Rilek1Corner

Tag: elected presidency

  • Chee Soon Juan: By All Means, Let’s Continue To Humiliate Our Minority Citizens

    Chee Soon Juan: By All Means, Let’s Continue To Humiliate Our Minority Citizens

    THE SAGA OVER the Elected Presidency (EP) has again, thanks to the Prime Minister, dredged up the hideous truth that our political system is indefensibly undergirded by racialist and racist thinking.

    The official line of the EP rhapsodised about the need for racial harmony and the safeguarding of multiculturalism. The truth, as everyone else who is not a party apparatchik knows, was about ensuring that only the most PAP-aligned of souls helmed the presidency.

    In a similar vein, the creation of the Group Representation Constituency (GRC) system was never about ensuring adequate ethnic minority representation in Parliament but rather to further stack the system against the opposition.

    An outgrowth of the reserved presidency and the GRC policies require our Malay, Indian and “Other” friends to obtain certification of their race. I find such a practice absolutely abominable. We certify skills, training experience and even livestock. But human beings?

    I cringe whenever my party colleagues of minority ethnic descent undergo this degrading process during elections. They have to submit an application asking for recognition of their bloodline and/or racial identity. In return, they get a document certifying who – or more accurately what – they are.

    (And they have to do this at every election. Perhaps our bureaucrats think that some strange morphological transformation may occur undetected in between elections.)

    This policy is mandated by a majority Chinese-dominated political structure. It is the ultimate humiliation that one ethnic group can impose on another, a practice which I daresay would be unequivocally denounced in civilised societies, societies with a modicum of human decency.

    It is a practice that cheapens the individual and brutalises the soul of this nation. It makes us all lesser humans.

    But what is even more mystifying is why the Halimahs and Tharmans and Yacobs in the party agree to subject themselves to such abasement. Is there no intellectual spine in these people? Surely they understand that genuine equitable political representation goes beyond the tokenism of reserved presidencies and parliamentary seats.

    The reality is that these folks are, first and foremost, politicians and like most politicians, their instinct is to protect their power. The aforementioned schemes allow them to do just that. The wretched practice of certification of minority candidates can be rationalised away or, if not, compartmentalised and placed back in the far recesses of one’s conscience.

    But at what point does one draw the line between political fealty and personal dignity? What price does one have to pay and how much of one’s soul does one have to trade to retain that power? What happens when Mephistopheles comes a-knocking to collect what he is owed?

    If our race-conscious friends at the PAP are genuinely concerned about fissures that cause ethnic division in our society, they need look no further than their own policies. Policies like our education system where top schools are deliberately moved to affluent districts where the overwhelming majority of Malays do not reside. Or policies that widen income inequality in an economy where a disproportionate number of the Malay community are stuck in low-income jobs without minimum wage. Or policies that stipulate a quota of ethnic minority residents who are permitted to live in any one HDB estate (and thereby constricting the market for them should they want to sell their flats).

    Read also A Singapore For All Singaporeans

    It should not be hard to recall that America elected a black man as its president, Londoners picked a Muslim of Pakistani descent as their mayor and the Irish chose a son of Indian immigrants to be their prime minister. Are we Singaporeans somehow less enlightened and colour blind?

    Or is the PAP employing the age-old divide-and-conquer stratagem from its Singapore-is-not-ready-for-a-minority-PM playbook and then mollifying its critics by placing minority politicians here and there?

    Singapore needs a leader whose vision of politics looks beyond the pigmentation of our skin. We need someone who calls to us as a race – the human race, who appeals to the noblest spirit of our being, and who inspires the loftiest ideals that we, as a society, possess.

    May we find that leader – and soon.

     

    Source: http://www.cheesoonjuan.com

  • Commentary: We Didn’t Like #PE2017, But We Didn’t Resist, Either

    Commentary: We Didn’t Like #PE2017, But We Didn’t Resist, Either

    Finally, Singapore has a female president. A woman as our head of state. Her photo will hang in every government building, not as the benevolently smiling wife, but as the boss.

    I would have expected myself to be bloody ecstatic.

    Instead, I’m feeling a range of emotions that run the gamut from a simmering anger to an exasperated eye-roll. The pride I should have felt over what would otherwise be significant progress in the political landscape of my country has been usurped by an overwhelming sense of having been taken for a ride.

    It’s been over a year since the People’s Action Party (PAP) government said that they would make changes to the Elected Presidency to include this “hiatus-triggered model”. Over a year of parliamentary speeches, of think pieces, of forums, of Facebook posts, of challenges in court, of “oops I called her Madam President” slips, of will-Halimah-run-or-not faux-suspense. Of wayang, wayang, wayang.

    I know that Singapore’s democracy flawed, an illusion in many respects. I know about the gerrymandering of electoral boundaries, of the obstacles deliberately erected to trip up opponents, of the calculated coercive actions that extract costs from opposition politicians and dissidents alike.

    Yet this presidential “election” has been its own sickening reveal—a demonstration of a ruling party so up itself that it would prioritise its own power and self-interest over what’s good for the country and its democratic processes. Or, and this is almost worse, a ruling party who has conflated itself with the country so much that it believes its self-interest is the country’s interest.

    The implications are terrifying; if the PAP’s #1 goal is to consolidate its own power, what will (or won’t) it do?

    After the optimistic-sounding “new normal” post-2011, civil and political space has been shrinking once again in Singapore. Key members of the opposition Workers’ Party are now facing lawsuits for huge amounts of money. We’ve been promised laws that will further restrict free speech and press freedom, all in the name of maintaining religious harmony and combating “fake news”. Academics, artists and activists have been pushed out of the country, either through the denial of visas and permits or of employment. The police have opened an investigation into activists, reporters and supporters—myself included—for attending a candlelight vigil for a death row inmate who was about to be hanged at Changi Prison.

    But it’s not enough to just look at the PAP. We need to look at ourselves too. Despite the presidential election triggering widespread scepticism and unhappiness, there was no organised grassroots resistance. There were plenty of frustrated, cynical social media posts; it was clear that there was no shortage of intellectual discussion or criticism. Yet there was little to no on-the-ground action, no mobilisation or organising to mount greater opposition to this farce.

    There are, of course, reasons for this: years of oppression, restriction and restraint, of an education purged of awareness of civil and political rights. But we can’t wait for the government to loosen the reins before we shake ourselves out of this inaction, because, as we’ve just seen, they have no intention of doing anything of the sort.

    It’s going to get tough; action will not be without risks. But silence and paralysis can’t be the answer. The more we resign ourselves to our fate, the more we tell ourselves that “this is just how Singapore is”, the more we wait for that magic election where the scales will suddenly tip in the opposition’s favour, the more inevitable results like this joke election will be.

    To resist further erosions of our democracy, we need to build: build awareness, build networks, build solidarity. We need to be activists for our own cause, and democracy is our own cause.

    This is not to say that we should all take to the streets right now (although, if that’s what you want to do, it should be your right). But we should find ways to push ourselves and the people around us a little more—to normalise (intelligent) political discussion, to be more critical about the assumptions we make on a daily basis, to refuse to simply sit down and accept. We need to find our comfort levels, then push ourselves a little further. If you’ve been a casual observer, educate yourself more. If you’ve been passively attending events, find ways to volunteer and contribute more actively. If you’re already a member of civil society, start working on how to organise more effectively and reach more people. There is no step too small, as long as we keep taking more steps.

    We can’t turn back the clock on this farcical election now. But we can do something about future erosions of our democracy—as long as we’re willing to work for it.

     

    Source: https://spuddings.net

  • Salleh Marican: I Am Disappointed That The PEC Committee Did Not See Me Fit

    Salleh Marican: I Am Disappointed That The PEC Committee Did Not See Me Fit

    Mainstream media CNA stated that the reason Second Chance CEO Salleh Marican did not qualify as his firm was “considerably below” the S$500 million shareholders’ equity required. But how many people, even other races, would have qualified in handling over $500 million equity?

    Did PAP do their homework thoroughly when they set that 500mil asset requirements to ensure that no “Malay” can match it? Meanwhile, Halimah has managed $0. Look at the loophole PAP has left for itself. Helping your mother to sell nasi lemak in your younger days do not provide you with expertise in handling over $500 million equity.

    Singaporeans don’t even comprehend why the need to be qualified in handling huge amount of money is a requirement in serving Singapore as President. If you got heart and passion, you should be eligible. Then for the next election, can we suggest that only people like Jack Ma or Peter Lim are eligible because they will raise the ceiling to a billion and hit PAP’s criteria?

    Shortly after the announcement by PEC, Salleh gave the following statement on his FB profile.

    “I am disappointed that the committee did not see it fit to give me the go-head to take part in the Presidential Election.

    But this doesn’t mean my work to help my fellow citizens comes to an end. My team and I will regroup to see how the effort to help our disadvantaged sisters and brothers can go forward.

    Since I threw my hat into ring months ago, I have realized there is an urgent need to help my fellow citizens. And I pledge to do exactly that.

    To my family, friends, business associates and well wishers who had stood by me in my decision to become the President of Singapore I say: The fight to serve Singapore is not over. We will regroup and put our plans into action soon.”

     

    Rilek1Corner

     

  • SDP On EP Walkover: PAP’s Contempt For Our Constitution And Our Flag Must Be Roundly Condemned

    SDP On EP Walkover: PAP’s Contempt For Our Constitution And Our Flag Must Be Roundly Condemned

    Singapore Democrats

    The walkover of the Presidential Election comes as no surprise. The PAP had changed the rules and revised the criteria of the Elected Presidency to pave the way for Ms Halimah Yacob to assume the office.

    Nevertheless, this is a sad day for Singapore. The rule of law has been mercilessly mocked and denigrated. The contempt the PAP has shown for our constitution and our flag which symbolises the ideals of democracy, unity and progress must be roundly condemned.

    By doing what it has done, the PAP has shown yet again that its only goal is to strengthen its grip on power. That the goal is detrimental to the interests and progress of Singapore is of secondary concern to the party.

    It is bad enough that the PAP has manipulated the system to get one if its own to become the president. That it has dangerously played the race card and divided the people to achieve this must be of grave concern to all Singaporeans.

    The SDP protests this outcome in the strongest manner possible.

     

    Source: http://yoursdp.org

  • Singapore High Commissioner Rebutted Utusan Malaysia’s Article On Elected Presidency And Claim That President Is Only “Symbolic”

    Singapore High Commissioner Rebutted Utusan Malaysia’s Article On Elected Presidency And Claim That President Is Only “Symbolic”

    The Republic’s High Commissioner to Malaysia has rebutted “false assertions” that Utusan Malaysia made in a recent commentary on Singapore’s Elected Presidency.

    The article, which was published on Monday (Aug 14) in the Malay-language newspaper, described the Elected President’s role in Singapore as merely symbolic, and as such not something that the Malay community should be proud of, in spite of recently entrenched laws to guarantee minority representation.

    In his letter sent to the newspaper on Thursday, Mr Vanu Gopala Menon said that the Singapore President, who is elected with a popular mandate, “plays key roles in nation-building and in ensuring good governance”.

    The roles include serving as the symbol and unifier of a multi-racial Singapore, custodian of the country’s reserves and protector of the integrity of its public service, he explained.

    The Utusan commentary was titled Berubahkah nasib kaum Melayu di Singapura? Presiden sekadar simbolik (Will the fate of Malays in Singapore change? President is only symbolic).

    Noting that the Elected President’s post “has been dominated by non-Malays”, the commentary stated: “Perhaps it is because the non-Malays in Singapore have been given priority and advantages in whatever fields, that the Presidents concerned did not have to struggle to think about the fate of their own community.

    It added: “As such, when a Malay holds the position of President, the direction that the Malay community is headed for will surely be given more attention, since the community has often regarded itself as being sidelined in its own country.”

    In his letter, Mr Menon said: “It is incorrect to say that non-Malays in Singapore have been given ‘priority and advantages’. We certainly do not have a race-based system of benefits and patronage.” He noted that Singapore’s Malay community “has achieved significant social and economic progress within Singapore’s rules-based and meritocratic society”.

    “We are, as a nation, proud of these accomplishments, and we will achieve further progress together.”

    Mr Menon added: “Singapore will not tolerate the use of race or religion to promote ill-will between different segments of Singapore society, or to undermine our institutions.”

    It was the second time in three months that the High Commissioner had written to the newspaper on the subject.

    He previously responded to a May 28 editorial in Utusan on the Elected Presidency scheme, to point out several inaccuracies such as its claims that  “meritocracy was always being used as an excuse to discriminate against Malays” and “meritocracy was also open to manipulation”.

    In his response to the earlier commentary which was published on the Singapore Foreign Ministry’s website, Mr Menon said: “Singapore’s meritocratic system has never been ‘manipulated’ or ‘used as an excuse to discriminate’ against Singapore’s Malay community, or any other community.”

    In his letter to Utusan on Thursday, Mr Menon pointed out that the newspaper did not publish his response to the May 28 editorial “for reasons I could not understand other than not providing a true picture to the readers”.

    “Instead, the Editor published a second commentary (on Monday), with similar inaccuracies and misrepresentations of Singapore’s Presidential Election and of the statements by Singapore’s political office holders,” he added.

     

    Source: http://www.todayonline.com