Ghui /

Officially, the President of Singapore is Singapore’s head of state.  He opens each Parliamentary session with an official address, occupying a position much like Queen Elizabeth II in the United Kingdom.

Image from Britannica

The monarchy has had a long and deep history in the United Kingdom and the royal family is seen as part of British culture and heritage. Thousands of tourists worldwide flock to Buckingham Palace to watch the changing of the guard and millions tuned in to watch the wedding of Prince William and Catherine Middleton. Countless souvenirs commemorating the royal engagement and subsequent wedding were sold, generating millions for the British economy. The Queen and now, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge (as Prince William and Catherine Middleton are now known) have embarked on various tours overseas to promote British causes and photographers follow their every move. In this regard, I can see and understand why the British people have chosen to continue to have a ceremonial head of state who wields no real political power. They represent British culture and have made significant contributions to tourism.

Can the same be said of the President of the Republic of Singapore?

The Parliament of Singapore is required to provide for the maintenance of the President. This is done by way of a civil list. Overall, the current civil list stands at approximately $11.6 million annually. In short, it costs the taxpayers a staggering $11.6 million yearly to maintain the office of the President. I wonder if the money can be better spent elsewhere.

One might argue that the President has an important role to play. The Constitution enshrines his power to block and veto certain government actions. Theoretically, this would ensure that the government does not have absolute power since the President exists to form a system of checks and balances, preventing the government from riding roughshod over certain key issues, such as the nation’s financial reserves. However, whether or not the President has in effect performed that role is open for debate. Does the President perform a role which cannot be fulfilled by a strong and credible opposition?

Before 1991, the Constitution contained no provisions preventing the government from squandering the nation’s reserves. The government at that time took the view that safeguards had to be put in place to prevent a future irresponsible government from leading the country into financial ruin, and came up with their brainchild: the “elected President”.

According to the Constitution, the powers of the President are broadly threefold:

1. Financial powers

In summary, the President acts as the fiscal guardian of Singapore’s national reserves. His concurrence is required before the government can enter into various financial transactions.

Amongst other things, his approval is needed for the budgets of:

(i) certain statutory boards such as the Central Provident Fund Board, the Housing and Development Board, JTC Corporation and the Monetary Authority of Singapore; and

(ii) certain government companies such as Government of Singapore Investment Corporation Pte. Ltd., Temasek Holdings Pte. Ltd. And MND Holdings Pte. Ltd.

2. Powers relating to key office holders

These include amongst other things:

(i) appointing the prime minister; and

(ii) appointing the chairman and members of the advisory board constituted to determine if a person should be detained without trial for security reasons.

3. Other powers

These include amongst other things:

(i) granting pardons and reprieves for offenses or execution and remission of sentences; and

(ii) concurring with the Director of the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau for an investigation to take place even if the Prime Minister refuses.

The above powers are divided into those which the President may exercise in his own discretion and those he must exercise in accordance with the advice of the Cabinet or of a Minister acting under the general authority of the Cabinet. The President also has to consult the Council of Presidential Advisers when performing some of his duties.

The Council of Presidential Advisers comprise six members and two alternate members.  Two members are appointed by the President at his discretion, two are the Prime Minister’s nominees, one is the Chief Justice’s nominee and one is the nominee of the Chairman of the Public Service Commission.  One alternate member is appointed by the President at his discretion while the other is appointed by the President on the advice of the Prime Minister, in consultation with the Chief Justice and Chairman of Public Service Commission.

Every aspect of the President’s powers are therefore closely affliated and linked to the government.

The first and hitherto only directly elected President was Ong Teng Cheong. His term in office was marked by differences between him and the government concerning the extent of his discretionary fiscal powers. In short, it can be suggested that Mr Ong tried to exercise his powers as a safeguard against the government, but faced resistance from the government.

Following such difficulties, the government limited the powers of the President in 1996 by deciding that a presidential veto can be overridden with a two-thirds majority in Parliament. With one main party ruling Singapore, achieving this requisite two-third majority is far from difficult.

Image from The Straits Times

The incumbent President is S.R. Nathan. He became President in 1999 by virtue of being the only candidate deemed qualified by the Presidential Elections Committee. In 2005, he was again deemed re-elected after a walkover. He is due to retire on the 31st of August 2011.

During his terms in office, President Nathan did not attempt to exercise any of his powers. In fact, former Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong once said that the government would give the President no “cause to exercise” his powers.

Ong took his duties seriously and upon taking office in 1993, he requested for an accounting of Singapore’s vast assets, financial as well as physical. When this request was put forward, the then accountant-general unhelpfully responded that it would take “52 man-years” to produce a complete list!

From the above, it is clear that the President has very limited powers and even from those limited powers it would appear, from the Ong Teng Cheong example, that attempts by the President to exercise his powers would not be welcomed!

As such, is the office of the President not a superflous waste of the country’s money?

Perhaps, things will change with the new elected President after President Nathan retires. The seat has after all not been so hotly contested before. This, coupled with the newly politicised population of Singapore, might herald the dawn of a new age for this office.

Be that as it may, we still go back to the original question, can the President’s role as a check on this system not be fulfilled by an effective opposition? Is the role played by the President worth the $11.6 million spent on it? Why rely on the President’s curtailed and artificial powers as a check on the system when the opposition can do the same job at a much lower cost?

The office of the President (with limited powers) was created at a time when there was virtually no credible oppostion on the political scene. That is clearly changing with the stigma of being part of the opposition fading. The role of the President is therefore redundant. In fact, has it ever not been so?

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Temasek-linked project to build new state capital in India stalled

The media reported on Monday that the joint venture project between Singapore…

警方忙晕! 选举10日来多达13项报案

大选虽然已经过去,但在大选期间,朝野政党和国人,就各种事件向警方通报,从竞选海报被破坏、针对候选人言论等,不一而足。 警方发表声明称在大选期间,自6月30日提名日以来至7月10日投票日期间,至少接到13份投报,部分已受理 ,其余待更进。 7月1日和2日期间,即竞选刚开始时,警方便接获有关选举海报被破坏的通报,其中人民行动党和前进党都相当多。1日时,人民行动党针对后港大道10号,其选举海报遭损毁而通报警方;2日,前进党也遭遇类似的事情,其海报在武吉巴督和后港一区内被破坏,随之通报警方。 对此,警方在一项声明中表示,52岁和13岁人士分别在不同案件涉嫌破坏,正接受调查。 再来是7月4日时,人民行动党在兀兰13街的选举海报再次遭到破坏,就此通报警方,一名48岁男子因涉嫌破坏而被捕。 此外,工人党辣玉莎也在4日和5日被指两项涉嫌在网络上发表歧视性言论的指控,破坏宗教和种族的情感。 当时辣玉莎代表工人党竞选盛港集选区,目前案件正在侦办中。 在此之后,人民行动党针对辣玉莎的言论发出一篇声明,一名公民则针对人民行动党的声明向警方通报,称人民行动党已违反刑事法典第298A条文。经警方调查和向总检察署咨询,并没有犯嫌任何罪行。 7月7日,一名声称是第一位爆料辣玉莎言论的网友,被爆涉嫌发表蓄意伤害宗教和种族情感的言论,如今亦正接受警方调查。 警方当时也表示正对一位脸书用户,名为Abdul Malik…

合力追踪数据议题处理不当 前进党忧动摇群众信任不利防疫

“我们对当今国家正在发生的事情深感不安,人民行动党自1月4日起收回此前的说法,表示新加坡警察部队在刑事诉讼法下有权获取“合力追踪”的数据,以作刑事调查。” 本月4日,内政部政务部长陈国明,在国会答复议员质询时表示,刑事诉讼法赋予警方权力,可获取任何数据,包括合力追踪便携器的数据。 此事引发全民议论,部长维文和尚穆根较后澄清,称只有在发生重大罪案时才会启动,但似乎平息不了人民对此事的质疑和失望,甚至有者扬言要删掉该追踪程式。 对此,前进党也发声明回应,重申“人民需要一个透明、独立且对人民负责的政府”,而显然“合力追踪”一事,有悖该追踪程式的初衷,即仅用于对抗如今严峻的疫情。 事实上,主管智慧国计划的外交部长维文,曾在去年6月5日在国会表示,合力追踪数据仅限于防疫追踪用途。他不得不在本月5日再次作出澄清,强调指警方只有在追踪重大罪案时,才能动用“合力追踪”数据。 前进党:此举侵蚀人民对政治机构的信心 “政府要求我们采用合力追踪程式来应付疫情,但时至今日,它却被允许根据刑事诉讼法进行调查。” 此外,声明也表示,政府此举带有更深的含义,且收回说法并非是好的决策,以致于侵蚀人民对政治机构的信心和社会契约。 “对于政府如何处理敏感信息,人民感到非常不安,我们忧心“合力追踪程式”会不必要地暴露用户位置,或侵犯他们的隐私。” 此外,前进党也忧虑政府的越权会全面遏制人民使用合力追踪的可能,反而延缓我国抗疫的进程,尤其当前有消息指出新毒株出现,很可能会白费我国日前的抗疫效果。 “在监督和追踪接触者的过程中,我们必须要同心协力,朝着同一方向前进。因此,我们也担心政府此举会流失人民对国家的信任。 智慧国及数码政府署(Smart…

缓解紧张关系 新马暂停重叠港口界限

新加坡和马来西亚在周一(8日)起,暂停实施扩大港口海域界限,缓解两国在海域纠纷上的紧张关系,恢复到2018年10月25日前和12月6日前的状况。 新加坡海事及港务局表示,相互暂停令于星期一(4月8日)凌晨0时1分生效。 马国于去年10月25日在宪报公布了新的柔佛港口界限,而我国政府认为这已侵入大士的领海。 12月6日,我国将港口限制扩大到大士港口,并表示会毫不犹豫地对入侵该领域的马来西亚船只采取 “坚决行动” 。 我国也抗议马来西亚在这数月所做出的“挑衅行为”,包括柔佛州大臣奥斯曼访问停泊在我国海域的一艘马国船只。 暂停重叠港界界限,是新马高级别联合工作小组,于上个月提呈的工作报告中,所建议的五项措施之一。 有关的措施获得新加坡外交部长维文医生和马国外交部长赛夫丁同意后,于3月14日公布。其他的措施包括了暂停该地区的商业活动,不在该处停泊政府船只。 最重要的是,两国的船只将根据国际法,包括联合国海洋公约(United Nations Convention…