The following is the translated version of the Chinese
article:
I would like to thank you for putting up my previous article The
Spirit of Democratic System. I would like to discuss rationally
the political problems, or even the political time bomb that our
Nation is facing.
I need to make clarifications to Mr. Lim that I am not denying the
workings of Democracy here in Singapore but merely point out the
fact that having elections alone is not the only standard to
determine whether the system is democratic or not. If half of the
voters do not have the opportunity to exercise their voting power,
how could the power of the people be enshrined by the system? If
40% of the voters' political choice could not get adequate
representation by the electoral system, then how could this system
enshrine the political will of the mass in totality?
To be more specific, democracy should be a consensus building
process and this process should include more different voices and
views. The Nordic country's proportionate representation system
should be a good role model for us to research on. If we want to
pick an Asian successful model of proportionate system, I would
recommend Hong Kong. Although Hong Kong is just a Special
Administration of China without universal suffrage for its Chief
Executive, but its concept of separation of 5 powers is quite
distinctive. Although it did not set up specific organization which
is empowered with the power of impeachment, but we all know its
judiciary, ICAC and press are all very independent. Couple with the
examination system for its civil servants, it has enshrined the
independence of the power of judiciary, impeachment and
examination. The executive power lies with the Chief Executive and
its legislative power lies with the Legislative Council (Legco). In
addition, it has Town Councilors who are elected at the grassroot
level.Half of its Legco members are elected by means of universal
suffrage via the proportionate representation system while the
other half are elected by the various functional groups. Diverse
interests and choices of the people are fully represented by the
whole system.
On the other hand, although Taiwan has the 5 powers Constitution,
but due to the long period of marshal law rule, this system of 5
powers separation has not really been practiced. This is why in my
previous article, I stressed on the importance of having both the
constitution and execution process to explicitly enshrine the
spirit of 5 power separation. Taiwan's present political
instability is due to the process of jumping from one system of
extreme concentration of power to the extreme of civil liberty.
This has similarities to the French revolution whereby it took more
than 100 years before the whole political situation stabilized. I
personally do not wish to see this happening to Singapore and thus,
I hope that Singapore could progressively move towards a more
mature democratic system.
In fact, the ruling PAP knows that the present system has a hidden
big time bomb within, but just like what Mr. Lim says, PAP refuse
to amend the constitution to disarm this time bomb due to the
considerations of its own interests. This huge time bomb refers to
the fact that if this system of high concentration of power is to
fall into the hands of those devious ones (these people could come
from any political parties, including PAP itself!), Singapore would
inevitably face the biggest disaster in history!
The proportionate representation system does not necessarily
disadvantaged PAP totally. I dare to say that at this moment, PAP
face the problem of having MPs that lacks the baptism of fire.
Especially for those younger generation MPs whom we observe during
the last Generation Election, they keep making verbal bloopers.
Even some seasoned candidates are making the same mistakes. This is
a sign of the hidden crisis. If we do not have a competitive
environment for our politicians to train themselves, it would
inevitably subject the fate of regression according to the law of
evolution. Even if they could get themselves elected due to their
ruling advantage, could they handle the complex international
politics in time to come? If the proportionate representation
system could make more MPs and ministers to go through the baptism
of fire, this will only benefit both the Nation and the ruling
party. To keep soldiers untrained, defeat will be the
inevitable.
Furthermore, if Mr. Lim's wish really come true and PAP lost two
GRCs, then it would mean that it will possibly lose two or more
ministerial caliber candidates. This will be a deep blow to PAP.
Under the proportionate representation system, this could well be
avoided.
Rules are set by human beings and most important of all, who are
the ones that finalize them. If we allow an autocratic ruling party
to determine the rules, it would be inevitable that they will make
full use of the rules to entrench themselves. This will become a
vicious cycle. We must use a more rational, more altruistic
attitude that is truthful to the interests of the Nation and its
future political stability to set these rules. We should go through
a democratic process to produce consensus and then set a new
direction for a new set of rules, so to disarm this huge time bomb.
This is the only way we could guarantee our Nation's long term
survival and stability.
Unfortunately, I think at the present moment the only way to force
PAP to amend the Constitution for the good of this nation is to
make them feel the pain of losing more ministers during
elections.
Goh Meng Seng
