DOCSLIB.ORG

Competing Conceptions of the Rule of Law in Singapore

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

UCLA UCLA Pacific Basin Law Journal Title Lex Rex or Rex Lex? Competing Conceptions of the Rule of Law in Singapore Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/35h2k603 Journal UCLA Pacific Basin Law Journal, 20(1) Author Thio, Li-ann Publication Date 2002 DOI 10.5070/P8201022155 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California ARTICLES LEX REX OR REX LEX? COMPETING CONCEPTIONS OF THE RULE OF LAW IN SINGAPORE Li-ann Thio* If the government had failed to establish the basics for politi- cal stability and social cohesion, the Rule of Law would have become an empty slogan in a broken-backed Singapore. But we have succeeded, and the Rule of Law today in Singapore is no clich6. -Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, 19901 Despite the trappings, the Rule of Law in Singapore today has given way to empty legalism. -International Human Rights Committee of the New York City Bar Association, 19912 I. INTRODUCTION A. THE RULE OF LAW AS CERTAINTY AND/OR JUSTICE: BETWEEN FORM AND SUBSTANCE While the Rule of Law is not formally enshrined in the Sin- gapore constitution's text, it has through practice entered Singa- pore's constitutional and political lexicon. In opposing political absolutism, it avers that no man is above the law and the law's supremacy (lex rex) in contradistinction to the rule of man (rex * BA (Oxon)(Hons); LL.M (Harv); Ph.D. (Cantab); Barrister (GI), Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore. An earlier version of this paper was presented at a conference on Rule of Law in Asia: Competing Con- ception, 20-21 June 2002, Hong Kong University. 1. Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, Speech at the Opening of the Singapore Law Academy (Aug. 31, 1990), in 2 S Ac LJ 155, 156 (1990). 2. Beatrice S. Frank et al., The Decline of the Rule of Law in Malaysia and Singapore Part H - Singapore, A Report of the Committee on InternationalHuman Rights of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, 46 THE RECORD 7, 17 (1991) [hereinafter, NEW YORK BAR RECORD]. PACIFIC BASIN LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 20:1 lex).3 It has been the subject of Singapore parliamentary de- bates, ministerial statements, media discussions and judicial pronouncements. However, the ambiguity dogging this powerful legitimating idea, a "notoriously contested concept ' 4 in other jurisdictions, is also evident in Singapore. The contest is essentially polarised be- tween formal ("thin") and substantive ("thick") conceptions of the Rule of Law.5 The former considers the Rule of Law as au- tonomous from theories of justice or political morality, drawn from virtues inherent in the concept of "law" itself.6 Rules are 7 assessed through "content-independent" evaluative criteria, (clarity, generality, accessibility, prospectivity, certainty). Thus, jurisprudential bias towards the idea of "law" itself determines 8 how the term is deployed as a plumb-line of good government. A 'substantive" or dynamic conception engages substantive justice theories,9 which precipitates controversy. In speaking qualitatively to a state's economic system, political ideology or human rights practice,10 this broader conception may encompass 3. Samuel Rutherford authored LEX REX: or The Law and the Prince in 1664, (1982 ed.) which England and Scotland banned upon publication. It advocated law- ful resistance against tyranny, based on the premise that the Law, identified as di- vine law, was supreme. A monarch or government could be legitimately disobeyed if it disregarded the Law. This concept flows from the idea of a higher law antecedent to and binding upon the contemporary government which made law. Similarly, Sir Edward Coke opposed James I's belief that a king ruled by divine right and estab- lished prerogative courts to implement his will. He asserted that judges must follow the common law, asserting that "Quad Rex non debet esse sub homine sed sub Deo et Lege" (The King should not be under man, but under God and the Law). See ProhibitionsDel Roy, 77 Eng. Rep. at 1343. In Dr. Bonham's Case (1609) 8 Co. Rep. 107 at 118a, Sir Coke affirmed that the "common law will control acts of Parlia- ment" and adjudge them as void where acts are "against common right or reason or repugnant or impossible to be performed." This reflects the distinction between law as reason and as power in western legal thought. 4. Martin Krygier, Marxism and the Rule of Law: Reflections after the Collapse of Communism, 15 LAw & Soc. INQUIRY 633, 633-63 (1990). 5. Paul Craig, Formal and Substantive Conceptions of the Rule of Law: An An- alytical Framework, PUBLIC LAw 467-87 (1997). 6. what Lon Fuller, who identified eight features that ground a legal system, -termed the "inner morality of law" which gave "law" its distinctive features. H.L.A. HART, THE CONCER OF LAW 202 (Oxford University Press 1961). (1961). 7. John Gardner, Legal Positivism: 5 1hMyths, 46 AM. J. JURIS. 199, 207 (2001). 8. Legal positivists like Joseph Raz prefer a "thin" conception of the Rule of Law to preserve the idea's coherence and determinacy. To Raz, the Rule of Law's virtue is essentially negative, designed to prevent the arbitrary exercise of power, protecting liberty and human dignity against unclear, unstable and retrospective laws. See Joseph Raz, The Rule of Law and its Virtue, 93 L.Q.R. 195, 195-211 (1977). 9. Thus, there arises the problem of subjectivity inherent in the appropriation of the "Rule of Law" by any political ideology of choice. 10. See, for example, the definition adopted by the International Commission of Jurists in 1959 at a Conference in Delhi of the Rule of Law as a dynamic concept which should not only "advance the civil and political rights of the individual in a free society, but also... establish social, economic, educational and cultural condi- 2002] LEX REX OR REX LEX? a wide range of political virtues, blurring the law/politics dichotomy."' The mere legalism engendered by the formal, order-based version is considered deficient as it could mean that authoritarian regimes promulgating unjust laws through correct legal proce- dures could be considered to act consistently with the Rule of Law.12 The law's content could not be evaluated by any higher order norms or13 natural law principle committed to an ethical or "rights-based" conception of law. The dilemma is captured thus: "while the Rule of Law is more than the rule of the law, it 14 must be less than the rule of good law."' Furthermore, what the Rule of Law entails is obfuscated by the concept's close associations with the politically charged con- cepts of constitutionalism, 15 human rights,16 and democracy. 17 A tions under which his legitimate aspirations and dignity may be realised." INTERNA- TIONAL COMMISSION OF JURISTS, THE RULE OF LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS: PRINCIPLES AND DEFINITIONS 66 (International Commission of Jurists 1966). 11. Critical Legal Scholars would deride the fiction of law's autonomy from politics, as law is a tool to legitimate existing power structures and inequities. Law cannot be divorced from its underlying political philosophy. See, e.g., ROBERTO UN- GER, LAW IN MODERN SOCIETY 176-81, 192-223 (Free Press ed., 1976); Morton J. Horwitz, The Rule of Law: An Unqualified Human Good?, 86 Yale L.J. 561 (1977) (reviewing EP THOMPSON, WHIGS AND HUNTERS: THE ORIGINS OF THE BLACK ACT (1975) Duncan Kennedy, Legal Formality 2 J. LEGAL STUD. 351-98 (1973). This reinforces RJ Rushdoony's observation that "Every system of thought is at heart religious and begins with a religious, ultimate principle which is the source of power and authority": LAW AND SOCIETY: VOLUME II OF THE INSTITUTES OF BIBLICAL LAW 519 (1986). 12. Kazimierz Opalek, The Rule of Law and Natural Law in SELECTED PAPERS IN LEGAL PHILOSOPHY 95 (J.Wolenski ed., 2000) (where he discusses the dilemma of two possible faulty solutions in the naturalist and positivist approach, as "the only way of escaping formalism leads to natural law"). 13. Dworkin has suggested a substantive "rights-based" conception (as opposed to a "rule-book" conception) of law, which assumes that citizens are subject to judi- cially enforceable political and moral laws. Hence, in the absence of clear laws, judges are to make political judgements by referencing a community's political and legal culture rather than making historical enquiries into the law-makers" original intentions: RONALD DWORKIN, A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE 2 (Harvard University Press 1985). 14. Jeffrey Goldsworthy, Legislative Sovereignty and the Rule of Law in SCEPTI- CAL ESSAYS IN HUMAN RIGHTS 61, 65 (T. Campbell et al. eds., 2001). 15. See generally CL Ten, Constitutionalism and the Rule of Law, in A COMPAN- ION TO CONTEMPORARY POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 394, 394-403 (Robert E. Goodin & Philip Petit eds., 1993). 16. Human rights guard against the arbitrary exercise of discretion or abuse of power through justiciable individual entitlements and by guiding policy formula- tions, thereby limiting state power. 17. The Rule of Law bears a close historical affiliation with liberal democratic political orders, sharing the purpose of limiting government through electoral ac- countability. Arguably, failing to develop pluralist and representative democratic structures inhibits the development of a strong Rule of Law as authoritarian execu- tives will disallow meaningful checks through judicial review or parliamentary scru- tiny: J.Reitz, Constitutionalism and the Rule of Law: Theoretical Perspectives, in PACIFIC BASIN LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 20:1 few examples may serve as a preliminary orientation into the na- ture of the contest and the contestants engaged in articulating the dominant and secondary conceptions of the Rule of Law in Singapore.
Recommended publications
  • Why Are Gender Reforms Adopted in Singapore? Party Pragmatism and Electoral Incentives* Netina Tan

    Why Are Gender Reforms Adopted in Singapore? Party Pragmatism and Electoral Incentives* Netina Tan

    Why Are Gender Reforms Adopted in Singapore? Party Pragmatism and Electoral Incentives* Netina Tan Abstract In Singapore, the percentage of elected female politicians rose from 3.8 percent in 1984 to 22.5 percent after the 2015 general election. After years of exclusion, why were gender reforms adopted and how did they lead to more women in political office? Unlike South Korea and Taiwan, this paper shows that in Singapore party pragmatism rather than international diffusion of gender equality norms, feminist lobbying, or rival party pressures drove gender reforms. It is argued that the ruling People’s Action Party’s (PAP) strategic and electoral calculations to maintain hegemonic rule drove its policy u-turn to nominate an average of about 17.6 percent female candidates in the last three elections. Similar to the PAP’s bid to capture women voters in the 1959 elections, it had to alter its patriarchal, conservative image to appeal to the younger, progressive electorate in the 2000s. Additionally, Singapore’s electoral system that includes multi-member constituencies based on plurality party bloc vote rule also makes it easier to include women and diversify the party slate. But despite the strategic and electoral incentives, a gender gap remains. Drawing from a range of public opinion data, this paper explains why traditional gender stereotypes, biased social norms, and unequal family responsibilities may hold women back from full political participation. Keywords: gender reforms, party pragmatism, plurality party bloc vote, multi-member constituencies, ethnic quotas, PAP, Singapore DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5509/2016892369 ____________________ Netina Tan is an assistant professor of political science at McMaster University.
  • The Rule of Law and Urban Development

    The Rule of Law and Urban Development

    The Rule of Law and Urban Development The transformation of Singapore from a struggling, poor country into one of the most affluent nations in the world—within a single generation—has often been touted as an “economic miracle”. The vision and pragmatism shown by its leaders has been key, as has its STUDIES URBAN SYSTEMS notable political stability. What has been less celebrated, however, while being no less critical to Singapore’s urban development, is the country’s application of the rule of law. The rule of law has been fundamental to Singapore’s success. The Rule of Law and Urban Development gives an overview of the role played by the rule of law in Singapore’s urban development over the past 54 years since independence. It covers the key principles that characterise Singapore’s application of the rule of law, and reveals deep insights from several of the country’s eminent urban pioneers, leaders and experts. It also looks at what ongoing and future The Rule of Law and Urban Development The Rule of Law developments may mean for the rule of law in Singapore. The Rule of Law “ Singapore is a nation which is based wholly on the Rule of Law. It is clear and practical laws and the effective observance and enforcement and Urban Development of these laws which provide the foundation for our economic and social development. It is the certainty which an environment based on the Rule of Law generates which gives our people, as well as many MNCs and other foreign investors, the confidence to invest in our physical, industrial as well as social infrastructure.
  • The Criminal Procedure Code 2010

    The Criminal Procedure Code 2010

    (2011) 23 SAcLJ Modernising the Criminal Justice Framework 23 MODERNISING THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE FRAMEWORK The Criminal Procedure Code 2010 The concept of “balancing” prevalent in criminal justice discourse is premised on a paradigm where “state” and “individual” interests are perpetually in conflict. This article outlines the key components of the new Criminal Procedure Code 2010 and discusses another dimension of the state- individual relationship. Rather than being inherently incompatible, synergistic common goals can, on occasion, be pursued between the State and an accused. The article will also consider areas in the Criminal Procedure Code 2010 where conflicts between “state” and “individual” interests have in fact arisen, and will outline the pragmatic approach that has been adopted towards their resolution. Melanie CHNG* LLB (Hons) (National University of Singapore), LLM (Harvard); Advocate & Solicitor (Singapore); Assistant Director, Ministry of Law. The criminal process is at the heart of the criminal justice system. It is not only a subject of great practical importance; it is also a reflection of our ideals and values as to the way in which we can accord justice to both the guilty and to the innocent.[1] I. Introduction 1 The recent legislative amendments to Singapore’s Criminal Procedure Code (“CPC”) signify a new chapter in the continuing evolution of Singapore’s criminal justice process. The new Criminal Procedure Code 2010 (“New CPC”),2 which came into force on * The opinions expressed in this article are those of its author and are not representative of the official position or policies of the Singapore government. The author is grateful to Mr Amarjeet Singh SC, Ms Jennifer Marie SC, Mr Bala Reddy, Professor Michael Hor, Mr Subhas Anandan, Ms Valerie Thean and Mr Desmond Lee for their invaluable comments on an earlier draft of this article.
  • [2020] SGCA 16 Civil Appeal No 99 of 2019 Between Wham Kwok Han

    [2020] SGCA 16 Civil Appeal No 99 of 2019 Between Wham Kwok Han

    IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE [2020] SGCA 16 Civil Appeal No 99 of 2019 Between Wham Kwok Han Jolovan … Appellant And The Attorney-General … Respondent Civil Appeal No 108 of 2019 Between Tan Liang Joo John … Appellant And The Attorney-General … Respondent Civil Appeal No 109 of 2019 Between The Attorney-General … Appellant And Wham Kwok Han Jolovan … Respondent Civil Appeal No 110 of 2019 Between The Attorney-General … Appellant And Tan Liang Joo John … Respondent In the matter of Originating Summons No 510 of 2018 Between The Attorney-General And Wham Kwok Han Jolovan In the matter of Originating Summons No 537 of 2018 Between The Attorney-General And Tan Liang Joo John ii JUDGMENT [Contempt of Court] — [Scandalising the court] [Contempt of Court] — [Sentencing] iii This judgment is subject to final editorial corrections approved by the court and/or redaction pursuant to the publisher’s duty in compliance with the law, for publication in LawNet and/or the Singapore Law Reports. Wham Kwok Han Jolovan v Attorney-General and other appeals [2020] SGCA 16 Court of Appeal — Civil Appeals Nos 99, 108, 109 and 110 of 2019 Sundaresh Menon CJ, Andrew Phang Boon Leong JA, Judith Prakash JA, Tay Yong Kwang JA and Steven Chong JA 22 January 2020 16 March 2020 Judgment reserved. Sundaresh Menon CJ (delivering the judgment of the court): Introduction 1 These appeals arise out of HC/OS 510/2018 (“OS 510”) and HC/OS 537/2018 (“OS 537”), which were initiated by the Attorney-General (“the AG”) to punish Mr Wham Kwok Han Jolovan (“Wham”) and Mr Tan Liang Joo John (“Tan”) respectively for contempt by scandalising the court (“scandalising contempt”) under s 3(1)(a) of the Administration of Justice (Protection) Act 2016 (Act 19 of 2016) (“the AJPA”).
  • Date Published: 11 Mar 2014 Dr Vivian Balaskrishnan, Minister for the Environment and Water Resources, Had Announced in His Comm

    Date Published: 11 Mar 2014 Dr Vivian Balaskrishnan, Minister for the Environment and Water Resources, Had Announced in His Comm

    Date Published: 11 Mar 2014 Dr Vivian Balaskrishnan, Minister for the Environment and Water Resources, had announced in his Committee of Supply (COS) speech today that the Government of Singapore has decided to appoint an International Advisory Panel on Transboundary Pollution (IAP). 2. The Terms of Reference of the IAP are to study and advise the Government of Singapore on the trends and developments in international law relating to transboundary pollution and on the issues arising under international law from the impact of transboundary pollution as well as on the related solutions and practical steps which Singapore can adopt in light of the foregoing. Deputy Prime Minister (DPM) Mr Teo Chee Hean, who is also Chairman of the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Climate Change and Co-ordinating Minister for National Security, has appointed Professor S. Jayakumar and Professor Tommy Koh to co-chair the IAP, which will comprise legal experts from Singapore and abroad (their bios are attached at Annex A and Annex B respectively). 3. In making the appointment, DPM Teo said that: "The severe haze that enveloped Singapore in 2013 was a grim reminder that countries, especially small ones, are vulnerable to pollution that originates from outside their borders. In order to protect the health of our people, we need to explore all available avenues to tackle such transboundary environmental challenges. The Government has thus decided to set up an International Advisory Panel to study and advise the Government on trends and developments in international law relating to transboundary pollution and the options available to Singapore under international law.
  • THE OXFORD and CAMBRIDGE SOCIETY of SINGAPORE Patron: H.E

    THE OXFORD and CAMBRIDGE SOCIETY of SINGAPORE Patron: H.E

    THE OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE SOCIETY OF SINGAPORE Patron: H.E. Lee Hsien Loong Prime Minister of Singapore 21st Dec 2020 Short Note about the Oxbridge Society of Singapore (www.oxbridge.org.sg) For more than 100 of the last 200 years, Oxbridge alumni have been Prime Ministers, Governors and Colonial Secretaries of Singapore. It was an Oxbridge alumnus , Lord Hastings, who also gave the green light for the founding of modern Singapore in 1819. Our history mirrors that of modern Singapore, initially comprising the colonial administrators post War and then the dynamic core of our independence leaders including Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew; Law Minister Eddie Barker, who drafted the Proclamation of Independence, which PM Lee Kuan Yew called “an adroit bloodless coup” and also our Separation Agreement from Malaysia; and Chief Justice Wee Chong Jin . The Society was ultimately registered with the Registrar of Societies in 1961. On our website are photographs of our founding President of Singapore, Yusof Ishak, and founding Prime Minister of independent Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, attending our annual dinners in the 1960s. From that start, the Society morphed into becoming the wider alumni grouping for our returning Oxbridge scholars, who were taking on not just political leadership but also leadership of the administrative service, professions, armed forces, judiciary and the media. Over time, this membership has happily grown to include our private sector alumni. Our members now comprise the 3000 plus alumni of both Cambridge and Oxford, most of whom are Singapore citizens, but also several hundred expatriates based here, some of whom are also office holders within the Society.
  • 1 Singapore's Dominant Party System

    1 Singapore's Dominant Party System

    Tan, Kenneth Paul (2017) “Singapore’s Dominant Party System”, in Governing Global-City Singapore: Legacies and Futures after Lee Kuan Yew, Routledge 1 Singapore’s dominant party system On the night of 11 September 2015, pundits, journalists, political bloggers, aca- demics, and others in Singapore’s chattering classes watched in long- drawn amazement as the media reported excitedly on the results of independent Singa- pore’s twelfth parliamentary elections that trickled in until the very early hours of the morning. It became increasingly clear as the night wore on, and any optimism for change wore off, that the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) had swept the votes in something of a landslide victory that would have puzzled even the PAP itself (Zakir, 2015). In the 2015 general elections (GE2015), the incumbent party won 69.9 per cent of the total votes (see Table 1.1). The Workers’ Party (WP), the leading opposition party that had five elected members in the previous parliament, lost their Punggol East seat in 2015 with 48.2 per cent of the votes cast in that single- member constituency (SMC). With 51 per cent of the votes, the WP was able to hold on to Aljunied, a five-member group representation constituency (GRC), by a very slim margin of less than 2 per cent. It was also able to hold on to Hougang SMC with a more convincing win of 57.7 per cent. However, it was undoubtedly a hard defeat for the opposition. The strong performance by the PAP bucked the trend observed since GE2001, when it had won 75.3 per cent of the total votes, the highest percent- age since independence.
  • Rule of Law Without Democratization: Cambodia and Singapore in Comparative Perspective

    Rule of Law Without Democratization: Cambodia and Singapore in Comparative Perspective

    Griffith Asia Institute Research Paper Rule of Law without Democratization: Cambodia and Singapore in Comparative Perspective Stephen McCarthy and Kheang Un ii About the Griffith Asia Institute The Griffith Asia Institute produces relevant, interdisciplinary research on key developments in the politics, security and economies of the Asia-Pacific. By promoting knowledge of Australia’s changing region and its importance to our future, the Griffith Asia Institute seeks to inform and foster academic scholarship, public awareness and considered and responsive policy making. The Institute’s work builds on a long Griffith University tradition of providing multidisciplinary research on issues of contemporary significance in the region. Griffith was the first University in the country to offer Asian Studies to undergraduate students and remains a pioneer in this field. This strong history means that today’s Institute can draw on the expertise of some 50 Asia–Pacific focused academics from many disciplines across the university. The Griffith Asia Institute’s ‘Research Papers’ publish the institute’s policy-relevant research on Australia and its regional environment. The texts of published papers and the titles of upcoming publications can be found on the Institute’s website: www.griffith.edu.au/asiainstitute ‘Rule of Law without Democratization: Cambodia and Singapore in Comparative Perspective’ 2018 iii About the Authors Stephen McCarthy Stephen McCarthy is a Senior Lecturer in South East Asian politics in the School of Government and International Relations and a member of the Griffith Asia Institute at Griffith University. He received his PhD in political science from Northern Illinois University and has published widely on Burmese politics and South East Asia in international journals including The Pacific Review, Asian Survey, Pacific Affairs, Democratization and International Political Science Review.
  • 331KB***Administrative and Constitutional

    331KB***Administrative and Constitutional

    (2016) 17 SAL Ann Rev Administrative and Constitutional Law 1 1. ADMINISTRATIVE AND CONSTITUTIONAL LAW THIO Li-ann BA (Oxon) (Hons), LLM (Harvard), PhD (Cantab); Barrister (Gray’s Inn, UK); Provost Chair Professor, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore. Introduction 1.1 In terms of administrative law, the decided cases showed some insight into the role of courts in relation to: handing over town council management to another political party after a general election, the susceptibility of professional bodies which are vested with statutory powers like the Law Society review committee to judicial review; as well as important observations on substantive legitimate expectations and developments in exceptions to the rule against bias on the basis of necessity, and how this may apply to private as opposed to statutory bodies. Many of the other cases affirmed existing principles of administrative legality and the need for an evidential basis to sustain an argument. For example, a bare allegation of bias without evidence cannot be sustained; allegations of bias cannot arise when a litigant is simply made to follow well-established court procedures.1 1.2 Most constitutional law cases revolved around Art 9 issues. Judicial observations on the nature or scope of specific constitutional powers were made in cases not dealing directly with constitutional arguments. See Kee Oon JC in Karthigeyan M Kailasam v Public Prosecutor2 noted the operation of a presumption of legality and good faith in relation to acts of public officials; the Prosecution, in particular, is presumed “to act in the public interest at all times”, in relation to all prosecuted cases from the first instance to appellate level.
  • Institutionalized Leadership: Resilient Hegemonic Party Autocracy in Singapore

    Institutionalized Leadership: Resilient Hegemonic Party Autocracy in Singapore

    Institutionalized Leadership: Resilient Hegemonic Party Autocracy in Singapore By Netina Tan PhD Candidate Political Science Department University of British Columbia Paper prepared for presentation at CPSA Conference, 28 May 2009 Ottawa, Ontario Work- in-progress, please do not cite without author’s permission. All comments welcomed, please contact author at [email protected] Abstract In the age of democracy, the resilience of Singapore’s hegemonic party autocracy is puzzling. The People’s Action Party (PAP) has defied the “third wave”, withstood economic crises and ruled uninterrupted for more than five decades. Will the PAP remain a deviant case and survive the passing of its founding leader, Lee Kuan Yew? Building on an emerging scholarship on electoral authoritarianism and the concept of institutionalization, this paper argues that the resilience of hegemonic party autocracy depends more on institutions than coercion, charisma or ideological commitment. Institutionalized parties in electoral autocracies have a greater chance of survival, just like those in electoral democracies. With an institutionalized leadership succession system to ensure self-renewal and elite cohesion, this paper contends that PAP will continue to rule Singapore in the post-Lee era. 2 “All parties must institutionalize to a certain extent in order to survive” Angelo Panebianco (1988, 54) Introduction In the age of democracy, the resilience of Singapore’s hegemonic party regime1 is puzzling (Haas 1999). A small island with less than 4.6 million population, Singapore is the wealthiest non-oil producing country in the world that is not a democracy.2 Despite its affluence and ideal socio- economic prerequisites for democracy, the country has been under the rule of one party, the People’s Action Party (PAP) for the last five decades.
  • The Evolution of the Singapore Criminal Justice Process

    The Evolution of the Singapore Criminal Justice Process

    (2019) 31 SAcLJ 1042 (Published on e-First 23 July 2019) THE EVOLUTION OF THE SINGAPORE CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROCESS This article analyses the Singapore criminal justice process in the context of Herbert Packer’s Crime Control and Due Process models. It begins by analysing the features and goals of the two models before applying them to recent changes and developments in the Singapore criminal justice system. The article will focus in particular on developments in societal attitudes and values, legislative and executive policy, detention without trial, amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed), the statement of facts in guilty-plea cases, Kadar disclosure and the judicial discretion to exclude evidence. Following an analysis of these developments, the article will then assess the change in balance between the two models in the Singapore criminal justice system as well as comment on the trend and future of our criminal justice process. Keith Jieren THIRUMARAN LLB (Hons) (National University of Singapore) I. Introduction 1 The criminal justice process is the backbone of society that provides the context in which the substantive criminal law operates. The process includes all the activities “that operate to bring the substantive law of crime to bear (or to keep it from coming to bear)” on accused persons.1 In his seminal book2 and article,3 Herbert Packer espoused two renowned models that elucidate the framework for analysing the criminal justice process: the Crime Control Model and the Due Process Model. This article will analyse the unique Singapore criminal justice process to determine where it currently lies on the spectrum between the two models.
  • The War on Terrorism and the Internal Security Act of Singapore

    The War on Terrorism and the Internal Security Act of Singapore

    Damien Cheong ____________________________________________________________ Selling Security: The War on Terrorism and the Internal Security Act of Singapore DAMIEN CHEONG Abstract The Internal Security Act (ISA) of Singapore has been transformed from a se- curity law into an effective political instrument of the Singapore government. Although the government's use of the ISA for political purposes elicited negative reactions from the public, it was not prepared to abolish, or make amendments to the Act. In the wake of September 11 and the international campaign against terrorism, the opportunity to (re)legitimize the government's use of the ISA emerged. This paper argues that despite the ISA's seeming importance in the fight against terrorism, the absence of explicit definitions of national security threats, either in the Act itself, or in accompanying legislation, renders the ISA susceptible to political misuse. Keywords: Internal Security Act, War on Terrorism. People's Action Party, Jemaah Islamiyah. Introduction In 2001/2002, the Singapore government arrested and detained several Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) operatives under the Internal Security Act (ISA) for engaging in terrorist activities. It was alleged that the detained operatives were planning to attack local and foreign targets in Singa- pore. The arrests outraged human rights groups, as the operation was reminiscent of the government's crackdown on several alleged Marxist conspirators in1987. Human rights advocates were concerned that the current detainees would be dissuaded from seeking legal counsel and subjected to ill treatment during their period of incarceration (Tang 1989: 4-7; Frank et al. 1991: 5-99). Despite these protests, many Singaporeans expressed their strong support for the government's actions.