- Joined
- Dec 30, 2010
- Messages
- 12,730
- Points
- 113
SINGAPOREANS elect a new Parliament every five years or so, and their president every six years - and it so happens that this round, both elections occur within months of each other in the same year. It's a temporal quirk that is unlikely to recur in the foreseeable future - which would be just as well, seeing as how the sentiments expressed in the watershed May 7 general election appear to have carried over into the presidential election tomorrow.
By virtue of the constitutional requirement that the president be non-partisan and above party politics, the presidential election is supposed to be an apolitical event - but evidently, it is anything but, going by both the pronouncements and promises made by some of the candidates in the run-up to Polling Day, and the views and voices of various segments articulated online and elsewhere. While the unprecedented four-man contest has put paid to any notion of a lack of interest in the country's highest office or fervour for public service, and has also focused the minds of Singaporeans on the presidency, it's apparent too that some in the anti-establishment sector are treating the polls tomorrow as GE Round 2, revisiting and extending their unhappiness over policy and governance onto the ballot for a totally different office, one that's not supposed to be politicised.
As would be abundantly clear by now, the Singapore president has no executive powers. Rather, he is a ceremonial head of state with enhanced custodial powers in specific areas. Yet his role and influence do go beyond the soft powers of being, ideally, a unifying figure in today's somewhat polarised Singapore society. As head of state, he is a symbol and ambassador of the country, possibly - as professor Tommy Koh has put it - its No 1 diplomat, with a role to help expand Singapore's economic and political spheres. Singaporeans would want in their president not only a knowledgeable statesman but someone who can hold his own in interacting with foreign leaders. But it's probably in his custodial role, particularly in the core areas of protecting Singapore's reserves and the integrity of the public service, that expectations get more mixed. Singaporeans would want a president with the independence of mind and courage of his convictions to question or veto any move or appointment by the government that is patently bad, detrimental to national interests, even just plainly misguided, in his wise judgement. Yet should people want a president who sees in his 'second key' check-and-balance role a permit to challenge and dispute the government at every turn?
Some Singaporeans may want a president who would be more activist than he can 'constitutionally' be, preferring probably one who's more adversarial than quietly co-operative in engaging with the government. But that would require a constitutional change in the office of the presidency, and the election tomorrow isn't the platform to do so. In casting their ballot, Singaporeans should vote for the Tan who they believe would best and most honourably fulfil the role and duties of the office as it now stands.
By virtue of the constitutional requirement that the president be non-partisan and above party politics, the presidential election is supposed to be an apolitical event - but evidently, it is anything but, going by both the pronouncements and promises made by some of the candidates in the run-up to Polling Day, and the views and voices of various segments articulated online and elsewhere. While the unprecedented four-man contest has put paid to any notion of a lack of interest in the country's highest office or fervour for public service, and has also focused the minds of Singaporeans on the presidency, it's apparent too that some in the anti-establishment sector are treating the polls tomorrow as GE Round 2, revisiting and extending their unhappiness over policy and governance onto the ballot for a totally different office, one that's not supposed to be politicised.
As would be abundantly clear by now, the Singapore president has no executive powers. Rather, he is a ceremonial head of state with enhanced custodial powers in specific areas. Yet his role and influence do go beyond the soft powers of being, ideally, a unifying figure in today's somewhat polarised Singapore society. As head of state, he is a symbol and ambassador of the country, possibly - as professor Tommy Koh has put it - its No 1 diplomat, with a role to help expand Singapore's economic and political spheres. Singaporeans would want in their president not only a knowledgeable statesman but someone who can hold his own in interacting with foreign leaders. But it's probably in his custodial role, particularly in the core areas of protecting Singapore's reserves and the integrity of the public service, that expectations get more mixed. Singaporeans would want a president with the independence of mind and courage of his convictions to question or veto any move or appointment by the government that is patently bad, detrimental to national interests, even just plainly misguided, in his wise judgement. Yet should people want a president who sees in his 'second key' check-and-balance role a permit to challenge and dispute the government at every turn?
Some Singaporeans may want a president who would be more activist than he can 'constitutionally' be, preferring probably one who's more adversarial than quietly co-operative in engaging with the government. But that would require a constitutional change in the office of the presidency, and the election tomorrow isn't the platform to do so. In casting their ballot, Singaporeans should vote for the Tan who they believe would best and most honourably fulfil the role and duties of the office as it now stands.
