Rilek1Corner

Tag: Tan Cheng Bock

  • Damanhuri Abas: PAP No Champion Of Racial Equality, Malays Marginalised

    Damanhuri Abas: PAP No Champion Of Racial Equality, Malays Marginalised

    This is another ugly truth of how labels are conveniently thrown by them at persons to distract from the issue of contention.

    They are no champion of racial equality. For if they were, there would be no discriminatory practises of excluding the Malays from so-called sensitive positions in the SAF for the last 5 decades sowing the poison of distrust into the minds of Singaporeans towards the entire race, the Malay schools would not have closed down, the Madrasah would have stop ‘begging’ long time ago for a decent premise to educate our children while SAP schools are showered with endless tax-payers money, or would the Malays be systematically marginalised in so many other ways in society. Instead, race have been abused by the PAP to institutionalise deceptive mechanism such as the GRC to their political advantage. And now the EP.

    The fact that after more than 50 years of PAP led Malay leadership in government, the Malays are still behind in education, over represented in drug abused cases, prison inmates, delinquents, divorce, low income, etc., etc., are a damning indictment of the failures of the chosen PAP Malay leadership. The reserved EP is neither our community’s priority, need nor want for a show-puppet Malay President. Its a disgrace.

    We have seen few days ago what parliament has become when 1 party rules and now the last bastion of the people’s defence will simply become another tool of the PAP.

    Come on Singaporeans, lets take back our country from the current double tongue bunch of financially bloated elites that knows no shame oozing out their hypocrisy and taking the entire nation for their joy ride.

     

    Source: Damanhuri Bin Abas

  • Dr Tan Cheng Bock: Parliament Is Not The Right Place Platform Lee Family Issue

    Dr Tan Cheng Bock: Parliament Is Not The Right Place Platform Lee Family Issue

    Parliament is not the right place to settle family disputes.

    It is an institution to make laws and debate national issues.

    Family disputes should be settled in courts.In parliament MPs have no details of the case and only hear PM telling his side of the case.

    Wrong platform.

     

    Source: Dr Tan Cheng Bock

  • Damanhuri Abas: The Reserved Malay EP Irony – Malay Votes Do Not Matter

    Damanhuri Abas: The Reserved Malay EP Irony – Malay Votes Do Not Matter

    With Mr Salleh Marican coming forward and putting his hat in the ring, we may have a contest for the upcoming EP in September. There are sceptics commenting since he made the announcement but he had previously indicated well in advance his willingness to respond to the PM’s call for capable Malays to come forward to meet the call to serve the people.

    In fact, I was present at the Reach session when Mr Salleh Marican was the first to speak to the government panel comprising of Dr Yaacob Ibrahim and Mdm Rahayu Mahzam. He expressed his disappointment to them about the change to the financial requirement from 100 million paid up capital to 500 million equity shares company. He indicated then that this change would affect his chance of serving which he was seriously considering when the EP was made exclusive for Malays.

    However, he clearly is determined by still coming forward and willing to make the pitch to convince the EP committee to qualify him possibly on the third equivalent route.

    He mentioned his strength of being a businessmen thus comfortable with big numbers as his company is worth at least 200 million in equity shares. Thus he has a valid reason to be heard fairly by the committee on his other credentials that would compensate for not exactly meeting the minimum financial requirement for the job. On that note alone, we should give him a chance to make his case before the committee.

    The Malay community is still hoping likewise for more potential candidates with credentials to offer themselves as a possible EP. The value of a contest should not be underestimated.

    The word on the ground is a great sense of disappointment among the Chinese majority who felt this reserve EP is undermining their believe in the ‘system’. Their reaction however is mix from out right condemnation and a desire to cast a protest vote possibly through spoiling them to voting in any other non-government candidate.

    Among the Malays they are similarly mix about the EP as they never see this anywhere in the community’s priority to do list for the government. The mainstream media nonetheless as expected has gone into overdrive since the announcement for a reserve EP was made. The picture coming from them is the general support and gratitude of the Malay community towards this initiative by the government. The more realistic ones see this as a desperate manoeuvre to stop the potential victory of Dr Tan Cheng Bock at the polls if it was an open election. This group would likely cast a vote for the non-government candidate.

    In all honesty, the Malay vote ironically do not really matter much as it is a low percentage. The swing will be to see where the supporters of Dr Tan Cheng Bock and Mr Tan Jee Say cast their votes. They are clear defined blocks that may determine who wins. The PAP block are quite predictable and from what the last EP showed its about 30-40% at most. So there are 60-70% potential vote eagerly waiting to be cast against the PAP/government candidate. All is not lost people. Let this EP be a healthy contest for a better deal to the people to check this government. So let the contest begin.

    #PE2017 #MalayPresidentforSingapore

     

    Source: Damanhuri Bin Abas

  • 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