Saturday, July 07, 2012

Did the IMF Pledge violate the Singapore constitution?

You can read the explanation in this article
http://www.todayonline.com/Singapore/EDC120707-0000033/IMF-pledge-did-not-violate-Constitution

Mr. Kenneth Jeyaretnam said that the pledge of US$4 billion to the International Monetary Fund, without approval of Parliament and the President, violate article 144 of the Constitution. The MAS said that the article refer only to borrowing and does not apply to lending by the Government.

I have to disagree with the MAS. My reasons are: 

  • Article 144 states that "no guarantee or loan shall be given or raised by the Government except under the authority of any resolution of Parliament with which the President concurs". I consider the pledge to be a "guarantee". 
  • Even if the article did not contain the word "guarantee", the article also stated that "no loan shall be given". How can MAS said that the article does not apply to lending by the Government?
I am surprised that MAS would give the above type of explanation - as it seemed to defy logic and common sense. 








20 comments:

  1. That kind of reply is a joke !
    Must be the Uniquely Singapore by line again !

    ReplyDelete
  2. In MAS' term `loan' refers to borrowing from the reserves, not lending. If the government `borrows' from the reserves, to pay for its spending, it is a loan. So, if the government `borrows' from the reserves, to `lend' to IMF,........what is that?
    I'm really confused!

    ReplyDelete
  3. it is yet another example of how the std of english here has fallen. it also highlights the illogical thinking of the govt.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Unfortunately, Kenneth Jeyaretnam and his Reform Party did not win any seats, let alone 93% seats, in the last election.

    Otherwise, the IMF pledge by the PAP govt might not have happened and also his question would not have arise.

    So Kenneth should try hard to win elections first rather than asking the questions he asked and which achieved nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The truth requires no qualification.
    EXAMPLE:
    "The earth revolves around the sun."

    No need to win elections to tell the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  6. As long as IMF understands that our politicians' definition of a "pledge" is just an "aspiration".

    SOURCE:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6f2Kgj1nhSQ

    ReplyDelete
  7. I agree with you.

    If it is to mean “no loan shall be raised” as is the government’s view, then there should be the word “respectively” after “raised”, thus reading to mean “No guarantee shall be given, no loans shall be raised…”

    As it is, I read it as “No loan shall be given or raised…”

    ReplyDelete
  8. Article 144 should be understood as "no guarantee shall be given & no loan shall to be raised by the Government...' It should be clear after you read this reference:

    http://books.google.com.sg/books?id=_mhnDRnoaOcC&pg=PA74&lpg=PA74&dq=Reddendo+singula+singulis&source=bl&ots=qFWtjOaMlu&sig=G4iOfc4x2Ybbcmg8q2OInBDOhA8&hl=en&sa=X&ei=c-D3T5DqNtGzrAeg99DgBg&ved=0CE8Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Reddendo%20singula%20singulis&f=false

    This kind of confusion arises when lawyers try and communicate to ordinary people like us

    ReplyDelete
  9. "Lending" or "Borrowing" whatever, Govt has always resort to twisting around with words to cover their mis-steps or incompetence.
    They think the National Wallet is their own wallet, to be opened at will without regards to the Constitution, which drafted by them, is their puppet to be manipulated.
    We place high hopes on the President to safeguard our Reserves, it's not surprising Tony becomes another postman, shirking this responsibility to MAS. We forsaw this during the PE hustings, that's why we fought so hard during the Presidency's campaign.
    Have enough of diam diam Presidents, Almighty God save us Singaporeans. Unlike the Resource- rich SWFs of other countries, Singapore's reserves are sourced from the hard work of its own citizens. When you tear each $ note, the blood and sweat of Singaporeans will ooze out.
    We can't let the PAP Govt, or any other Govt in future, to misuse our Reserves.
    Similiar to the ongoing Court case regarding the PM's right to call for a BE at his own discretion, precise terms must be clarified in the Constitution regarding using the Reserves, so that no loopholes could be use in skirting Parliamentary and the President's approvals.
    To avoid a similar situation like Greece, we've got to set the Constitution right this very moment.
    At last KJ has started the ball rolling, the Govt could forget about continuing its decades old policy of easy Governance without opposition. It's not business as usual any more, yet they refuse to listen.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The constitution is very clear (from a strictly legal point of view) with regards to this IMF matter. It is a pointless exercise on the part of KJ to make allegations that the govt's actions are ultra vires. He should focus his attentions on what needs to be changed.

    The court case regarding the PM's powers with respect to Hougang is a different kettle of fish. There are genuine issues to be clarified in this case.

    How concerned can Singaporeans be about the nations's reserves when they continue to vote on auto-pilot ie. PAP linked candidate SOP. Singaporeans get to choose the govt the want and DESERVE the govt that they get.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Just to add:

    I'm extremely disappointed with Tony Tan's role in this IMF matter. He seems to have adopted the attitude that since the constitution (quite correct from a legal point of view) states that his approval need not be sought, he can sit quietly and sip his tea. While his approval need not be sought, this matter still falls broadly under his powers to protect the reserves. Hence, he has every right and should exercise that right to raise questions about WHY his approval need not be sought and if the contitution needs to be changed with regards to this issue!

    ReplyDelete
  12. If the government is not allow to lend money to others, it means it cannot buy bonds.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I am surprised that people really think the president's role is to really safeguard our reserves just because someone said so when initiating this elected president thingy. It is to prevent the opposition in future to enjoy unfettered access to the reserves to do their job!

    ReplyDelete
  14. After reading the "convoluted " English interpretation regading the two subjects and verbs, let me just sound a warning to the AGC that crafty lawyers will soon find other misleading interpretation with other statues.

    It will be a World Class joke which All the King's men will not be able to put back our Constitution and All the enacted Laws in which make a generally civilized Singapre so far!

    I better pick up my trusty "First Aid in English " and throw it aside. Quite sure many of my former English teachers if they are still around are going to IMH.

    ReplyDelete
  15. If they can get away with NPark paying $2,200 for each of the 27 foldable bicycles as well as World's best paid Ministers' salary, what can we do about it other than shocking them during the next GE. During the Hougang rally, PAP MPs mentioned they are good enough to be the check and balance, so where are they now? Take out reserve and loan to IMF, what's the opinion of MPs? What's the opinion of President Tony? Land banking scheme has been mentioned on TKL blog for a long while but nothing was done to protect the retail investors. Where are the MPs and MAS? I guess they are the same, not able to think independently, just make noises during election and then hibernate until the next GE.

    ReplyDelete
  16. It's time people realise that lawyers have their language which they pick up over many years in school and at the bar. That's why most English teachers won't have a clue.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Yes, Mr. Kenneth Jeyaretnam did the right thing. Sometime I wonder why the Govt continue to take Singaporeans for granted even after the GE11. I wonder where GCT going to find $80 million had Hougang WP lost the election 2 elections ago. Since Potong Pasir changed hand to PAP, I wonder who is paying for all the upgrading promises since PAP always say opposition is badly run and financial screwup...

    ReplyDelete

  18. I actually enjoyed reading through this posting.Many thanks...



    Calibration Singapore

    ReplyDelete
  19. Integrity means doing the right thing even when no one is looking. But for those who write and publish the dictionary, integrity can means do the wrong thing even if everyone is looking. That sum s it up. Btw, I am. Fraud Examiner.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Thank you Mr Tan for supporting Kenneth's cause to protect our money from the twisted interpretation by MAS.
    Time is running out, pls support Kenneth's appeal against the ruling.

    Kenneth Jeyaretnam’s IMF loan case, need to appeal by Tues

    ReplyDelete