Rilek1Corner

Tag: reserved EP

  • 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

  • Singaporeans Petition For Ong Teng Cheong To Be Recognised As First Elected President

    Singaporeans Petition For Ong Teng Cheong To Be Recognised As First Elected President

    “The President shall be elected by the citizens of Singapore in accordance with any law made by the Legislature.”

    – Singapore Constitution, Article 17(2).

    This is a call for the Government of Singapore, led by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, to not disregard and disrespect Mr Ong Teng Cheong as our nation’s first Elected President.

    This call is made in light of remarks made in Parliament by Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), Mr Chan Chun Sing, on 6 February 2017.

    Mr Chan, in responding to a question from the Workers’ Party Member of Parliament for Aljunied GRC, Ms Sylvia Lim, said that “President Wee Kim Wee was the first president to exercise the powers under the new Elected Presidency act”, and thus Mr Wee was Singapore’s first Elected President.

    Mr Chan said that the Government was advised on this by the Attorney General.

    Mr Wee is the fourth of Singapore’s seven presidents.

    We contend that the Attorney General is wrong in advising the Government that Mr Wee was our country’s first Elected President simply because Mr Wee had exercised the powers under the Elected President scheme; and we ask that the honour be rightly bestowed on Mr Ong Teng Cheong instead.

    We present the following reasons for this call.

    – Mr Wee, who held the post of president with distinction and honour, was nonetheless unelected, a fundamental requirement of our Constitution. He did not present himself to the people of Singapore as a candidate. Instead, Mr Wee was appointed by then Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew.

    – No other candidate was able to present himself as a challenge to Mr Wee and to let the people of Singapore choose or make their choice in a democratic and open election.

    – Mr Ong had relinquished his position as a minister in the Government, resigned his post from the People’s Action Party (PAP), before offering himself as a candidate for the Elected Presidency.

    – Mr Ong faced an opponent in Mr Chua Kim Yeow, a former Accountant General, in an open and democratic presidential election in 1993. Mr Ong won the popular vote and became our 5th President, and our First Elected President.

    Also, we note that through the last 24 years since Mr Ong became Singapore’s 5th President, numerous media reports and articles have cited and recognised him as our first Elected President.

    But the highest recognition of Mr Ong as Singapore’s first Elected President came from our former Prime Minister, Goh Chok Tong, himself.

    In his condolence letter to Mr Ong’s family when Mr Ong passed away in 2002, Mr Goh wrote:

    “As the first elected President, Teng Cheong had to work the two-key system…”

    Mr Goh is, of course, correct and right in recognising Mr Ong and affirming the fact that Mr Ong was indeed Singapore’s first Elected President.

    So was our founding Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew, who had initiated the idea for an Elected President as far back as 1985.

    Mr Lee had said then “that Singapore might have its first elected President at the end of Mr Wee’s four-year term or, perhaps, earlier.”

    Mr Ong’s status is also recognised by curators of our nation’s history.

    The website of the National Library Board (NLB) also affirms this fact, with this title on its “History SG” page on Mr Ong:

    “ONG TENG CHEONG IS THE FIRST ELECTED PRESIDENT OF SINGAPORE”.

    Please see here: http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/history/events/a99d13…

    The basis for anyone being recognised as an Elected President is two-fold:

    1. He must offer himself as a candidate in a presidential election, so that the people of Singapore have a choice to express their wish. This is at the very heart of a democratic election, whether parliamentary or presidential. This is an unequivocal stipulation in Article 17(2) of the Constitution.

    2. Even if it turns out that there is no actual contest because of a lack of opponents, the candidate would still be recognised as the winner because he had actually stepped forward and put himself up as a candidate for the people to choose.

    The Elected President scheme was introduced so that the candidate and eventual president would have to go through an open election to get the people’s endorsement. And this was required for one very important reason:

    The Elected President must have the moral authority to act on behalf of the people in being a check on the government of the day. And he can only have such moral authority if he has the assent of the people who bestow such powers on him through the vote.

    With all due respect to Mr Wee, he did not offer himself as a candidate in an open election. This is not his fault as the scheme was introduced halfway through his term.

    Nevertheless, it would not be right to recognise him as our first Elected President.

    Professor of Law, Jack Lee, of the Singapore Management University, wrote on the Singapore Law website in 2016 that while Mr Wee was the first to exercise the powers of the Elected President scheme, “[the] provision [in the law] was carefully worded to avoid deeming Wee Kim Wee as having been elected, so although he exercised all the discretionary powers of an elected President, the first truly elected President was Ong Teng Cheong.”

    It is quite clear that Mr Ong, who fulfils all the necessary and important requirements of the Elected President scheme as stated in the Constitution, should be recognised as SINGAPORE’S FIRST ELECTED PRESIDENT.

    We must not do him a dishonour by brushing off his contribution with a simple stroke of the pen without any substantive, rational explanation.

    Mr Ong gave his whole life to public service, first as a Member of Parliament, later as minister and deputy prime minister, and finally as president.

    To now dismiss him as Singapore’s first Elected President is to dishonour him, and to dishonour Singaporeans who still hold him in the highest regard.

    It is also an attempt to re-write our history.

    We thus call on the Singapore Government to respect history and to respect Mr Ong, and to recognise him as our first Elected President.

     

    Source: www.ipetitions.com

  • Ismail Kassim: PAP Leaders Must Ask Themselves If They Are Cowards

    Ismail Kassim: PAP Leaders Must Ask Themselves If They Are Cowards

    To all PAP leaders, watch the Hollywood classic High Noon and ask yourself:

    Am I a coward?
    A craven coward,
    A coward till my grave

    This is the refrain from the theme song. In this film, a sheriff played by Gary Cooper deliberates on his dilemma: hand over his badge and leave town with his bride (Grace Kelly) or stay and face four just released gunmen screaming for his blood.

    He could have left office as planned, but he decided to face the challenge head-on, and only after despatching all four to the nether world did he go on his honeymoon.

    The same question can be asked of the PAP leaders. When faced with a challenge from TCB, instead of taking up the gauntlet as our great departed leader would have done, they resorted to a cowardly dodge to avoid a fight.

    Now, one after another, they come up with all kinds of rationalisation to make themselves look good.

    But it will all be in vain. The damage has been done; multi-racialism and meritocracy have been sacrificed on the altar of political convenience and the disunity among the people and between and within each ethnic group will only get worse with time.

     

    Source: Ismail Kassim

  • Nizam Ismail: No Need For Yaacob Ibrahim To Belittle Geylang Serai In Making Flawed Meritocracy Argument

    Nizam Ismail: No Need For Yaacob Ibrahim To Belittle Geylang Serai In Making Flawed Meritocracy Argument

    Yaacob Ibrahim has confirmed that he won’t run for the elected Presidency.

    Well, if a role that is reserved for a Malay is now seen to be still meritocratic, then you can simply extend that argument to any position in government.

    Let’s have a Malay PM (without any competition from non-Malays), and that can be meritocratic?

    I think it’s regrettable that there is a derogatory remark about the people in Geylang Serai.

    “But we believe it must come about because of meritocracy. Even for the elected president, you don’t just pick up somebody from Geylang Serai – the person must qualify, the person must earn the respect of all Singaporeans,” he added.

     

    Source: Nizam Ismail In Suara Melayu Singapura