NO OFFICIAL ROLE FOR PRESIDENT’S SPOUSE: ANALYST
Singapore used to have the official title of “first lady” for the spouse of a male President, but that has not been the case since at least 2000, said Associate Professor Eugene Tan of Singapore Management University (SMU).
He added that the use of “first lady” prior to 2000 was “merely a practice that had no legal basis”.
“There is as such no official role for the President’s spouse. Any courtesies extended to her is by virtue of her being the spouse of the head of state and not because of her designation as ‘first lady’.”
Assoc Prof Tan also said that Mr Tan is “engaging in negative campaigning”, referring to his comments apparently alluding to Mrs Tharman and Ms Lau.
“His nativist views are highly inappropriate and clearly self-serving,” he said, reiterating that Mr Tharman’s wife is Singaporean but of Japanese-Chinese parentage, while Ms Lau is a “naturalised” Singaporean.
“It is not only a risky grasp at winning support but one that is divisive and certainly not in keeping with the dignity and decorum of the office he is seeking to win a mandate for,” Assoc Prof Tan said.
NEXT PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BROADCAST
Mr Tan also said on Friday that he will continue the tradition of the President’s Star Charity, which was initiated by former President Ong Teng Cheong.
He added that Mr Ong had several charities covering different groups of people and he would “study which are appropriate and relevant today” and implement those.
Mr Tan also said he has his own ideas for charity, which will cater to older people. Further details will be provided later in his campaign, he added.
The former NTUC Income CEO also spoke about his presidential candidate broadcast speeches, the first of which took place on Thursday evening.
The Elections Department (ELD) and Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) said on Thursday that there were “inaccuracies” about the President’s role in Mr Tan’s speech that had to be removed.
The joint statement came after Mr Tan told reporters earlier in the day that IMDA asked for three paragraphs to be removed, which he considered the “most important paragraphs” of his campaign message.
Mr Tan took issue with the edits, saying that IMDA “did not have the authority to interpret the constitution in a narrow way and asked for these statements to be removed”.
For the next and final presidential candidate broadcast on Aug 30, Mr Tan said he would send his draft to IMDA early and ask if they want to remove any part of his speech.
“I don’t want to take the trouble of translating into the other languages when some parts are to be removed,” he said.
He reiterated that removing the parts in his original speech for Thursday’s broadcast was “not correct” and that “IMDA (interpreted) the constitution in their way”.