some help required...

[zhihau]

couldn't help it but had to ask for help from the vast wealth of experienced bros here, was primarily looking up the Singapore Statutes Online, particularly at a specific section of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore, Part 6, The Legislature, Point 49. Filling of vacancies.

I had to reproduce the said section in full, because i couldn't bear to make any mistakes when i wanted to understand more of our Constitution.
here it is:
Quote
Filling of vacancies
49. — (1) Whenever the seat of a Member, not being a non-constituency Member, has become vacant for any reason other than a dissolution of Parliament, the vacancy shall be filled by election in the manner provided by or under any law relating to Parliamentary elections for the time being in force.
(2) The Legislature may by law provide for —
(a) the vacating of a seat of a non-constituency Member in circumstances other than those specified in Article 46;
(b) the filling of vacancies of the seats of non-constituency Members where such vacancies are caused otherwise than by a dissolution of Parliament.
Unquote

the question i had in mind was simple, does this mean that the MP seat must be filled?

source: http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/browse/otherResults.w3p;letter=Constitutional Documents;type=actsAll

 

[HTOLAS]

You have just cited a perfect example of a bad law, or should I say, a good law made bad by dubious amendment. This law says that something "shall" be done but no longer states a time frame within which it must be done, nor the penalties for not doing it.

In the past, there were specific provisions for when the seat must be filled. This was amended out of the constitution in the 1980s.

 

[Varuna]

Really catch no balls. Any lawyers/bros here who can decrypt the codes into simple english?

 

[HTOLAS]

I'm not a lawyer but I'll try.

Laws, rules and regulations either:

• require you to do something, e.g. you shall your subscription fees by the 5th of each month, or
• prohibit you from doing something, e.g. you shall not litter (and the act of littering is defined).

For rules that require you to do something, some kind of time-frame is usually specified, in the above example, "by the 5th of each month".

To ensure compliance, these laws, rules and regulation usually include a penalty for failure to do so, e.g. your club's by-laws might have a penalty fee for failure to pay by the 5th and the anti-littering law would say something about a fine.

The provisions for by-elections when a seat becomes empty other than by dissolution of parliament (which happens just before a GE) states that the seat must be filled but does not say by when and what happens if it isn't. Bad law.

Really catch no balls. Any lawyers/bros here who can decrypt the codes into simple english?

 

[scroobal]

In a nutshell any filling of vacancies must follow the Parliamentary Elections Act which is the current existing legislation in force. There is no time limit to fill the vacancy. The privilege of incumbency. The intention is clear. Its "shall" and not "must" or "required".

It goes perfectly well with the PAP ethos where serving the people is secondary. Hitting the GDP numbers is a priority.

 

[zhihau]

The provisions for by-elections when a seat becomes empty other than by dissolution of parliament (which happens just before a GE) states that the seat must be filled but does not say by when and what happens if it isn't. Bad law.

It goes perfectly well with the PAP ethos where serving the people is secondary. Hitting the GDP numbers is a priority.

with the incumbent having over 90% of the Parliamentary seats, any amendments can be easily passed

 

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

There are many more relevant sections that what was presented here. For example, for GRCs, there is no requirement for by-election as long as one member is still an MP. Only if not all GRC members are no longer MPs will there be a by-election. For SMC it is less clear. However, taking the relevant GRC text as a guide, if there is no MP for that area then a by-election should be called. All the talk about UK and our model is idiotic because it fails to account for private candidates as well as the relevancy of our own laws with respect to GRC by-elections. The law is actually clear that as long as voters are not represented in parliament by an elected representative, a by-election should be called.

The issue of time is lacking as one would expect for a law that has been written poorly. At the end of the day, it is the PMs decision when to call for a by-election. If this is the case then it should have been written as such and clearly.

 

[cunnilaubu]

The intention is clear. Its "shall" and not "must" or "required".

The dictionary definition for "shall" is "—used in laws, regulations, or directives to express what is mandatory <it shall be unlawful to carry firearms>" - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shall

Although the Constitution is silent on when a by-election should be called, since it is mandatory, shouldn't it be called before the next GE? Is there a "general" penalty for contravening any article in the Constitution?

 

[Ramseth]

Shall is always used in law, for it means something should be done or else some consequence would befall.

Will means something must be done, regardless of consequence, rarely used in law.

 

[HTOLAS]

Yup, 'shall (not)' as used in laws, rules and regulations denote a regulatory obligation, i.e. it has to be performed or it is forbidden respectively. It has stronger force than 'should' or 'must'.

The dictionary definition for "shall" is "—used in laws, regulations, or directives to express what is mandatory <it shall be unlawful to carry firearms>" - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shall

Although the Constitution is silent on when a by-election should be called, since it is mandatory, shouldn't it be called before the next GE? Is there a "general" penalty for contravening any article in the Constitution?

 

[Varuna]

I'm not a lawyer but I'll try.

Laws, rules and regulations either:

• require you to do something, e.g. you shall your subscription fees by the 5th of each month, or
• prohibit you from doing something, e.g. you shall not litter (and the act of littering is defined).

For rules that require you to do something, some kind of time-frame is usually specified, in the above example, "by the 5th of each month".

To ensure compliance, these laws, rules and regulation usually include a penalty for failure to do so, e.g. your club's by-laws might have a penalty fee for failure to pay by the 5th and the anti-littering law would say something about a fine.

The provisions for by-elections when a seat becomes empty other than by dissolution of parliament (which happens just before a GE) states that the seat must be filled but does not say by when and what happens if it isn't. Bad law.

Thanks bro. Left hanging without any deadline. I think can forget about Bye Election. LTK will not let Hougang residents down. WP will re-align their manpower and workload to manage Hougang with ALjunied GRC as a whole.

 

[zhihau]

Yup, 'shall (not)' as used in laws, rules and regulations denote a regulatory obligation

bro,

thank you, i'm learning a lot from you

 

[Ramseth]

Shall or will, should or must, if you know how not to get caught or to explain it away if you got caught, make no difference except a minor inconvenience in explaining your case. I've killed people before. Look, no death penalty, not even imprisonment, walk away free.

 

[Balancemind]

couldn't help it but had to ask for help from the vast wealth of experienced bros here, was primarily looking up the Singapore Statutes Online, particularly at a specific section of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore, Part 6, The Legislature, Point 49. Filling of vacancies.

I had to reproduce the said section in full, because i couldn't bear to make any mistakes when i wanted to understand more of our Constitution.
here it is:
Quote
Filling of vacancies
49. — (1) Whenever the seat of a Member, not being a non-constituency Member, has become vacant for any reason other than a dissolution of Parliament, the vacancy shall be filled by election in the manner provided by or under any law relating to Parliamentary elections for the time being in force.
(2) The Legislature may by law provide for —
(a) the vacating of a seat of a non-constituency Member in circumstances other than those specified in Article 46;
(b) the filling of vacancies of the seats of non-constituency Members where such vacancies are caused otherwise than by a dissolution of Parliament.
Unquote

the question i had in mind was simple, does this mean that the MP seat must be filled?

source: http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/browse/otherResults.w3p;letter=Constitutional Documents;type=actsAll

Is that not obviously clearly in Article 49(1) of The Constitution of the Republic of Singapore what need to be done in the situation therein stated. Moreover you may like to look up Article 47 of The Constitution. If you were to read Article 49(1) together with Article 47 it is as clearly as daylight that a by-election for Hougang has to be called as soon as possible.

 

[zhihau]

If you were to read Article 49(1) together with Article 47 it is as clearly as daylight that a by-election for Hougang has to be called as soon as possible.

now that the affidavit has been filed, what's next?