Rilek1Corner

Tag: elected presidency

  • M Ravi Files Constitutional Challenge Against Changes To Elected Presidency

    M Ravi Files Constitutional Challenge Against Changes To Elected Presidency

    Human rights lawyer M. Ravi yesterday filed a constitutional challenge against changes to the elected presidency made last year.

    The changes, which Parliament approved last November, tighten the qualifying criteria for candidates, and include a provision to reserve a presidential election for candidates from a racial group that has not been represented in the office for five continuous terms.

    Mr Ravi argues that the changes are unconstitutional because they deprive citizens of their right to stand for public office and discriminate on the grounds of ethnicity.

    The High Court confirmed that Mr Ravi had filed an originating summons and supporting affidavit.

    A spokesman for the Attorney-General’s Chambers told The Straits Times that “it will study the papers” filed by Mr Ravi.

    Mr Ravi, currently a non-practising lawyer, said on Facebook that he filed the application in his capacity as a private citizen.

    His is the second legal challenge related to the elected presidency mounted this month.

    On May 5, former presidential candidate Tan Cheng Bock filed a challenge over whether the upcoming presidential election should be a reserved one.

     

    Unlike Dr Tan, Mr Ravi challenges the entire reserved election mechanism as unconstitutional, he said on Facebook yesterday.

    He believes that the elected presidency is not consistent with Article 12(2) of the Constitution.

    It states that unless expressly authorised by the Constitution, there shall be no discrimination against Singapore citizens on the ground only of religion, race, descent or place of birth in any law, or in the appointment to any office, or employment under a public authority.

    “The right to stand for the elected presidency should be no different from the right to participate in parliamentary elections – all citizens should be equal,” he wrote.

    “The selection of the elected candidate should be based on merit, all other relevant requirements being fulfilled.”

    Mr Ravi also contends the amendments run counter to a legal principle called the basic structure doctrine, which he says applies here.

     

    Source: www.tnp.sg

     

  • Opposition Heavyweights Lend Support To Dr Tan Cheng Bock’s Constitutional Challenge

    Opposition Heavyweights Lend Support To Dr Tan Cheng Bock’s Constitutional Challenge

    Lim Tean, Tan Kin Lian, Syafarin Sarif and I had started the initiative to publish a Non-Partisan Joint Statement in support of Dr Tan Cheng Bock’s challenge of the Constitutional change to enforce Reserved Elected Presidency based on dubious grounds.

    We wanted a Non-Partisan Joint Statement basically because we feel that this is an important matter which should include private individuals, other than politicians.

    You can add your name to this Joint Statement by sharing it in your Facebook. Let the Force be with us.

    Please join us to stop the emasculation of our Constitution! To support please like, share & comment. Also message me if you want your name added to the bottom of the statement and I will do so.

    JOINT STATEMENT MAY 11TH 2017….
    The written Constitution of Singapore should be a repository of the most cherished values we hold as a people and also a bulwark of our venerable institutions.

    Sadly, our Constitution has been subject to numerous attacks over the years .The recent episode over changes to the Elected Presidency Scheme is the latest demonstration of such an attack.

    There was never a call by any Singaporean of any ethnic group for our next President to be a Malay. If race is an important element in the choosing of an elected President, it beggars belief that it did not surface as an issue during the period when the time scheme was first conceived and the interlude of almost 7 years until it was passed into law. The scheme was not cobbled together hurriedly as has been suggested, thereby necessitating substantial changes at this time. The scheme was first mooted by Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew as far back as 15 April 1984 during a walkabout in his Tanjong Pagar Constituency, and again brought up by him during his National Day Rally speech on 19 August that year. There was intense media and public interest in the issue. On 29 July 1988, then First Deputy Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong introduced the first White Paper on the proposed scheme in Parliament. There were changes and amendments made and a second White Paper was introduced on 27 August 1990. Following a lengthy debate during the second reading of the resultant Bill on 4 October 1990, a 12-member select committee, which included key cabinet ministers was appointed to look into issues and make recommendations. The committee’s report was presented to Parliament on 18 December 1990 and, on 3 January 1991 the Bill was passed into law .

    Moreover, by 1988, the PAP had introduced the Group Representation Constituencies ( GRCs ) into the Parliamentary electoral system in Singapore. Race is the very foundation of the GRC system, as all Singaporeans are aware of.

    In the years following the last Presidential election of 2011, no PAP member ever expressed any concern that too many years had passed without Singapore having a Malay President until the issue surfaced in the President’s speech, opening Parliament in January 2016. If this issue is of such grave national importance as the PAP and the Prime Minister have made it out to be, why was this issue not put before the Singapore people in the last General Elections held in September 2015? And why has this issue not been put before the Singapore people in a referendum?

    The PAP euphemistically termed the changes made as a “refreshment “of the Scheme in the President’s speech. In reality, they amount to an over-arching arrangement to kill off competition so that the favoured candidate of the PAP will triumph at the next Presidential election. It tarnishes the institution of the Elected President which is supposed to be part of the “two-key “mechanism designed to safeguard Singapore’s financial reserves and the integrity of our civil service. It is a betrayal of their proclaimed ideal of meritocracy which calls for the best person to be elected to the position of President, and it is a desecration of the Singapore pledge penned by one of their founders S. Rajaratnam – in which Singaporeans pledge themselves as one united people regardless of race, language and religion to build a democratic society.

    We have come together as a group of concerned Singaporeans, from diverse walks in life and from a wide political spectrum, to ask Singaporeans to stand up and to protect our Constitution from constant manipulation by the PAP government to suit their selfish political needs.

    We are pleased to note that Dr Tan Cheng Bock has mounted a judicial challenge to the constitutionality of the next Presidential Election being a reserved election. Even if it is now the law that there must be a reserved election for a particular racial group if no one from that group has been President after 5 continuous terms, it is clear to everyone of us that only the Presidential election of 2023 need be a reserved election. The next Presidential election in September this year should be an open election as there have been only 4 elected Presidents since the Elected Presidency scheme came into effect, with Mr Ong Teng Cheong being our first elected President. We do not know of any ordinary Singaporean who has taken an opposing view.

    Since the PAP Government insists that the upcoming Presidential election is a reserved election under the Presidential Elections (Amendment) Act 2017, the burden was on them to explain to the Singapore people the basis of their decision. It was incumbent upon them to produce the advice which they said they had obtained from the Attorney-General, which formed the basis of their decision. This is no different to a judge having to give his reasons for a decision made by him. It was important for the Government to have made known the reasoning behind the Attorney-General’s advice because the Attorney-General’s advice does not constitute the law of the land and is open to challenge by way of Judicial Review.
    Finally, we note from Dr Tan Cheng Bock’s statement issued after he had filed the proceedings in Court that Lord Pannick QC, the most renown British Constitutional lawyer of his generation, whom Dr Tan consulted, is of the opinion that section 22 of the Presidential Elections (Amendment) Act 2017, which makes the upcoming Presidential election a reserved one, is unconstitutional . That means that in Lord Pannick QC’s opinion, the advice of the Attorney-General was wrong. We must now await the determination of this issue by the Supreme Court.

    11th May 2017
    Lim Tean, Goh Meng Seng, Syafarin Sarif, Tan Kin Lian. Dolly Peh, Firros Rajah, Steven Goh, Brad Bowyer, William Wallace, Robert Teh, Jafri Basron, Sukhdev Singh Gill, Michael Dorai, Singaram Padmanathan, Mohammad Saqib, Hong Ht, Sohibo Netads, Kelvin Law Chee Ming, Leslie Terh, C Sing Ow, Kenneth Chan, Simon Lim, Abdul Salim Harun, Soonkin Chew, Roy Boey, Ng Fark Yew, Kelvin Ong, Bernard Riio, Derek Tan, Danny Ng, Raymond CH Chan, Keith Ong, Lee Anthony, Anne Lim, Andrew Wong, David Koh, Niki Ng, Yeu Yong Teo, Stanley Goh, Ricky Lim, Richard Sim, Michael Wong K E, Sarah Lim, RockinAngels Patrick, Gloria Siew, Tan Seng Hoo, Mani Maran, Robert Teo, Simon Chong, Sue Ryan, Goh Chok Chai Ricky, Low SK, Ravi Velu, Kelvin Cheong, Wong Sunny, Alvina Khoo, Liao Bo Tan, Wong YY, AK Tan, Sandra Goh, David Wee, Ashura Chia, Alan Anthony, Issaro Poh, Hmy Shaharudin, Gillian Chan, Cheyenne Cherokee Sioux, Raymond Tham, Sajeev Kamalasanan, Johan Teh, Abdul Kadir Md Noor, Henry Tan, Christopher Chin, Andre l,Chia, Ronald Koh, Gilbert Louis, Robert Guo, Oh Bock Thin, Simon Loke, still updating….

     

    Source: Goh Meng Seng

  • Contradictions On The Slippery Slope Towards The Reserved Elected Presidency

    Contradictions On The Slippery Slope Towards The Reserved Elected Presidency

    This is a summary of my thoughts that I shared at a Discussion Session with undergraduates from the University Scholars Program at Cinnamon College, NUS on 3 Apr 2017.

    I was asked to broadly comment on the following issues:

    1. Given the varying responses to the Reserved Presidency, how this will affect the unity of the Malay community.
    2. How this will affect the standing of the Malay community in Singapore’s political landscape.

    The announcement of the next Presidential Elections in Singapore being reserved for a Malay candidate has evoked mixed reactions from the Malay community in Singapore.

    There are 3 broad reactions to the notion of a Malay Reserved President.

    1. Disinterest. This is not so much driven by apathy, but a sense of resignation that the limited role of the Presidential will not have much impact on the Community, or that the outcome is a foregone conclusion (with the Government-supported candidate winning).  It did not help that Mdm Halimah Yacob has been referred to as “Madam President” in Parliament by Minister Chan Chun Sing (albeit by mistake).
    2. Agreement. The reactions from this group within the community stem from a belief that it is important for the Community to have a reference point as a beacon of hope for the community, and to also project the President as a symbol of multiculturalism in Singapore.  There are those who express an underlying defeatism – that the Community will not get a chance to have a Malay candidate through meritocratic process. An IPS survey to the effect that Singaporeans will vote along ethnic lines is thrown in to support this view. There are also those from the Community who exhibit opportunism – an attitude of “it’s there, so just grab the opportunity, and don’t be apologetic.”
    3. Disagreement. I belong to this group.

    What are the Objections?

    The Malay Community has never asked for a reserved Malay president in recent times. This was never raised as an issue by any Malay-Muslim Organization (MMO), any Malay Member of Parliament or any thought leader within the community.

    In fact, the announcement of a presidential race for Malays came as a complete surprise to most within the community.

    This announcement came as the Community grapples with are more fundamental problems that need fixing – gaps in educational attainment (relative to other communities in Singapore), lower socio-economic standing, over-representation in crimes/drugs, discrimination.

    A prevailing sentiment was that if there was indeed a commitment to uplift the Malay community, why not fix the various gaps and issues within the Community?  The Community would want to product a Malay presidential candidate can make the qualifying criteria and be elected in a national elections on his or her own footing.

    There is also strong perception that genesis for the Reserved Presidency was to exclude a certain Chinese candidate from qualifying.  Hence, the perception was that the Reserved Presidency was not borne out of a desire to promote the interests of the MMC. Consequently, those who hold that perception felt upset that the Malay community is used an instrument in this game.

    The Government has always said that meritocracy is sacrosanct. That was what defined Singapore and made us different. This mantra was oftentimes cited as a differentiating factor for Singapore in the wake of Singapore’s eviction from Malaysia. This call was made consistently, even long after Singapore’s independence.

    Interestingly and perhaps ironically, Madam Halimah Yacob herself, during her speech during a National Day Rally in 2012 mentioned the significance of meritocracy in Malay (obviously addressed to the Malay community):

    “Kita perlu beri sepenuh perhatian dan jangan jemu jemu bekerja keras demi kebaikan semua.

    Tuan-tuan dan Puan-puan, Saya yakin dibawah sistem meritokrasi, dan bermodalkan usaha gigih kita, masyarakat Melayu/Islam mampu mendaki tangga kejayaan yang jauh lebih tinggi.”

    English translation: “We have to give full attention and cannot shun hard work for the collective good.”

    “Ladies and Gentlemen, I am confident that under our system of meritocracy, and based on our hard work, the Malay/Muslim community can ascend the steps of success”

    In trying to address this anomaly, an argument had been made is that the principles of meritocracy is not sacrificed as a Malay candidate will need to meet the stringent qualifying criteria for President.

    However, meritocracy is not just about setting minimum qualifying standards for a candidate.  It is about picking the best person for the job.

    This was the argument made by the Establishment in the past against any ethnic-based affirmative action programs.

    But yet, we make exceptions to meritocracy where it appears to be expedient to do so.

    This gives rise to a slippery slope – where do you stop disapplying meritocracy?  Apart from the reserved Presidency, the Group Representation Constituency, which guarantees minority representation, is another instance of meritocracy being disapplied (though the evidence seems to point towards more minority representation in parliament before the GRC were introduced, but that is another matter).

    So where do you stop in disapplying meritocracy?

    • Should we have a reserved Prime Minister?
    • A reserved Deputy Prime Minister?
    • Reserved Ministers in “heavyweight” ministries (such as Finance, Defence, Trade and Industry, Foreign Affairs) ?
    • Reserved Permanent Secretaries?

    The argument – that the elected Presidency embodies the multicultural aspect of Singapore – must similarly apply to other roles above.

    It can be argued that it is important to have multicultural representation on senior policymaking roles, no?

    Lest I be misunderstood, I am not advocating reserved positions or ethnic-based affirmative action programs for these position.

    But by having a Malay reserved President, have we set a wrong precedent for Singapore?

    Another argument against the Reserved Presidency is the belief that contrary to the IPS survey, Singaporean voters will not be blinded by ethnic affiliations in voting.  Consider the fact that the GRC led by Tharman Shanmugaratnam had garnered the highest percentage of votes at the last General Elections.  Muralidharan Pillai, a first-time candidate, had defeated Dr Chee Soon Juan at the Bukit Batok By-Elections.  There is thus evidence that Singaporeans look beyond ethnic affiliations.

    There is yet another disconnect.  On the one hand, statements have been made to the effect that Singapore is not ready for a minority Prime Minister (even if polls done by research company Blackbox Research show that DPM Tharman, a minority, is seen as the most credible candidate for Prime Ministership).

    And so, in the context of the Prime Minister’s position, the assertion is that minorities are not ready to assume leadership of Singapore as a country.

    However, a diametrically-opposed position is taken for the Presidency – in that it is now important for Singapore to have a minority as the President.

    Why the contradictory stance?

    Crutch Mentality.  The other fear is that having a reserved presidency perpetuates the perception that the MMC will not succeed unless there is affirmative action.

    Will a Malay Reserved President therefore have the legitimacy and respect?

    Already, there is already resentment amongst quarters of the non-Malay Singaporean community.

    Also, if Singapore wants to be truly inclusive, why not reserve the Presidency for women? Or for people coming from lower socio-economic backgrounds?  True inclusivity must move beyond ethnicity.

     

    Source: https://nizamosaurus.wordpress.com

  • In History Of Presidencies, Colour Blind Reality Of The Ordinary Singaporean Is The One Factual Highlight

    In History Of Presidencies, Colour Blind Reality Of The Ordinary Singaporean Is The One Factual Highlight

    A letter from Patrick Low on the Elected President.

    Dear Fellow Singaporeans

    Comes September 2017 we may be going to the polls to elect our 8th President reserved for the Malay race only. Notwithstanding the constitutionaI amendments passed in Parliament I am not convinced of the wisdom and logic of changing our Presidential system to ensure that a member of the minority must always have a chance to become President via rotation.

    As a Singaporean who lived through the time of our first President or the Yang di- Pertuan Negara appointed in 1959 in self governing Singapore to the 7th President elected in 2011 race was never an issue in my mind and in the minds of countless Singaporeans.
    He can be Chinese Malay Indian or Eurasian elected or appointed it did not make any difference. What matters most is the President must serve the people. If he is honest sincere and capable he will be able to unify all Singaporeans regardless of race language class and religion.

    As a 72 year old Singaporean it is my privilege to grow up colour blind even through the worst racial riots in 1951 1964 and 1965. I was a child of 6 when I first witnessed the horrors of the Maria Hertog riot from a cubicle window in Jalan Besar. Then came the 2nd and 3rd racial riot in 1964/65 when we were part of Malaysia. We were at the Cathay Cinema when racial riots broke out and we were told to go home.

    But none of these riots change our generation’s perception that in multiracial Singapore race should not matter and should never be allowed to matter certainly not in the choice of a President whether he is black white brown or yellow.

    It never occur to me that a Malay should not be the head of state in Chinese majority self governing Singapore in 1959. Neither did I have any reservation to a Eurasian President Dr. Benjamin Sheares a distinguished gynaecologist who served us well from 1971 to 1981.
    Then came our third President Mr. Devan Nair an Indian MP who came from the ranks of the PAP. He unfortunately had to leave office after 4.5 years as a result of personal health problem.

    Next came President Wee Kim Wee another appointive President who hailed from the Straits Time Press. He was a “baba” Chinese Singaporean who performed his role so well that he became known as the People’s President.

    Another well loved President was Mr. Ong Teng Cheong the first elected President in Singapore history. He was our Deputy Prime Minister before he took office but completed only one term owing to differences in perception of the President’s role as a guardian of our reserve.

    After him came the 2 term President S R Nathan a civil servant who was moderately popular with the people attending President’s Charity galas to raise funds for the people. Again race was not an issue even though the previous Indian President did not fare too well and had to leave office under a cloud.

    Now we are nearing the end of the term of Mr Tony Tan an endorsed elected Chinese PresIdent who was a former DPM in the PAP government.

    So all in all we have had 7 Presidents over 58 years. 1 Malay, 2 Indians, 1 Eurasian and 3 Chinese. Out of the seven 4 were appointed and 3 were elected. As far as the people are concerned it does not matter as long as they are men of integrity and perform the jobs well to serve the people.

    Without going into the merits and demerits of the government’s rationale for amending the Constitution to allow for a reserved Presidential Election for only members from the Malay race my main objection is that such a change violates the Singapore Constitution and undermines the daily National Pledge recited by all school children every morning that:

    “We the citizens of Singapore, pledge ourselves as one united people, regardless of race, language or religion to build a democratic society based on justice and equality so as to achieve happiness prosperity and progress for our nation”.

    If we have any regards at all to the history of our Presidencies one fact that stands out is the colour blind reality of the ordinary Singaporean. There was never any perceived notion that the Presidency must be rotated by race to ensure fairness to the minority. All the friends acquaintances and strangers I meet on the streets and in the parks in the last one year invariably dismiss race as a factor in their reckoning of what makes a good President.

    The issue of the President holding the second key to the national reserve should also not be an issue for he is surrounded by the Council of Presidential Advisors whom he has to take advice from. So whether he is Malay Chinese Indian or others the key that he holds is a collective key held by a panel of advisors nominated by the government.

    As for the financial qualifications required of a Presidential candidate it is most unlikely that the government would be able to headhunt for one who would meet all the stringent requirements.
    In fact all our past Presidents never had the experience of running a $500 million company. Where then do they get the forte to disagree with the government on opening our national coffers.
    However in raising the bars so high the government turns what should be a level playing field into a pole vault pitch ruling out the possibility of sourcing for a few good men who can genuinely understand the plight of the ordinary people and work for their welfare.

    The office sadly is in danger of becoming the precinct of the rich and powerful.

    In this day and age when governments all over the world are beginning to lose the trust of the people it is incumbent on the PAP leadership not to erode that trust further by imposing a albatross around the people’s neck.

    Given the challenge from a former Presidential candidate Dr Tan Cheng Bok that the reckoning of the first elective President does not reside in Mr Wee Kim Wee’s term but rathet in Mr. Ong Teng Cheong’s it would be prudent for the government to pause before rushing to implement it’s Reserve Presidency – an area where angels may fear to tread.

    It would also be doing itself a huge favour to hold a referendum to ascertain the wishes of Singaporeans whether race is indeed a factor in the choice of our Head of State. Afterall what is the hurry when more haste produces less speed and further undermines the trust of the people in the midst of a economic recession and a very uncertain world.

    Patrick Low
    4th April 2017

     

    Source: Soh Lung Teo from Patrick Low

  • Damanhuri Abas: Malays Do Not Mind Waiting Another Six Years As Long As Government Acknowledges Ong Teng Cheong As First EP

    Damanhuri Abas: Malays Do Not Mind Waiting Another Six Years As Long As Government Acknowledges Ong Teng Cheong As First EP

    By the evidence that Dr Tan Cheng Bock presented this morning, the Government in its haste has clearly made a mistake in terms of the number of elected Presidents to date.

    Simply quietly moving the goalpost again by resorting to the AG’s interpretation is arbitrary as Dr Tan has provided all the statements over the years from the Government itself that acknowledges Mr Ong Teng Cheong as the first elected President. Clearly now, the Government must stay true to its own terms and wait for the Presidential election after this coming one for a clear 5 election cycle for a particular minority absence requirement to be met.

    It will be a desperate move for the Government to insist on a clearly wrong premise and hide behind the AG.

    We the Malays do not mind waiting another 6 years.

    No worries mate, we are patient people and used to waiting for many other things which are more priority such as discrimination in the SAF, Tudung and others!!!

     

    Source: Damanhuri Bin Abas