GE VOTER EDUCATION SERIES - this infographic is part of CAPE's - Yale-NUS College
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
08 l ect i o n
e S
OI N T
N G P
L KI
TA
this infographic is part of CAPE’s
GE VOTER EDUCATION SERIESELECTION TALKING POINTS 1 of 8
Later, gah-men
know I vote for The fear that the
talking point opposition! government traces
01
ballots to individuals
and subsequently
Ya lor, I work in civil “punishes” them for
service, don’t want to their voting behaviour
lose my job leh
still persists today.
MARUAH’s exit poll during GE2011 suggests that the share of the electorate
who are casting their votes under the influence of this fear is approximately
10 per cent, which is greater than the margin of victory in many
Is my vote constituencies in GE2011.2 This fear is generally more prevalent amongst
secret? 1 older voters and those who are working in (or who have relatives working in)
the civil service or PAP-linked organizations such as the NTUC and PCF.
But is this fear valid?
What are the various measures put in place to maintain vote secrecy?
Voting slips have serial numbers which are matched to the Electoral Roll to
ensure (a) each voter only gets one slip and votes only once and (b) voters’
names are NOT on the slip.
Under Section 56 of the On Polling Day, only one voter is allowed into the voting booth at a time. At
Parliamentary Elections Act, 8pm, ballot boxes are sealed using serial-numbered tamper-proof stickers
signed off by party representatives. The boxes are then sent to a counting
everyone manning the centre under police escort.
polling or counting centre The ballot boxes are opened and the voting slips are counted but the
(i.e. officer, clerk, agent, serial numbers are not recorded. The slips are then transferred back into
interpreter, candidate) the ballot boxes and sealed again with another set of seals.
must aid in maintaining
the secrecy of voting. The ballot boxes are then locked in a high-security vault at the Supreme
Court which cannot be opened without a court order. After 6 months, the
ballot boxes containing the voting slips are burnt at an incineration plant.ELECTION TALKING POINTS 2 of 8
ta l kin g poin t
02 Is voting a
constitutional right?
DID YOU KNOW that there is no explicit constitutional right to vote in Singapore?
In 1966 The Government rejected the The Law Minister has said that the right to vote is
Constitutional Commission’s implied in the structure of the Constitution which
recommendation to enshrine this establishes representative democracy in Singapore.
right on the basis that
The Courts have “located the philosophical underpinnings of
Singaporeans had “little
the right to vote in the Westminster model of government set
experience of general elections
up by the Constitution” (Yong Vui Kong v PP [2015] 2 SLR 1129
nor could it be safely assumed
at [70]) and stated that voters in a constituency are “entitled
that they have grown up to cherish
to have a Member representing and speaking for them in
as an inalienable right the right to
Parliament” (Vellama d/o Marie Muthu v AG [2013] 4 SLR 1 at
be governed by a government of
[79]).
their own choice.”
2009 During a Parliamentary Debate,
So why is explicitly affirming the right to vote important?
NMP Thio Li-Ann asked to
enshrine this right in the
constitution, stating that it is a According to SMU Law Professor Jack Tien-Ta Lee, without
“hallmark of democracy.” Law an “unambiguous statement in the Constitution of the
Minister K Shanmugam argued nature of the right to vote, a future government might well
that such a constitutional alter the manner in which the vote is exercised to an
amendment was unnecessary.3 unrecognisable extent. Singaporeans' “right to vote" as such
might not be taken away but the vote might be inequitable
or lacking in secrecy. “ELECTION TALKING POINTS 3 of 8
talking point
03 Is the electoral
process inclusive?
Singapore’s electoral process has at times excluded certain groups of people, making
it difficult for them to exercise their right to vote. Here are some instances:
Disabled persons People on Quarantine Order
According to a 2016 study by the The recent Parliamentary Elections
Disabled People’s Association, disabled (COVID-19 Special Arrangements) Act
persons are often hindered by barriers makes arrangements for voters on Stay At
such as a lack of awareness about the Home Notice to vote.6 However, no such
right to vote, inaccessible information arrangements were made for voters on
about elections and physical barriers quarantine orders or on medical leave due
at election rallies.4 to acute respiratory illnesses, except that
they would not be penalised for not voting.
Overseas voters
Eligible voters abroad may find it difficult Prisoners
to participate as there is no provision for Under the Parliamentary Elections Act,
postal voting. Limited overseas registration those serving a sentence exceeding 12
centres make it difficult for voters who are months or the death sentence are
not near specific regions to vote.5 disqualified from voting.ELECTION TALKING POINTS 4 of 8
This rhetoric can be traced back to the 1984 election
where the PAP garnered 63% of the popular vote, rather than
talking point the 75% it had come to expect. Lee Kuan Yew then warned
04
of the possibility of a “freak election” where the electorate
might vote against the PAP to send it a message of
discontent, but end up electing another inexperienced
and unprepared party.7 Academics such as Terrence
Lee have suggested that such fear-mongering
persists today and contributed to a huge vote
swing in favour of the PAP in GE2015. 8
Beware the
Would a freak election actually be that freakish?
‘freak election’!
The Workers’ Party
has often been called Academics such as Walid Jumblatt Abdullah and
But, why the fear? the “People’s Action
Michael Barr have argued that the Workers’ Party does
Party in blue”!
not challenge the PAP’s core governing ideologies of
If the people are unhappy with the incumbent meritocracy, multiracialism and economic
and the opposition is sufficiently strong, would pragmatism. In the case of a freak election,
a new party coming into power for the first Singaporeans would still have a government which
time since independence be so bad? operates on recognisably similar values and principles.
Academics argue that a change in leadership might Checks and balances neutralise the impact of a
actually be good for Singapore’s democracy. ‘freak election’ on Singapore’s politics. For
Prolonged one-party dominance often leads to instance, the elected presidency scheme gives the
consolidation of power, arrogance in leadership, president veto powers over the spending of
breakdown of decision-making in party institutions national reserves, the appointment of the prime
and degeneration of party responsiveness to the minister as well as other key positions in the civil
people. service, government companies and statutory
Why else has Singapore’s opposition not grown boards. The president also has the right to
over the years? Check out talking point 8! withhold consent for the dissolution of Parliament.ELECTION TALKING POINTS 5 of 8
Other important institutions must work
talking point in tandem with an elected government
05
to ensure accountability:
JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE
The judiciary is separated from legislative and
executive power. It is not influenced by external,
partisan interests such as the government. This
Is the ballot box ensures that rule of law is maintained, necessary
for fair and just governance.
enough to keep the
party accountable?
A VIBRANT CIVIL SOCIETY
Under Article 14 freedom of speech, assembly and
Numerous scholars have observed that
association of our Constitution, citizens are allowed
the ruling party in Singapore believes to engage with and advocate for socio-political
that the ballot box provides adequate causes, and to provide feedback and improvements
accountability and is reluctant to be on policies whether individually or collectively. A
held accountable in other ways.9 vibrant civil society is necessary for informed, rights-
bearing and participatory citizenship and responsive
governance.
However, the threat of the electorate
voting against the party in favour of PRESS FREEDOM
the opposition may be insufficient in
motivating and ensuring party Many governments recognise the necessity of the
accountability. media as a pillar which monitors and checks the
power and policies of governments. In our own history,
journalists have served a very important function of
scrutinising poor government policies.ELECTION TALKING POINTS 6 of 8
talking point
06
The recent Electoral Boundaries Review Committee (EBRC) Report
stated that there is an “average ratio of one MP to about 29,200
electors.” But, with the introduction of GRCs in 1988, it is difficult
to ensure that all voters have equal strength.
Are all votes Unequal voter strength occurs when
are equal? The population size of a
constituency is the same
The population size is different
DID YOU KNOW?
vs vs
Lee Kuan Yew once suggested
that the “one person one vote”
system should be modified to but the number of parliamentary but the number of parliamentary
give “better qualified” and seats for that GRC differs seats for that GRC is the same
presumably “more rational”
individuals greater voting
weights, such as the past British
practice of giving university
graduates an additional vote.11 Some voters will therefore have a more “powerful” vote. Given
that Singapore allows for a plus or minus 30% from ideal
electoral quota, the largest district can be 130% of ideal and
the smallest district can be 70% of ideal, meaning that the
All votes are
equal, but some largest district can be twice as large as the smallest.10
votes are more
equal than
others?ELECTION TALKING POINTS 7 of 8
talking point
07
Group Representation Constituency (GRC) system
stipulates that at least one member running
for the GRC must be a minority candidate
Reserved Presidential Election scheme
Are these changes the
best way to guarantee dictates that the presidential election must be
reserved for a particular community if no one
minority representation? from that community has been President for
any of the five most recent terms.
Such changes were introduced to ensure minority political
representation and entrench multiracialism. But how effective are they
at ensuring minority representation in government?
Furthermore, with the GRC scheme, minority
representatives are often perceived to be riding
on the coat tails of their ethnic Chinese
electoral colleagues. In fact, the PAP’s reluctance
Paradoxically, some argue that these schemes to field minority candidates in SMCs reinforces
only institutionalise the CMIO model and this notion. This is harmful to the credibility and
formalise consciousness of ‘difference’ which success of ethnic minority candidates especially
can enervate genuine multiracialism.112 given that Singaporeans have shown support for
them even without these schemes.13ELECTION TALKING POINTS 8 of 8
talking point
08
Singapore has a multiparty political system with a total of
nine parties contesting in the 2015 GE. Singapore’s elections
are also free of fraud and other such irregularities. While the
electoral process may at times be non-inclusive, all citizens
are granted the right to vote.
While we might have free and legitimate elections, some
might argue that we might not have fair and truly
competitive elections.
Elections are In 2019, Singapore was ranked 69th on the World Democracy
free and fair! Index by the Economist Intelligence Unit. Along with many
other experts, they identified the following as measures to
stifle fair electoral competition14:
01 Media Censorship and Limited Press Freedom
Many including NMP Anthea Ong and Walter Theseira have pointed out
that the newly enacted POFMA has been used exclusively against
individuals who are politicians or affiliated with political parties such as
Progress Singapore Party’s Brad Bowyer and Reform Party’s Alex Tan.15
02 Use of ruinous libel suits against opposition candidates
NUS professor Chua Beng Huat notes that libel suits have been used as a “mode of
repression” by PAP MPs to “destroy” political opponents such as JB Jeyaretnam
and Chee Soon Juan, resulting in their disqualification from elections. NUS Law
professor and former NMP Thio Li-Ann has also recorded 11 cases of opposition
politicians made bankrupt through libel suits from 1971 to 1993.17ELECTION TALKING POINTS 8 of 8
03 First Past the Post (FPTP) system together with GRC
magnifies the share of the largest parties beyond
talking point their apparent voting strength
08 Under the FPTP, the candidate with the most number
but not necessarily the majority of votes wins all the
seats. While opposition parties might secure ~30%
of the vote, they are only given less than 10% of the
seats.
IN A 5-MEMBER GRC,
Elections are PARTY PARTY PARTY
A B C
free and fair!
Party C wins ALL the seats
30% 34% 36%
04 Electoral Secrecy and Gerrymandering
Since there is no specific procedure for delineating boundaries under the
Parliamentary Elections Act, the PM has the power to appoint an Electoral
Boundary Review Committee (EBRC). 18 Academics have stressed that this
results in a lack of independence and transparency. Given that elections may
be called as soon as 1 day after the EBRC report is released, there may be
insufficient time for opposition candidates to campaign effectively. Moreover,
big boundary changes are not abnormal - since 1988, most SMCs and GRCs
with over 40% oppositional voting have been dissolved or reshaped.19
With fewer Opposition members in Parliament as a result, this has contributed to a reduced diversity of
viewpoints and representation in Parliament – a problem which critics say have led to groupthink. Concerned
with this issue, Lee Kuan Yew introduced the NCMP and NMP scheme in 1984 as a measure to introduce more
alternate views in Parliament.20 The schemes have not been without controversy, and opposition parties
maintain that it is not an adequate solution to democratic multi-party competitive elections. 21references
1. Jamal Ismail, “The fear perpetuated by the urban myth about voting in Singapore” (The Online Citizen, 18 August 2015)
2. Defending the Legitimacy of Singapore Elections: MARUAH Position Paper on Improving Citizen Confidence in the Secrecy of
the Ballot
3. Parliamentary Debates Singapore: Official Report, vol 85 at col 3119 (12 February 2009) (Prof. Thio Li-ann).
4. “Achieving Inclusion in the Electoral Process” (Disabled People’s Association, 2016)
5. “Explainer: Singapore’s Electoral System” (New Naratif, 26 March 2020)
6. “COVID-19 elections Bill passed to enable Singaporeans on stay-home notices to vote” (Channel NewsAsia, 4 May 2020)
7. Chua, Beng Huat. Liberalism Disavowed: Communitarianism and State Capitalism in Singapore. Cornell University Press, 2017.
8. Lee, Terence. 2019. “Pragmatic Competence and Communication Governance in Singapore.” In L.Z. Rahim and M.D. Barr eds.,
The Limits of Authoritarian Governance in Singapore’s Developmental State, 233-249
9. Kevin YL Tan, “State and institution building through the Singapore Constitution 1965 - 2005” in Thio Li Ann & Kevin YL Tan
(eds), Evolution of a Revolution: Forty Years of the Singapore Constitution (Routledge 2009), 61; Cherian George, Freedom
from the Press: Journalism and State Power in Singapore (NUS Press 2012), 209.
10. Electoral Rules and Manufacturing Legislative Supermajority
11. (Straits Times 21 Nov. 1992), Quoted in Liberalism Disavowed
12. Tan, Eugene K. B. 2005. “Multiracialism engineered: The limits of electoral and spatial integration in Singapore.”
Ethnopolitics, 2005, 413-428.
13. Gemma Iso, “69% of Singaporeans want Tharman to succeed PM Lee but Heng says older Singaporeans not ready for non-
Chinese leader”, (The Independent SG, 29 March 2019)
14. Tan, Netina. "Manipulating electoral laws in Singapore." Electoral Studies 32.4 (2013): 632-643.
15. Cheow Sue-Ann, “Use of fake news law on opposition is ‘coincidence’: Minister” (The New Paper, 7 January 2020) < https://
www.tnp.sg/news/singapore/use-fake-news-law-opposition-coincidence-minister>
16. Liberalism Disavowed, p 45
17. Thio Li-ann. "Rule of law within a non-liberal ‘communitarian democracy’” in Asian Discourses of Rule of Law, ed. Randall
Peerenboom, 189. London: Routledge, 2004.
18. Parliamentary Elections Act(Cap 218, 2011 Rev Ed), s 8(1)
19. Tan, Netina. "Manipulating electoral laws in Singapore." Electoral Studies 32.4 (2013): 632-643.
20. Lee Kuan Yew (Prime Minister), speech during the Second Reading of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore
(Amendment) Bill, Singapore Parliamentary Debates, Official Report (24 July 1984), vol. 44, cols. 1724–1726.
21. Rodan, Garry. "Elections without representation: the Singapore experience under the PAP." Woodrow Wilson Center Press,
1996. 61-89.This resource is part of CAPE’s GE Voter Education Series. CAPE, or the
Community for Advocacy & Political Education – a student organisation based
in Yale-NUS College – was founded in 2017 by students from Yale-NUS College
and the Law Faculty of the National University of Singapore (NUS). An
independent and non-partisan community, we aim to build capacity for
political literacy and constructive participation in Singapore’s civic democracy.
cape.commons.yale-nus.edu.sg | @cape.sg08
K I N G
TA L T S
P O I NYou can also read
