Woman fined after her company's private investigators surveilled police officer

The client was dissatisfied with how the police officer was investigating a matter involving his father and wanted to know if he was a "good or bad policeman".

Tan Hui Ting leaving the State Courts on Sep 15, 2026. (Photo: CNA/Mak Jia Kee)

This audio is generated by an AI tool.

SINGAPORE: A woman was fined S$24,000 (US$18,870) on Tuesday (Sep 15) for consenting to a private investigator from her firm conducting surveillance on a police officer.

The client had engaged the company to gather information on an investigating officer who was handling a case involving his father.

Tan Hui Ting, a partner at private investigation and security firm CDiC Consultants, pleaded guilty to one charge under the Private Security Industry Act of consenting to her company supplying a private investigator to conduct surveillance on a police officer.

Another charge was taken into consideration.

The 33-year-old Singaporean woman paid the fine in full.

The court heard that Hui Ting was a partner at CDiC Consultants along with co-accused Tan Kok Boon.

In November 2021, a man named Pai Hong Yao approached CDiC to hire a private investigator to look into Deputy Superintendent (DSP) Lee Tien Huat.

DSP Lee was a police officer at the Police Cantonment Complex, a protected area.

He had been assigned to investigate a matter involving Mr Pai's father, and Mr Pai was dissatisfied with the manner in which the investigations were being conducted.

Mr Pai met Hui Ting and Kok Boon at CDiC on Nov 29, 2021, to discuss the engagement. They learned that the target was a police officer, and that Mr Pai wanted to know if he was a "good or bad policeman".

Hui Ting and Kok Boon then consented to CDiC being engaged by Mr Pai to supply the services of a licensed private investigator to surveil and gather information on DSP Lee.

Hui Ting sent a formal letter of engagement to Mr Pai that same day, which he signed and returned.

CDiC began investigating DSP Lee around Nov 30, 2021, after receiving his photograph, mobile number and workplace information.

Mr Pai subsequently sent more messages identifying people whom DSP Lee may have interacted with in the investigations against Mr Pai's father, including the name and photo of the lead prosecutor.

From Dec 16, 2021 to Jan 9, 2022, CDiC deployed private investigators to surveil DSP Lee at his residence and his workplace.

The investigators tracked his whereabouts during the day and photographed him, including two pictures of him standing topless in his kitchen.

Some surveillance operations lasted more than 12 hours, with one instance beginning at 7.35am and ending at midnight.

The private investigators also called the Police Cantonment Complex to determine if DSP Lee was inside the building.

During the engagement, Hui Ting provided Mr Pai with regular updates, including photographs of DSP Lee, his vehicles and his home.

In total, CDiC received S$25,100 from Mr Pai for the job.

The company did not obtain the written approval of a licensing officer to conduct surveillance on a police officer.

At about 4.15pm on Jan 9, 2022, DSP Lee noticed that he was being followed by a group of people.

He filed a police report the following day.

Deputy Public Prosecutors Hairul Hakkim and Bharat Punjabi sought a S$25,000 fine for Hui Ting, which is what Kok Boon received.

They cited the security of government premises and broader interests of national security and public order.

The prosecutors said the Police Cantonment Complex was not merely a building but the operational heart of the Singapore Police Force and other law enforcement departments, and was a protected area for good reason.

Defence lawyer Aristotle Eng said a fine of not more than S$18,000 was appropriate, saying that Kok Boon was the managing director of the firm and had exercised a supervisory role over the operation.

Hui Ting's role was mainly client-facing and involved coordinating a group chat to relay updates on the assignment, said Mr Eng.

He said the difference in their decision-making and involvement supports the lower fine sought.

The defence also said the surveillance did not capture DSP Lee engaging in any confidential or secretive operations, and that all the surveillance took place outside the Police Cantonment Complex.

For consenting to her company allowing its private investigator to conduct surveillance on a police officer, Hui Ting could have been jailed for up to two years, fined up to S$50,000 or both.

Get our pick of top stories and thought-provoking articles in your inbox

Stay updated with notifications for breaking news and our best stories

Join our channel for the top reads for the day on your preferred chat app

委托人对警官调查其父亲案件的方式感到不满，想知道该警官是“好警察还是坏警察”。

2026年9月15日，陈慧婷离开国家法院。（图片：CNA/麦嘉琪）

这段音频由人工智能工具生成。

新加坡：一名女子因同意其所在公司的一名私家侦探对一名警官进行监视，于周二（9月15日）被罚款24000新元（18870美元）。

客户委托该公司收集有关一名正在处理其父亲案件的调查人员的信息。

私人调查和安保公司 CDiC Consultants 的合伙人 Tan Hui Ting 承认违反《私人保安行业法》的一项指控，即同意其公司提供私人调查员对一名警官进行监视。

另一项指控也被纳入考虑范围。

这位33岁的新加坡女子已全额缴纳罚款。

法庭获悉，许婷与同案被告陈国文是 CDiC Consultants 的合伙人。

2021 年 11 月，一名叫白鸿耀的男子联系了 CDiC，希望聘请一名私家侦探调查副警司（DSP）李天发。

李警官是警察营地（一个受保护的区域）的一名警官。

他被指派调查一起与白先生父亲有关的案件，白先生对调查的进行方式很不满意。

2021年11月29日，白先生在CDiC与许婷和郭文会面，讨论此次行动。他们了解到目标是一名警官，白先生想知道他是一名“好警察还是坏警察”。

许婷和郭文随后同意白先生聘请 CDiC 提供持牌私人侦探的服务，以监视和收集有关李警司的信息。

当天，慧婷就向白先生寄送了正式的聘用函，白先生签字后寄了回来。

2021 年 11 月 30 日左右，CDiC 收到李警官的照片、手机号码和工作单位信息后，开始对他展开调查。

随后，白先生发送了更多信息，指明了李警司在调查白先生父亲的过程中可能与之有过接触的人员，包括首席检察官的姓名和照片。

从 2021 年 12 月 16 日至 2022 年 1 月 9 日，CDiC 派出私家侦探监视李警官的住所和工作场所。

调查人员跟踪了他白天的行踪，并拍摄了他的照片，其中包括两张他赤裸上身站在厨房里的照片。

有些监视行动持续了 12 个多小时，其中一次从早上 7 点 35 分开始，一直持续到午夜。

私家侦探还致电警察营房大楼，以确定李警官是否在大楼内。

在交往期间，慧婷定期向白先生提供最新情况，包括李警官、他的车辆和他家的照片。

CDiC 总共从 Pai 先生那里收到了 25,100 新元的报酬。

该公司未获得许可官员的书面批准，便对一名警官进行监视。

2022年1月9日下午4点15分左右，李警官注意到自己被一群人跟踪。

第二天他就向警方报案了。

副检察官海鲁·哈基姆和巴拉特·旁遮比要求对许婷处以 25,000 新元的罚款，而郭文最终也确实被处以了 25,000 新元的罚款。

他们援引了政府场所安全以及国家安全和公共秩序等更广泛的利益。

检方表示，警察营地大楼不仅仅是一栋建筑物，而是新加坡警察部队和其他执法部门的行动中心，因此是一个受保护的区域，这是有充分理由的。

辩护律师亚里士多德·恩表示，罚款不超过 18,000 新元是合适的，并称郭文是该公司的董事总经理，对公司的运营行使了监督作用。

Eng先生说，Hui Ting的主要职责是与客户沟通，包括协调群聊以传达项目的最新进展。

他表示，他们在决策和参与程度上的差异支持了较低的罚款要求。

辩方还表示，监视并未拍到李警司从事任何机密或秘密行动，而且所有监视活动均在警察总部大楼外进行。

许婷因同意其公司允许其私人侦探对一名警官进行监视，可能被判处最高两年监禁、最高 5 万新元罚款或两者并罚。

订阅我们的邮件，即可获取精选热点新闻和引人深思的文章。

订阅通知，第一时间获取突发新闻和精彩报道。

加入我们的频道，即可在您常用的聊天应用上获取当日热门文章。