21-7-2023 (SINGAPORE) Ng Kok Song, former chief investment officer of GIC, Singapore’s sovereign wealth fund, has declared his candidacy for the presidential election. However, whether he qualifies hinges on the interpretation of his responsibilities during his tenure and how the Constitution is construed.
Mr. Ng, aged 75, is the third candidate to announce his bid for the presidency. Speaking to reporters on July 19, he stated that his application would be based on his six-year stint as GIC’s chief investment officer until his retirement in 2013. Prior to his role at GIC, Mr. Ng’s illustrious public service career included positions as an investment analyst in the Ministry of Finance and managing Singapore’s reserves at the Monetary Authority of Singapore, which he did since its establishment in 1971.
The eligibility criteria for presidential candidates in the public sector require them to have held office for at least three years as a minister, chief justice, Speaker of the House, attorney-general, chairman of the Public Service Commission, auditor‑general, accountant‑general, or permanent secretary. They may also qualify if they served as chief executives or the most senior executives in Fifth Schedule entities, such as key statutory boards and government companies like the Central Provident Fund Board, Temasek, and GIC, for at least three years.
Mr. Ng’s former position as chief investment officer does not automatically align with these requirements, making his application fall under the public sector “deliberative track.” This track is reserved for candidates who claim comparable experience and ability to those who automatically qualify, and it is subject to the discretion of the Presidential Election Committee (PEC).
Legal experts from various institutions have weighed in on the matter. Benjamin Joshua Ong, an assistant professor at Singapore Management University (SMU), highlighted that the “deliberative track” decision lies in the hands of the PEC. Mr. Ben Chester Cheong from the Singapore University of Social Sciences (SUSS) suggested that Mr. Ng’s eligibility depends on the strictness of the PEC’s interpretation of the Constitution. A narrow approach could deem a chief investment officer ineligible, while an extensive interpretation might render the fixed list of qualifying positions irrelevant.
Thio Li-Ann, a law professor at the National University of Singapore (NUS), emphasized financial competence and political independence as essential factors in assessing eligibility. Prof. Thio highlighted that the PEC should not adopt a literalist approach but should consider comparable experience and ability in candidates, aligning with the spirit of the constitutional provisions for the Elected Presidency scheme.
The factors considered by the PEC may include Mr. Ng’s leadership functions, the length of his experience, and the complexity of his responsibilities during his tenure as chief investment officer. Additionally, his ability to make judicious decisions and represent Singapore on the local and international stage might be assessed. It remains to be seen how the PEC will evaluate Mr. Ng’s application for the presidential candidacy.
The eligibility debate further extends to the private sector “deliberative track.” Mr. Ng’s role as the executive chairman of Avanda Investment Management, a company he co-founded, could potentially be compared to a chief executive or most senior executive of a Fifth Schedule statutory board or government company. However, the company’s shareholder equity falls significantly short of the minimum S$500 million requirement. Experts speculate that Mr. Ng may have chosen the public sector track to highlight his public service experience, while his role as chairman might not be deemed comparable to a chief executive under the private sector requirements.
As the presidential race unfolds, the PEC’s decision on Mr. Ng’s eligibility will be pivotal in shaping the landscape of Singapore’s upcoming election.
