Connect with us

Politics

Despite dismissed application, Court of Appeal affirms constitutional right to vote

Published

on

The Court of Appeal on Tuesday (30 June) affirmed the constitutional right of citizens under the Singapore Constitution to vote in the country’s elections.

The court, however, dismissed Singapore citizen Daniel De Costa’s application to prohibit the Returning Officer from conducting the next general election under current circumstances.

Mr De Costa’s counsel, M Ravi of Carson Law Chambers, said that the total cost ordered by the court against his client stands at S$23,000.

Mr Ravi called on members of the public to kindly support their legal process by donating to the following account: DBS Savings 052-8-020501.

Yesterday, the High Court dismissed the constitutional challenge brought by Mr De Costa against holding the general election under present circumstances.

Justice Chua Lee Ming, who heard the case in chambers, said there is no basis for the Prohibitory Order that Mr Ravi was seeking to stop the Returning Officer from holding an election now.

The role of the Returning Officer — a public officer appointed by the Prime Minister to oversee the election — is a “matter of duty, not discretion” under Section 24(3) of the Parliamentary Elections Act (PEA), said the judge, adding that such a duty is non-justiciable.

Justice Chua yesterday ordered Mr Costa to pay S$8,000 in costs to the Attorney-General.

Mr Ravi submitted on Monday that the key provisions under the Parliamentary Elections (COVID-19 Special Arrangements) Act will disadvantage citizens on quarantine orders or stay-home notices at home, as they will not be able to cite their right to vote as a defence against their orders or notices.

The Returning Officer, he added, as well as the director of medical services have powers to prohibit a citizen from casting their vote if they demonstrate acute respiratory symptoms or a fever, or if they have been exposed to the risk of being infected with the virus.

He also argued that alternative parties in Singapore “are grossly disadvantaged” this election, as “there is late guidance as to organising rallies and campaigns, which directly affects the votes that can be garnered by the Opposition.”

“The fundamental right to vote and/or free and fair elections of citizens is unduly derogated,” he continued.

Noting that 66 countries have opted to postpone their elections due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, Mr Ravi said that only 36 countries have decided to carry on with their elections despite the circumstances — 21 of which were either national elections or referendums.

22 countries out of the 66 that postponed their elections did so for either national elections or referendums, he added.

Deputy Attorney-General Hri Kumar Nair, however, argued on behalf of the Attorney-General that South Korea, Australia, France, Germany, Japan and Israel “have held elections safely” during the pandemic, which proves that the same can be done in Singapore.

He also stressed that now the 13th Parliament has been dissolved, the next general election must, by law, be held within the stipulated time frame — three months after the dissolution of Parliament, as stated in Article 66 of the Constitution.

This means that the next general election must be held by 22 September this year, he argued, adding that delaying the election to 2021 “would flagrantly violate this constitutional deadline”.

Mr Nair added that Members of Parliament (MPs) cease to be MPs and citizens are not represented as a result, which makes it “imperative for the electoral process to be set in motion, so that citizens can elect their representatives afresh, and representative government can resume”.

Touching on Mr Ravi’s arguments on how holding an election under present circumstances would go against the constitutional rights of citizens to have free and fair elections, Mr Nair said that Mr De Costa’s factual case on alleged unfairness in the coming election “is essentially a partisan, political rant, based on outdated information, misconceptions, speculation and outright falsehoods”.

The plaintiff, he added, did not succeed in “ground the putative right to free and fair elections in any provision of the Constitution”.

Mr Nair argued that there is “no real controversy for the court to resolve” in Mr De Costa’s case, as the issues raised in the latter’s affidavit “are all about campaigning and timing issues for opposition parties in relation to the General Election”.

Mr De Costa, he added, also did not challenge President Halimah Yacob’s dissolution of Parliament and her issuance of the Writ of Election. Mr Ravi’s client is also not challenging the constitutionality of any provision of the PEA, said Mr Nair.

Mr Nair further argued that there is no evidence present that COVID-19 will subside between now and next January.

Citing the Ministry of Health’s Dr Vernon Lee Jian Ming’s affidavit, Mr Nair noted that “the scientific consensus is that the pandemic would still be around by then” — a consensus shared by MOH.

Dr Lee also predicted that there is “a risk of resurgence of community infection cases and clusters later on” in Phase Two following the circuit breaker period, “especially when Singapore decides to open up its borders”.

Mr Ravi, in his clarification on the immediate point, however, argued that the figure of 4.6 cases a day cited by Dr Lee “is derived from conditions under normal daily life and it cannot be representative of Polling Day as there would possibly be every adult Singaporean out in public to vote”.

“4.6 cases a day is regardless, a significant number because each and every one of the voters are humans with names and they cannot be merely reduced to a statistic. Citizens cannot be subject to physical suffering for political expediency,” he stressed.

Mr Ravi also argued that the court must not “unquestioningly accept unchallenged medical evidence”, and added that the opinion endorsed by Dr Lee “has been challenged by medical experts and epidemiologists elsewhere”.

While noting Mr Nair’s point that the Elections Department has released “a set of safe management measures for voting” in collaboration with MOH, Mr Ravi argued that despite such measures, “the risk of transmission of COVID-19 cannot be completely reduced as it is known that the virus can adhere onto surfaces for a few hours”.

Voters are also required to remove their masks for identification. Given how the virus is transmitted through water droplets from the nose and mouth, Mr Ravi argued that polling agents and voters “would still be unduly exposed to such risks”.

Continue Reading
6 Comments
Subscribe
Notify of
6 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

People

LHY’s eulogy: Dr Lee Wei Ling, brilliant doctor and devoted daughter

In his eulogy, Lee Hsien Yang fondly remembered his sister, Dr Lee Wei Ling, as a brilliant doctor and devoted daughter who cared deeply for their parents, Lee Kuan Yew and Kwa Geok Choo. He described her as a lifelong fighter, determined to right wrongs and speak truth to power, seeing herself as a modern-day Don Quixote.

Published

on

Eulogy by Lee Hsien Yang, younger brother of Dr Lee Wei Ling, for her funeral on 12 October 2024 

Wei Ling and I have always been completely different, but we have always been close. We grew up together, and in the nature of our family, were each other’s closest family. She was almost 3 years older; Loong was in turn about 3 years her senior, but was a loner. So Ling and I grew up playing with each other. Of course, when we were little, there were physical fights. One scar I still carry from a particularly vigorous encounter serves as a reminder.

Right from the outset, Ling was always a tomboy and a fighter, and until I outgrew her, I was disadvantaged in our skirmishes. She was tough and strong and, whilst we disagreed and continued to disagree on much, I loved and admired her dearly. She carried that spirit of a fighter throughout her life, seeking to right wrongs, with a preparedness to speak truth to power.

She was straight as an arrow, and would not mince her words. She had a reckless streak and could be impetuous. She saw herself as a modern day Don Quixote: an idealist, a hero, determined with dogged tenacity, stoic and ever-conscious of the need to withstand suffering.

Ling strove hard throughout her life to excel. She was outstanding academically – studious, driven, and intense. Perhaps her competitive fighting spirit came from a desire to be recognised and valued by our parents, even though she was second born and a girl. She loved animals and wanted to be a vet but was persuaded by our parents to pursue medicine instead.

Always wanting to earn their approval, she graduated at the top of her class in medical school in Singapore and won a slew of prizes. Today, when I look back, I wish our family had acknowledged and recognised at home her accomplishments. It would have meant the world to her.

Physical fitness was also something she excelled at and both my father and myself value physical fitness from her encouragement. She was a superb long distance runner. Because of her, my father gave up golf and took up jogging. While I am reasonably fit, and could easily pass my physical fitness tests with flying colours, Ling was always a better long distance runner.

Ling and I attended karate class together and she became a Karate black belt; she was not someone to be messed with! She exercised with fanatical devotion and her typical regime would involve hours of exercise on a cross trainer, a rowing machine and swimming. As she aged and became prone to injury, she resented having to scale back her exercise regime. Ling sought in running, and in life, to “fill the unforgiving minute With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run”

Ling was a brilliant doctor with strong clinical skills. Fern and I would consult her whenever any of our 3 sons was sick or had medical issues, and she was invariably spot on in her diagnosis, even in areas outside her speciality.

We valued and trusted her judgement and skills as a doctor. She in turn sought investment advice from me. Bedside manners were not her forte, and completely in character, she never sugar-coated her diagnosis to patients. But she was straightforward and would always be her patients’ best champion. I have heard myself countless stories of patients’ gratitude for this, and have learnt of a few more since her passing.

Surprisingly, Ling discovered she enjoyed penning her thoughts and views, and for many years had a very popular weekly newspaper column. She was deeply disappointed when it was terminated in 2016. Each week we would always hear at home her excited plans for her next article and her book compendium of articles made the bestsellers list to her huge delight.

Ling loved the outdoors and was a keen, if disorganised, hiker. She loved the sense of adventure, the freedom and the adrenaline rush that it gave her.

In early 2020 before Covid, on her request, I travelled to Machu Picchu with her. It was high on her bucket list, and was a long trip. Machu Picchu was built on a very remote and isolated steep outcrop and was challenging for her as her incipient illness had affected her sense of balance and mobility. Nonetheless, with a little help she managed to get around the citadel. She loved and thoroughly enjoyed the experience. I am so glad we made that trip together.

As often is the lot of an unmarried daughter, the caring of our parents as they aged fell on Ling. She nursed and cared for each of them through their illnesses and old age frailties, and for this I remain eternally grateful.

Ling lived her entire life at 38 Oxley Road. It was the only home she knew and she wanted to live out her days in her home.

It was for this reason that Papa gave her that right to live there. He knew it meant much to her. In the years following Mama’s first stroke in 2003, Ling cared for Mama and became Papa’s primary companion and confidant at home. Although, as two strong personalities they sometimes disagreed, they also became much closer.

Papa was always very open and public about his wishes. In that period from 2003 to his passing in 2015, Papa spoke with Ling extensively, including on his hopes and his concerns for the future. Everyone knows that Papa was always against any deification of himself and was against monuments or memorials; Ling knew how very strongly he felt.

In April 2016, she wrote, “Lee Kuan Yew would have cringed at the hero worship just one year after his death”

In 2017, she persuaded me to stand up with her for our father’s wishes. I am proud to have stood with her.

Ling was not one who was afraid to talk about or prepare for death. She provided that only myself and my middle son, Huan, should make decisions on her care. As they were both middle children, she had always seen in Huan a kindred spirit, and the two of them had holidayed together.

It has been my privilege, with Huan’s help, to deal with her affairs and organise her care arrangements during her illness. I am deeply grateful to her doctors Dr Philiip Yap of Khoo Teck Puat Hospital and Prof Tan Eng King of NNI. In addition, Wee Tin, Jackie, Nurse Michelle, Lina, Cheng Piau and many others, have all helped with the care for Ling. Thank you.

She wanted a very simple funeral and for her ashes to be scattered at sea.

I said my goodbyes to Ling in June 2022. I wish I could have been here today for this final farewell. Huanwu has been a stalwart in organising her care in my absence, and I am very grateful to Huanwu and Shaowu for being there for Ling at this time.

Ling directed me to convey the following statement on her passing:

“My father’s, LEE KUAN YEW, and my mother’s, KWA GEOK CHOO, unwavering and deeply felt wish was for their house at 38 Oxley Road, Singapore 238629 to be demolished upon the last parent’s death. LEE KUAN YEW had directed each of his 3 children to ensure that their parents’ wish for demolition be fulfilled. He had also appealed directly to the people of Singapore. Please honour my father by honouring his wish for his home to be demolished.”

Farewell Ling, You will always be my special big sister.

Continue Reading

Comments

LHL’s 15-minute visit to Dr Lee Wei Ling’s wake raises eyebrows among Singaporeans

On the evening of 10 October, Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his wife, Ho Ching, attended Dr Lee Wei Ling’s wake, staying for about 10-15 minutes. This brief visit sparked online discussions about the custom of family members remaining throughout the day at funerals.

Published

on

On Thursday evening (10 October), Singapore’s mainstream media, stationed outside Singapore Casket where Dr Lee Wei Ling’s wake was held, reported the arrival of Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his wife, Ho Ching, to attend his sister’s funeral.

Dr Lee, the daughter of Singapore’s founding Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew, passed away on 9 October at the age of 69, at her family home at 38 Oxley Road.

Her wake is being held at Singapore Casket from 10 October to 12 October.

According to Lianhe Zaobao, SM Lee and Mdm Ho arrived outside Singapore Casket at around 8.30 pm.

They reportedly stayed at the wake for about 10 minutes and did not provide any comments to the media.

In contrast, the South China Morning Post reported that SM Lee and Mdm Ho stayed for approximately 15 minutes before leaving.

A member of the public who paid respects to Dr Lee shared with TOC that SM Lee had written a simple “RIP” in the condolences book.

Mr Li Yipeng, the eldest son of Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong, also attended Dr Lee’s wake earlier.

Observing comments on social media, some users questioned the brevity of SM Lee’s visit to his sister’s wake.

One user remarked that even attending a friend’s funeral typically lasts at least 30 minutes, asking, “Where can you find a brother who attends his sister’s funeral for just 15 minutes?”

Others pointed out that it is customary for family members to stay the entire day at a funeral, particularly the eldest brother, who usually greets visitors and offers hospitality, such as refreshments.

“That’s what family members do,” one user noted.

A netizen lamented that instead of receiving guests at his sister’s wake, LHL appeared as a VIP guest accompanied by bodyguards.

Another user expressed sadness over the situation, noting that the eldest brother was attending the wake like any other outsider.

The comment highlighted that Lee Hsien Yang, the younger brother, was organizing the funeral remotely and could not return.

This led to a broader question among netizens: Would LHL attend his own brother’s funeral if he were to pass first?

Some netizens disagreed with the criticism of LHL’s attendance at his sister’s wake, arguing that, regardless of public sentiment towards the government, this is a personal matter.

One comment emphasised the need for objectivity, stating that people cannot judge LHL solely based on appearances or media reports.

He questioned what LHL might have done for his sister behind the scenes and pointed out that even if he had stayed longer, some would still find fault with his actions.

A comment on Reddit expressed that while LHL doesn’t necessarily need to be invited, his absence from receiving mourners as the eldest family member suggests he was not asked or instructed to participate in the funeral proceedings at all.

A netizen lamented that family disputes deeply affect one’s soul, particularly when reconciliation with a sibling is impossible, even in death.

The Reddit comment emphasised the emotional pain that arises from being reminded of happy childhood moments during such difficult times.

 

Continue Reading

Trending