RIGHT TO VOTE
NMP Thio Li Ann raises the following questions:
· Is voting a right or a privilege?
· What is the legal status of the right to vote?
· Should it be an express right?
· And does the case of Taw Cheng Kong cast any doubt on the position?
Right or privilege
2 Let me deal with whether it is a right or a privilege. Representative Democracy is the very essence of our political system and voting is the foundation of Representative Democracy.
3 The power of our citizens to vote cannot be a privilege, because that would imply that there is some institution superior to the body of citizens, which is in a position to grant such a privilege to the citizens. But in a free country, there is no institution that can be in such a position, to grant such a privilege to the citizens.
4 In a representative democracy like
Nature of the right to vote
5 Next, what is the nature of the right to vote? The right to vote is a constitutional right. It is an implied right, arising from the various provisions in the Constitution, including Articles 65 and 66 which provide for a general election within three months after every dissolution of Parliament. I have consulted the Attorney-General who agrees with me on this.
6 This is not a new point. As Ms Thio has acknowledged, DPM Wong stated this in Parliament in 2001.
Need for express provision in the Constitution on the right to vote?
7 Third, is there a need to have an express provision in the Constitution on the right to vote? As we have said, the right to vote enjoys the highest possible legal protection – it is a Constitutional right. Is there a need to set it out expressly? The member knows the history of our Constitution. It is essentially a product of British drafting, based primarily on the
8 The member will also know of the various approaches to the drafting of Constitutions in the Commonwealth, in the 1950s and ‘60s. There were countries which chose to draft their Constitutions in great detail, and others which only set out the basic philosophy. The last 50 years of post colonialism has shown that in the end, regardless of all the high flown language in the Constitution, it is the mettle of the people and its leadership which will decide whether the Constitution becomes a living document or a near worthless piece of paper.
9 Ms Thio referred to the 1966 Constitutional Commission which recommended that the right to vote be entrenched in the Constitution. The context in which those recommendations were made has to be understood. But she knows, because she has written about it. At the time when the recommendation was made by the Committee in 1966,
10 The Wee Commission therefore felt that Singaporeans had little experience of general elections and it could not be safely assumed that they had grown up to cherish choice, expressed in periodic and general elections by universal and equal suffrage, held by secret vote. For that reason, the Commission recommended that the right to vote be expressly stated in the Constitution.
11 We have had 10 general elections since then with about 95 per cent turnout at each election. Every citizen reaffirms that
12 Sir, the Member spoke about the importance of entrenching the right as a symbol of representative democracy. As a simple proposition, that is questionable though I doubt the Member meant it in that sense. A survey will show that Myanmar and North Korea are among the countries that have expressly set out in their Constitutions, the right to vote, while neither Australia nor the US have made express provision for the right to vote in those terms. It will be difficult to suggest that the right to vote is less protected in the latter two countries. Then, of course, the
13 Specifically as regards voting, our policy has always been to ensure the maximum possible participation by our citizens, in the electoral process. Thus, as stated earlier, we are among a handful of countries, including
14 What is fundamental is a government committed to the Rule of Law, an educated population aware of its rights and responsibilities and stable institutions which provide for a democratic polity. We believe the right to vote to be a Constitutional right. We are one of the few post-colonial countries to hold regular elections. We have among the highest voter turnouts and we are increasingly building the necessary institutions. And we have identified Articles 65 and 66 as among those to be entrenched. For a constitutional lawyer, dare I say, the salad days are not the yonder years gone by.
Taw Cheng Kong
15 Next, let me refer to Taw Cheng Kong. The Member has also referred to the case of Taw Cheng Kong. Our general approach in this House is to avoid discussing specific Court decisions. Nevertheless, since the Member has raised the point by direct reference to the case, I will set out our view.
16 My officials have checked the Court records in Taw Cheng Kong. The legal nature of the citizens’ right to vote was not in issue in that case and was not specifically argued. The Member may well be aware of the substantial body of learning, confirmed by the Privy Council in Baker v The Queen [1975] AC 774 that in such situations, even if it was the ratio, the Court’s observations are not likely to be treated as precedent. In Taw’s case, the observations were in fact orbiter, as the Member acknowledges. The Member will also be aware that the decision in Taw Cheng Kong was overruled by the Court of Appeal, albeit on another point. I should emphasise that in commenting on Taw Cheng Kong, I am not seeking in any way to traverse the jurisdiction of the Courts. I am merely giving the Government’s views on the case, in answer to Ms Thio’s specific question. So, in conclusion, there is in our view no doubt about the legal nature of the right to vote, nor any dilution as of the government’s commitment to the philosophies underlying that right.
17 Thank you, Sir.