BY-ELECTION FOR JALAN BESAR GRC

Mr J. B. Jeyaretnam asked the Prime Minister whether he has any new reason for not holding a by-election for the Jalan Besar GRC.

The Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Wong Kan Seng) (for the Prime Minister): Sir, the reasons for not holding a by-election in Jalan Besar GRC were fully debated in this House on 6th July 1999 when I responded to the motion raised by the NCMP. The Prime Minister does not have any new reason nor does he need one for not holding a by-election in Jalan Besar GRC.

When the Parliamentary Elections Act was amended to provide for Group Representation Constituencies, the Government decided not to make it a legal requirement to hold a by-election when an MP vacates his seat for whatever reasons. This is to be fair to the other MPs in a GRC. They should not resign simply because a member in the GRC had vacated his seat. It would also prevent them from being held to ransom by an MP who may threaten to resign for whatever reasons.

The Members of Parliament for Jalan Besar GRC were elected both as a team and as individuals. The existing members will continue serving the whole GRC.

Mr J. B. Jeyaretnam (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Speaker, Sir, at the risk of your ruling that the Minister need not answer this, may I know why the Prime Minister is not here to answer this question? After all, elections is his responsibility, and not that of any Minister. But my supplementary question is this.

Mr Speaker: I am certainly ruling against that question. It is not relevant to the Question on the Order Paper.

Mr Jeyaretnam: I have a supplementary question.

Mr Speaker: All right.

Mr Jeyaretnam: I thought you would rule against it. Is the Minister, speaking for the Prime Minister, aware that when the Party first raised this question, the Prime Minister's reply was that Singaporeans could not be distracted from the grim tasks of recovering from the recession. That was the only reason given. He did not give any other reason. I know that on 6th July 1999, the Minister found lots of other reasons, but I want to know from the Prime Minister what is his new reason.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: The Prime Minister can delegate any Minister to reply a question on his behalf. The Prime Minister does not need to give a reason for not holding a by-election. He had given one reason before, and there are other reasons too. But, as I have said, the law provides that it is up to the Prime Minister to call for a by-election for any vacancy in a constituency. It is up to him. That is in our law.

Mr Jeyaretnam: May I ask why is the Prime Minister not obliged to give a reason to Parliament? Is he accountable or not accountable to Parliament?

Mr Wong Kan Seng: Sir, the law does not provide for a compulsory calling for a by-election whenever a vacancy arises. That is the power of the Prime Minister according to the Constitution and the Parliamentary Elections Act.

Mr Jeyaretnam: May I repeat my question? What is the reason? The law does not prohibit the filling of the vacancy. The Constitution demands that the vacancy be filled. What is the reason for not filling the vacancy?

Mr Wong Kan Seng: Can the Member quote me the Article in the Constitution that demands a by-election be called?

Mr Jeyaretnam: Would the Minister look up Article 49 of the Constitution? I read this on the 6th July debate.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: Sir, since the Member quotes Article 49, maybe he can read Article 49 for us so that we can understand.

Mr Jeyaretnam: I will certainly read it. Article 49 reads:

'Whenever the seat of a Member, not being a non-constituency Member, has become vacant [may I repeat, the seat of any Member other than a non-constituency Member, has become vacant] for any reason other than a dissolution of Parliament, the vacancy shall be filled by election in the manner provided by or under any law relating to Parliamentary elections for the time being in force.'

Is that not crystal clear? It states that the vacancy of any Member other than that of a non-constituency Member shall be filled.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: Sir, the Article is very clear that a by-election is to be called in accordance with the law, and the law is the Parliamentary Elections Act. If the Member does not know, read up section 24(2A) of the Parliamentary Elections Act. It is there.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Does the Minister appreciate that section 24(2A) is purely procedural? The substantive Article is Article 49. In any event, the Article takes precedence over any law in any other Act of Parliament.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: Sir, Article 49 is very clear that a by-election would be called in accordance with any written law. The written law for election is the Parliamentary Elections Act. If the Non-Constituency Member feels that the Government has violated the Constitution, then he should take the case to the court and seek a redress there rather than to raise this here from time to time hoping that one would be called so that he can try again.

Mr Jeyaretnam: May I ask why does the Prime Minister not openly admit that he fears a defeat at the hands of the Opposition?

Mr Wong Kan Seng: Sir, I think the Non-Constituency Member is rather presumptuous that we are afraid of a defeat. I do not think we are ever afraid to confront any issue, but when there is a need to, we will do it. But the law does not provide for compulsory by-election. The Prime Minister does not think there is a need for it, and that is it.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Would he like to put it to the test?

Mr Wong Kan Seng: Sir, he will have another chance to have a crack at it. He could choose any constituency he wants at the next general elections.