’s reciprocal visit to Singapore for ulterior purposes. I would request PM to reply publicly to my allegations of ulterior purposes.

I have provided sufficient evidence of the malice on the part of both IMH and Changi prison with regard to abuse of psychiatry. I think it is necessary for the PM’s office to give a call to both IMH and Changi Prison to ensure the safety of patients and inmates there. I would appreciate it if PM take my request seriously.

Due to financial difficulties, I am temporarily living in Johor Bahru of Malaysia (Jalan Perintis 1/1, Taman Nusa Perintis 79200 Nusa Jaya, Johor). I have compelling evidence to believe that the PAP government has already put me under surveillance. I would request PM to respond publicly to my allegations of the government’s espionage activities in Malaysia.

I have my way to overcome my financial difficulties. One thing is clear, I will continue my protest.

Regards,

Yan Jun

(Singapore NRIC: S7684361I)

A request for interview

From: Yan Jun
Sent: Monday, 9 September, 2019 12:49
To: Lian He Wan Bao (wanbao@sph.com.sg) <wanbao@sph.com.sg>; news@theindependent.sg; Online Citizen (Singapore) (theonlinecitizen@gmail.com) <theonlinecitizen@gmail.com>; Shin Min Daily (shinmin@sph.com.sg) <shinmin@sph.com.sg>; Straits Times (stforum@sph.com.sg) <stforum@sph.com.sg>; Today (voices@mediacorp.com.sg) <voices@mediacorp.com.sg>; Zao Bao (zblocal@sph.com.sg) <zblocal@sph.com.sg>; Hong Kong Journalists Association (hkja@hkja.org.hk) <hkja@hkja.org.hk>; Ming Pao (mingpao@mingpao.com) <mingpao@mingpao.com>; Oriental Daily News (news@odn.on.cc) <news@odn.on.cc>; SCMP (letters@scmp.com) <letters@scmp.com>; Singtao Daily (localnews@singtao.com) <localnews@singtao.com>; The Standard (editor@thestandard.com.hk) <editor@thestandard.com.hk>; Taiwan news (service@taiwannews.com.tw) <service@taiwannews.com.tw>; United Daily News (newspro@udn.com) <newspro@udn.com>; 'Apple Daily' <news@appledaily.com.tw>; Asia times <special@atimes.com>; Jon Fasman (Economists) <jonfasman@economist.com>; Keith Bradsher (New York Times) <kebrad@nytimes.com>; 'Linus Chua (Bloomberg)' <lchua@bloomberg.net>; 'Philip Bowring (The South China Morning Post)' <philip@bowring.net>; Reporters Without Borders (dbastard@rsf.org) <dbastard@rsf.org>; Rico Hizon (BBC) <ricohizon@gmail.com>; Roberto Coloma (Agence France-Presse) <Roberto.Coloma@afp.com>; 'Seiff Abby (Freelance Corrrespondent)' <aseiff@gmail.com>
Cc: AGC (AGC@agc.gov.sg) <AGC@agc.gov.sg>; SUPCOURT QSM (SUPCOURT) <SUPCOURT_QSM@supcourt.gov.sg>
Subject: A request for interview

Dear Media,

I refer to my email to PM Lee Hsien Loong dated Dec 31, 2018 about judicial corruption in Supreme Court, the Terrex conspiracy and Singapore’s Watergate scandal.

My interview request

I am writing to invite the media to interview me. I can talk more about judicial corruption, conspiracy, espionage activities, political abuse of psychiatry in the Institute of Mental Health, and cruel and inhumane rule in Changi Prison.

Although the People's Action Party (PAP) had argued that “Integrity is the Fundamentals for Singapore's Governance Success”, the PAP government is authoritarian in nature and has earned its good reputation by deception and a full control of local media. My experience with Changi Prison shows that prison officers have made no difference to inmates.

Since Aug 24, 2018, I have gone on a hunger strike against the abuse of power by Senior Sergeant Ahmed Ashraf Bin. On the afternoon of Aug 28, I was brought to Supreme Court to attend my appeal hearing. When I asked the court for some bread on the grounds of 3 days starvation, it was hard to image that the court ignored my request.

Donation

I am currently unemployed so I would give priority to the media who can donate S$10K to me. I can be interviewed in early October as I need one month or so to prepare for it. The donation money is meant to improve my living standards only. Please email your questions to me in advance, and I will reply to you in English or Chinese. For reporters who speak English only, it is better for them to have a translator with them during the interview, if any.

Please feel free to forward this email to any media, press, or organizations. The international community will see this email soon.

Clash of civilizations

Nowadays social scientists are still interested in clash of civilizations thesis and have used it to explain the growing conflicts between the US and China. It seems to me that there are two common misunderstandings of this thesis. As far as I know, no one proposed the idea of self-renewal of a civilization or explained how the self-renewal can take place. I can share my personal opinion in this regard during the interview.

Samuel Huntington, the late political scientist who proposed clash of civilization thesis in 1993, famously said that “the honesty and efficiency that Senior Minister Lee has brought to Singapore are likely to follow him to his grave”. It is me who happened to prove Huntington right.

In April this year, Kiron Skinner, the director of policy planning at the US State Department, claimed America’s rivalry with China was “a fight with a really different civilization”. A challenge to this argument is whether there are universal values to be preserved by a fight. My answer to this question is that the universal value to be preserved is just fundamental justice.

In my opinion, one common mistake about the clash of civilization thesis is to see the development of civilizations as a marathon race. Although athletes follow the same route in a marathon race, civilizations develop in the same direction but along different routes.

It is more appropriate to see the development of civilizations as a mountain climbing. All mountain climbers, or civilizations, go up from the foot of the mountain to the summit along totally different routes. As a result, climbers have to respond to different challenges posed by distinct types of mountain environments such as stone, or forest, plateau, or even volcano. It is self-evident that climbers will acquire different and sometimes unique skills during the course of their mountain climbing.

Researchers have given various answers to the Needham Question, or why had China and India been overtaken by the West in science and technology, despite their earlier successes? A popular answer given by Justin Lin in 1995 was that “the contents of civil service examinations and the criteria of promotion, which distracted the attention of intellectuals away from investing the human capital necessary for modern scientific research.”

If this answer is correct, Chinese government probably needs to push through radical political reforms to boost its scientific research. I think not. If a researcher cannot do his job well, he should blame himself but not the government as long as he has adequate research funding and access to scientific equipment. 

One simple answer to Needham Question, as given by Nathan Sivin, was that the development of science but not technology was a unique achievement of Western civilization. While other civilizations have every intention of catching up with the scientific developments initiated by the West, the question is how do that.

Maoism and Confucianism

At page 92 to 93 of Tom Plate's book Conversations with Lee Kuan Yew: How to Build a Nation, the late MM Lee Kuan Yew said that “He (Richard Nixon) asked me about Mao. So I gave him a graphic assessment of what I thought of Mao was doing. I said that Mao is painting on a mosaic with 5,000 years of history behind the mosaic. He's painting his picture on it. The rains will come. What he's said will be washed away, what's been settled for 5,000 years will remain. This is Confucius.”

It is clear to me that MM was wrong. What Mao’s said will not be washed away because it has already dramatically changed Confucianism. Under favorable circumstances, this dramatic change could make Confucianism undergo self-renewal and thus lead to the creation of a new civilization. To understand how this dramatic change works, one need to think about how Puritan ethics and ideas influenced the development of capitalism, a question answered by Max Weber in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.

Thank you.

Regards,

Yan Jun 

(S7684361I)