SINGAPORE, Aug 1 — Former presidential candidate Tan Kin Lian might again fare poorly, as he did in 2011, if he were to contest the presidential election this year, analysts said yesterday.
Tan, 75, announced in a media statement on Sunday that he had submitted his application for a certificate of eligibility, through a proxy, on July 11. He said he would wait to see the final slate of candidates before deciding if he would seek to run.
The former chief of NTUC Income previously stood as a candidate in the 2011 Presidential Election, where he came in last of four candidates.
Tan won 104,085 (4.91 per cent) of the total 2,274,773 votes and lost his deposit of S$48,000 (RM163,533) for failing to garner more than one-eighth of the total number of votes polled in the election.
While Tan had been certified eligible to stand for election in 2011, the criteria for prospective presidential candidates were tightened in 2016, leaving some political observers to believe that he may not necessarily qualify to contest this year.
Tan’s potential bid brings to four the number of potential presidential hopefuls who have emerged so far along with Tharman Shanmugaratnam, a former senior minister; George Goh, a businessman; and Ng Kok Song, a former GIC investment chief.
TODAY spoke to analysts on Tan’s potential bid for presidency, his prospects of meeting the updated eligibility criteria, and the anticipated impact of his bid should he qualify and choose to run.
Will Tan qualify to stand for election?
Analysts told TODAY that Tan’s securing of a certificate of eligibility in 2011 does not guarantee his eligibility in this year’s contest given the tightened criteria, though this decision would ultimately lie with the Presidential Elections Committee (PEC).
In 2011, Tan applied for a Certificate of Eligibility under a special clause, where he cited his experience as chief executive officer (CEO) of the insurance cooperative NTUC Income.
Then, presidential candidates could include individuals who had served at least three years as a chairman or CEO of a statutory board or company with a paid-up capital of at least S$100 million.
With the 2016 amendments to the Constitution, presidential candidates must have served as the CEO of a company, or be the most senior executive running the firm, for at least three years.
The company must have at least S$500 million in shareholders’ equity during the person’s most recent three-year period as CEO, and have been profitable after tax for the entire time that the candidate served as CEO.
Associate Professor Eugene Tan, from Singapore Management University’s (SMU) school of law, said that it is “by no means certain” that Tan would qualify to run this year.
“His securing a certificate of eligibility in 2011 by no means makes his eligibility certain whether under the automatic or deliberative tracks.”
“He will rely on his being the most senior executive in (NTUC) Income, when it was an insurance cooperative. In 2011, he was issued the certificate under the deliberative track. It is likely that he will be considered under this track,” said Assoc Prof Tan.
The deliberative track refers to a discretionary clause for the PEC to assess a candidate’s suitability to run for President. Under this track or clause, a prospective candidate must have served for at least three years in a private sector organisation.
The PEC must be satisfied that the prospective candidate has the experience and ability comparable to that of someone who has served as CEO of a profitable company with at least S$500 million in shareholders’ equity for three years.
The committee must also be satisfied that the person has the experience and ability to effectively carry out the functions and duties of the office of President.
Still, Nydia Ngiow, managing director of advisory firm BowerGroupAsia Singapore, said that while the threshold for private sector candidates has become higher, Tan’s 30-year stint at NTUC Income “should continue to qualify him”.
Dr Gillian Koh, senior research fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) at the National University of Singapore (NUS), added: “While the eligibility criteria have changed since 2011, Tan who will know best, has indicated that NTUC Income does indeed meet the threshold of being... worth S$500 million in shareholder equity at the time when he was CEO of it.”
She added: “That is what he has claimed and if it is indeed the case, and he was certainly there for more than three years and should have been profitable, then it would give cause for him to express his confidence even now that he will be eligible to receive a certificate that qualifies him for candidacy.”
“This is what he has to present, (but) it is what the PEC has to confirm.”
Agreeing, Associate Professor Chong Ja Ian, a political scientist at NUS, said that the decision on a candidate’s eligibility ultimately lies with the PEC.
The committee can set its own procedures, and its decisions are not subject to legal review, he added.
Can ‘wrestle some votes’, but overall impact likely ‘negligible’
Should Tan qualify to contest, analysts have also raised doubts about the impact of his bid.
While observers have said that Tan might “wrestle some votes” away from other candidates, they added that his impact on the contest would likely be “negligible”.
Dr Felix Tan, a political analyst at Nanyang Technological University (NTU), said Tan might appeal to “disgruntled voters” who feel that they would want a President who is “antagonistic to the Government”.
Assoc Prof Chong from NUS added that Tan is likely to appeal to voters who are “more sceptical” of the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) and Singapore state establishment.
“I am doubtful if Tan would have an effect on the vote share for Tharman and perhaps Ng, given their close association with the PAP and the broader Singapore state establishment, respectively.”
“Public perceptions are that Goh is somewhat more distant from the PAP and state establishment. Tan is more likely to draw votes away from Goh, but to what extent remains in question,” added Assoc Prof Chong, pointing out that Tan had garnered the least votes in the 2011 Presidential Election.
Assoc Prof Tan from SMU said that while Tan would “likely splinter the vote share of candidates who position themselves at the opposite end of the spectrum with regard to Mr Tharman”, he believes this effect would “ultimately be negligible”.
Still, he notes that Tan is also a former member of the PAP, and could be seen as a former member of the establishment by virtue of his ties with NTUC.
Regardless, Dr Tan from NTU notes that the number of votes Tan garners could “deprive” other presidential candidates of some of the votes that might otherwise “turn the tide in their favour”.
‘Name recognition’ from 2011 presidential bid not without ‘notoriety’
On how his 2011 bid might impact his potential candidacy this year, analysts told TODAY that while Tan might have better “name recognition” among voters, statements he had made since his 2011 presidential run could end up working against him to limit his voter appeal.
Dr Tan from NTU said that Tan’s bid would provide “fodder for discussion” on what he could bring to the table, beyond “rehashing the same old issues” that he had raised in the past.
Assoc Prof Chong from NUS added that while “name recognition is obviously helpful”, he noted that Tan has also been associated with statements that have garnered some public criticism in the years since his presidential run.
Agreeing, Ngiow of BowerGroupAsia Singapore said: “While he definitely has better name recognition compared to Ng or Goh, this name recognition also comes with a certain notoriety of being the candidate with the least number of votes in 2011, as well as some of the controversial comments he has made since.”
“This includes xenophobic comments against Indians, his dismissiveness over data privacy as well as his endorsement of the Taliban government being credible,” she added.
Tan had previously found himself in a pickle over various statements he reportedly made.
• In 2015, Tan reportedly made a post on his Facebook page with a photograph inside a bus and a caption which read: “I boarded SMRT 857 and found that I was in Mumbai. Hahaha.” Tan later took down the alleged post
• In 2019, Tan reportedly dismissed concerns over data privacy and the “paranoia” over National Registration Identity Card (NRIC) and personal data. He was later reportedly locked out of his Singpass account after daring anyone to hack the account
• In 2021, Tan wrote on his blog that he holds a favourable view of the behaviour of the Taliban government of Afghanistan, a regime that is almost universally condemned around the world
Ngiow additionally noted that given Tan previously declined to run in this election, citing how traumatic and disheartening his experience was in 2011, he would need to present a clear platform that addresses his past controversies, or risk repeating the same outcome.
Assoc Prof Tan from SMU added that voters are unlikely to see Tan as a “serious contender”.
“It doesn’t help that Tan has said he would wait for the PEC to confirm the candidates before he decides whether or not to proceed on Nomination Day. Such tentativeness makes one wonder if he is serious about running in the first place!”
“As for the impact of Tan’s potential contest: Unless he is able to exert a wholly different appeal and value proposition this time, it is likely that his impact would be negligible — perhaps even inconsequential when all the votes are tallied,” he added.
Regardless, Dr Koh from IPS said it is “certainly good” that more individuals who qualify put themselves forward to serve the nation.
She added that the institution is “better served” when there is an electoral contest among quality candidates, as its legitimacy would be strengthened this way.
“What will also be interesting is how citizens themselves think of the candidates and what they are looking for in voting for the next president.”
“This can only surface when we have a diversity of candidates.” — TODAY
