|
|
|
Discussion
in Parliament on voting secrecy misses the point
Singapore
Democrats
3 Mar 08
Given the gravity of the problems
surrounding the election process in Singapore, it is astounding
that the debate in Parliament on the matter during Budget 2008
was completely devoid of substance and sense.
The
declaration that the vote is secret (see Straits
Times
report below) misses the point. Whether there is in fact ballot
secrecy is not for the Minister to assert or MPs to agree; it is
for an independent commission to enforce and ensure.
The
fact that the ballot slip is numbered sets up the possibility for
the authorities to trace the vote. Such a possibility compromises
the principle of secrecy.
This problem takes on a much
more sinister complexion given the atrocious record of the PAP
when it comes to democratic practices.
The opposition must
insist that serial numbers be removed from the voting slips. Mr
Wong Kan Seng's excuse that the numbers are to prevent ballot
stuffing is limp.
The Australian vote, for example, does
not carry any identification. Yet, stuffing of ballots is not a
problem there.
This is because there are many ways to
prevent such cheating: Votes should be counted at the polling
centre instead of being transferred to another venue thereby
reducing opportunities for ballot boxes to be switched or added,
watchdog groups should be allowed to monitor the voting and
counting processes, voters' fingers could be marked with
indelible ink after they vote, an independent commission should
be in place to conduct elections, and so on.
Many
countries have adopted such procedures and their systems have
much more credibility than Singapore's. Numbering of voting slips
is just a convenient excuse for the PAP.
Pretending that
the numbering is not a factor so as not to exacerbate voters'
fears is wishful thinking at best.
Singaporeans have
repeatedly indicated that they fear voting for the opposition
because they may get found out. Sticking our heads in the sand
and wishing for the problem to go away is not a solution.
Even
if the opposition keeps quiet about this, it is not beyond the
PAP and its so-called grassroots people to start a whisper
campaign that such-and-such a person was victimised by the
Government because he or she voted for the opposition.
During
our walk-abouts, many Singaporeans have approached us asking
whether such scenarios are true and whether the PAP really checks
how they vote. Real or imagined, the fear is there.
For
example, a taxi-driver told us that he had on one occasion
approached his MP for assistance on a matter. When he returned to
enquire about the outcome of his request, he was asked why he
voted for the opposition and not PAP.
Whether his story
was real or whether he was fear-mongering, no one knows. But
stories like these make their rounds in the kopitiams
and housing estates.
Why allow such stories to be
circulated when there is a solution which is to remove the
numbering on ballot slips? In this way any doubt that the voting
may not be secret is once and for all eradicated.
Take the
bull by its horns. Confront the problems and work to change it.
The short-term pain will build the necessary foundation for free
and fair elections in the decades to come.
The longer we
try to take the easy way out and not demand a genuinely secret
vote, the more advantageous it is for the PAP.
This is why
the SDP has called on opposition parties to come together to
demand reform of the election process. We will continue to do so.
With the other many problems that beset our electoral
process, there is no doubt that Singapore's election system is a
sham. That there was no substantive debate in Parliament on the
issue is a shame.
Is
the vote secret? Of course, says Low Thia Khiang
Li
Xueying
Straits Times
28 Feb 08
Opposition MP Low
Thia Khiang does believe that the vote in Singapore is
secret.
"Of course I do believe the vote is secret,
otherwise I will not even want to participate in elections!"
declared the smiling Workers' Party secretary-general, to
laughter in the House.
In response, Deputy Prime Minister
Wong Kan Seng said: "Well, I'm happy to hear Mr Low saying
and confirming here in this House that he believes that the vote
is secret and I believe Ms Sylvia Lim, the party chairman also
thinks the vote is secret."
The exchange started when
Mr Low (Hougang) asked Mr Wong about plans for a voter education
campaign.
Mr Wong had earlier, during the debate on the
budget for the Prime Minister's Office, said educational
brochures will be mailed to every home.
Videos will also
be produced for TV and Internet broadcast, and for distribution
at community centres.
Saying that he was pleased with this
news, Mr Low noted that there are still some Singaporeans who are
"wary" about the vote's secrecy, particularly given the
serial numbers printed on ballot papers.
He asked if the
campaign would address this.
Mr Wong said: "Before I
answer the question, maybe I'll ask Mr Low whether he thinks that
the vote is secret."
Yes, said Mr Low.
Mr Wong
responded with a smile: "So there's no question about the
integrity of the voting process as well as the secrecy of the
vote."
He then explained the need for serial
numbers.
"When there is a dispute, for example, there
are more votes counted than there are voters in the constituency,
then we'd know whether ballot papers have been stuffed into the
ballot boxes and we can then trace every number and see where
these extra papers come from."
But he assured: "There
is no way of tracing who (cast the ballot) unless the court so
orders when there is a dispute in terms of the vote."
Voters
will be educated on this issue, he added.
Mr Wong also
addressed a query from Ms Lim, who asked if overseas Singaporeans
could vote earlier, so that their ballots are counted with local
votes.
She said: "My concern was that in some single
seats especially, the number of overseas voters could be as low
as two, so there may be some concern about anonymity."
Mr
Wong replied that such a move will mean overseas Singaporeans
will have just four to five days of listening to campaign
speeches and so "may not have enough information to form a
conclusion".
Thus, it will "not be fair"
for them to vote so early.
He allowed the possibility of
putting aside some votes in Singapore to be mixed with the
overseas ones.
"But
again it will also mean a delay in the announcement of the
results of those constituencies."
|
|
