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.