[Obamao]

Significantly, the CPIB report now discloses a further personal involvement by SM Teo in the matter under review: in recusing himself from any discussion on the rental of his property, Mr Shanmugam had informed SM Teo that should matters arise in relation to his intended lease that had to go beyond Minister Indranee Rajah, she would approach SM Teo. While no such issue arose, the unavoidable result is that SM Teo knew of these arrangements, was directly and personally embedded within the relevant chain and implicitly, if not explicitly, approved of the very process whose legitimacy he was later tasked with reviewing.

In these circumstances, SM Teo ought to have recused himself from the review, much less lead it, since the review would inevitably touch on the legitimacy and robustness of the very process that involved himself. If this were a commercial dispute, internationally accepted rules on appearance of bias would have disqualified SM Teo from acting as an arbitrator in the matter, and any findings made by a tribunal led by him would have been liable to be set aside by a court of law.