Unauthorised persons inside polling stations: SDP's response

12 August 1997

Mr Chan Sek Keong
Attorney General

Dear Sir,

PRESENCE OF UNAUTHORISED PERSONS INSIDE POLLING STATIONS

I have obtained a copy of your letter to the Minister for Law dated 21 July 1997 and, frankly, I find your arguments indigestible.

Your interpretation [of sections 82(1)(d) and 82(1)(e)] that persons can loiter inside a polling station but not outside makes absolutely no sense, legal or otherwise. Tell me if my interpretation (and that of countless others) does not make more sense: The relevant sections of the Act are aimed at preventing any person from interfering and influencing the voting process. Thus, unauthorised persons are not allowed within 200 metres of the polling station. Persons inside the polling stations are further regulated by Section 39(4) of the Parliamentary Elections Act which you cited in your letter and which states:

"the presiding officer shall keep order in his station and shall regulate the number of voters to be admitted at a time, and shall exclude all other persons except the candidates, the polling agent or agents of each candidate, the Returning Officer and persons authorised in writing by the Returning Officer, the police officers on duty and other persons officially employed at the polling station." (emphases added)

I do not see any ifs, ands or buts. The word "shall" spells out exactly what presiding officers must do. The said persons whom the complaints were brought against were neither candidates nor polling agents nor police officers on duty nor persons officially employed at the polling stations. They were PAP politicians. Period. The following question, thus, screams for an (logical) answer: Why did the presiding officers not ask these persons, who did not fall into any of the authorised-persons category as stipulated in the above-quoted section, to leave the polling stations?

You, then, conclude in your letter that "the possibility of a person influencing or intimidating voters in the presence of the presiding officer and his officials, the polling stations etc was considered so remote that it was discounted by the Act." With all due respect, sir, you are dead wrong. The Act forbids anyone from canvassing for votes on polling day - yes, including those inside polling stations. (I should know because I was called up by the police, as you must be aware, and questioned if I had canvassed for votes whilst I was in the polling station.) And how would one know if the said persons had influenced, or canvassed, for votes in the polling stations? One way to find out would be, of course, to ask these individuals. Which then begs the following questions:

• Did the police take statements from the said persons?
• If yes, what were the reasons given by the PAP leaders for being inside the polling stations? ·
• If no, why not and how did you come to the conclusion that they did not canvass for, or influence, votes?

And speaking of questions, you have not answered those in my previous press statement. I will ask again.

• Can any Tom, Dick and Harry enter polling stations?
• If yes, why are candidates and their agents made to wear labels signalling their authority to enter polling stations?
• If no, how do officials prevent non-candidates, non-agents and non-voters from entering and remaining inside polling stations?

As this matter is of public interest, I would like to inform you that this letter will be released to the media. I await your reply.

Sincerely,