Where does it say that you can't hold more than one citizenship. The govt can remove citizenship without even you holding another as they did to Tan Wah Piow, Arun Senkuttavan etc. Removing on a "may" is whole different thing.
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Yaccob tries to defned his children--but fails
- Thread starter steffychun
- Start date
Spot on. Well articulated. A lot of people imagine things that are not there. I even know of lawyers who tell me it is illegal and after checking they come back and seem lost. It probably the best perpetuated urban myth by the PAP.
For those who struggle with English, I will make it simple.
1) The Govt "MAY" remove your Singapore citizenship if you acquire another country citizenship.
2) It is not "shall, will or must". After primary 3, this part of English should be clear.
3) No where does it say that you are committing an offence. The govt cannot charge you, fine you, jail you, incarcerate you, imprison you or even impose restrictions on you. They can't even scold or issue you a warning letter. They however can charge you for littering if you throw a sweet wrapper on the floor.
4) They can't take away your foreign citizenship or force you renounce it.
Ever heard of anyone being charged in court for possession of a foreign citizenship while being a Singaporean.
1) The Govt "MAY" remove your Singapore citizenship if you acquire another country citizenship.
2) It is not "shall, will or must". After primary 3, this part of English should be clear.
3) No where does it say that you are committing an offence. The govt cannot charge you, fine you, jail you, incarcerate you, imprison you or even impose restrictions on you. They can't even scold or issue you a warning letter. They however can charge you for littering if you throw a sweet wrapper on the floor.
4) They can't take away your foreign citizenship or force you renounce it.
Ever heard of anyone being charged in court for possession of a foreign citizenship while being a Singaporean.
Just expanding the topic.
How about applying or renewing a Singapore passport? The ICA do not need to issue one to multiple-nationality Singaporeans.
And the law regarding withdrawal of CPF is set in stone! Have to renounce Singapore citizenship.
There is a whole series of threads and posts covering over the years in the emigration folder.
One has to give up Singapore Citizenship to get CPF and you will get every cent. Passport renewal requires making a declaration. Just be honest. Some people don't bother to renew and use the foreign passport to enter singapore or to travel. The idea anyway is to travel and not feel good having 2 valid passports. If you call, they will tell you to submit and they handle on a case by case basis. They will never give you an answer.
One has to give up Singapore Citizenship to get CPF and you will get every cent. Passport renewal requires making a declaration. Just be honest. Some people don't bother to renew and use the foreign passport to enter singapore or to travel. The idea anyway is to travel and not feel good having 2 valid passports. If you call, they will tell you to submit and they handle on a case by case basis. They will never give you an answer.
Last edited:
Scro,
I always wonder how the govt "may" move on something if there wasnt a law or legal process based on some law in the first place. Maybe that's why there is this constant debate among forummers here every time this subject of dual citizenship comes up. Is it a Ministerial discretion which then is above the law? If that's the case, the govt will have a lot to answer since it definitely is on very shaky grounds with the likes of Yaacob and all other Ministers who may one day be in charge of the Immigration and citizenship apparatus? these people are supposed to lead us out of the darkness, and yet they have chosen to be in the darkness.
I always wonder how the govt "may" move on something if there wasnt a law or legal process based on some law in the first place. Maybe that's why there is this constant debate among forummers here every time this subject of dual citizenship comes up. Is it a Ministerial discretion which then is above the law? If that's the case, the govt will have a lot to answer since it definitely is on very shaky grounds with the likes of Yaacob and all other Ministers who may one day be in charge of the Immigration and citizenship apparatus? these people are supposed to lead us out of the darkness, and yet they have chosen to be in the darkness.
Would call it discretion or option allowed by law given to the authorities. The convention in the early years was to use this to strip those who were born in PRC, India or Malaysia and who fiddled with nationals security such as communists, its followers and strip them of their citizenship and deport them. If the other side does not accept them, they will remain as stateless but will be given travel document but not a passport. It is seldom used now and never used on a singaporean by birth unless they acquire foreign citizenship and cause trouble such as Gopalan Nair.
The govt came out with a new piece of legislation to strip Tan Wah Piow of his citizenship as he had not acquired a foreign citizenship at that time. This is now Sec 135 1(c)(i) and used to be called Tan Wah Piow Law.
Because of globalisation and the fear of the brain drain to developed countries, they stopped worrying about dual citizenship hoping that some will return. They are not the only one. Other countries have followed suit to keep pace with the times. OZ is a good example. Its law was very clear - absolutely no dual citizenship. They repealed it in 2004.
Old man mentioned a few years ago that cabinet papers were put up to allow dual citizenship but any decision has been stayed.
The Elites have taken the opportunity to acquire foreign citizenship but the layman is left in the dark.
The govt came out with a new piece of legislation to strip Tan Wah Piow of his citizenship as he had not acquired a foreign citizenship at that time. This is now Sec 135 1(c)(i) and used to be called Tan Wah Piow Law.
Because of globalisation and the fear of the brain drain to developed countries, they stopped worrying about dual citizenship hoping that some will return. They are not the only one. Other countries have followed suit to keep pace with the times. OZ is a good example. Its law was very clear - absolutely no dual citizenship. They repealed it in 2004.
Old man mentioned a few years ago that cabinet papers were put up to allow dual citizenship but any decision has been stayed.
The Elites have taken the opportunity to acquire foreign citizenship but the layman is left in the dark.
Last edited:
I think Ah Seng was making a different point. If the child is born (even to both Singaporean parents) in a country which accords citizenship by birth to anyone born there, then the constitution does not allow the child to get citizenship by descent (guess you can go by way of citizenship by registration).
But Ah Seng was pursuing the point even when another forumer pointed out that both YI's children were born in Singapore so they had citizenship by birth. Their US citizenship is by descent and that did not have the same rules as Singapore.
But Ah Seng was pursuing the point even when another forumer pointed out that both YI's children were born in Singapore so they had citizenship by birth. Their US citizenship is by descent and that did not have the same rules as Singapore.
You have poor understanding here.
The point is that the Singapore Constitution has this spirit of not accepting Dual Citizenship in Singapore. If Dr Y's children were born in Singapore and the parents actually apply to US embassy here for US citizenship for them, it just demonstrates even more what's on their minds. And that don't seem right as well if they don't give up their children's Singapore citizenship.
What is the difference between being born in Singapore then later on, if you have the opportunity, apply for American citizenship when you are adult as compared to applying for American citizenship while you are a child, in both cases, without denouncing your Singapore citizenship? Practically no difference because you will be holding dual citizenship.
To take the example of being born overseas is to give the benefit of doubts to Dr Y. It would have meant that his children couldn't even apply for Singapore citizenship if they have already acquired American citizenship.
Scroobal is it right here. It just means that there is practically a contradiction on what the Singapore Constitution wants as embedded in one clause while in practice, the execution part, they just do otherwise. I have put up the questions to ICA deliberately to show that they are not acting according to the spirit of Singapore Constitution... outright hypocrisy in talking about not "recognizing" dual citizenship but in actual fact, on the ground, they just close one or even both eyes on it... unless you are made to take the oath.
The key lies on the oath taking which could criminalize you if you hold dual or multiple citizenship.
In this case, I am different from Scroobal in the sense that I am only interested how Dr Y's children could end up with dual citizenship, apparently KNOWINGLY. There is no way of getting into dual citizenship without an proactive action from the parents in getting them registered for both. Well, he is somebody in the Cabinet which has insisted that Singapore will not allow dual citizenship.
Goh Meng Seng
I know of a case this year when a SG adult citizen entered and left SG with a US passport. Didn't renew SG passport. No NS problem or any other problem. Was let through, went smoothly. But months later, received a letter from ICA asking them to consider renouncing SG citizenship. Didn't really force the issue, but they did because they didn't want to risk any problems coming in next time, and they've no plans to resettle here.
Think this issue is far from clear. They didn't carry the case far enough to see if they MAY actually be stripped of SG citizenship. However, the possibility of being barred from re-entering is also a real fear. Maybe just fear that is unfounded. But anybody got any legal precedence ?
Maybe this YI incident would get govt to relook, issue proper guidelines and answer GMS questions. But suspect they'll not want to touch this with a ten-foot pole.
Agree, they have to explain why the 2 standards.
All these decades, they have remained silent and there are various reasons why including the fear that good Singaporeans will leave if this is strictly enforced. ICA staff except for senior execs have no idea how these things work. They typically go to MHA directly. I know of people who have friends in ICA who have advised them wrongly and got into trouble. The best case is a chap whose close friend is a internationally known ex Perm Sec who also gave him the wrong info. This chap's 2 sons are banned from entering Singapore. Typically the NS, liabilities, citizenship status is heavily interlinked. It is also the same reason why constitution does not allow those below 21yrs to renounce their citizenship.
Best advice is not to make false declaration. Use the SG passport to enter and exit. If it has expired, use the foreign passport. There is a clause in the immigration act that requires you to use your SG passport and there is a penalty. But there is no law to renew an expired passport. I also am aware of passport renewals done despite declaring that you are possession of another foreign citizenship. All the above applies to Singaporeans by birth. Those new talents who apply to become Singaporeans, all have to renouce their original citizenship. No exceptions.
The lesson here is to be adventurous, treat the world as your home, grab the opportunity to become a citizen of a developed country, explore the wider opportunities, set your family on the right road etc. At the same time, don't listen to urban myth. Ask around. Take advice from the right people, don't be overcautious, don't lie. I believe I have helped people over many years in the emigration folder on NS, dual citizenship and having their cake and eating it. Others have chipped in with their dose of experience and help as well.
Best advice is not to make false declaration. Use the SG passport to enter and exit. If it has expired, use the foreign passport. There is a clause in the immigration act that requires you to use your SG passport and there is a penalty. But there is no law to renew an expired passport. I also am aware of passport renewals done despite declaring that you are possession of another foreign citizenship. All the above applies to Singaporeans by birth. Those new talents who apply to become Singaporeans, all have to renouce their original citizenship. No exceptions.
The lesson here is to be adventurous, treat the world as your home, grab the opportunity to become a citizen of a developed country, explore the wider opportunities, set your family on the right road etc. At the same time, don't listen to urban myth. Ask around. Take advice from the right people, don't be overcautious, don't lie. I believe I have helped people over many years in the emigration folder on NS, dual citizenship and having their cake and eating it. Others have chipped in with their dose of experience and help as well.
Last edited:
i
Yup,you got it right pal...because our constitution on this issue is a minefield.And if anyone seeks clarification or challenge the interpretation than it's the supreme court that gonna interpret it....not you or me or even the parliament.Lets get that straight.Meanwhile,our PAP ministers exercise the right of discretion where the constitution is silent.
But let me stress here that neither the constitution nor the laws of the country is sacredly sacrosanct...thus the holy cow needs to be slaughtered every now and than.Why?....because for every one man made law there is a morality root that holds it.Thou shalt not kill and therefore the penal code for murder...and etc.
Thus if I were you I rather bark at the morality of our multi million dollar minister harboring a foreign wife and children.....because even if Yaccob faulted on technicalities over his foreign wife's citizenship ; it can always be mitigated with right reasoning.So there...
But it is morally wrong on our PM and his political party's part to knowingly enlist a minister with foreign wife and children.You know that before anybody is enlisted at a senior position in our government he/she and his/her entire immediate and extended family must undergo the scrutiny by ISD?....and that our ministers are monitored more than opposition figures?.So,I would have guess Yaccob already must have spelt his term of service.That wify wants to remain as US citizen and so too the children ;in case if they divorce.Thus it is understandable and acceptable.
But the onus lies entirely with the PM for accepting or rejecting Yaccob terms of service.The culprit here is the PM---for not only co-opting a minister with a foreign family but also shielding that information to public.This is where we need a charter or law passed to compel the government for our righst to information.US and India has such an act.
Freedom of information legislation comprises laws that guarantee access to data held by the state. They establish a "right-to-know" legal process by which requests may be made for government-held information, to be received freely or at minimal cost.Our opposition and aspiring politicians should fight for this.
The issue of claiming citizenship years after birth reminds me of Bruce Lee. He was born in Oakland, California and brought back to HK as an infant. His birth certificate was issued in Oakland, but he wasn't registered as a US citizen until as an adult he went back to claim US citizenship. Of course, that was less complicated as HK was a colony without issue of conscription. Law of birthright to citizenship is not that simple and varies from country to country. Of course, there's the absolute incontestible citizenship by birth when you're born in a country to parents both citizens of the country. When other permutations and circumstances come in, things wouldn't be that simple.
Singapore Constitutional Law 101
gee wiz this why i still keep coming bk in here...there still exists some gold dust albeit thru the shitloads of rubbish n nonsense...
...mini-tutorial on sin constitutional law!...now all we need r thio li ann n kevin tan to provide the grades:p
gee wiz this why i still keep coming bk in here...there still exists some gold dust albeit thru the shitloads of rubbish n nonsense...
...mini-tutorial on sin constitutional law!...now all we need r thio li ann n kevin tan to provide the grades:pi dont think dual citizenship is the big issue save for pap govt's pathetic double std position ...the big issue resides under NS liability n obligations...
btw i recall ramseth mentioning the age of 7 being the cut off for male singgies wif dual citizenship who wish to avoid NS i.e. before turning 7 the male singgie must leave sin...think he is correct although it wld appear that neither Mindef/CMPB nor ICA wld come out publicly to confirm this...still dealt wif on a case by case basis...those interested in this issue - do not make a sin passport for yr son if possible n never renew the passport, same thing applies wif IC etc...all these wld pt to 'benefits' n place a disadvantage to future appln to avoid NS...
btw i recall ramseth mentioning the age of 7 being the cut off for male singgies wif dual citizenship who wish to avoid NS i.e. before turning 7 the male singgie must leave sin...think he is correct although it wld appear that neither Mindef/CMPB nor ICA wld come out publicly to confirm this...still dealt wif on a case by case basis...those interested in this issue - do not make a sin passport for yr son if possible n never renew the passport, same thing applies wif IC etc...all these wld pt to 'benefits' n place a disadvantage to future appln to avoid NS...
Last edited:
yes can vouch for this as i too hv heard of such cases as well...
just dont listen to urban myths...do complete due dilligence the best u can n follow the laws at all times...oh yes n try n hv contingent plans...
just dont listen to urban myths...do complete due dilligence the best u can n follow the laws at all times...oh yes n try n hv contingent plans...
Agree. On Charlie Rose, LKY was asked what he'd advise young SG. Reply was to go out into the world, America, China, using SG as a base.
As for NS, think that's a sacred cow. Absolutely no political capital (or any administrative reason) for govt even trying to clarify anything about getting out of it.
But if they want SG to go out into the world and bring the world to SG, they should level the playing field and be transparent. Children, spouses from overseas common. Right now, these ambiguities about dual citizens serve only to advantage foreigners, certain elites, those with foreign spouses. They can come and go anytime. Even if children renounce foreign citizenship at 21, their foreign citizen spouses (who are also SG PR) can easily get back their children's foreign PR (and eventually citizenship) if need be.
Adventurous SG may end up with problems and disadvantaged in going out into the world or returning with valuable experience.
Having the right to claim US citizenship is very different from actually registering for that US citizenship.
Goh Meng Seng
