Friday, 6 October 2017

Counting presidential term is not a ‘chicken or egg’ question.

Untitled drawing(2).jpg

    The counting of presidential term is a serious business as it is so difficult to get it debated in the Parliament.  However, it can also become a ‘chicken or egg’  question as reported by Lianhe Zaobao:

    This is not a fake news, perhaps the most it is only 50% right.


    By naming the debate as a ‘chicken or egg’ question, Zaobao is directly admitting that the whole issue can go either way - policy decision or legal advice.  It means Lee Hsien Loong and the People’s Action Party government is 50% right in misleading the Parliament and so the people of Singapore.    

    However, as the way the mainstream media reports, it is clearly we should give the benefit of doubt to Lee Hsien Loong and the PAP government.  They have 50% chance of not misleading the Parliament, like the ‘chicken or egg’ question.,  

    The ‘chicken or egg’ can be a good excuse for Lee Hsien Loong and his government not directly answering the question. Terry Xu of The Online Citizens has clearly pointed out: Did Minister K Shanmugam deflect responsibility for PM Lee, DPM Teo and Minister Chan?

    Judge for yourself whether it is a ‘chicken or egg’ debate?

[50% Malay]

    By the same ‘chicken or egg’ analogy, it is nothing right or wrong to classify an Indian-Malay mixed blood as a Malay candidate. It can go either way. If someone decides to be a Malay, so be it.

Yes. Even the identity card states clearly the race is Indian, one can still legally choose to be a Malay under the amended Singapore Constitutions.


[50% dishonorable son]

    In the ‘Dishonorable son’ debate in Parliament, Lee Hsien Loong was given the benefit of doubt - another ‘chicken or egg’ question where 50% right or 50% wrong.

    Like the ‘chicken or egg’ debate of presidential term, many documents or references are clearly not presented, for example the secret behind the legal advice from Attorney-General’s Chamber, the secret behind the setting up of ministerial committee on 38 Oxley Road.    

    When there is doubt, ‘chicken or egg’, Lee Hsien Loong and the PAP government can, the best, claim 50% accuracy. They may be 50% wrong by not providing additional supporting proofs to get the fact right.

[50% Fake news]

    The ‘chicken or egg’ headline shows Zaobao is not sure about its reporting. By giving the confusing headline, it is producing fake
news. It misled readers to believe Lee Hsien Loong and the PAP government is 50% right.  At the same time, it also admits Lee and the government is 50% wrong.  By manipulating news report, Zaobao and other mainstream media can easily omit the 50% wrong.

    The Yahoo news gives the following headline:

    Government used ‘distraction’ of AGC’s advice on Elected Presidency: Sylvia Lim

    Even the Straits Times dares not give a ‘chicken or egg’ fake headline: Parliament: Shanmugam, Sylvia Lim debate reason for Govt's decision on counting of presidential terms

    However, they all focus on the 50% right and ignoring the 50% wrong. So, an incomplete reporting is even worst than a fake news.

[0% Court decision]

    The only state institution that does not give a ‘chicken or egg’ answer is the Court of Appeal. The Courts can not give 50% right 50% wrong answer. So, the Courts make no decision and let the Parliament decides.  

{“It was evident from reading Art 19B together with Art 164 that it was open to Parliament, for the purpose of determining when the reserved election scheme would take effect, to select as the first of the five most recent terms, a term of office that predated the coming into force of the recent amendments to the Constitution,” }

Ultimately, the Courts believes this is a people’s decision and the Parliament, representing the citizens of Singapore, is the agent of change.

Have we learned something from the ‘chicken or egg’ wayang? How can we expose and inform citizens about the 50% wrong fake news or misleading reporting?  

The ‘chicken or egg’ drama provides ‘50% right 50% wrong’ confusion.  The real purpose is to provide a playing field for an institutionalised One-Party Rule, with or without AG advice, with or without Courts. Hence, even the Parliament cannot really check and balance the wrong doing of the PAP government.


For those who like Chinese dramas, here is a video to enlighten your understanding of historical facts and wayang.

No comments:

Post a comment