SDP: Reform the election system
4 02 2008Kelvin Lim | kl@nus.edu.sg
the ridge news
A NUSSU Publication
Feb. 4, 2008
On Jan. 20, 2008, the Singapore Democratic Party organized a public forum entitled “Reform of the Election System in Singapore” at the Allson’s Hotel.
Aimed at spearheading a national effort for a reform of the current election system, the main agenda was to brainstorm for solutions with the public.
Moderated by the chairman of Singapore Democratic Party, Gandhi Ambalam, the four panellists were Chia Ti Lik, J.B. Jeyaretnam, Jufrie Mahmood and Chee Soon Juan.
Tan Tarn How, a policy researcher at the Institute of Policy Studies was slated to speak, but backed out at the last minute.
Former Workers’ Party candidate and founding member of SG Human Rights Chia, said that the reform of current institutions can be achieved either in accordance to the law, or an establishment of a new legal order via “extra-electoral action.”
With the People’s Action Party in parliamentary majority, he said, the current system is skewed to give power towards the incumbent party.
Suggesting “extra-parliamentary” and “extra-legal” ways to compel the government to reform, Chia encouraged the audience to campaign openly and strongly for an independent election commission.
Chia also spoke disapprovingly of “acceptable” opposition parties and called to expose these PAP apologists and sympathizers.
He winded up his speech by questioning the audience whether they wanted an opposition that played by the rules of the ruling party.
Jeyaretnam, the former sectary-general of the Workers’ Party was the second speaker of the forum.
He likened the current state of affairs as “a planned system of denial”.
As a veteran player in the local political arena, he recounted his colourful experiences of past elections, covering on various issues such as the fear factor, denial of freedom for information and the lack of transparency.
In addition, Jeyaretnam lamented about the Political Donation Act which prohibited anonymous donations above $5,000 and the pressing need for a Freedom of Information Act.
He then rounded up by recollecting the “blatant intimidation of voters” during the 1996 elections in the now-defunct Cheng San Group Representation Constituency.
Veteran oppositionist Jufrie started with an analogy of the martial art of karate whereby the main objective is to attack the opponent’s weakest spot.
And the weakest spot of the PAP, he opinionated would be the minds of Singaporeans.
Jufrie then elaborated that reform would thus have to begin with the mass media. Citing numerous anecdotes, he griped that local reporters had “no sense of shame.”
Jufrie drew laughter and applause from the audience when he made a similar observation as Chia, that some opposition parties had chosen to be a “poodle” instead of a “watchdog” in parliament.
In all, he called upon the audience to start a campaign against the media, in view of the numerous PAP apologists in the press.
Addressing particularly to the journalists, he urged them to “do their part not for PAP or the opposition, but for Singapore”.
The final speaker of the forum was Chee, the secretary-general of SDP. Moving the spotlight away from the PAP, he challenged the audience by methodically laying down a list of actions towards electoral reform.
They were:
Research best practices
Develop website
Publish training manual for poll watchers
Recruit and train poll watchers
Raise awareness
Seek support from bloggers
Seek international observers – United Nations, Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, International Foundation for Election Systems, Asian Network for Free Elections
Learn from overseas reform campaigns
Engage the Prime Minister’s Office and the Elections Department
He emphasized that the reform of the election system is not a partisan issue and hoped to engage with a myriad of opposition parties, civil society groups, academics and women’s group in this national effort.
While Chee was disappointed at the non-participation from other opposition parties, he was determined not to be deterred.
Chee challenged the audience “to do more and to do better”, and rhetorically questioned to be “men or mice, woman or wimp, citizen or slaves”.
Edit (06 April 2008): The Ridge: Not a mouthpiece for SDP. Refutation of allegations of censorship.
[...] Kelvin Lim, a student reporter for The Ridge, wrote to Dr Chee in January this year for an interview for the magazine when the [...]
Well, where is the transcript of the interview?
It would be much better if all us readers, and fellow academics are able to have a look.