Ah Neh cleaner wins PM Lee over court case

[3_M]

I don't know what the big deal is over this. The prime minister has called for by-election twice, in reasonable timeframe, proving that he does not give himself unfettered discretion.

In any case, the ruling is utterly non-sequitur since no fixed timeframe is mandated. The PMO can easily say it will call a by-election within a year, and there's nothing the courts or anyone can do about it, whether or not there has been this ruling. I don't see any legal or political implications whatsoever about the ruling. There is no way at all to prove in a court of law that the PM has in fact given himself unfettered discretion.

Nothing much the judges can do as the constitution doesn't mention anything about the time frame. Though there is no fix time frame, public pressure will be on PM to call for a by-election ASAP. Gone are the days when PAP can afford not to call for a by-election when a seat was vacated.

 

[Force 136]

AG says Indian Lady lost !!!

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/hougang-resident-s-appeal/735496.html

SINGAPORE: The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) has highlighted three main points that led to Singapore's highest court dismissing an appeal by Hougang resident Vellama Marie Muthu concerning the Prime Minister's discretion about whether and when to call an election.

The AGC is also studying the judgment of the Court of Appeal carefully and will advise the Prime Minister on it in due course.

Madam Vellama had appealed against the High Court's decision to dismiss her application for declarations concerning the Prime Minister's discretion about whether and when to call an election.

She had initiated the case in March 2012, after former Hougang Member of Parliament Yaw Shin Leong vacated his post.

In a statement, the AGC highlighted three main points that led to Madam Vellama's appeal being dismissed.

First, that Madam Vellama's application was "clearly premature" at the time it was filed - barely two weeks after the seat in Hougang SMC was vacated.

At the time, the Prime Minister had yet to make his stand on the matter, and there was no factual basis for her to make the application. AGC said this was their position from the outset of the proceedings.

Second, that the Appeals Court had pointed out that leave to proceed with the application should not have been given, as at that time the Prime Minister had already declared that a by-election would be held to fill the vacancy in Hougang SMC.

Third, that Madam Vellama did not have the standing to proceed with her substantive application for declaratory relief as the by-election in Hougang SMC was held on 26 May 2012.

The AGC said that while the last point would be enough to dispose of the appeal, the Judges of Appeal had made some observations on Article 49 of the Constitution.

These are:

that the Prime Minister has to call a by-election to fill casual vacancies of elected MPs within a reasonable time;

that the Prime Minister is entitled to take into account all relevant circumstances in deciding what is a reasonable time within which to call a by-election;

that the timing for the calling of a by-election can involve considerations that go well beyond mere practicability;

that it is impossible to lay down the specific consideration or factors which would have a bearing on the question whether the Prime Minister has acted reasonably in the exercise of his discretion under Article 49 of the Constitution;

and that the Prime Minister's exercise of discretion as to the timing of a by-election can only be challenged in exceptional cases.

The AGC also responded to media queries about a statement made by Madam Vellama's lawyer, M Ravi, who said that the Constitution "in a way has circumscribed the Prime Minister's executive authority".

It noted that the Court of Appeal has in fact said that the Prime Minister has broad discretion to decide when to call a by-election, and that in deciding when to call a by-election, he is entitled to take into account matters relating to policy including the physical well-being of the country.

"The Court of Appeal also recognised that it is only in exceptional cases that the Court may intervene in the exercise of the Prime Minister's discretion under Article 49 of the Constitution. In our system of constitutional government, all executive authority has to be derived from either the Constitution or some legislation. The Executive branch does not have any authority independent of the Constitution or legislation," said the AGC.


- CNA/ir

 

[Thick Face Black Heart]

Nothing much the judges can do as the constitution doesn't mention anything about the time frame. Though there is no fix time frame, public pressure will be on PM to call for a by-election ASAP. Gone are the days when PAP can afford not to call for a by-election when a seat was vacated.

I wonder what will happen in a GRC if one person suddenly steps down or dies. The last time, it was close to the GE anyway, so the PM got away with it. This time there will certainly be pressure even if there are 4 members left out of a 5 member GRC. Is it reasonable to demand a quick by-election in this example?

 

[sleaguepunter]

I wonder what will happen in a GRC if one person suddenly steps down or dies. The last time, it was close to the GE anyway, so the PM got away with it. This time there will certainly be pressure even if there are 4 members left out of a 5 member GRC. Is it reasonable to demand a quick by-election in this example?

His old man the prime candidate to be the next mp to mati in office. So TP grc by erection?

 

[steffychun]

His old man the prime candidate to be the next mp to mati in office. So TP grc by erection?

they will say not possible

 

[freedalas]

This proves that the Singapore Judiciary is independent. If dispels the myth that judges are beholden to the executive arm.

It also further proves that the Lees are not above the law and that the achievements of this remarkably talented family have been attained in a fair and even playing field.

Shows once again how politically naive u are. This latest ruling has no consequence at all because PAP had already decided that they cannot hold off a by-election for long as the unhappiness on the ground of a possible delay in Hougang BE was overwhelming. This is why Hougang BE was called even before the Courts decided on this case and likewise Ponggol East BE was called so quickly that surprised even the opposition. So while there's nothing for PAP to gain politically with the Court of Appeals overturning the High Court's judgement since they themselves had already decided to call a quick BE should one arises, PAP would have plenty to loose if it was upheld.

 

[winnipegjets]

This proves that the Singapore Judiciary is independent. If dispels the myth that judges are beholden to the executive arm.

It also further proves that the Lees are not above the law and that the achievements of this remarkably talented family have been attained in a fair and even playing field.

It is an outlier case. Most judges answer to ONE master. Why would a judge wants to give up millions in earnings by going against the master?

 

[winnipegjets]

Agree. PAP will abide by this ruling. Majullah Singapura. Let's close ranks and move on.

We have always closed ranks ...it is just that the PAP is selling sinkees out. Let's move them out - the PAP and the foreigners.

 

[steffychun]

We have always closed ranks ...it is just that the PAP is selling sinkees out. Let's move them out - the PAP and the foreigners.

closed ranks cocked up ranks. BG ME.

 

[Troll]

The Court of Appeal has ruled that the Prime Minister must call an election to fill a seat vacated by an elected Member of Parliament, overturning a previous decision by a High Court judge that the PM has the discretion to decide whether or not to call an election.

The decision brings to an end a long-running court case which has sparked much discussion since Hougang resident Vellama Marie Muthu applied for the High Court to rule on the issue in March last year after former Hougang MP Yaw Shin Leong vacated his seat.

Last August, Justice Philip Pillai dismissed Madam Vellama's bid after noting that the case turned upon the meaning of one word in Article 49 of the Constitution, which says a vacancy "shall be filled by election". Madam Vellama's lawyer M. Ravi had argued that the word "election" meant an election had to be held, while the Attorney-General's Chambers said "election" described the process of how a vacancy is to be filled. The judge stood with the latter interpretation.

Madam Vellama, a cleaner, had appealed against Justice Pillai's ruling. But after reserving judgement in January this year, the Court of Appeal said in its written judgement on Friday that the key lay in the word "shall" rather than "election". "Shall" indicates the act is mandatory, said the apex court, repeating an argument that Mr Ravi had earlier made.

I totally welcome this decision. Glad to see common sense and independence in our Judiciary.

I wonder how long will the current CJ last ....

 

[Troll]

Shows once again how politically naive u are. This latest ruling has no consequence at all because PAP had already decided that they cannot hold off a by-election for long as the unhappiness on the ground of a possible delay in Hougang BE was overwhelming. This is why Hougang BE was called even before the Courts decided on this case and likewise Ponggol East BE was called so quickly that surprised even the opposition. So while there's nothing for PAP to gain politically with the Court of Appeals overturning the High Court's judgement since they themselves had already decided to call a quick BE should one arises, PAP would have plenty to loose if it was upheld.

I have to agree with you on that one. The by-elections were held more due to necessity brought about by disquiet on the ground, rather than being compelled to do so because that's the law.

The ruling is a totally different matter. It effectively says that as PM, there are limits to his discretionary powers, and this is one of the case. He has (shall) call an election within a reasonable time frame, no excuses. Its not a very big thing after all, but you never know it's far reaching impact years down the road.

Unless... they change the laws, which PAP can pretty well do it with a majority in the Parliament.

 

[eatshitndie]

quite a big deal to me if madam hell-of-a-mama weighs over 200 lbs. how can a "cleaner" become so big in sg? was she "cleaning" up every piece of food dropped on the floor? :p :o

 

[streetsmart73]

Of course he has to call an election!! It took a court of appeal to determine that!!! But by when?? Within 3 months?? 6 months ???

hi there


1. aiyoh!
2. no eye see hoh.
3. it takes some cleaner to challenge the almighty sheep:kma:

 

[3_M]

I wonder what will happen in a GRC if one person suddenly steps down or dies. The last time, it was close to the GE anyway, so the PM got away with it. This time there will certainly be pressure even if there are 4 members left out of a 5 member GRC. Is it reasonable to demand a quick by-election in this example?

Article 49 doesn't distinct between SMC or GRC, so the ruling should applied across the board.

With the court's ruling, it no longer a matter if he should hold one but when? PM options will be limited as there is no ideal time in our context as to when a BE should be held. If he drags longer, it will be an albatross around his neck and prevent him from implementing unpopular policies. Politically it better for PM to hold BE ASAP and move on.

 

[steffychun]

Article 49 doesn't distinct between SMC or GRC, so the ruling should applied across the board.

With the court's ruling, it no longer a matter if he should hold one but when? PM options will be limited as there is no ideal time in our context as to when a BE should be held. If he drags longer, it will be an albatross around his neck and prevent him from implementing unpopular policies. Politically it better for PM to hold BE ASAP and move on.

GRCs were designed so that all MPs are in charge of each other. If an MP wants to slack like Harry, another must take care of his ward. So resign makes no difference. Life goes on.

Now, if by unlucky chance the PAP gets to outst an Aljunied MP they will put the law in their favour