Advertisement

COMMENT: What's wrong with electorate choosing the President?

An elderly woman places her vote in the ballot at the polling centre in Singapore on May 7, 2011. (AFP photo)

Parliament has reopened in the new year, and with that comes questions of what will be in store for us. During his speech, President Tony Tan suggested that changes to Singapore’s political system might be afoot. One of these changes could likely be to his own office, that of the elected presidency.

There’ve been rumblings about doing away with the elected presidency for some time. Kishore Mahbubani, dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, has called for a “u-turn” back to the days when the president was elected by Parliament. His piece for the Straits Times brought up the possibility of a “rogue president”, an echo of former Member of Parliament Inderjit Singh’s comment about the “wrong person” being elected.

All this talk about a “freak” presidential election makes it impossible not to look at the 2011 presidential election again. In that election, Tony Tan – the favoured Tan of the ruling party – won by less than one per cent of the vote over Tan Cheng Bock, the less favoured Tan. Having been so close to victory once, it is possible that Tan Cheng Bock could be up for another try when the next presidential elections comes.

Could this be why we’re hearing cautions against the possibility of the public electing the “wrong person”?

It’s pretty laughable to talk about the possibility of getting the “wrong person” out of what is meant to be a democratic election. If the election is free and fair with no sign of foul play or gerrymandering, it is hard to see how we would end up with the “wrong person”. There is no right or wrong answer in a popular election; there is only the person chosen by the electorate.

Saying that the presidential election could yield the wrong result suggests that the Singaporean public might fail to elect the preferred “right” candidate of the establishment. If that is the case, it is the establishment that is out of step with the people, not the other way ‘round. Also, is it not strange that while Singaporeans are lauded for their wisdom in voting in the PAP by a landslide during the last election, these same voters are suddenly deemed untrustworthy when choosing a president?

It is true that the presidential elections are often politicised. Is there any election that is not politicised in some way? Yet politicisation is not always a bad thing – it means that people are thinking about their values, their beliefs, prioritising what is important to them and voting accordingly (whether or not we agree with their conclusions).

Fear of the electorate’s choice is not a good enough reason to abolish the elected presidency. If the worry is that the electorate is somehow abusing the presidential election to vent anger against a particular political party, then what we need is more political education, to ensure that voters understand the role and importance of the presidency. More political engagement and freedom will also help; when Singaporeans can freely and adequately make their choices at the ballot box during the general elections without fearing for the amenities in their HDB estate or feeling restricted by GRCs, they are less likely to make use of the presidential election to make a point. And if they still persist in voting for the “wrong person” – well, then it is time for the establishment to learn respect for the will of the electorate.

Kirsten Han is a Singaporean blogger and journalist. She is also involved in the We Believe in Second Chances campaign for the abolishment of the death penalty. A social media junkie, she tweets at @kixes. The views expressed are her own.