President-elect Halimah Yacob (C) takes the oath of office while flanked by Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong (L) and Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon (R) during the presidential inauguration ceremony at the Istana Presidential Palace in Singapore September, 14 2017. (Getty)[/caption]
by Ahmed Taher
On September 13 2017, Singaporeans were meant to go to the polls to vote for a new president. The elections received widespread local, regional and international attention. The politics of Singapore takes the form of a parliamentary representative democratic republic whereby the President of Singapore is the head of state and the Prime Minister is the head of government. The president’s position is largely ceremonial, but enjoys several powers including withholding presidential assent on supply bills and appointing, changing or revoking civil service appointments, whereas the Prime Minister is the most powerful person in Singapore's politics. However, despite the limited powers of the Head of State, there are three reasons why these elections were important:
Firstly, this was the first presidential election following a bill to amend the Constitution was passed in Parliament in November 2016 with 77 MPs giving their approval and all six MPs from the opposition Workers' Party (WP) voting "no". The constitutional amendments introduced the free election of the head of state for the first time since 1993 and the reservation of an election for a particular ethnic group if no one from that group has been president for five continuous terms, i.e within 30 years. In this election, for the first time, presidential candidates could only come from one racial group: Malays.
Secondly, this is the first time that a woman is named president and the second Malay Muslim to hold the post since Singapore's first president Yusuf Ishaq (1965-1970) in a country that suffers from institutional discrimination and is made up of three main races: Chinese, Indian and Malay.
Thirdly, the limitations on presidential power doesn’t mean that the head of state has a weak political status. The president’s powers may be limited in number, but they are not limited in impact. The head of state has influence over the implementation of many policies made by the government such as the power to withhold approval of government expenditure if it exceeds the state’s financial capacity. The president also appoints people to serve in many key public positions. The success of these appointments depend on the capabilities and visions of the heads of the public institutions and bodies.
In connection with the first point, there has been growing fear that the new president will appoint Malayans or another ethnic group to some of the most important public posts which could result in a particular group wielding predominant control over these functions during the six years. However, this apprehension is exaggerated for the following reasons:
Firstly, having previously held the post of Speaker of the Parliament, the elected president is well aware of the balance required in managing the political process.
Secondly, the amount of power held by the government limits the president's freedom in such policies. The president only has veto power over such decisions and the unjustified use of this power would take the country down a dark tunnel of political intransigence that could lead to political stagnation which would have negative implications on internal stability. The new president’s political and professional experience indicate that she will distance herself from such situations, particularly as she realises the amount of criticism that has accompanied her election.
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
In light of the new constitutional amendments the Singaporean government, headed by Lee Hsien Loong, adopted a package of resolutions on 28 August 2017 that included a strict eligibility criteria which presidential candidates must meet. The Presidential Elections Committee assess the prospective candidates based on the criteria and issue a certificate of eligibility to those that meet the requirements. On 13 September 2017, the Presidential Committee decided to set a date to determine the candidates eligible to participate in the electoral process which was scheduled for the 23 September 2017. The three presidential candidates this year were:
• Halima Yacoub, 62: Trade union leader for more than 30 years and former Speaker of Parliament (2013-2017)
• Farid Khan, 61: Head of a maritime service company
• Mohammed Saleh Marikan, 67: CEO of a real estate company
However, only one candidate received the approval of the Presidential Committee and was declared the only nominee. Thus, Halima Yacoub was named the president-elect without a vote. Halima’s appointment as president did not come as a surprise despite objections directed not at her, but at the entire electoral process. All indications pointed to Halima becoming the next president as she was the strongest among the candidates due to her strong position as a representative of women and ethnic minorities, and her long and distinctive history serving the nation and her professional and political background. Additionally, one of the requirements for private sector candidates is that they must have held a CEO position in a company that has an average shareholder’ equity of $500 million, a requirement that neither of the other two candidates met, thus the election result was predetermined.
WHO IS HALIMA YACOUB?
Halima Yacoub, 62, belongs to the Malay minority. She was born to an Indian father and a Malayan mother. Halima is married to a Yemeni businessman Mohammed Ali al-Habashi since 1980 and a mother of five children. She graduated from the National University of Singapore with a Law degree in 1978 and has worked in public affairs for 40 years. In 2001 Halima was elected as an MP for the Jurong Group Representation Constituency. Following the 2011 general election, Halimah was appointed Minister of State at the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports. She became a Minister of State at the Ministry of Social and Family Development after a cabinet reshuffle in November 2012. From January 2013 until her resignation to run for presidency Halima served as Speaker of Parliament and was the first woman in Singapore’s history to hold this post.
[caption id="attachment_55254554" align="aligncenter" width="5451"]
A man takes part in a protest against the walkover victory of Halimah Yacob as Singapore's President at Hong Lim Park in Singapore on September 16, 2017.(Getty)[/caption]
CONSITUTIONAL PLURALISM
It is no exaggeration to say that the constitutional amendments, although approved by the majority, were not supported by all parties. The amendments, especially regarding the reservation of the presidential election for an ethnic minority, were met with strong opposition by some who appealed to the Singaporean judiciary. Singaporean Politian Tan Cheng Bock filed a lawsuit in the Supreme Court in May 2017 to protest against the government's decision. The case was dismissed on 7 July and appealed on 31 July. However, the Court rejected the appeal in August 2017 and supported the government's decisions.
But the question remains: to what extent do these amendments to the presidential elections contribute to Singapore's democratic process? It is worth mentioning before answering this question that Singapore is the fourth largest financial center in the world. In 2016, the country’s Gross National Income was $ 500 billion. Singapore’s capital is one of the most expensive cities in the world in terms of cost of living, dominating the top of the index issued by the Economist for two consecutive years (2014 – 2015). A decline in democracy may have a negative impact on the economic achievements of the state. This is the most important challenge facing the new president - how to ensure that Singapore continues to have high growth rates and maintains its economic achievements. This year’s Presidential elections sparked an unprecedented level of debate and controversy over the constitutional amendments and whether these amendments are a step toward in democracy or a step back. To analyse what these amendments mean for democracy we must look at them from two aspects:
Firstly, it is important not to look at the amendments in their overall framework, but to look at them from two angles:
The first relates to the democratic system which has shifted from an indirect democracy through parliament to a direct democracy through citizens. In practice, the constitutional amendments allow more space for citizens to exercise their right to political participation in choosing not only their MPs but their President too. The second angle relates to the additional space given to the president to use their limited powers since it is difficult for the head of state to use the veto power on decisions made by the government which holds the parliamentary majority, and in turn has the right to select the Speaker of Parliament. The amendments freed the President from the grip of parliament and gives the head of state more confidence and independence in the face of the government. This results in the deepening of democratic practice in two ways:
Firstly, it allows for the free and direct choice of the head of state by the citizens of Singapore while granting the president freedom away from the control of the executive branch of the government which controls the legislative branch. The second aspect of these amendments is the reservation of the election for one ethnic group if no one from that group has been president for five continuous terms, i.e within 30 years. Some see this amendment as a retreat from the democratic process as it restricts citizens from selecting the person that they see as an appropriate president. This view lacks logic. Democratic practice must ensure equality for all, but the dominance of the majority over the reins of power for long periods of time can lead to the marginalization of minorities and their political rights thus creating a majority dictatorship at the expense of the minority. This is called "affirmative action" - positive steps taken to increase the representation of women and minorities in areas from which they have been historically excluded.
Singapore's experience in democratic transformation is not the first of its kind. It has been preceded by the experiences of other countries that have endeavoured to guarantee the effective exercise of political participation rights of all its citizens. However, Singapore is distinct in that this positive change adopted by the constitutional amendments will not necessary lead to dire effects on political stability and economic development. This will depend the new president’s vision on how to run the country and on the extent to which the Chinese majority accepts the rotation of the presidency with ethnic minorities.
