Skip to main content

Advertisement

Advertisement

SDP member loses final bid to seek Marsiling-Yew Tee by-election

SINGAPORE — The apex court has dismissed a Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) member’s bid for a by-election in Marsiling-Yew Tee Group Representation Constituency (GRC) after Mdm Halimah Yacob vacated her seat to successfully run for President.

The suit was filed by the opposition party’s assistant treasurer Wong Souk Yee on the same day Mdm Halimah Yacob was declared President-elect in a walkover at Singapore’s inaugural reserved election in September 2017.

The suit was filed by the opposition party’s assistant treasurer Wong Souk Yee on the same day Mdm Halimah Yacob was declared President-elect in a walkover at Singapore’s inaugural reserved election in September 2017.

Follow TODAY on WhatsApp

SINGAPORE — The apex court has dismissed a Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) member’s bid for a by-election in Marsiling-Yew Tee Group Representation Constituency (GRC) after Mdm Halimah Yacob vacated her seat to successfully run for President.

The Government has no duty to call a by-election when a single vacancy arises in a GRC, a five-judge Court of Appeal that included Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon ruled on Wednesday (April 10).

A by-election would only have to be called if all Members of Parliament (MPs) in the GRC vacate their seats.

The suit was filed by the opposition party’s assistant treasurer Wong Souk Yee on the same day Mdm Halimah was declared President-elect in a walkover at Singapore’s inaugural reserved election in September 2017.

Dr Wong is a resident of Marsiling-Yew Tee, and the three remaining MPs of the four-member GRC are National Development Minister Lawrence Wong, Mr Alex Yam and Mr Ong Teng Koon.

‘AMBIGUOUS’ ARTICLE

Article 49(1) of the Constitution – which, in Dr Wong’s view, mandates a by-election when any seat in a GRC is vacated besides the dissolution of Parliament – refers only to a Single Member Constituency (SMC) seat, the Court of Appeal ruled.

The article is “ambiguous” on whether, and how, it applies to GRCs, the appeal judges said.

It is phrased in terms wide enough to include the interpretation that a by-election shall be called when a single seat in a GRC has been vacated, they said.

Yet, the Constitution is “conspicuously silent and does not expressly compel the other Members of the affected GRC to vacate their seats in such a scenario, and this is a necessary precondition before any by-election in a GRC can be held”, they noted.

However, parliamentary debates make it “abundantly clear” how the GRC scheme was envisioned to operate, they said.

In the lead-up to the GRC scheme’s implementation in 1988, then-First Deputy Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong had said GRCs are meant to ensure a multi-racial Parliament, not a multi-racial team in the constituency.

He also said: “We will not want to provide for by-election to replace somebody who has vacated his office and there is a reason for this. If you provide for compulsory by-election to fill the vacancy, you are introducing the possibility that one MP can hold the other two to ransom.”

WHAT ABOUT VACANCY LEFT BY MINORITY MP?

On whether the Constitution requires a by-election to fill a GRC vacancy left by a minority MP, CJ Menon said Parliament had already considered the risk of minority representation being diminished in such a way. It decided that it was an acceptable trade-off to prevent an MP in a GRC from holding the others ransom.

To reverse the policy choice would result in the courts “overstepping our constitutional role”, said CJ Menon.

Although Article 49(1) only refers to an SMC seat, the apex court said it appears “at least arguable that an implied right to representation might be invoked” to fill this gap in the Constitution.

“It would, we add, obviously be more desirable for this lacuna to be addressed by an amendment to the Constitution to expressly deal with vacancies in the seats of GRC Members,” it said.

NO COSTS ORDERED AGAINST DR WONG

The Court of Appeal, however, ruled that Dr Wong did not have to pay costs to the Attorney-General’s Chambers.

It also rejected the Attorney-General’s Chambers’ request to adopt one of two tools of statutory interpretation.

The Attorney-General’s Chambers had wanted the apex court to either add or substitute words to give effect to Parliament’s intentions, or adopt a tool called an “updating construction” that would continuously update the wording of a statute to allow for circumstances as they change. Both tools are not appropriate in this case, said CJ Menon.

In a statement issued after the judgment, the SDP said it deeply regrets the apex court’s decision.

The decision “whittles down yet more rights of Singaporean citizens – the present one being the right to replace an MP who has resigned with another elected one”, it said.

The party will discuss with Dr Wong how to proceed. 

Related topics

SDP election GRC

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.