Tan Cheng Bock v Attorney-General: Interpretation of Constitution Articles 19B & 164 on Presidential Election & Community Representation
In Tan Cheng Bock v Attorney-General, the Court of Appeal of Singapore addressed the interpretation of Articles 19B and 164 of the Constitution concerning reserved presidential elections for specific communities. Dr. Tan Cheng Bock appealed against the High Court's decision, arguing that Parliament's specification of President Wee Kim Wee's term as the first term for determining reserved elections was unconstitutional. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that Parliament's decision was within its constitutional powers.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Constitutional
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The Court of Appeal addressed the interpretation of Articles 19B and 164 of the Constitution regarding reserved presidential elections and community representation. The court dismissed the appeal.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attorney-General | Respondent | Government Agency | Appeal Dismissed | Won | Hri Kumar Nair of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Tan Cheng Bock | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | Yes |
| Judith Prakash | Judge of Appeal | No |
| Steven Chong | Judge of Appeal | No |
| Chua Lee Ming | Judge | No |
| Kannan Ramesh | Judge | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Hri Kumar Nair | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Chelva Retnam Rajah | Tan Rajah & Cheah |
4. Facts
- The Constitution was amended by the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment) Act 2016.
- Article 19B(1) introduces the concept of a reserved election for candidates of a particular community.
- Article 164 requires Parliament to specify the first term of office of the President to be counted for deciding whether an election is reserved.
- Parliament specified the last term of office of President Wee Kim Wee as the first term.
- The appellant, Dr. Tan Cheng Bock, contended that this specification was contrary to the Constitution.
- The Attorney-General argued that there is no restriction on Parliament’s power under Article 164.
- The High Court dismissed the appellant's application.
5. Formal Citations
- Tan Cheng Bock v Attorney-General, Civil Appeal No 124 of 2017, [2017] SGCA 50
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment) Act 2016 passed | |
| President Tan assented to the 2016 Amendment | |
| Presidential Elections (Amendment) Bill read in Parliament | |
| Presidential Elections (Amendment) Bill debated and passed | |
| President Tan assented to the Presidential Elections (Amendment) Act 2017 | |
| 2016 Amendment came into operation | |
| Appellant filed Originating Summons No 495 of 2017 in the High Court | |
| Application heard before a High Court judge | |
| Judge dismissed the application | |
| Appellant filed appeal against the Judge’s decision | |
| Judgment reserved | |
| Judgment delivered |
7. Legal Issues
- Interpretation of Article 19B of the Constitution
- Outcome: The court interpreted Article 19B to allow Parliament to specify the first term of office of the President to be counted for the purposes of deciding whether an election is reserved.
- Category: Substantive
- Interpretation of Article 164 of the Constitution
- Outcome: The court interpreted Article 164 to empower Parliament to specify the last term of President Wee Kim Wee as the first term for the purposes of Article 19B.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Declaration that Section 22 of the Presidential Elections (Amendment) Act 2017 is inconsistent with Arts 19B(1) and/or 164(1)(a) of the Constitution, and therefore void
- Declaration that the reference to President Wee in the Schedule referred to in s 22 of the PE(A) Act 2017 is inconsistent with Arts 19B(1) and/or 164(1)(a) of the Constitution, and therefore void
9. Cause of Actions
- No cause of actions
10. Practice Areas
- Constitutional Law
- Civil Procedure
11. Industries
- Government
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constitutional Reference No 1 of 1995 | Unknown | Yes | [1995] 1 SLR(R) 803 | Singapore | Cited regarding the relevant Parliamentary intention at the time the law was enacted. |
| Attorney-General v Ting Choon Meng and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] 1 SLR 373 | Singapore | Cited for the correct approach to purposive interpretation. |
| JD Ltd v Comptroller of Income Tax | Unknown | Yes | [2006] 1 SLR 484 | Singapore | Cited for the rule that Parliament shuns tautology and does not legislate in vain. |
| Hong Leong Bank Bhd v Soh Seow Poh | Unknown | Yes | [2009] 4 SLR(R) 525 | Singapore | Cited for the rule that Parliament is presumed not to have intended an unworkable or impracticable result. |
| Madras Electric Supply Corporation Ltd v Boardland (Inspector of Taxes) | Unknown | Yes | [1955] 1 AC 667 | Singapore | Cited for the rule of interpretation that identical expressions used in a statute should presumptively have the same meaning. |
| Seow Wei Sin v Public Prosecutor | Unknown | Yes | [2011] 1 SLR 1199 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that extraneous material cannot be used to give the statute a sense which is contrary to its express text. |
| Public Prosecutor v Low Kok Heng | Unknown | Yes | [2007] 4 SLR(R) 183 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that purposive interpretation must be done with a view toward determining a provision’s or statute’s purpose and object as reflected by and in harmony with the express wording of the legislation. |
| Regina v Secretary of State for Social Security ex parte Britnell | Unknown | Yes | [1991] 1 WLR 198 | Singapore | Cited for the function of a transitional provision. |
| Tan Cheng Bock v Attorney-General | High Court | Yes | [2017] SGHC 160 | Singapore | The High Court decision that was appealed in this case. |
| Evans v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs | Federal Court of Australia | Yes | [2003] FCAFC 276 | Australia | Cited for the distinction between the specific purpose underlying a particular provision and the general purpose or purposes underlying the statute as a whole or the relevant part of the statute. |
| Edwards v Attorney General | New South Wales Court of Appeal | Yes | (2004) 60 NSWLR 667 | Australia | Cited for the distinction between the specific purpose underlying a particular provision and the general purpose or purposes underlying the statute as a whole or the relevant part of the statute. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (1985 Rev Ed, 1999 Reprint), Arts 19B | Singapore |
| Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (1985 Rev Ed, 1999 Reprint), Arts 164 | Singapore |
| Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment) Act 2016 (Act 28 of 2016) | Singapore |
| Interpretation Act (Cap 1, 2002 Rev Ed), s 9A | Singapore |
| Presidential Elections (Amendment) Act 2017 (Act 6 of 2017) | Singapore |
| Presidential Elections Act (Cap 240A, 2011 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (1980 Reprint), Art 17 | Singapore |
| Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment) Act 1991 (Act 5 of 1991) | Singapore |
| Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (1985 Rev Ed, 1999 Reprint), Art 2 | Singapore |
| Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (1985 Rev Ed, 1999 Reprint), Art 17A | Singapore |
| Interpretation Act (Cap 1, 2002 Rev Ed), s 8 | Singapore |
| Interpretation Act (Cap 1, 2002 Rev Ed), s 15 | Singapore |
| Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (1985 Rev Ed, 1999 Reprint), Art 163 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Reserved election
- Term of office
- First term
- Community
- President
- Constitution
- Parliament
- Elected Presidency
- Appointed date
- Purposive interpretation
15.2 Keywords
- Constitution
- Presidential Election
- Reserved Election
- Community Representation
- Article 19B
- Article 164
- Singapore
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Constitutional Law | 95 |
| Statutory Interpretation | 70 |
| Administrative Law | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Constitutional Law
- Presidential Elections
- Statutory Interpretation