The Singapore State Court Friday (18 May) issued fresh charges to several suspects involved in an alleged case of stolen marine gas oil (MGO) from Shell Pulau Bukom refinery at Singapore, according to documents obtained by Manifold Times.
Abdul Latif Bin Ibrahim, Mohd Ibrahim S/O K Abdul Majid, and Richard Goh, all ex-employees of Shell Eastern Petroleum, were issued eight charges under section 408 with section 109 of the Penal Code. The charges indicate misappropriation of 8,647 metric tonnes (mt) of MGO worth approximately $4.5 million (Exact: USD$4,430,893.45).
The court issued an additional four charges to Alan Tan Cheng Chuan and Ng Hock Teck under section 411 with section 109 of the Penal Code. The charges related to misappropriation of 2,777.6 mt of MGO worth about $1.3 million (Exact: USD$1,337,985.67).
Five individuals, namely Cai Zhi Zhong, Juandi Bin Pungot, Koh Choon Wei, Muzaffar Ali Khan Bin Muhamad Akram and Tiah Kok Hwee, were slapped with 51 extra charges under section 408 with section 109 of the Penal Code. The new charges showed misappropriation of 51,948.44 mt of MGO at market value of around $25.8 million (USD$25,814,992.81).
Section 408 states:
Whoever, being a clerk or servant, or employed as a clerk or servant, and being in any manner entrusted in such capacity with property, or with any dominion over property, commits criminal breach of trust in respect of that property, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 15 years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Section 411 states:
Whoever dishonestly receives or retains any stolen property, knowing or having reason to believe the property to be stolen property, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 5 years, or with fine, or with both. A person convicted of an offence under this section shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 5 years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Section 109 of the Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) states:
Whoever abets any offence shall, if the act abetted is committed in consequence of the abetment, and no express provision is made by this Code for the punishment of such abetment, be punished with the punishment provided for the offence.
In detail, charges to the following individuals are below (best viewed by PC):
| Name | Charge | Quantity of MGO (MT) | Amount (USD) | Date of offence |
| ——————— | ——— | ————————— | ————— | ————————- |
| Abdul Latif Bin Ibrahim
Mohd Ibrahim S/O K Abdul Majid Richard Goh Formerly employed by Shell Eastern Petroleum |
From 7 to 15 (8 more) | 1007.9 (8th charge)
1,342.3 (9th charge) 1,055.9 (10th charge) 1,052.9 (11th charge) 760.30 (12th charge) 1,393.6 (13th charge) 1,486.4 (14th charge) 547.7 (15th charge) |
542,149.41
722,023.17 530,959.32 529,450.77 382,316.86 698,207.54 744,701.26 281,085.12 |
9 November
4 November 2017 31 October 2017 17 October 2017 7 October 2017 28 September 2017 23 September 2017 22 September 2017 |
| ——————— | ——— | ————————— | ————— | ————————- |
| Alan Tan Cheng Chuan
Ng Hock Teck Dishonestly receive stolen property transferred from |
From 3 to 7 (4 more) | 529 (4th charge)
699.7 (5th charge) 748.4 (6th charge) 800.5 (7th charge) |
312,464.43
323,513.29 339,197.33 362,810.62 |
1 January 2018
13 August 2017 27 May 2017 14 May 2017 |
| ——————— | ——— | ————————— | ————— | ————————- |
| Cai Zhi Zhong
Juandi Bin Pungot Koh Choon Wei Muzaffar Ali Khan Bin Muhamad Akram Tiah Kok Hwee Fomerly employed by Shell Eastern Petroleum |
From 12 to 63 (51 more) | 685 (13th charge)
529 (14th charge) 1,540 (15th charge) 716.8 (16th charge) 778.6 (17th charge) 1,661.6 (18th charge) 721.3 (19th charge) 1,133 (20th charge) 1,150.8 (21st charge) 775 (22nd charge) 767.8 (23rd charge) 1,848.84 (24th charge) 716.4 (25th charge) 517.8 (26th charge) 2,380.6 (27th charge) 654 (28th charge) 2,126.30 (29th charge) 768.1 (30th charge) 737 (31st charge) 736 (32nd charge) 702.3 (33rd charge) 824.2 (34th charge) 325.1 (35th charge) 1776.6 (36th charge) 542.5 (37th charge) 754.7 (38th charge) 2,071.4 (39th charge) 730.8 (40th charge) 454.6 (41st charge) 1,889.7 (42nd charge) 762.70 (43rd charge) 730.1 (44th charge) 1,878.6 (45th charge) 699.7 (46th charge) 756 (47th charge) 504.5 (48th charge) 1,570 (49th charge) 806.4 (50th charge) 738.4 (51st charge) 2,498.2 (52nd charge) 1,164.7 (53rd charge) 1,470 (54th charge) 1,393.8 (55th charge) 731.6 (56th charge) 748.4 (57th charge) 655.8 (58th charge) 693.8 (59th charge) 800.5 (60th charge) 789.6 (61st charge) 751 (62nd charge) 788.8 (63rd charge) |
404,608.95
312,464.43 869,530.20 400,669.70 435,214.04 938,189.21 403,185.06 639,725.79 627,772.91 416,872.50 412,999.62 1,008,560.71 385,351.56 278,524.62 1,298,641.11 328,863.90 1,089,367.28 386,239.09 370,600.45 370,097.60 351,859.32 412,932.44 166,844.57 911,768.89 278,416.43 378,112.25 1,063,063.19 337,892.69 210,188.86 891,900.61 352,641.97 337,569.04 886,661.63 323,513.29 349,544.16 233,260.62 718,369.20 368,976.38 332,154.47 1,074,525.78 500,960.76 632,276.40 599,501.26 331,583.07 339,197.33 299,956.36 314,540.97 362,810.62 357,870.41 340,375.73 378,245.38 |
3 January 2018
1 January 2018 25 December 2017 25 December 2017 18 December 2017 15 December 2017 14 December 2017 1 December 2017 28 November 2017 23 November 2017 19 November 2017 12 November 2017 9 November 2017 5 November 2017 4 November 2017 16 October 2017 14 October 2017 13 October 2017 8 October 2017 1 October 2017 30 September 2017 29 September 2017 23 September 2017 22 September 2017 11 September 2017 6 September 2017 4 September 2017 27 August 2017 24 August 2017 23 August 2017 22 August 2017 14 August 2017 13 August 2017 13 August 2017 9 August 2017 4 August 2017 12 July 2017 2 July 2017 2 July 2017 24 June 2017 22 June 2017 15 June 2017 2 June 2017 29 May 2017 27 May 2017 25 May 2017 21 May 2017 14 May 2017 7 May 2017 6 May 2017 30 April 2017
|
Related: Shell Singapore oil heist: More charges issued at court
Related: Shell Singapore oil heist: Nine charged offered bail
Related: Singapore bunker employee faces additional charges
Related: Intertek Singapore employee among Shell oil heist suspects
Related: Shell Singapore oil heist update: More individuals charged
Related: Shell Singapore oil heist: Shipowner should have conducted a charterer check
Related: Fuel syndicate busted at Singapore Shell Bukom
Related: Shell Singapore oil heist: Breakdown of stolen oil cargoes
Photo credit: Chensiyuan / CC BY-SA 4.0
Published: 21 May, 2018
MMEA states Malaysia’s territorial waters extend as far as Eastern Bank, Ramunia Shoal, and North Patch despite being beyond 12 nautical miles from nearest land.
Japan's Maritime Self-Defense Force claim to have seen activity in East China Sea during early May.
In violation of Merchant Shipping Ordinance 1952; Customs Act 1967, Control of Supplies Act 1961 and more.
Second Circuit decision questions if OW Bunker provided the fuel in ‘bad faith’ while insolvent.
The crew failed to furnish relevant tax and customs documents.
WFS delivered 240.06 mt of VLSFO and 30.20 mt of MGO to the M/V WL Uglich through agent NuStar Energy Services at Houston port in Texas on September 24 2020.
Program introduces periodic assessments, mass flow metering data analysis, and regular training for relevant key personnel to better handle the MFMS to ensure a high level of continuous operational competency.
U.S. Claims Register Summary recorded a total USD 833 million claim from a total 180 creditors against O.W. Bunker USA, according to the creditor list seen by Singapore bunkering publication Manifold Times.
Glencore purchased fuel through Straits Pinnacle which contracted supply from Unicious Energy. Contaminated HSFO was loaded at Khor Fakkan port and shipped to a FSU in Tanjong Pelepas, Malaysia to be further blended.
Individuals were employees of surveying companies engaged by Shell to inspect the volume of oil loaded onto the vessels which Shell supplied oil to; they allegedly accepted bribes totalling at least USD 213,000.
MPA preliminary investigations revealed that the affected marine fuel was supplied by Glencore Singapore Pte Ltd who later sold part of the same cargo to PetroChina International (Singapore) Pte Ltd.
‘MPA had immediately contacted the relevant bunker suppliers to take necessary steps to ensure that the relevant batch of fuel was no longer supplied. Further investigations are currently on-going,’ it informs.
