If you guys think that you've heard of PAP leaders bending the
rules to suit themselves, you need to hear this one. Apparently,
they can even bend the rules of physics! Isn't it reassuring to
know that we have super-human leaders that can protect our
interests in Singapore?
In 1997, the Workers' Party had complained to the police that Mr
Goh Chok Tong, Dr Tony Tan and Brigadier-General (NS) Lee Hsien
Loong had been inside a Cheng San GRC polling station on Polling
Day. This is clearly a breach of the law.
But the Public Prosecutor recently advised the police that the PAP
leaders had not broken the law.
PRESENCE OF UNAUTHORISED PERSONS INSIDE POLLING STATIONS
On 14 July l997, THE Workers' Party issued a press release
expressing "amazement" that the public prosecutor had advised
police that no offence was disclosed in the reports made by it
leaders against the prime minister, the two deputy prime ministers
and Dr S Vasoo that they had been present inside polling stations
when they were not candidates for the relevant constituencies. The
Workers' Party queried why such conduct was not an offence under
paragraph (d) or (e) of section 82(1) of the Parliamentary
Elections Act.
2. On 15 July 1997, the Singapore Democratic Party also called on
the attorney general to explain his "truly befuddling" decision and
to state clearly if it was an offence for unauthorised persons to
enter polling stations.
3. You have asked me for my formal opinion on the question raised
in these two statements. My opinion is set out below.
Opinion
4. The question is whether it is an offence under the Parliamentary
Elections Act for an unauthorised person to enter and be present in
a polling station.
5. For this purpose, the authorised persons are the candidates, the
polling agent or agents of each candidate, the Returning Officer,
and persons authorised in writing by the returning officer, the
police officers on duty and other persons officially employed at
the polling station; see section 39 (4) of the Act (quoted
below)
Activities Outside Polling Stations
6. The relevant sections of the Parliamentary Elections Act to be
considered are sections 82 (1)(d) and 82 (1)(e). These provisions
were enacted m 1959 pursuant to the Report of the Commission of
Inquiry into Corrupt, Illegal or Undesirable Practices at
Elections, Cmd 7 of 1968 (hereinafter called "the Elias
Report)"
7. Section 82 (1)(d) provides that - "No person shall wait outside
any polling station on polling day, except for the purpose of
gaining entry to the polling station to cast his vote".
8. Plainly, persons found waiting inside the polling stations do
not come within the ambit of this section. Similarly, those who
enter or have entered the polling station cannot be said to be
waiting outside it. Only those who wait outside the polling station
commit an offence under this section unless they are waiting to
enter the polling station to cast their votes.
9. Section 82 (1)(e) provides that -
"No person shall loiter in any street or public place within a
radius of 200 metres of any polling station on polling day."
10. The relevant question is whether any person who is inside a
polling station can be sad to be "within a radius of 200 metres of
any polling station". The answer to this question will also answer
any question on loitering inside a polling station.
11. Plainly, a person inside a polling station cannot be said to be
within a radius of 200 metres of a polling station. A polling
station must have adequate space for the voting to be carried out.
Any space has a perimeter. The words "within a radius of 200
metres" ' therefore mean "200 metres from the perimeter of" any
polling station. This point is illustrated in the diagrams in the
Appendix. (Editor's note: Diagrams not available).
12. The above interpretation is fortified by the context of the
provision. The polling station, as a place, is distinguished from a
street or public place. It is not a street or a public place.
Hence, being inside a polling station cannot amount to being in a
street or in a public place. By parity of reasoning, loitering in a
street or public place cannot possibly include loitering in the
polling station itself and vice versa.
13. There is no ambiguity in section 82 (1)(e). If the legislature
had intended to make it an offence for unauthorised persons to wait
or loiter inside a polling station, it could have easily provided
for it. It did not. The mischief that section 82 (1)(e) is intended
to address is found in paragraph 99 of the Elias Report. It
reads:
"In order to prevent voters being made subject to my form of undue
influence or harassment at the approaches to polling stations, we
recommend that it should be made an offence for any person to
establish any desk or table near the entrance to any polling
station, or to wait outside any polling station on polling day
except for the purpose of gaining entry into the polling station to
cast his vote; and that it should be an offence for any person to
loiter in any street or public place within a radius of 200 yards
of any polling station on polling day ."
14 . Paragraph 99 of the Elias Report appears under the heading
"Activity OUTSIDE POLLING STATIONS". The Commission of Inquiry was
addressing the possibility of voters being subject to undue
influence and harassment as they approach the polling stations.
There is therefore no doubt whatever that this provision was never
intended to cover any activity inside the polling station as there
would be officials and election agents in attendance.
15. The legislative history makes the provision so clear that it is
not even necessary to consider the application of an established
principle of interpretation that any ambiguity in a penal provision
should, whenever possible, be resolved favour of the accused.
Activities Inside Polling Stations
16 Activities inside polling stations were made subject to a
different regime under the Act. Section 39(4) provides that -
"the presiding officer shall keep order in his station and shall
regulate the number of voters to be admitted a time, and shall
exclude all other persons except the polling agent or agents of
each candidate, the Returning Officer and persons authorised in
writing by the Returning Officer, the police officers on duty and
other persons officially employed at the polling station."
17. Under section 39(7), any person who misconducts himself in the
polling station, or fails to obey the lawful orders of the
presiding officer may be removed from the polling station by a
police officer acting under the orders of the presiding officer. If
an unauthorised person refuses to leave the polling station when
told to do so by the public officer, he commits an offence under
section 186 of the Penal Code for obstructing a public servant in
the discharge of his duty.
18. There is a consistency in the rationales of the regulatory
schemes governing activities inside and those outside polling
stations on election day. Waiting outside a polling station is made
an offence because it gives rise to opportunities to influence or
intimidate voters: see paragraph 99 of the Elias Report. Hence, the
Act has provided a safety zone which stretches outwards for 200
metres from the polling station. In contrast, the possibility of a
person inside a polling station influencing or intimidating voters
in the presence of the presiding officer and his officials, the
polling agents etc was considered so remote that it was discounted
by the Act.
19. I therefore confirm my opinion that the Parliamentary Elections
Act does not provide for any offence of unauthorised entry into or
presence within a polling station. Accordingly, those unauthorised
persons who only wait or loiter inside a polling station on polling
day do not commit any offence under the Act.
20. You are at liberty to publish this opinion.
Signed:
Chan Sek Keong
Attorney General.
