Tag: Tan Cheng Bock

  • Dr Tan Cheng Bock: 2017 Should Be Open Presidential Election

    Dr Tan Cheng Bock: 2017 Should Be Open Presidential Election

    (Dr Tan Cheng Bock’s Press Conference on 31st March 2017)

    1. Thank you everyone for making the time to attend this Press conference.

    2. I call this press conference to ask the government whether it is correct to make the 2017 Presidential Election a reserved election. I think it should be an open election.

    3. For those new to Singapore politics, our Constitution was recently changed. We now have a new Article 19B(1). This reserves an election for a racial group if no one from that community has been President for the 5 most recent Presidential terms.

    4. The purpose for reserved election was explained in the Constitutional Commission’s report dated 17 August 2016. They said that a reserved election for a minority group should only be invoked if VOTERS do not CHOOSE someone from that minority group as President after 5 consecutive presidential terms produced by free and unregulated elections.

    5. Let’s look at what the Constitutional Commission Report originally said (Constitutional Commission Report dated 17 August 2016):

    “5.36 … if free and unregulated elections produce Presidents from a varied distribution of ethnicities, the requirement of a reserved election will never be triggered.

    5.40 … This may be illustrated in the following scenario: An election is reserved for racial group A because no candidate from racial group A has been ELECTED for 5 consecutive terms”.

    6. The “free and unregulated” elections mentioned by the Commission, is what many people call “open elections”. It is not closed to a specific group of candidates. It is a presidential election where candidates of all races can stand, and voters can elect a President who is Chinese, Malay, Indian or any other race.

    7. The Government said the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) advised the Prime Minister that 2017 will be our 1st reserved election. This is based on AGC counting 5 consecutive presidential terms beginning with President Wee Kim Wee.

    8. I question whether AGC’s method of counting is actually in line with the spirit and purpose put forward by the Constitutional Commission for having a reserved election.

    9. The AGC included a nominated President in their count. But the Commission’s emphasis was on open elections, where voters fail to vote in a minority president.

    a. Let me read for you what the Commission said again:

    “5.36 … if free and unregulated elections produce Presidents from a varied distribution of ethnicities, the requirement of a reserved election will never be triggered.

    5.40 … This may be illustrated in the following scenario: An election is reserved for racial group A because no candidate from racial group A has been ELECTED for 5 consecutive terms”.

    b. The Government White Paper published on 15 Sept 2016 accepted this position. At paragraph 81 and 82, they explain,

    “81(b) … A reserved election will never arise if free and unregulated elections produce Presidents of varied ethnicities. It will only be invoked if there has not been a President of a given ethnicity for an “exceedingly long period.

    82 The Govt agrees with the approach proposed by the Commission.”

    c. On 7 Nov 2016 in Parliament, DPM Teo Chee Hean at the 2nd reading of the Constitutional Amendment Bill repeated that a reserve election will only come into play if OPEN ELECTIONS fail to return a President from the different races. I quote at paragraph 107(b) of his speech “..it will only come into play if open elections fail to periodically return Presidents from the different races”.

    d. So, open elections is the trigger for reserved elections.

    e. DPM Teo then introduced the new Article 19B of our Constitution at paragraph 109 of his speech by saying that “Elections will generally be open to candidates from all races.” “However, if a particular racial group has not held the Presidency for the most recent 5 consecutive terms, Article 19B(1) reserves the next election for that group.”

    f. Reading DPM Teo’s statements, which adopted the Commission’s report and the White Paper, it is obvious that 5 open elections must first take place before there is a reserved election.

    g. So his reference to “the most recent 5 consecutive terms” to be counted must therefore mean “the most recent 5 consecutive terms PRODUCED BY OPEN ELECTIONS”.

    h. However one day later, on 8 Nov 2016, PM Lee told Parliament that AGC had advised the Government to count 5 consecutive terms of presidents who exercised elected powers. So AGC counted from Dr Wee Kim Wee 5 Presidents with elected powers. PM Lee said:

    “We have taken the Attorney General’s advice. We will start counting from the first President who exercised the powers of the Elected President. That means we are now in the fifth term of the elected Presidency.“

    i. The counting is clearly different from what the Commission said previously. If you recall, the Commission said that “An election is reserved for racial group A because no candidate from racial group A has been elected for 5 consecutive terms”. The Commission’s emphasis was on open elections and not Presidents who exercised elected powers.

    j. So AGC’s trigger and the Commission’s trigger for reserved elections are different.

    10. Unfortunately, there was no debate on whether AGC advised the Government correctly. The Government also declined the opportunity to explain this in Parliament. As a result of AGC’s advice, 2017 became a reserved election year.

    11. So we need to know why the AGC did not advise the PM to count 5 “open elections” in line with the spirit and purpose of the Commission? And why did the AGC also advise the PM that Singapore is now in the fifth term of the Elected Presidency when only 4 presidents have been returned by open elections?

    12. History shows that Singapore has only invoked 4 open presidential elections. The Prime Minister only issued 4 writs of Presidential Elections: in 1993, 1999, 2005 and 2011.

    13. Our 1st open election produced President Ong Teng Cheong. President Nathan returned unopposed in the 2nd and 3rd open elections. The 4th open election produced President Tony Tan. Following the Commission’s recommendations as accepted by the Government, 2017 should be an open election.

    14. President Wee never stood for election. He was a President nominated by Government. He only exercised the powers of an elected president for less than ½ a term. Those powers were given to him by Parliament as a transitional provision. But his term was never an Elected Presidency. That is the view of a respected constitutional law professor in Singapore. He said: “Although he exercised all the discretionary powers of an elected president, the first truly elected President was Ong Teng Cheong.” (https://singaporepubliclaw.com/2016/08/25/elected-president/)

    15. In all my 26 years in Parliament we had always referred to Mr Ong Teng Cheong as the first elected President. Our Presidents past and present, and Ministers and MPs in Parliament have ALL referred to President Ong Teng Cheong directly or indirectly as Singapore’s first elected president and the 1st elected presidency. Even the Constitutional Commission’s Report contains a statement calling President Ong Teng Cheong the first elected president. That is also the view of most, if not all, Singaporeans I’ve spoken to.

    16. To summarise, I have put forward the reasons why I think 2017 should be an open election year. I think my understanding is consistent with the Commission’s spirit and purpose for introducing reserved elections. The AGC should have counted the 5 most recent presidential terms produced by open elections. This starts with President Ong Teng Cheong.

    17. I now invite the Government or the AGC to explain why they counted the presidential terms of presidents who exercised elected powers. If need be, the Government can refer AGC’s opinion to Court for independent judicial verification. After all, the Courts have the final say on legal issues in Singapore. And a recent high profile Court of Appeal case has shown that the AGC is not always correct in their legal opinion.

    18. If the Government double-checks the AGC’s advice with the Court, then Parliament and the people of Singapore can be satisfied beyond doubt that the constitutional changes they are making stand on strong legal foundations.

    19. But if the Government simply accepts AGC’s advice without explaining why they accepted the accuracy of the opinion, I am concerned that our Elected Presidency will always be tainted with the suspicion that the reserved elections of 2017, was introduced to prevent my candidacy.

    20. How we do things is as important as what we do.

    21. On this note, I would urge the Government to explain, or refer AGC’s opinion to Court to confirm whether AGC’s advice is in sync with the Commission’s spirit and purpose for having reserved elections.

     

    Source: Dr Tan Cheng Bock

  • Damanhuri Abas: Dr Tan Cheng Bock Is The Only Choice For All Singaporeans

    Damanhuri Abas: Dr Tan Cheng Bock Is The Only Choice For All Singaporeans

    The President to be that the Malays want whom we know will speak up for us and all Singaporeans. The malay community do not want a Malay exclusive President with no powers.

    Stay strong Singapore, God sees what is happening and will one day answer the prayers of the oppressed as He promises and always do.

    We place our trust in Him!!!

    5000 briyani for the Poor.

    I just came back from a charity event.l was the Guest of Honour.
    This event to offer food to the needy of all races is organised by Free Food For All and they are driven by a mission which they believe in,that made them give their sacrifice to become non-profit.Such an act is noble and gracious.
    Many came to the event to pay a “meal for a meal.”Every packet you buy, another
    packet will go to feed a needy.Also many order online which will be delivered to them.
    I was impressed by the many volunteers helping out and the logistics involved.
    The photos show MP Tin Pei Ling participating also in the event

    dr-tan-cheng-bock-free-food-for-all

     

    Source: Damanhuri Abas

  • Mohamed Jufrie Mahmood: PAP Must Stop Wayang On Elected Presidency

    Mohamed Jufrie Mahmood: PAP Must Stop Wayang On Elected Presidency

    Listening to the news about the proposed amendments to the criteria of a candidate for the elected president has made my kepala pusing.

    So complicated and confusing.

    Among other things the financial criterion is to be raised to $500 million, effectively ruling out Dr Tan Cheng Bock. And I don’t know of any Malay who can fullfil the criterion besides ex or current PAP office holders. You see how dirty the PAP is. Why can’t they save us lots of time, money and effort by admitting that for self preservation they just want someone whom they can go to bed with?

    All the wayang!

    After what they saw in the last PE, especially how close and dangerous it would be for them if their chosen horse were to be defeated, a Malay candidate of their choice would surely lose his pants even if he is an ex minister.

    Now you see the picture?

    Source: Mohamed Jufrie Bin Mahmood

  • Cherian George: Elected Presidency Missed Opportunity For Multiculturalism, Halimah Yaacob Would’ve Won With No Help

    Cherian George: Elected Presidency Missed Opportunity For Multiculturalism, Halimah Yaacob Would’ve Won With No Help

    What do you make of the proposed changes to Singapore’s elected presidency?

    The impression I get is that it has been framed as a debate between the need for minority representation and an open system that would allow Tan Cheng Bock to possibly become President. And people are lined up on either side. But I do want to see a minority President. I think it is a very important symbol. But, precisely because I understand the importance of having a minority president, I’m disappointed in the way the government has gone about it.

    The assumption seems to be that we don’t now have a minority candidate on the radar capable of winning the presidency in open competition. I think that is wrong. Halimah Yacob can win with no help or handicap. If they picked Halimah Yacob as a candidate, I don’t think they need to block Chinese candidates against her. She is enormously respected, she has extremely strong trade union labour credentials. She is respected by Malays as well as Chinese. This is one of those cases where the PAP as well as some other Singaporeans have a very dim view of Singaporeans, and that view is unrealistically dim. Yes, there might be some prejudice against Halimah on account of her gender, religion and race. But this prejudice probably does not amount to some kind of total trump card that will ensure her defeat. Those backing her might have to fight a little harder. But whatever kind of handicap she carries would just quantitatively amount to a tiny disadvantage. And I don’t see how that can compromise her track record. And I also cannot believe that the PAP with all its machinery and the union movement as well as many Singaporeans wouldn’t go all out to bat for her. After all, how wonderful would it be for Singapore to have a female, Malay, Muslim president?

    I have total faith that there are enough male, Chinese, non-Muslim Singaporeans who will campaign for her. Unfortunately, many others do not have such faith. And I see it as a huge moment of opportunity for Singapore’s multiracialism. This is an opportunity to signal to the world, and ourselves, that after fifty years of nation building, we are ready to embrace a President who is not from the conventional mainstream.

    Instead, what are we heading for? We’re heading for a situation where the PAP has decided to give a Malay candidate a walkover, which will taint the presidency forever. Whoever becomes the president next year will be a token president. Why taint it with the label of tokenism? It’s so unnecessary. I believe that if it were a straight fight between Halimah Yacob and Tan Cheng Bock, Halimah would win hands down.
    Source: www.mackerel.life

     

  • REACH Cancels Public Forum, Wrongly Informs That Dr Tan Cheng Bock Did Not Register

    REACH Cancels Public Forum, Wrongly Informs That Dr Tan Cheng Bock Did Not Register

    Government agency, REACH, was to organise an public forum on the Presidential Election. Presidential hopeful, Dr Tan Cheng Bock, successfully registered to participate in the forum.

    I was looking forward to attending a REACH public forum on the Presidential Election set for today. Minister Shanmugam was due to speak and I wanted to hear what he had to say. I registered my attendance last week and was happy to receive a confirmation for my attendance. I was planning to attend with a few friends and family.

    So Dr Tan was understandably disappointed when the forum was eventually cancelled. REACH explained that the cancellation was due to poor response. The agency also indicated that there was no registration under the name of Dr Tan Cheng Bock.

    reach-explanation

    But why would someone of Dr Tan Cheng Bock’s stature lie online about registering for the event?

    Turns out, he Dr Tan wasn’t. He had in fact registered under the alias ‘Adrian Tan’, which is recorded in his NRIC. He also provided all his personal details during the registration.

    In response to REACH that I did not register?

    I did register under my alias Adrian Tan which is in my NRIC, the registration also asked for my NRIC number, mobile, address, and occupation which I supplied. My acceptance letter is attached, as well as my alias in my NRIC.

    reach-confirmation

    So what really was the reason for the cancellation of the forum? Your guess is as good as mine.

     

    Dr Who

    [Reader Contribution]