Trial to begin for former Hyflux CEO Olivia Lum, ex-CFO and directors
This comes nearly three years after they were charged - the culmination of a dramatic downfall for the water treatment firm.
Before Hyflux went into liquidation in July 2021, it was one of Singapore's most successful companies. Lum won accolades at a time when female founders were not common.
She now faces a months-long trial, along with former chief financial officer Cho Wee Peng and four independent directors.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
6 minutes ago
- Straits Times
Hyflux issued preference shares to fund Tuaspring as it had problems getting bank loans: Prosecution
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox SINGAPORE - Hyflux issued preference shares to fund its Tuaspring project because it had trouble getting bank loans, the prosecution said on the first day of the trial involving former senior executives of the failed water treatment plant. Deputy Chief Prosecutor Christopher Ong noted that a consortium of banks had raised concerns in 2011 over Hyflux's strategy of selling electricity to subsidise the sale of water to PUB. This led Hyflux to consider other avenues of raising funds. Its eventual collapse left about 34,000 investors of perpetual securities and preference shares, who had sunk in a combined $900 million, with nothing. Former Hyflux employees and bank representatives who were involved in negotiations on financing the Tuaspring integrated water and power project are expected to testify for the prosection. In total, seven people have been charged over Hyflux's intentional failure to disclose information relating to Tuaspring, among other things. Six of them – Hyflux founder and former chief executive Olivia Lum Ooi Lin, former chief financial officer Cho Wee Peng, and former independent directors Teo Kiang Kok, Christopher Murugasu, Gay Chee Cheong, and Lee Joo Hai – are contesting their charges in a 56-day trial scheduled to run from Aug 11 to Feb 5, 2026. The prosecution will proceed on 11 charges, including two of the six charges Lum faces. The remaining four charges against Lum are stood down. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore Keppel to sell M1's telco business to Simba for $1.43b, says deal expected to benefit consumers Business Singtel, StarHub shares fall after announcement of Keppel's M1 sale Singapore ST Explains: Who owns Simba, the company that is buying M1? Singapore Simba-M1 deal is S'pore's first telco merger, after years of liberalisation Singapore S'pore Govt asks inactive political parties including Barisan Sosialis for proof of existence Singapore Man's claim amid divorce that his mother is true owner of 3 properties cuts no ice with judge Opinion Anwar's government: Full house but plenty of empty offices The prosecution, in an opening statement to the State Court on Aug 11, said Hyflux won the tender for Singapore's second and largest desalination plant with the lowest submitted bid. It had proposed to sell water to PUB at a first-year tariff price of $0.45/m3, undercutting its competitors by at least 27 per cent. 'At this price, the desalination plant would operate at a loss,' Mr Ong said. 'To make the project financially viable, and also fulfil PUB's requirement to procure or produce electricity for the desalination plant at Hyflux's cost, Hyflux intended for the power plant to supply electricity to the desalination plant, while actually selling the vast majority of the power that it generated to the national grid.' It was only from this sale that Hyflux would be able to make up for the desalination plant's losses and make the project profitable. But Hyflux had no prior experience in power generation, much less selling electricity. The Tuaspring Project would be the first time Hyflux entered the electricity market, the prosecution said. How it all unfolded To finance the Tuaspring project, which was initially projected to cost $890 million, Hyflux sought a term loan of about $527 million from a consortium of banks. Six banks signed in-principle commitment letters in October 2010 indicating their willingness to finance the project. But they had not been told of Hyflux's plan to build a power plant and sell excess electricity to the grid at the time, Mr Ong noted. In November 2010, when they found out about Hyflux's power strategy, they 'raised serious concerns'. In January 2011, they told Hyflux that they could not lend it money on the terms previously indicated, as the power plant introduced new 'merchant sale risk and operational risk'. On 4 July 2011, only three of the original six banks - DBS, Mizuho Corporate Bank and Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation - extended Hyflux financing of $150 million for the construction of the desalination plant. This financing was eventually terminated by Hyflux. Tuaspring was ultimately financed by a shareholder's loan of $840.4 million by Hyflux in October 2011, which was in turn refinanced with Maybank Singapore and Maybank Kim Eng Securities in September 2013. The case against Lum In January 2011, in the midst of their negotiations with the banks, Hyflux's management began to contemplate issuing of preference shares to raise funds. On 19 January 2011, Hyflux senior vice president, legal (business) Ms Yang Ai Chian informed the Board of the need to issue preference shares to 'increase our funding options' for 'several new major projects' that Hyflux was expected to win that year. In reality, this money was meant to fund Tuaspring because of the challenges Hyflux faced in getting bank financing. On 13 April 2011, Hyflux lodged an offer information statement with the Monetary Authority of Singapore to issue up to $200 million in 6% preference shares. These were oversubscribed and the offer amount was increased. Hyflux ultimately raised $400 million. But the statement did not mention risks arising from Hyflux's entry into the electricity business, or those associated with Hyflux's strategy for Tuaspring, which could affect the company's financial position or results, the prosecution said. The information was omitted because Lum wanted to downplay Tuaspring's significant exposure to the electricity market, both in Hyflux's announcement that it had been named the 'preferred bidder' for the desalination project, as well as in the offer information statement, the prosecution said. 'Lum was determined that Hyflux had to win the bid and cement its status as a global leader in the water treatment and desalination industry. Hyflux was facing setbacks in its Middle Eastern ventures and winning the Tuaspring bid was critical for strengthening the company's order book,' Mr Ong said. 'She did not want to detract from the positive news of winning a landmark water project, by revealing the Tuaspring Project's reliance on electricity sales, and the fact that the low tariff price – the key to winning the tender – was only viable because of such electricity sales.' The prosecution also said Lum was well aware of the banks' negative reactions regarding the power plant component of the project, and feared that full disclosure might deter investors and compromise Hyflux's ability to raise funds through the planned preference shares. This, in turn, could jeopardise financial close for the project and potentially result in losing the bid, the prosecution said. The desalination plant of the Tuaspring Project became operational on September 18, 2013. But its power plant only became operational nearly two years later, on or around August 2015. It began selling electricity commercially on 18 February 2016. In March 2011, the average Uniform Singapore Energy Price had been around $187 per megawatt hour (MWh). By February 2016, this had fallen to around $49.10 per MWh. As the profitability of Tuaspring depended on electricity sales, this fall in electricity prices hit Hyflux hard. In its 2017 annual report, it reported a $115.6 million after tax loss. The report stated that the weak power market in Singapore drove losses for the first time in Hyflux's history, with the Tuaspring Project accounting for the majority of the losses. On 21 May 2018, Hyflux suspended trading of its shares. The next day, Hyflux announced that it had applied to seek court protection for debt reorganisation. On 18 May 2019, PUB took over the Tuaspring desalination plant. On 1 June 2022, a wholly owned subsidiary of Malaysia-based YTL Power International, YTL Powerseraya, completed its acquisition of the Tuaspring power plant. By 16 November 2020, Hyflux entered judicial management and into liquidation on 21 July 2021. Other witnesses include a lawyer from Stamford Law Corporation, who was Hyflux's external legal counsel on the April 2011 offer information statement; an SGX representative who will provide evidence on the sequence of events that led to this case being investigated; and a PUB representative, who will testify to PUB's dealings with Hyflux and its employees and management during the tender and award process for Tuaspring. The Prosecution will also adduce evidence from a securities expert, Mr Kevin Gin who will address why the omitted information ought to have been disclosed by Hyflux. The hearing continues.
Independent Singapore
40 minutes ago
- Independent Singapore
Police arrest man who tried to hack into RedeemSG to access vouchers
Screengrab/RedeemSG SINGAPORE: In a statement on Sunday (Aug 10), the Singapore Police Force (SPF) said that a 39-year-old man had been arrested for his suspected involvement in a hacking attempt on the Government's digital voucher system, RedeemSG. The team from RedeemSG filed a report with the police on Jul 28, 2025, regarding multiple suspicious attempts to access voucher links on its portal. Fortunately, these attempts had been unsuccessful, with no vouchers compromised. Upon conducting follow-up investigations, police officers from the Cybercrime Command under the Criminal Investigation Department were able to establish the identity of the man suspected of trying to hack into ReddeemSG on the same day the police report was filed. He was arrested on the following day. The laptop he used in his hacking attempt was seized by the police for further investigations. The man is now under investigation for the offence of Attempted Unauthorised Access to Computer Material under Section 3(1) read with Section 12 of the Computer Misuse Act 1993. If he is found guilty, he could be facing a jail term of as long as two years, be made to pay a fine as high as S$5,000, or both. The SPF added that investigations into the man's doings are still ongoing. 'The Police take a serious view of any unauthorised access to Government systems. Anyone found to be involved in such activities will be dealt with firmly in accordance with the law,' the Public Affairs Department of the SPF added. In related news, a man claimed last month that a sizable portion of his SG60 vouchers had been spent by someone else. He filed a police report, and the matter was investigated. According to a Jul 13 report in Shin Min Daily News, someone else had used more than S$400 of the SG60 vouchers belonging to the household of a certain Mr Li, which had received a total of S$800 in vouchers. What is RedeemSG? RedeemSG's voucher system was developed by Open Government Products, GovTech. It serves to digitize vouchers for recipients, while at the same time making it easier for merchants to accept vouchers issued by the Government. The system also works for Government agencies and charities, facilitating the launch and management of voucher campaigns. Screengrab/ RedeemSG RedeemSG is used by several Government agencies, including the National Environment Agency (NEA), the Public Utilities Board—Singapore's National Water Agency, and the People's Association (PA) for the CDC Voucher scheme. More information about RedeemSG may be found here . /TISG Read also: Police investigate after someone else spends S$400+ of family's SG60 vouchers () => { const trigger = if ('IntersectionObserver' in window && trigger) { const observer = new IntersectionObserver((entries, observer) => { => { if ( { lazyLoader(); // You should define lazyLoader() elsewhere or inline here // Run once } }); }, { rootMargin: '800px', threshold: 0.1 }); } else { // Fallback setTimeout(lazyLoader, 3000); } });
AsiaOne
an hour ago
- AsiaOne
Criminal trial of Hyflux founder Olivia Lum and 5 others starts on Aug 11, Singapore News
SINGAPORE — The long-awaited criminal trial of Hyflux founder and former chief executive Olivia Lum Ooi Lin, former chief financial officer (CFO) Cho Wee Peng and several former board members will start on Aug 11, nearly three years after they were charged with violations of the Securities and Futures Act. Already, one of the defendants has thrown in the towel. In total, seven individuals have been charged over Hyflux's intentional failure to disclose information relating to the Tuaspring Integrated Water and Power Project, among other things. But six are contesting their charges in a 56-day trial scheduled to run from Aug 11 to Feb 5, 2026. The charges were filed more than a year after the failed water treatment firm was approved for winding up in 2021, leaving about 34,000 investors of perpetual securities and preference shares, who had sunk in a combined $900 million, with nothing. On Aug 11, the prosecution will proceed on 11 charges against the six defendants. These include two of the six charges Lum faces. The remaining four charges against Lum are stood down. The two charges proceeding against Lum relate to her consenting to Hyflux omitting information relating to Tuaspring, when disclosure was required under Singapore Exchange (SGX) listing rules. This information was necessary to avoid the establishment of a false market in Hyflux's securities, the charge sheet said. According to the charge, she consented to intentionally failing to notify SGX that the Tuaspring project was Hyflux's expansion into a new business of selling electricity, and that the plant's profitability was contingent on electricity sales revenue, which was projected to make up a significant proportion of its overall revenue. This had implications for Tuaspring's resulting exposure to market risks arising from the volatility of electricity prices. If convicted of this charge, Lum, 64, faces up to seven years' jail, a fine of up to $250,000, or both. She was also charged over Hyflux's omission to disclose the information about Tuaspring in the offer information statement issued for the offer of $200 million, 6 per cent preference shares on April 13, 2011. If convicted of this charge, she faces up to two years' jail, a maximum fine of $150,000, or both. Cho, 56, who was also Hyflux's group executive vice-president, was charged with conniving in Hyflux's omission to disclose the information about Tuaspring. The former Hyflux independent directors (IDs) also charged with disclosure-related offences are: Teo Kiang Kok, 69; Christopher Murugasu, 66; Gay Chee Cheong, 69; and Lee Joo Hai, 69. The four men were charged with two counts each - one for neglect relating to Hyflux's failure to disclose information relating to Tuaspring as required, and another for omitting material information in the 2011 offer information statement. But one other independent director, Rajsekar Kuppuswami Mitta, on Aug 7 pleaded guilty to a charge of neglect in relation to an announcement by Hyflux to the SGX on March 7, 2011. The announcement stated that Hyflux had been named the "preferred bidder" by national water agency PUB to build and operate Singapore's second and largest seawater desalination plant in Tuas for a concession period of 25 years. It also mentioned that a power plant would be built to supply electricity to the desalination plant, and that excess power would be sold to the power grid. But it did not disclose that Hyflux was going into the business of selling electricity for the first time. A second charge, for non-disclosure related to Hyflux's offer on April 13, 2011, was taken into consideration during sentencing. Rajsekar, a 68-year-old Australian citizen and Singapore permanent resident, was fined $90,000 over the company's failure to disclose information relating to the Tuaspring project in 2011 as required. He was also barred from acting as a company director for five years. Corporate governance advocate Mak Yuen Teen said that Rajsekar's sentence "may be a combination of lower culpability and his guilty plea" before trial. In seeking the $90,000 fine for Rajsekar, Deputy Public Prosecutor Kevin Yong noted that the harm caused was high while Rajsekar's culpability was low. The prescribed sentence is a fine of up to $250,000, a jail term of up to seven years, or both. Corporate finance lawyer Robson Lee, a partner at Kennedys Law, noted: "The fact that one independent director pleaded guilty before the start of trial does not affect the legal positions of the other IDs or executive director and CFO to defend the charges against each of them." The charges against the seven followed a joint probe in June 2020 by the Commercial Affairs Department, the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority. The probe was initiated after a review of Hyflux's compliance with accounting and auditing standards, as well as disclosure rules. It looked at whether there were lapses in Hyflux's disclosures concerning the Tuaspring project, and non-compliance with accounting standards between 2011 and 2018. [[nid:719522]] This article was first published in The Straits Times . Permission required for reproduction.
