Speech by Mr. Louis Ng Kok Kwang, MP for Nee Soon GRC at the Second Reading of the Presidential Elections (Amendment) Bill [Bill No. 2/2017]
Video
Introduction
Madam, I stand in support this Bill. However, I would like to seek a few clarifications and offer some suggestions.
Advocating transparency
I hope that the decision-making process of the Community Committee can be transparent. I trust that the Community Committee will carry out its functions in a fair and equitable manner. Hence there should be no issues and difficulties in allowing the decisions and processes to be transparent.
In today’s liberal social media where opinions and questions are openly raised and disseminated, it would be advisable for the government to provide answers and clarity, before doubt and misinformation cloud the minds of people. To this end, the Community Committee should be transparent in its processes.
May I suggest that the Community Committee, inform the Declarant why the Community Committee concluded that the Declarant is not a member of the particular Community that he or she had declared to be of.
I have as well, additional reasons for suggesting why the Community Committee should reveal the reasons that guided it to the conclusion to reject a Declaration form.
Reasons for the need for transparency
First, the Declarant does not appear to have recourse if he or she believes the decision made by the Community Committee is incorrect or unjustly concluded. As per Section 8J(2), the Community Committee’s decision is final and is not subject to appeal or review by the Court.
Further, the Community Committee is granted very comprehensive immunity as well, subject to the exception of malice, which is a high threshold to satisfy in a procedural and administrative context.
Secondly, unless invited by the Community Committee, the Declarant may submit his or her form only once. Hence it would be considerate to produce the reasons behind the rejection in order to demonstrate that the Community Committee considered the Declarant’s form and relevant documents or evidence rigorously and fairly in an application where the Declarant has probably only one chance to apply.
Thirdly, the Community Committee, which is statutorily unencumbered by legal forms and evidence laws as per Section 8G(4), appears to be able to make its decision with fewer considerations or constraints. Hence it would be helpful for the Declarant and the public to know of the reasons behind the rejection. This would surely help preserve the credibility of the Community Committee.
Community Committee procedures
Madam, may I also seek clarifications on Section 8L of the Bill.
I note that the Community Committee may regulate its own procedure. Could the use of this power be clarified, and what possible regulations of procedure do we envisage?
Next, I note that a defect in the appointment of any member of the Community Committee would not invalidate “any proceedings of the Community Committee”.
The phrase “any proceedings” appear to include decisions on accepting or rejecting a Declaration form. May I know why a defect in this particular appointment should be tolerated when a strict and stringent approach has always been adopted in election matters?
Transparency on PEC processes
Madam, ancillary to this Bill is the powers of the Presidential Elections Committee. Like how the Community Committee determines if a person is of a particular community, the PEC functions as another gatekeeper. May I propose that the PEC also reveals its reasons for rejecting any candidate for not being “a person of integrity, good character and reputation” as per Article 19(2)(e) of the Constitution? As a group of persons who are not democratically elected by the citizens of Singapore, it is only appropriate for the PEC to account to the electorate on the reasons that guided the PEC to limiting the nominees to such persons only.
Conclusion
Madam, I believe that the Declarant ought to know of the reasons behind being rejected by the Community Committee in a system where he or she has probably only one chance to submit the form and where the decision is final and not subject to appeal or judicial review.
Madam, the above comments notwithstanding, I stand in support of the Bill.