Commentaries
Without fear
By Dylan Cheng
It is with great dismay that I share this incident with everyone.
I am formerly an intern with the renowned human rights lawyer, M Ravi. One of the tasks that I was assigned to do was to assist him in conducting research on a particular case that the firm is handling. Many know Mr Ravi as an advocate of human rights and a firm believer of justice and equality. Thus the case that I am working on should not come to anyone as a surprise.
It is the ‘Hong Lim Park CPF Protest’ case, which involves the blogger, Roy Ngerng and a few other individuals that partook in the protest in September 2014.
Two weeks ago, I was having a conversation with my lecturer and he asked me what I have been busy with in recent weeks. I told him that I was conducting research on the ‘Hong Lim Park CPF Protest Case’. He felt that it was a good opportunity for me to gain relevant experience and made no further comments about it.
A few days later, a close friend of mine texted me and told me that my lecturer had said that I should be careful about what I am doing.
I was rather confused when I got the message. After much contemplation, it dawned upon me that he might have wanted me to be careful about what I am doing because the group of people that I am defending consists of individuals that are opposing the government and its policies openly.
My lecturer was apparently worried that by helping in their defence, I am putting myself in a very unfavourable position. The government might see me as part of a ‘rebellious and trouble-making’ group that is opposing them (government).
Why did he make such an inference? Well, it is not hard to see things from his perspective.
Let us look at J.B Jeyaratnam, Chee Soon Juan and many others who openly challenged the government and its policies. What was the outcome of their defiance and their reluctance to conform to the unbefitting policies (in their opinion) that the government had implemented? J.B Jeyaratnam was bankrupted as a result of a libel suit against the PAP leaders. As a result of his bankruptcy, he was stripped of his NCMP seat in 2001. Chee Soon Juan was also bankrupted for the same reason.
The point that I am trying to establish here is that Singapore is being engulfed in the fear of opposing the ruling party.
Many shudder at the thought of being sued or persecuted. Some adopt the ‘shut up and move on’ mentality, citing the fear of getting into unnecessary trouble.
The climate of fear limits one’s freedom of speech and expression, which is enshrined in Article 14 of our Constitution.
My position is clear and aboveboard. I am being assigned to conduct research on the ‘CPF Protest Case’ to help in the defence of the ‘clients’ that engaged the firm for their defence.
The fundamental principle that a lawyer or any individual that is partaking in the defence is to wholly secure, defend and fight for the rights of anyone or any group that have engaged us.
It is wrong and a general misconception to think that such a principle is entirely for the sake of professionalism as a legal practitioner.
Securing and fighting for the rights of another and to provide him/her a proper and reasonable defence goes beyond the ambit of professionalism.
It is the duty of every individual to stand up for his/her compatriots in distress. It is a moral obligation that one owes to another individual apart from the contractual obligations that we owe to our ‘clients’.
If one’s ability to discharge a fundamental right like this is being impaired by the fear of persecution, the growth of our society will be stunted. Singapore would have taken a step backwards in terms of progress.
The process of defending our clients can be daunting at times but this should not deter any legal practitioners from doing what they are supposed to do; to provide every individual a proper defence.
I am largely disappointed that my own law lecturer is disapproving of my involvement in the defence of five ordinary citizens of Singapore. Our very own prominent Criminal Lawyer, the late Mr.Subhas Anandan once said, “Even the most heinous offender deserves a proper trial.”
I think his statement is self-explanatory. I do not think it is right to shun someone and to deny anyone of their rights to a proper defence just because of the fact that I might face repercussions due to my actions. I do not think it is proper and becoming of a law student to inculcate such an attitude towards issues of such nature.
To cower in fear and stand idly for self-preservation is a trait that is not ideal and should not be possessed by any individual and or group, especially from anyone with a legal background or aspiring to be in the legal profession.
My mentor, Mr Ravi once said, ‘Love and compassion must deploy every tool to fight against inhumanity.’ This couldn’t be truer.
I truly hope that my values and principles will not waver in time, under pressure and fear, in particular and no one should. One of my friends asked me whether I think Roy and others were right in their actions and whether they deserve to be prosecuted or punished.
Well, to put it simply, it is not for me to decide whether they are right or wrong. Neither am I in the capacity to determine or judge whether they deserve to be prosecuted or not. It is the duty of the Judge to find that out.
My role is to assist in their defence and I will continue to render assistance unreservedly without prejudice and most importantly, without the element of fear.
The above incident relates to Dylan’s experience with Mr Ravi who was in charge of the said case in 2014.
Commentaries
Lim Tean criticizes Govt’s rejection of basic income report, urges Singaporeans to rethink election choices
Lim Tean, leader of Peoples Voice (PV), criticizes the government’s defensive response to the basic living income report, accusing it of avoiding reality.
He calls on citizens to assess affordability and choose MPs who can truly enhance their lives in the upcoming election.
SINGAPORE: A recently published report, “Minimum Income Standard 2023: Household Budgets in a Time of Rising Costs,” unveils figures detailing the necessary income households require to maintain a basic standard of living, using the Minimum Income Standard (MIS) method.
The newly released study, spearheaded by Dr Ng Kok Hoe of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKYSPP) specifically focuses on working-age households in 2021 and presents the latest MIS budgets, adjusted for inflation from 2020 to 2022.
The report detailed that:
- The “reasonable starting point” for a living wage in Singapore was S$2,906 a month.
- A single parent with a child aged two to six required S$3,218 per month.
- Partnered parents with two children, one aged between seven and 12 and the other between 13 and 18, required S$6,426 a month.
- A single elderly individual required S$1,421 a month.
- Budgets for both single and partnered parent households averaged around S$1,600 per member. Given recent price inflation, these figures have risen by up to 5% in the current report.
Singapore Govt challenges MIS 2023 report’s representation of basic needs
Regrettably, on Thursday (14 Sept), the Finance Ministry (MOF), Manpower Ministry (MOM), and Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) jointly issued a statement dismissing the idea suggested by the report, claiming that minimum household income requirements amid inflation “might not accurately reflect basic needs”.
Instead, they claimed that findings should be seen as “what individuals would like to have.”, and further defended their stances for the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) and other measures to uplift lower-wage workers.
The government argued that “a universal wage floor is not necessarily the best way” to ensure decent wages for lower-wage workers.
The government’s statement also questions the methodology of the Minimum Income Standards (MIS) report, highlighting limitations such as its reliance on respondent profiles and group dynamics.
“The MIS approach used is highly dependent on respondent profiles and on group dynamics. As the focus groups included higher-income participants, the conclusions may not be an accurate reflection of basic needs.”
The joint statement claimed that the MIS approach included discretionary expenditure items such as jewellery, perfumes, and overseas holidays.
Lim Tean slams Government’s response to basic living income report
In response to the government’s defensive reaction to the recent basic living income report, Lim Tean, leader of the alternative party Peoples Voice (PV), strongly criticizes the government’s apparent reluctance to confront reality, stating, “It has its head buried in the sand”.
He strongly questioned the government’s endorsement of the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) as a means to uplift the living standards of the less fortunate in Singapore, describing it as a misguided approach.
In a Facebook video on Friday (15 Sept), Lim Tean highlighted that it has become a global norm, especially in advanced and first-world countries, to establish a minimum wage, commonly referred to as a living wage.
“Everyone is entitled to a living wage, to have a decent life, It is no use boasting that you are one of the richest countries in the world that you have massive reserves, if your citizens cannot have a decent life with a decent living wage.”
Lim Tean cited his colleague, Leong Sze Hian’s calculations, which revealed a staggering 765,800 individuals in Singapore, including Permanent Residents and citizens, may not earn the recommended living wage of $2,906, as advised by the MIS report.
“If you take away the migrant workers or the foreign workers, and take away those who do not work, underage, are children you know are unemployed, and the figure is staggering, isn’t it?”
“You know you are looking at a very substantial percentage of the workforce that do not have sufficient income to meet basic needs, according to this report.”
He reiterated that the opposition parties, including the People’s Voice and the People’s Alliance, have always called for a minimum wage, a living wage which the government refuses to countenance.
Scepticism about the government’s ability to control rising costs
In a time of persistently high inflation, Lim Tean expressed skepticism about the government’s ability to control rising costs.
He cautioned against believing in predictions of imminent inflation reduction and lower interest rates below 2%, labeling them as unrealistic.
Lim Tean urged Singaporeans to assess their own affordability in these challenging times, especially with the impending GST increase.
He warned that a 1% rise in GST could lead to substantial hikes in everyday expenses, particularly food prices.
Lim Tean expressed concern that the PAP had become detached from the financial struggles of everyday Singaporeans, citing their high salaries and perceived insensitivity to the common citizen’s plight.
Lim Tean urges Singaporeans to rethink election choices
Highlighting the importance of the upcoming election, Lim Tean recommended that citizens seriously evaluate the affordability of their lives.
“If you ask yourself about affordability, you will realise that you have no choice, In the coming election, but to vote in a massive number of opposition Members of Parliament, So that they can make a difference.”
Lim Tean emphasized the need to move beyond the traditional notion of providing checks and balances and encouraged voters to consider who could genuinely improve their lives.
“To me, the choice is very simple. It is whether you decide to continue with a life, that is going to become more and more expensive: More expensive housing, higher cost of living, jobs not secure because of the massive influx of foreign workers,” he declared.
“Or you choose members of Parliament who have your interests at heart and who want to make your lives better.”
Commentaries
Political observers call for review of Singapore’s criteria of Presidential candidates and propose 5 year waiting period for political leaders
Singaporean political observers express concern over the significantly higher eligibility criteria for private-sector presidential candidates compared to public-sector candidates, calling for adjustments.
Some also suggest a five year waiting period for aspiring political leaders after leaving their party before allowed to partake in the presidential election.
Notably, The Workers’ Party has earlier reiterated its position that the current qualification criteria favor PAP candidates and has called for a return to a ceremonial presidency instead of an elected one.
While the 2023 Presidential Election in Singapore concluded on Friday (1 September), discussions concerning the fairness and equity of the electoral system persist.
Several political observers contend that the eligibility criteria for private-sector individuals running for president are disproportionately high compared to those from the public sector, and they propose that adjustments be made.
They also recommend a five-year waiting period for aspiring political leaders after leaving their party before being allowed to participate in the presidential election.
Aspiring entrepreneur George Goh Ching Wah, announced his intention to in PE 2023 in June. However, His application as a candidate was unsuccessful, he failed to receive the Certificate of Eligibility (COE) on 18 August.
Mr Goh had expressed his disappointment in a statement after the ELD’s announcement, he said, the Presidential Elections Committee (PEC) took a very narrow interpretation of the requirements without explaining the rationale behind its decision.
As per Singapore’s Constitution, individuals running for the presidency from the private sector must have a minimum of three years’ experience as a CEO in a company.
This company should have consistently maintained an average shareholders’ equity of at least S$500 million and sustained profitability.
Mr Goh had pursued eligibility through the private sector’s “deliberative track,” specifically referring to section 19(4)(b)(2) of the Singapore Constitution.
He pointed out five companies he had led for over three years, collectively claiming a shareholders’ equity of S$1.521 billion.
Notably, prior to the 2016 revisions, the PEC might have had the authority to assess Mr Goh’s application similarly to how it did for Mr Tan Jee Say in the 2011 Presidential Election.
Yet, in its current formulation, the PEC is bound by the definitions laid out in the constitution.
Calls for equitable standards across public and private sectors
According to Singapore’s Chinese media outlet, Shin Min Daily News, Dr Felix Tan Thiam Kim, a political analyst at Nanyang Technological University (NTU) Singapore, noted that in 2016, the eligibility criteria for private sector candidates were raised from requiring them to be executives of companies with a minimum capital of S$100 million to CEOs of companies with at least S$500 million in shareholder equity.
However, the eligibility criteria for public sector candidates remained unchanged. He suggests that there is room for adjusting the eligibility criteria for public sector candidates.
Associate Professor Bilver Singh, Deputy Head of the Department of Political Science at the National University of Singapore, believes that the constitutional requirements for private-sector individuals interested in running are excessively stringent.
He remarked, “I believe it is necessary to reassess the relevant regulations.”
He points out that the current regulations are more favourable for former public officials seeking office and that the private sector faces notably greater challenges.
“While it may be legally sound, it may not necessarily be equitable,” he added.
Proposed five-year waiting period for political leaders eyeing presidential race
Moreover, despite candidates severing ties with their political parties in pursuit of office, shedding their political affiliations within a short timeframe remains a challenging endeavour.
A notable instance is Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam, who resigned from the People’s Action Party (PAP) just slightly over a month before announcing his presidential candidacy, sparking considerable debate.
During a live broadcast, his fellow contender, Ng Kok Song, who formerly served as the Chief Investment Officer of GIC, openly questioned Mr Tharman’s rapid transition to a presidential bid shortly after leaving his party and government.
Dr Felix Tan suggests that in the future, political leaders aspiring to run for the presidency should not only resign from their parties but also adhere to a mandatory waiting period of at least five years before entering the race.
Cherian George and Kevin Y.L. Tan: “illogical ” to raise the corporate threshold in 2016
Indeed, the apprehension regarding the stringent eligibility criteria and concerns about fairness in presidential candidacy requirements are not limited to political analysts interviewed by Singapore’s mainstream media.
Prior to PE2023, CCherian George, a Professor of media studies at Hong Kong Baptist University, and Kevin Y.L. Tan, an Adjunct Professor at both the Faculty of Law of the National University of Singapore and the NTU’s S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), brought attention to the challenges posed by the qualification criteria for candidates vying for the Singaporean Presidency.
In their article titled “Why Singapore’s Next Elected President Should be One of its Last,” the scholars discussed the relevance of the current presidential election system in Singapore and floated the idea of returning to an appointed President, emphasizing the symbolic and unifying role of the office.
They highlighted that businessman George Goh appeared to be pursuing the “deliberative track” for qualification, which requires candidates to satisfy the PEC that their experience and abilities are comparable to those of a typical company’s chief executive with shareholder equity of at least S$500 million.
Mr Goh cobbles together a suite of companies under his management to meet the S$500m threshold.
The article also underscored the disparities between the eligibility criteria for candidates from the public and private sectors, serving as proxies for evaluating a candidate’s experience in handling complex financial matters.
“It is hard to see what financial experience the Chairman of the Public Service Commission or for that matter, the Chief Justice has, when compared to a Minister or a corporate chief.”
“The raising of the corporate threshold in 2016 is thus illogical and serves little purpose other than to simply reduce the number of potentially eligible candidates.”
The article also touches upon the issue of candidates’ independence from political parties, particularly the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP).
It mentions that candidates are expected to be non-partisan and independent, and it questions how government-backed candidates can demonstrate their independence given their previous affiliations.
The Workers’ Party advocate for a return to a ceremonial presidency
It comes as no surprise that Singapore’s alternative party, the Workers’ Party, reaffirmed its stance on 30 August, asserting that they believe the existing qualifying criteria for presidential candidates are skewed in favour of those approved by the People’s Action Party (PAP).
They argue that the current format of the elected presidency (EP) undermines the principles of parliamentary democracy.
“It also serves as an unnecessary source of gridlock – one that could potentially cripple a non-PAP government within its first term – and is an alternative power centre that could lead to political impasses.”
Consistently, the Workers’ Party has been vocal about its objection to the elected presidency and has consistently called for its abolition.
Instead, they advocate for a return to a ceremonial presidency, a position they have maintained for over three decades.
-
Comments2 weeks ago
Christopher Tan criticizes mrt breakdown following decade-long renewal program
-
Comments7 days ago
Netizens question Ho Ching’s praise for Chee Hong Tat’s return from overseas trip for EWL disruption
-
Singapore1 week ago
SMRT updates on restoration progress for East-West Line; Power rail completion expected today
-
Singapore2 weeks ago
Chee Hong Tat: SMRT to replace 30+ rail segments on damaged EWL track with no clear timeline for completion
-
Singapore1 week ago
Lee Hsien Yang pays S$619,335 to Ministers Shanmugam and Balakrishnan in defamation suit to protect family home
-
Singapore1 week ago
Train services between Jurong East and Buona Vista to remain disrupted until 1 Oct due to new cracks on East-West Line
-
Singapore2 weeks ago
Major breakdown on East-West Line: SMRT faces third service disruption in a month
-
Singapore2 weeks ago
Transport Minister: Boon Lay-Queenstown train services may not resume tomorrow; SMRT leaders apologise