Skip to main content

Advertisement

Advertisement

Will Tan Cheng Bock’s ‘political gambit’ for presidency pay off?

Last Friday, in a considered move, 2011 presidential candidate Dr Tan Cheng Bock indicated his intent to contest in next year’s presidential election. The timing of his announcement is not coincidental; it is tactically shrewd and strategic.

Dr Tan Cheng Bock in 2011. The advantage of Dr Tan’s early announcement is that he will have mindshare as a first-mover and more time to win over voters. TODAY FILE PHOTO

Dr Tan Cheng Bock in 2011. The advantage of Dr Tan’s early announcement is that he will have mindshare as a first-mover and more time to win over voters. TODAY FILE PHOTO

Follow TODAY on WhatsApp
Follow TODAY on WhatsApp

Last Friday, in a considered move, 2011 presidential candidate Dr Tan Cheng Bock indicated his intent to contest in next year’s presidential election. The timing of his announcement is not coincidental; it is tactically shrewd and strategic.

Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong described Dr Tan’s move as a “calculated political gambit”, which came as a nine-member Constitutional Commission is reviewing the Elected Presidency framework, including the eligibility criteria for candidates. Mr Goh added that Dr Tan risked being misunderstood that he was trying to influence the Commission’s work.

Regardless of the Constitutional Commission’s recommendations on the Elected Presidency, Dr Tan will be an influential player in the presidential election whether he contests or not.

By the time Parliament makes the necessary constitutional changes to the Elected Presidency, it would be about 12 months to the 2017 presidential election (PE2017).

Parliament will have to manage public perception of the impact that any late changes may have on Dr Tan’s bid. A case can be made that any change to the eligibility criteria should apply prospectively, perhaps in the subsequent election.

What is the basis of Dr Tan’s legitimate expectation to contest in PE2017? First, he was eligible and did contest in the 2011 presidential election, polling 738,311 votes from 2,118,540 valid ballots cast.

Second, he lost narrowly to Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam by a razor thin 7,382 votes (a losing margin of 0.35 per cent).

Third, since 2011 he has continued to walk the ground and to engage with Singaporeans, most prominently at the last General Election.

Obviously, Dr Tan cannot pre-empt the high-powered Commission’s review and recommendations, as he acknowledged, but he has put his legitimate expectation squarely in the public domain.

But we might be getting ahead of ourselves here.

Dr Tan might still be eligible to contest, even if the criteria are enhanced. My calculation suggests that the paid-up capital of Chuan Hup Holdings Limited was about S$177 million when Dr Tan retired in 2011 after 20 years as its chairman. In 2011, Dr Tan had relied on Article 19(2)(g)(iii) of the Constitution, which states that a candidate could be someone who has served “as chairman of the board of directors or chief executive officer of a company incorporated or registered under the Companies Act (Cap. 50) with a paid-up capital of at least S$100 million or its equivalent in foreign currency”.

Nonetheless, if Dr Tan becomes ineligible to contest, there may well be a perceptible ground reaction that the change to eligibility is meant to thwart his attempt to be President. If so, the establishment-endorsed candidate may bear the brunt of any backlash, and Dr Tan’s supporters may vote for a candidate he might endorse.

VOTERS NOT THROWING CAUTION TO THE WIND

Dr Tan’s declaration of interest in contesting in PE2017 sets the stage for other presidential hopefuls to indicate their aspirations sooner rather than later. It is important for Singaporeans to know the hopefuls seeking to be head of state. The advantage of Dr Tan’s early announcement is that he will have mindshare as a first-mover and more time to win voters over.

The backdrop to PE2017 is likely to be quite different from PE2011. Residual unhappiness from the so-called “watershed” May 2011 General Election then had persisted into the presidential election held less than four months later.

Yet the ushering of the political “new normal” in 2011 should not be exaggerated. The majority of Singaporeans distinguished between the parliamentary and presidential elections. What both elections demonstrated was the average Singaporean voter’s keenness and appreciation for a robust system of checks and balances.

But as both poll results illustrated, the average voter did not throw caution to the wind and cast a ballot for a candidate just because he was not-of-the-establishment.

Being former People’s Action Party (PAP) stalwarts, both Dr Tan Cheng Bock and Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam were regarded as being from the establishment camp. They also represented a moderate and constitutionally faithful reading of the roles, functions and powers of the Elected President. Combined, both men polled 70 per cent of the popular vote.

Their past PAP affiliation did not deter voters, and there was confidence that they would exercise the President’s custodial powers independently and impartially.

Further, the belief that each was able to work with the PAP government was a relevant consideration.

PAP’s strong electoral mandate in last September’s General Election might not necessarily translate to the electorate preferring an establishment-backed candidate in PE2017.

Voters might feel that with a strong PAP government, it will further enhance the system of governance to have a President who is not only independent but also seen as independent.

Last week, Dr Tan took great pains to stress that he recognised that the President must be above politics. “I cannot be beholden to any political party,” he said. “I cannot be a proxy for any political party.” He said the President should not adopt a combative approach as he was not “another opposition in the House”. He said the President should keep Singapore stable.

To win the presidential contest, a candidate needs to draw votes across bipartisan lines and from the broad middle ground. With the benefit of a contested presidential election in 2011, after no contests in 1999 and 2005, Singaporeans have a better understanding of the constitutional powers and limits of the office going into the fifth presidential election. Public education on the powers of the Elected Presidency can enhance voters’ understanding and ensure they do not vote for a candidate whose promises fall outside the ambit of the President’s powers.

Despite the President being directly elected, the office provides a limited check in our constitutional system, which remains a parliamentary one, with the Cabinet in the driving seat for policies and laws, and it being accountable to Parliament.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Eugene K B Tan is associate professor of law at the School of Law, Singapore Management University.

Read more of the latest in

Advertisement

Advertisement

Stay in the know. Anytime. Anywhere.

Subscribe to get daily news updates, insights and must reads delivered straight to your inbox.

By clicking subscribe, I agree for my personal data to be used to send me TODAY newsletters, promotional offers and for research and analysis.