Tag: government

Reserved Presidential Elections: The Challenges And The Opportunities..

Mdm Halimah is now the President of Singapore. Elected on a technicality for the only one candidate meeting the set requirements for this year’s RPE. The Government has urged the people to move on and acknowledged the bitterness over elements leading up to the RPE. There are still lingering sentiments of unhappiness from the people. But overtime all this will die down as the reality of life in our sunny Island catches up.

Below are a summary of issues for our reflections in moving forward.

1. Race

– Race was upfront and personal in this RPE. It was ugly at times but overall it was a good exercise for everyone to see the raw issues in public space. It is not as bad as we pictured.

– Singapore has indeed grown up somewhat and from the spectrum of views and commentaries from all segments of society, we can see that it gave a fair variety, capturing feelings and thoughts representatives of quite a good number of us, Singaporeans.

– The letting off steam period will soon pass and we will pick up the pieces so to speak and honestly we came off not as bad as we might have. A testimony of our collective growth and vigour. We differ strongly on views and adamantly stood our grounds but at the end of the day we all have to move on. The bruises are part and parcel of growing up as a nation.

– Much can therefore be picked up and learned to continue the engagement from where this RPE have left us to reach the needed rapprochement across the stereotypes and divide. We should all see this as a welcome process of our maturing society.

– I may be against the RPE but I do see the benefits that this truly unexpected move the Government took for reasons that is best left for now, as all sentiments have been expressed.

– The Government has a vital role to address the soreness of the RPE but it has the vantage view of where we are truly at by taking a pretty back seat so far to its credit. But the next move it makes will be the game-changer. It can choose to ignore or capture the moment to offer us a fresh new deal which Singaporean clearly are keen to learn about.

2. Politics

– Putting aside the unfortunate vitriols of all kinds, there has been many more reasoned and intellectually worthy discourses from netizens. Several online forums platform do provide critical and constructive analysis offering good sound bases for further political explorations.

– Citizen’s has shown genuine concerns on processes and changes to our constitution. The Government should consider the people’s desire for engagement in politics and have their questions answered, instead of sticking to rigid clinical executions ignoring the people.

– This RPE stood right in the middle of the 5-year term of parliament and should have an impact in the next election. Depending on which way the Government again choose to lead, the opportunity for widening the political space is there for the taking.

– Singapore politics clearly has so much room for improvement and the Government should cease the day and begin the process of political reform.

3. Democracy

– This word has too often been taken for granted and it is high time that society and citizens learn more about what democracy is about. The Government for reasons it chooses to keep to itself adopts a very measured and slow progress in teaching democracy to us. Now is the right time for the Government to embrace the spirit of strengthening our democracy.

– For this, the Government can begin to reduce its excessive control on the media and public spaces for political discourse. It should not be overly sensitive and show more confidence which it actually has, as not all political discourse including opposition’s views are automatically detrimental to the Government.

– In fact, it will benefit the Government by allowing more diverse ideas and plurality of political viewpoints. It has enough buffer to take a robust political engagement than it realises. However, it has to restrain its army of online supporters which often time discredit the Government more than any short term good it does. The online troops adopts a shallow approach in engaging netizens that contributes little in content and substance but focuses on sarcasm, emotions and fears. It is hampering our citizen’s political growth and education.

4. Singaporean Identity

– The Government has thrown race into the political machine that it has carefully avoided in the past. It has open up a can of worms but on the flip-side it actually forced a nationwide wakeup. It now has the golden chance to reconfigure the race discourse as it chooses to. It should do so together with the people.

– The stakes are high but it is worth taking as the benefits truly outweighs its downside. This is about the Singaporean identity project that now requires a deeper soul searching exploration.

– There has been many opinions about race but most are stale uninspiring tales of the political past. However there has been thought provoking but reasoned views calling for a relook at our ethnic divide.

– Race realities are more fluid and the struggles over the definition of race for the RPE should suffice to tell us reform is a must, as indeed society has moved on and policies on race may be past its dues.

– We are more united and race blind in form than we view from the emotional lenses of ourselves. It is an exciting window to be opened by the Government to offer us a review of what our multi-racialism today is truly all about.

Finally, we can see the less savoury, somewhat polarised race divide that this RPE has caused. The Government by its decision for the RPE has calculated and has said clearly that it is prepared to take the risk. It must now listen to the voices of the people expressed in frustration not out of any hate, but an emotional pouring of love for this nation that we truly care about. The Government is truly poised to take the higher road and address this divide with the grace of leadership foresight or chooses to do otherwise. The nation awaits to see what it does.

Source: Damanhuri Bin Abas

September 21, 2017
Manipulation Of The Constitution: #notmypresident #notmygovernment #notmydemocracy

I am one of those who have highlighted the hypocrisy on both sides upon observing both sides and my views are from my personal perspective. Categorically, I am against the manipulation of the constitution particularly the reserved election on basis of race by the government of the day to maintain grip of power bases. This however does not automatically mean I am supportive of any claim of an alternative voice challenging the primary power base. There are inconsistencies in what have been said, what have been allowed to be said, what have been silence and what have been forced to be silenced.

The example of double standard begins with the hashtag campaign of #notmypresident pointing to the legitimacy of the presidency rather than #notmygovernment or #notmydemocracy that would point to the mechanism and ideology used to manipulate the constitution. The campaign of #notmypresident must be nuanced with an alternative person for presidency. This is perhaps presented in the person of Dr Tan Cheng Bock, the best loser for PE2011. This is with the assumption that an open election by the revised criteria, he would qualify for candidacy. However, the little has been said about the Dr Tan’s capacity to meet the $500m company criteria that saw Mr Salleh and Mr Farid disqualified.

The #notmypresident campaign was preceded with a spoil your vote campaign which in sum was intended as a protest against the reserved election (almost without mention of the manipulation of the eligibility criteria) simultaneously denouncing the nomination of Mr Salleh and Mr Farid as potential candidates who have stepped forward in full awareness of the changes of the eligibility criteria. What makes the movement inconsistent and precursor to double standard is the treatment and opinion accorded to Dr Tan, a former PAP MP who was blocked from contesting primarily on the grounds of a racially reserved election and the treatment and opinion accorded to Mr Salleh, a voluntary director at Temasek Foundation Cares on the grounds of not meeting the $500m criteria.

Dr Tan was hailed as being robbed of the presidency while Mr Salleh was portrayed as a crony despite both are directly associated with the establishment and both were blocked from potentially contesting the presidency. The above inconsistency prompted me to ask if the anger was due to violated principles or violated opportunity of an individual. Unreservedly, I am supportive of Dr Tan’s challenge to the presidency. This does not mean that should a more qualified candidate be available, I should ignore. For example it has been widely publicised that Mdm Halimah has no financial background to be a custodian of the reserves. However, would Mr Salleh Marican be less qualified than Dr Tan C B in this aspect. What would the principle of meritocracy suggest?

It is also known that Mdm Halimah is an immediate alumni of the establishment, however between Mr Salleh and Dr Tan, the association to the establishment of Dr Tan is as a former card carrying allowanced PAP MP who has refrained from joining a different political party since stepping down, while Mr Salleh was a volunteer director at a nonprofit community service arm of Temasek. What would the principle of independence suggest? Categorically I qualify that I am here not to pit Dr Tan against Mr Salleh but to highlight the tenor and treatment put forth by the alternative movement on two violated candidates, both with sound financial acumen, both with ties with the establishment and both non partisan to any political party at the time of planned candidacy.

Thus I have to undertake a personal reflection and question aspects of privilege, rights and principles. With that, I need to caution myself against getting caught in a cult of personality because Democracy is not simply the propelling the voice of the majority (in the widest sense) or the rule of majority, democracy stands in symbiotic coupling to ensuring minority (in the widest sense) rights (in a sense just as wide). Without the latter, a discourse on Civil Liberties and Civil Rights that ensues will sit on an oppressive high ground as demand for justice on aspects where the majority feels shortchanged are heard loud while privileges that propels benefits to the same majority are retained in silence.

Source: R.H.

September 19, 2017
Of TCB And Salleh Marican: Both Directly Associated With The Establishment, Both Blocked From Potentially Contesting The Presidency

I am one of those who have highlighted the hypocrisy on both sides upon observing both sides and my views are from my personal perspective.

Categorically, I am against the manipulation of the constitution particularly the reserved election on basis of race by the government of the day to maintain grip of power bases. This however does not automatically mean I am supportive of any claim of an alternative voice challenging the primary power base.

There are inconsistencies in what have been said, what have been allowed to be said, what have been silence and what have been forced to be silenced.

The example of double standard begins with the hashtag campaign of #notmypresident pointing to the legitimacy of the presidency rather than #notmygovernment or #notmydemocracy that would point to the mechanism and ideology used to manipulate the constitution. The campaign of #notmypresident must be nuanced with an alternative person for presidency. This is perhaps presented in the person of Dr Tan Cheng Bock, the best loser for PE2011. This is with the assumption that an open election by the revised criteria, he would qualify for candidacy. However, the little has been said about the Dr Tan’s capacity to meet the $500m company criteria that saw Mr Salleh and Mr Farid disqualified.

The #notmypresident campaign was preceded with a spoil your vote campaign which in sum was intended as a protest against the reserved election (almost without mention of the manipulation of the eligibility criteria) simultaneously denouncing the nomination of Mr Salleh and Mr Farid as potential candidates who have stepped forward in full awareness of the changes of the eligibility criteria.

What makes the movement inconsistent and precursor to double standard is the treatment and opinion accorded to Dr Tan, a former PAP MP who was blocked from contesting primarily on the grounds of a racially reserved election and the treatment and opinion accorded to Mr Salleh, a voluntary director at Temasek Foundation Cares on the grounds of not meeting the $500m criteria.

Dr Tan was hailed as being robbed of the presidency while Mr Salleh was portrayed as a crony despite both are directly associated with the establishment and both were blocked from potentially contesting the presidency.

The above inconsistency prompted me to ask if the anger was due to violated principles or violated opportunity of an individual.

Unreservedly, I am supportive of Dr Tan’s challenge to the presidency. This does not mean that should a more qualified candidate be available, I should ignore.

For example it has been widely publicised that Mdm Halimah has no financial background to be a custodian of the reserves. However, would Mr Salleh Marican be less qualified than Dr Tan C B in this aspect. What would the principle of meritocracy suggest?

It is also known that Mdm Halimah is an immediate alumni of the establishment, however between Mr Salleh and Dr Tan, the association to the establishment of Dr Tan is as a former card carrying allowanced PAP MP who has refrained from joining a different political party since stepping down, while Mr Salleh was a volunteer director at a nonprofit community service arm of Temasek. What would the principle of independence suggest?

Categorically I qualify that I am here not to pit Dr Tan against Mr Salleh but to highlight the tenor and treatment put forth by the alternative movement on two violated candidates, both with sound financial acumen, both with ties with the establishment and both non partisan to any political party at the time of planned candidacy.

Thus I have to undertake a personal reflection and question aspects of privilege, rights and principles. With that, I need to caution myself against getting caught in a cult of personality because Democracy is not simply the propelling the voice of the majority (in the widest sense) or the rule of majority, democracy stands in symbiotic coupling to ensuring minority (in the widest sense) rights (in a sense just as wide).

Without the latter, a discourse on Civil Liberties and Civil Rights that ensues will sit on an oppressive high ground as demand for justice on aspects where the majority feels shortchanged are heard loud while privileges that propels benefits to the same majority are retained in silence.

Source: Rafiz Hapipi

September 18, 2017
Commentary: PE2017 Experience Leaves One With A Bitter Aftertaste. What A Shame She Wasn’t Allowed To Fight A Fair Fight

As Halimah Yaacob thanked her supporters for waiting for her under the hot sun, someone yelled something I couldn’t catch and she laughed. It wasn’t forced or rehearsed. It was one of the few times I saw a Singaporean politician being natural. And I thought, what a shame.

As the camera panned to a group of makciks laughing along with her, looking so happy and proud as if thinking, yes, one of us made it. And I thought, what a shame.

As hashtags of #notmypresident popped up online, the trolls gleefully bash their keyboards, making fun of her for selling nasi padang because that’s so Melayu. And I thought, what a shame.

What a shame that this capable woman wasn’t allowed to fight a fair fight, that the odds were placed so ever in her favor that her presidency was seen as a sure thing, was tainted, even before she threw her name in the ring.

It’ll be interesting to see if history will gloss over the details of how she became President. 20 years from now, articles will be written and documentaries will be made about how she was the first Malay (?) female (hijab-wearing at that!) to be president – how she started out with the trade unions and worked her way up to be an MP, how she was a beloved MP for her constituency, how she became the first female Speaker and then eventually the President.

For me, I’ll remember the acute anger and disappointment of how this came to be. Of how the G insisted that the Malay community wanted a Malay president so they were just giving what the people wanted. Of how arrogant the G was to say that they were willing to pay the political price – because they think 4 years is long enough to make us forget, because come 2021, there will be an onslaught of goodies to succumb to.

I once asked my mom if she ever felt disappointed that my sister and I are not high-flyers and hold ordinary jobs. She said no and after a pause she said, “But I wouldn’t mind if one of you became a Minister.” I just hope if that ever happens, she won’t be thinking, “What a shame.”

Source: Junaini Johari

September 13, 2017
How Singapore Elected A President Without A Vote: Only One Eligible Candidate Thus Victorious By Default

Singaporeans were meant to go to the polls at the end of next week to vote for a new president, but they’ll no longer have the chance, with only one candidate qualifying for the race. Former Speaker of Parliament Halimah Yacob has emerged victorious by default, after other presidential hopefuls fell foul of new rules.

“I can only say that I promise to do the best that I can to serve the people of Singapore and that doesn’t change whether there is an election or no election,” she told reporters Monday. What should be a moment of celebration — Halimah will be Singapore’s first female president — has proved contentious for several reasons and appears at odds with Singapore’s reputation as a technocratic and efficient city state. While the office of president is largely a ceremonial role in Singapore, he or she has power to veto some of the government’s decisions, for example in fiscal matters that touch on the country’s reserves, or key appointments in the public service. “The only beneficiaries from this reserved presidential election are Halimah Yacob and her team, as well as Singapore’s opposition, which now has a new line of attack against the PAP (People’s Action Party). The rest of Singapore has suffered,” Sudhir Vadaketh, a Singapore author and commentator, told CNN. Halimah was, until recently, a loyal member of the ruling PAP, which dominates Singaporean politics.
“All Singaporeans are unhappy that meritocracy and electoral fairness, core Singaporean values, have been eroded to fulfill perceived political goals.”

Racial politics
In this election, for the first time, candidates to become Singapore’s president could only come from one racial group: Malays. It’s a radical policy that would likely prove divisive elsewhere but it’s one the Southeast Asian nation said was necessary to ensure better representation among the country’s three main races: Chinese, Indian and Malay.
“It shows we don’t only talk about multi-racialism, but we talk about it in the context of meritocracy or opportunities for everyone, and we actually practice it,” Halimah told The Straits Times newspaper, before declaring her intention to contest the election.

The new rules also set stricter criteria on the background of candidates. For example, those from the private sector are required to be a chief executive of a company, with at least $370 million in shareholders’ equity. The two other Malay presidential hopefuls — businessmen Salleh Marican and Farid Khan — failed to gain Certificates of Eligibility from the Presidential Elections Committee on these grounds, although the Presidential Elections Committee could have exercised its discretion to allow them to run for the office. Critics charge that the new rules are a way for the government to stage-manage the election and prevent opponents from running.

In August, Singapore’s appeal court ruled against a legal challenge to the new system by ruling party lawmaker turned critic, Tan Cheng Bock. Tan had narrowly lost the previous presidential election in 2011 to Tony Tan, a former deputy prime minister widely recognized as the government-favored candidate, and planned to run again. Singapore’s population is 74% Chinese, 13% Malay, 9% Indian and 3.2% are the ambiguously named “Others.”

New rules
The announcement late Monday by the Elections Department that only one candidate had qualified marks an underwhelming conclusion to a controversial election carried out under changes to the elected presidency system in Singapore voted through Parliament earlier this year. Specifically, the amendment states that an election will be reserved for candidates from a particular racial group if the previous five elections have not produced a president from that racial group. In Singapore, it’s dubbed a “hiatus-triggered model.”

“Every citizen, Chinese, Malay, Indian or some other race, should know that someone of his community can become President, and in fact from time to time, does become President,” said Lee Hsien Loong, Singapore’s prime minister, last November before the new rule was introduced. Singapore hasn’t had a Malay president since the country’s first President Yusof Ishak, who served as head of state from 1965 to 1970. Subsequent presidents have been from the Eurasian, Chinese and Indian communities.

Debate
The election has also triggered debate on who is Malay and raised questions over how an individual’s race can be determined. Candidates were required to be assessed by a five-member community panel to certify their race as Malay as part of the qualifying criteria. Halimah, who has successfully stood as a Malay candidate in previous general elections, is reported to have an Indian father. Moreover, Salleh Marican also has an Indian father, while Farid Khan’s identity card lists his race as “Pakistani,” the government-controlled Straits Times reported. What’s more, critics point out that, if the goal really was to improve racial representation and justice, more meaningful measures could be adopted.

The Chinese form the majority in Singapore and often dominate in positions of power and influence. Singapore’s prime minister has always been Chinese, and it was only in 2015 that the country finally had more than one Malay minister in the Cabinet at one time. The Malay community typically have lower incomes and grapple with institutional discrimination, such as in the armed forces.

“While reserving the presidential elections for only Malays is a highly symbolic gesture, there is a need to do more for concrete issues faced by the Malay community such as discrimination, lack of social mobility and relative poverty,” lawyer Fadli Fawzi told CNN. “I think that it is more important to focus on removing barriers and improving the lot of the man on the street rather than reserving slots for one or two individuals.”

Speaking at a forum on Friday, Chan Chun Sing, a minister in the Prime Minister’s Office, acknowledged the unpopularity of the new system, saying that it would be a “hard journey” to convince Singaporeans that the change was necessary. He denied accusations that the amendments were made for political gain. “We are prepared to pay the political price, because we think the future of our country is much more important than any political capital that we may have,” he said.

Source: http://edition.cnn.com

September 12, 2017