The recent appointment of Mr Philip Jeyaretnam to the Public Service Commission (PSC) has sparked intense debate both offline and online on whether he has been “co-opted” into the establishment.
Mr Philip Jeyaretnam is the younger son of late opposition leader Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam or JBJ as he is fondly called by Singaporeans.
First elected as a MP in a by-election in 1981 when he broke the PAP’s monopoly in parliament by winning the predominantly-Chinese seat of Anson, JBJ had a tumultuous if not torrid political career which saw him being bankrupted twice, disbarred twice and imprisoned once for a minor offence.
In an extensive interview with the Straits Times, Philip said that his father would be very happy for him joining the Public Service Commission (PSC).
“I have no doubt that my father would be very happy for me….It would not have been terribly different from how happy he was for me when I graduated from Officer Cadet School or when I was made a Senior Counsel – and the following year, when I became president of the Law Society,” he said.
Unfortunately, Philip’s enthusiasm for his new role in PSC was not shared by some former supporters of his father who felt “let down” and “betrayed” that he has “joined” the establishment.
Philip admitted that after the demise of his father last year, there had been calls on him and his brother to join politics to complete their father’s unfinished legacy of reforming the archaic political system of Singapore.
However, he had made up his mind to keep clear of politics as early as the 1990s and JBJ was understandably disappointed when he learnt of this.
His elder brother Kenneth has taken over the party founded by his father – the Reform Party in May this year.
Won’t JBJ be happier if he has joined force with his brother instead?
Of course it is pretty pointless to speculate on JBJ’s likely reaction now that he is no longer around.
In his numerous writings, JBJ has expressed his deep-seated love and affection for Singapore and its citizens which has spurred him to continue fighting whatever the system has thrown at him in spite of the odds.
As a Singaporean who had dedicated his entire life in service of his nation, JBJ would not have disapproved Philip of joining PSC.
After all, the PSC is a non-political organization and not the PAP itself which he had long decried and condemned for its “authoritarian” tendencies.
The problem arises due to the public perception whether rightly or wrongly that the PSC is somehow affiliated to the ruling party.
Indeed, Philip acknowledged that there is some basis in the perception that he is now on the side of the PAP because of the blurring of boundaries between the party and the state in Singapore.
“There is some basis in reality for the perceptions of an identification of state with, first of all, the Minister Mentor, who had such a strong role in the first 30 years of Singapore’s independence and, secondly, with the PAP. And that needs to be countered and changed as we go forward,” he said in the interview with Straits Times.
As Philip has put it subtlely and succinctly himself, although he has volunteered his services to the government in various capacities, he does not agree with the present political system which sees the PAP dominates and controls all institutions of the state including the civil service.
He has rightly pointed out that Singapore needs an establishment which encompasses within the full range of political opinions from the left to the right within the Constitution set-up.
This means that instead of marginalizing the opposition as a destabilizing force out to hamper the governance of the nation, its role and importance should be recognized and institutionalized within the establishment itself which will naturally correct the misperception that he has gone over to the “other side”.
The key words he said are “countered” and “changed as we go forward” which shows that Philip is aware of the inherent deficiencies in the establishment though he does not put the message across as strongly as his father.
Based on principles alone, it is quite clear that Philip does not deviate much from his father’s political beliefs though he has chosen to work within the establishment as of now.
Singapore has developed economically at breath-taking speed since independence in 1965, but the pace of political progress has been pain-stakingly sluggish.
We are a “freak” among the developed countries – a first world economy governed by a third world political system.
The impasse arises as a result of the confluence and interplay of two key factors:
1. The lingering presence of a strongman who continues to call the shots behind the back despite relinquishing his position as prime minister many years ago.
2. The complete wipe-out of Singapore’s opposition when the Barisan Sosialist boycotted the 1968 general elections thereby sealing the PAP’s dominance for the next four decades.
The present situation is untenable in the long run. A wave of democratization has swept across much of Asia as its people become more affluent and educated, the demand for more political rights and autonomy will continue to grow.
Both South Korea and Indonesia have made peaceful transitions from military dictatorship to democracy. The one-party political system in Taiwan and Japan was overthrown and replaced by multi-party politics.
Even our closest neighbor Malaysia now has a two-party system when the opposition denies the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition its traditional two-thirds majority in parliament.
How much more longer can Singapore’s monolithic and obsolete political system withstand the pressure and test of time?
Singapore’s pioneer leaders never had the vision of Singapore as a vibrant democracy as encapsulated by this statement made by then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew to the legislative council in 1962 when Singapore was still a British crown colony:
“If I were in authority in Singapore indefinitely without having to ask those who are governed whether they like what is being done, then I would not have the slightest doubt that I could govern much more effectively in their interests.”
Lee’s world view is completely out of sync with the aspirations of today’s generation.
As history has taught us, totalitarian forms of government can only prosper for as long as its founders are around after which it will degenerate and disintegrate because of a lack of a power-sharing and transfer mechanism as well as check and balance within the system itself.
After he became Malaysia’s sixth prime minister in March this year, Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak proclaimed immediately that the “government knows best” era is over.
Until Singapore leaders realize that, Singaporeans who have stepped forward to serve their nation like Mr Philip Jeyaretnam will have to live with the unfair accusation that they are “co-opted” into the establishment.
Mr Philip Jeyaretnam is the younger son of late opposition leader Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam or JBJ as he is fondly called by Singaporeans.
First elected as a MP in a by-election in 1981 when he broke the PAP’s monopoly in parliament by winning the predominantly-Chinese seat of Anson, JBJ had a tumultuous if not torrid political career which saw him being bankrupted twice, disbarred twice and imprisoned once for a minor offence.
In an extensive interview with the Straits Times, Philip said that his father would be very happy for him joining the Public Service Commission (PSC).
“I have no doubt that my father would be very happy for me….It would not have been terribly different from how happy he was for me when I graduated from Officer Cadet School or when I was made a Senior Counsel – and the following year, when I became president of the Law Society,” he said.
Unfortunately, Philip’s enthusiasm for his new role in PSC was not shared by some former supporters of his father who felt “let down” and “betrayed” that he has “joined” the establishment.
Philip admitted that after the demise of his father last year, there had been calls on him and his brother to join politics to complete their father’s unfinished legacy of reforming the archaic political system of Singapore.
However, he had made up his mind to keep clear of politics as early as the 1990s and JBJ was understandably disappointed when he learnt of this.
His elder brother Kenneth has taken over the party founded by his father – the Reform Party in May this year.
Won’t JBJ be happier if he has joined force with his brother instead?
Of course it is pretty pointless to speculate on JBJ’s likely reaction now that he is no longer around.
In his numerous writings, JBJ has expressed his deep-seated love and affection for Singapore and its citizens which has spurred him to continue fighting whatever the system has thrown at him in spite of the odds.
As a Singaporean who had dedicated his entire life in service of his nation, JBJ would not have disapproved Philip of joining PSC.
After all, the PSC is a non-political organization and not the PAP itself which he had long decried and condemned for its “authoritarian” tendencies.
The problem arises due to the public perception whether rightly or wrongly that the PSC is somehow affiliated to the ruling party.
Indeed, Philip acknowledged that there is some basis in the perception that he is now on the side of the PAP because of the blurring of boundaries between the party and the state in Singapore.
“There is some basis in reality for the perceptions of an identification of state with, first of all, the Minister Mentor, who had such a strong role in the first 30 years of Singapore’s independence and, secondly, with the PAP. And that needs to be countered and changed as we go forward,” he said in the interview with Straits Times.
As Philip has put it subtlely and succinctly himself, although he has volunteered his services to the government in various capacities, he does not agree with the present political system which sees the PAP dominates and controls all institutions of the state including the civil service.
He has rightly pointed out that Singapore needs an establishment which encompasses within the full range of political opinions from the left to the right within the Constitution set-up.
This means that instead of marginalizing the opposition as a destabilizing force out to hamper the governance of the nation, its role and importance should be recognized and institutionalized within the establishment itself which will naturally correct the misperception that he has gone over to the “other side”.
The key words he said are “countered” and “changed as we go forward” which shows that Philip is aware of the inherent deficiencies in the establishment though he does not put the message across as strongly as his father.
Based on principles alone, it is quite clear that Philip does not deviate much from his father’s political beliefs though he has chosen to work within the establishment as of now.
Singapore has developed economically at breath-taking speed since independence in 1965, but the pace of political progress has been pain-stakingly sluggish.
We are a “freak” among the developed countries – a first world economy governed by a third world political system.
The impasse arises as a result of the confluence and interplay of two key factors:
1. The lingering presence of a strongman who continues to call the shots behind the back despite relinquishing his position as prime minister many years ago.
2. The complete wipe-out of Singapore’s opposition when the Barisan Sosialist boycotted the 1968 general elections thereby sealing the PAP’s dominance for the next four decades.
The present situation is untenable in the long run. A wave of democratization has swept across much of Asia as its people become more affluent and educated, the demand for more political rights and autonomy will continue to grow.
Both South Korea and Indonesia have made peaceful transitions from military dictatorship to democracy. The one-party political system in Taiwan and Japan was overthrown and replaced by multi-party politics.
Even our closest neighbor Malaysia now has a two-party system when the opposition denies the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition its traditional two-thirds majority in parliament.
How much more longer can Singapore’s monolithic and obsolete political system withstand the pressure and test of time?
Singapore’s pioneer leaders never had the vision of Singapore as a vibrant democracy as encapsulated by this statement made by then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew to the legislative council in 1962 when Singapore was still a British crown colony:
“If I were in authority in Singapore indefinitely without having to ask those who are governed whether they like what is being done, then I would not have the slightest doubt that I could govern much more effectively in their interests.”
Lee’s world view is completely out of sync with the aspirations of today’s generation.
As history has taught us, totalitarian forms of government can only prosper for as long as its founders are around after which it will degenerate and disintegrate because of a lack of a power-sharing and transfer mechanism as well as check and balance within the system itself.
After he became Malaysia’s sixth prime minister in March this year, Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak proclaimed immediately that the “government knows best” era is over.
Until Singapore leaders realize that, Singaporeans who have stepped forward to serve their nation like Mr Philip Jeyaretnam will have to live with the unfair accusation that they are “co-opted” into the establishment.
