The Parliamentary Elections (Amendment) Act 2010 in effect
July 5th, 2010 | 
Author: The Prime Minister has announced the commencement of the The Parliamentary Elections (Amendment) Act 2010 on 1st July 2010.
The Parliamentary Elections (Amendment) Act 2010 is an amendment to the Parliamentary Elections Act (Chapter 218 of the 2007 Revised Edition).
Amendments in particular which may be of interest to would-be voters are highlighted below:
1. Penalty for offences
Generally, the penalty (fines) imposed on most offences under the Elections Act have been increased from the original $100 – $500 to $1000 – $1500. Jail term (if applicable) have also been increased and most offences are now a seizable offence within the meaning of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap. 68) – the police can arrest a person on the spot instead of issuing a summons.
2. Allowance for a “cooling off” day
Section 34 (6)(d) and 34A (6)(d) of the principal Act have been amended to allow for up to 10 days for poll to be taken instead of the original 9 days – the additional 1 day being the “cooling off” day, ie: eve of poll.
3. Restoration of name to register of electors
The fees for such restoration have been increased from $5 to $50 under Section 43 (8)(a) and (9).
4. Increase in the number of non-constituency Members
The number of non-constituency Members to be declared elected shall be the whole number (ignoring any less than 0) ascertained in accordance with the formula 9 – B, where B is the total number of Opposition Members elected to Parliament. It was 3 non-constituency Members prior to the amendment.
5. Badges, symbols, etc., prohibited on polling day and eve of polling day
No badge, symbol, rosette, favour, set of colours, flag, advertisement, handbill, placard or poster or any replica of a voting paper shall be worn, used, carried or displayed by any person or on any motorcar, truck or other vehicle as political propaganda on polling day will now include eve of polling day (ie: cooling off day).
6. Repeal and re-enactment of section 78B
Section 78B of the principal Act is repealed and the following section substituted therefor:
“Election advertising ban”
78B.—(1) Except as otherwise provided by or under subsection (2), no person shall, at any time on polling day or the eve of polling day at an election in an electoral division —
(a) knowingly publish, or knowingly cause or permit to be published, any election advertising in or among any electors in the electoral division; or
(b) knowingly display, or knowingly cause or permit to be displayed, any election advertising on any vehicle, thing or structure within the electoral division or adjoining the electoral division.
(2) Subsection (1) shall not apply to —
(a) the distribution of a book, or the promotion of the sale of a book, for not less than its commercial value, if the book was planned to be published regardless of whether there was to be an election;
(b) the publication of any news relating to an election —
(i) in a newspaper in any medium by a person permitted to do so under the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act (Cap. 206); or
(ii) in a radio or television broadcast by a person licensed to do so under the Broadcasting Act (Cap. 28);
(c) the telephonic or electronic transmission by an individual to another individual of the first-mentioned individual’s own political views, on a non-commercial basis;
(d) any election advertising that was lawfully published or displayed before the start of the eve of polling day at any election on what is commonly known as the Internet and that was not changed after its publication or display;
(e) the continued lawful display or posting of posters or banners that have been displayed or posted before the start of the eve of polling day at any election; and
(f) such activities or circumstances as may be prescribed by the Minister.
(3) Any person who contravenes subsection (1) shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction by a District Court to a fine not exceeding $1,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both.
(4) Every offence under this section shall be a seizable offence within the meaning of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap. 68).”.
7. Prohibition of canvassing on polling day and eve of polling day
Section 80 of the principal Act have been amended to prohibit canvassing on the eve of polling day ( cooling off day) and polling day.
8. New section 80A inserted to restrict election meetings
“Restrictions on election meetings”
80A.—(1) Without prejudice to sections 12 and 13 of the Public Order Act 2009 (Act 15 of 2009), and notwithstanding section 14 of that Act, all election meetings, wherever held, are prohibited —
(a) in the case of a general election, on polling day and the eve of polling day at the general election; or
(b) in the case of a by-election in any electoral division, on polling day and the eve of polling day at the by-election, and notwithstanding section 7 of that Act, no permit shall be granted under Part II of that Act for such an election meeting even if a notice
under section 6 of that Act is given in respect of that election meeting.
(2) Notwithstanding section 14 of the Public Order Act 2009, an election meeting shall not take place within any public place that is designated as an unrestricted area under that section during any of the following periods:
(a) in the case of a general election, between the day of nomination appointed for the general election and the day before the eve of polling day at that general election (both days inclusive); or
(b) in the case of a by-election in any electoral division, between the day of nomination appointed for the by-election and the day before the eve of polling day at that by-election (both days inclusive), unless the Commissioner of Police is notified under section 6 of that Act of the intention to hold the election meeting, and a permit is granted under section 7 of that Act in respect of that election meeting; and Part II of that Act shall apply to such an election meeting as if it does not take place within an unrestricted area.
(3) Any reference in the Public Order Act 2009 to an assembly or a procession that is unlawful under Part II of that Act shall include a reference to an election meeting —
(a) that is held in contravention of subsection (1) or (2); or
(b) in the case of an election meeting that takes place in an unrestricted area within the meaning of section 14 of the Public Order Act 2009 —
(i) that is held on a date or at a time which differs from the date or time specified in relation to the election meeting in the notice given under section 6 of that Act; or
(ii) that is not in compliance with any requirement imposed by section 8(1) of that Act or any condition imposed under section 8(2) of that Act on organisers or persons taking part in that election meeting.
(4) In this section, “election meeting” means a public assembly (within the meaning of the Public Order Act 2009) organised by or on behalf of a candidate nominated for election —
(a) to promote or procure the electoral success at the election for one or more identifiable political parties, candidates or groups of candidates; or
(b) to otherwise enhance the standing of any such political parties, candidates or groups of candidates with the electorate in connection with the election.”.
9. Persons prohibited from conducting election activity (Section 83 (1)(A))
Persons prohibited from conducting election activity have been expanded to include:
“(1A) An individual who is not a citizen of Singapore shall not knowingly publish or display, or knowingly cause or permit to be published or displayed, any election advertising in or among any electors in an electoral division during the period beginning with the day the writ of election is issued for an election and ending with the start of the eve of polling day at the election.”;
A full copy of the The Parliamentary Elections (Amendment) Act 2010 can be downloaded from the Official Web Site.
In addition, the Prime Minister has appointed Mr Yam Ah Mee to be the Returning Officer, with effect from 1st June 2010.
Andrew Tay
Disclaimer: The writer is not legally trained and interpretation may contain unintentional error(s). Readers are encouraged to seek expert legal advice whenever possible.
Posted in Opinion
Meaning elections are coming soon….
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
i sure hope all the opposition parties here will “READ” and “UNDERSTAND” every single clause here and whatever is needed to,
“successfully” “SUBMIT” proper polling paper or papers on that required day and not have a screwed-up, seen the last time.
we need all, repeat “ALL” opposition parties to co-operate on, “NIL” 3 party fights for/at all GRC or SMC, so that all “Singaporeans” have the right and opportunity to “VOTE”
VOTE OUT, THOSE WHO CALLED US “DAFTS”!!!
VOTE OUT, THOSE KILLING OUR JOBS !!!
VOTE OUT, MILLION $$$ MINISTERS !!!
VOTE OUT, PAP and uncle sam’s lapdogs !!!
we are singaporeans, “for singapore today and forever”….
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Why go thru all these legislation amendment just to impose more CONTROL over us ? Not to mention the waste of taxpayers’ monies in enacting these changes ?
Why not just simply announce to the entire world that we are actually a sister country of North Korea ? And that we have the same totalitarian political system that only allow 1 party regime ?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Is PAP so afraid of this elections and those to follow?
“The penalty (fines) imposed on most offences under the Elections Act have been increased from the original $100 – $500 to $1000 – $1500.”
Why? Let’s suppose it is to “deter” candidates from election offences.
“Restoration of name to register of electors – The amount of fees for such restoration have been increased from $5 to $50″
And why is this? To make it harder and discourage people from wanting to get back on the elector list?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
can I post a picture of where i mark the cross on the polling slip and post it in facebook?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
If I am not wrong, you can comment in TR on cooling day. Nothing about the Internet is explicitly mentioned at all.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Bring down this useless self-serving PAP government!
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Singaporeans, courage is needed this time.
Courage against a useless government, only know how to milk the locals.
Courage to say NO to immigrants who come as parasites to take away jobs and take away the future of the younger generations.
Courage to tell LKY and his corrupted government we have enough.
OUT! NOW!
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
TR web-site also must “close” lor!
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
2. Allowance for a “cooling off” day
Section 34 (6)(d) and 34A (6)(d) of the principal Act have been amended to allow for up to 10 days for poll to be taken instead of the original 9 days.
This is a new act, why did they introduce it???
In France they had this act, when the French said, total media black out on the last day means (1)total black out for all media outlet Mainstream or Online. In Singapore, it is (2)selective black-out.
The Right Wing Media like The Striat Times and Channel News Asia could continued their pro-govt reporting.
Then again, most countries do that after all
The good news is England had adopted (Australian Election System) which give the Lib Dems a helping hand. When you win the election, you must qucikly change the rule of the game to your advantage. I think the new govt. will tighten the funds of BBC news.
Today is USA declaration of independence
The players are thomas jefferson, john admans, george washinhgton
The red coats die for their rich lords and wealthy kings & queen
The American that is fighting for lives, die for their beliefs all men are born equal, they are born free, as their own man, own land.
How they beat the Superpower of the day Great Britian
1) The hunting riffles
2) The Guerrilla warefare
3) The role of Postmen fast rider horsemen that spread the news
4) The extensive network of spies working under the British
5) The death of General Fraizar and all the top officers
6) When the French had arrived by the sea
But it was back home, the “prolong 7yrs wars” the British no longer want to funds it, the public was against it. American was free
Today, in Iraq & Afghan, the prolong wars Poland, Italy, Canada, Britian…etc grew weary of the war, Amercian are sick of the war, this burden during recession will backfire. This is why I believe Amercian will be pulling out her troops pretty soon
I told you so…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Wah pang the rules are so long!
Why don’t they just have 1 line?
“Voting for opposition will result in a $2000 fine imposed”
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Stop all these PAPies farting,it stinks!
we have had enough.
say NO to more Farting and YES to Opposition.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
will TR operate on cooling day?
will another isd operation be launched if things don’t go PAP’ way?
will the returning officer postpone elections under the new law?
will PAP send ppl to disrupt opposition rally and provoke opposition supporters to create an impression that opposition is unruly and perhaps use law to arrest ppl?
so many qns,but no answer until elections
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I don’t hope for much. Just an “opportunity” (although a given in other countries) to vote coming election day.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
There are a number of reasons for the restoration name to register of electors with the fee to be increased from $5 to $50 under Section 43 (8)(a) and (9)of the Parliamentary Elections (Amendment) Act 2010.
An underhand reason can be the PAP ruling party controlled by the Familees does not want some of these local electors who may be dissatisfied with the present PAP to come out and vote against them. So the increased restoration fee act as a deterrent for them to register again.
The PAP has presently tilt the favourable balance to its side for the coming General Election by liberal approval of foreigners as new citizens up to 36% of our local electors.
These new citizens includes dubious masseuses who offer special sexual services will be grateful to the PAP and will vote for them in this election.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
If I am not wrong, to take in election
in the past it was a couple of hundred
today, its runs by ten of thousands dollars per person
and if you do not garner half of the votes you will lose the money
I guess so the raise it higher and higher for the fees
Anyhow, I would had done the same things, If I am Man In White
You play to win
Today is USA declaration of independence
Looking at history, the Vietnam War, the Amercian lost
1) The introduction of TV, picutre show G.I killing babies, womens
2) The VC networks of spies in the SAGION
3) The prolong wars, back home Amercian grew tired of the stupid war
China riase of YUAN is a good things
You can’t be rich & powerful by producing Nike Shoes, Slipper, Chopsticks, Mattress…etc I think China is allow these industries to move over to Blangladesh, India, Indonesia and Vietnam cost lost countries
Most Singaporeans are jealous of China success, they hope she failed
Well, don’t jump for joy, China is copying Japan success story by moving up the value-chain. Which I think they want to emulate Singapore Value Added Products Business. (We should expect many of our core business with face Head-On competition with China)
The worst nightmare, how we wish China keep on producing Slipper, Sandals, Tee-shirts, Bicyle tyre…that Singaporean are not interested in.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Wtf at the cooling-off day. It’s rather, a scare-tactic day where voters start to panic what will happen if they don’t vote for PAP…
It only makes people more inclined to vote for a stable govt (PAP) more than change (opposition) in politics.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
PM LHL from the Pro Alien Party should have also protect himself and his ministers by including the 1996 clarification – about “Ministers and ‘unauthorised persons’ inside Polling Stations” – made by then Attorney-General CSK, who is now the Chief Justice.
.
.
‘Unauthorised Persons inside Polling Stations’
http://www.singapore-window.org/ag0721.htm
.
.
‘The Truth about the Election System’
http://www.singaporedemocrat.org/elections.html
.
.
Election Strategy and Ethnic Politics in Singapore – Joel S Fetzer
http://www.tfd.org.tw/docs/dj0401/135-154-Joel%20S.%20Fetzer.pdf
.
.
Lawyers’ Rights Watch Report on Rule of Law in Singapore
http://pseudonymity.wordpress.com/2007/10/18/lawyers-rights-watch-report-on-rule-of-law-in-singapore/
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
it’s like ‘kelong’ in soccer matches.
it’s all fixed,lah.
all the rules will be made for their benefits and can be bent for their benefits.
all citizens and the opposition candidates will always be caught ‘off-side’.Some even get yellow cards and red cards.
yellow cards will go to jail.
red cards forced to deport and never to be seen here again until…?
so you see why most simple citizens prefer to be spectators.
in singapore of today,it’s better to be shitizens rather than the usual more respected citizens like australia or even malaysia.
here,shitizens can afford to watch the soccer match from the Grand-stand,citizens can only get to ’stand up for singapore’.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by wayangparty. wayangparty said: The Parliamentary Elections (Amendment) Act 2010 in effect: The Prime Minister have announced the commencement of … http://bit.ly/aZhfac [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Even if they read and memorized every word, I would not put it past the incumbents to pull dirty tricks to sabotage opposition candidates and parties.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Nothing need to be done. Just tick the correct box on that day.
If voters read to read something so long and not many can understand what it means and misleading the voter to tick the wrong box, then the voting is meaningless.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
They must have discovered some kind of psychological principle at play that made them wanna warrant this oen day cooling off day.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
This is one-sided policy. I disagree as the PAP administration will use the media during the cooling off day to send out subliminal messages for their side. CNA is owned by PAP, so is the world’s 140th ranked State Times. It’s time to bring this giant down before it gets so big, we can’t stop it anymore. Today, it’s millio dollar salaries, tomorrow…what’s next? Vote wisely.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
I think the cooling off day is also to ward off foreign media’s attention. On the eve of that day, all foreign journalists will have a tough time getting people to interview? What do you guys think?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
As Woody goh chok tong once ignorantly claimed before the pap took a beating at the polls: “The ground is SWEET”, so now the ground is EVEN SWEETER to beat the hell out of the arrogant pappies and reclaim what is rightfully Singaporean. Call for elections now, victory shall be sweet against the pappies!
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Time hase arrived vote for thr right party who will save us from paying money all the time
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
If you want change,if you want the PAP to listen to the people we must denied the PAPIES from wining 2/3 of the seats in Parliament.Maybe we might not succeed in overthrowing the PAP govt this coming election.
But if the combined Opposition can win over 1/3 of seats in Parliament,it will certainly scare the Shit of of LKY,LSL and their cronies.They will realise that if they dont change the next election they will not be so lucky.LSL will not want to be the first PM in the PAP to be kick out and be the cause of the downfall of his father’s Empire.
If the PAP continues to hold on to the status quo of 82 or 80 seats out of 84 then they will continue business as usual and the only people to lose out will be us.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
This is a War for your mind, hearts, wallets and most importantly your future.
Where will you stand?
Choose a side wisely.
This is the Lion City.
This is OUR city.
This is WAR!!!!
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
VOTE PEOPLE
God damn it.
Will you all freaking VOTE instead of complaining and sitting on your damn asses.
Get out there and make your vote count for something.
Everyone counts.
Don’t think your vote is useless.
Fuck it, if its rigged
Just Vote.
Stop being a damn coward.
VOTE!!!!!
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
This act is to instill fear to the electorates. And also increase of penalty is to increase govt income to cover the huge loss they made in the GIC and Temasek Holding “investments”.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
To opposition reading this article:
I hope you guys really buck up and read the rules carefully. If you get disqualified based on your own stupidity…. you are seriously letting all of us Sinkaporeans down.
Dun worry that your deposit will be forfeited, as without doubt sentiments against PAP is at an all time high. Sinkaporeans have eyes and ears, and we had taken into account what PAP had done for the past 10 years. Most importantly, Sinkaporeans have a heart… something which PAP is obviously lacking. We all want to free Sinkapore from the tyranny rule of PAP.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
LTK, CST, KJ, get your acts together. I don’t care how you guys do it. Just come out singing the same song and dancing to the same beat.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Persons prohibited from conducting election activity have been expanded to include:
“(1A) An individual who is not a citizen of Singapore shall not knowingly publish or display, or knowingly cause or permit to be published or displayed, any election advertising in or among any electors in an electoral division during the period beginning with the day the writ of election is issued for an election and ending with the start of the eve of polling day at the election.”;
Quickly, guys! Make your foreign talent citizens! NOW!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
So many rules? Like that no need election. If the public dunno which logo to vote for how? Everyday I see PAP logo (kindergarden, Qigong and other activities) of course I vote PAP (more familiar). Dirty tricks to fool Singaporeans and give us no choice.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
While it is undemocratic to struck off one’s name for failing to vote in a previous election; it is ANTI-DEMOCRACY to charge $50 to restore one’s name to the register of electors.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Many jobless Singaporeans are frustrated after their jobs are taken over by foreigners.
These jobless people can afford $50 to restore their names.
PAP knew that. I dont have any respect on PAP.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Tell the Very illeriate senior citizens Thunder strikes logo mean no good. Do we remember our merlion was strucked by “lightnings – this a bad omen for SINGAPORE. Dun believe, ust wait and see – PAIN AND PAIN (PAP), haha!
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
I suspect most citizens are proud of the system.
Afterall , they have been , in my mere mortal view, the most cooperative citizenry in the world, past and present and some in batam say all the way into the far future.
Well done citizens! You 1st world stedi boon until cannot bi bi !
Lets embrace the new citizens and make extinct the ugly singaporean mentality of Kia Si and Kia sai if not Kia su etc.
Lets brace ourselves.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“Cooling day” or not VOTE THE PAP OUT.
$50 to restore a citizen’s name? If you don’t VOTE THE PAP OUT now, familEE roots will grow deeper and it would be very tough for Singaporeans
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
The next amendment to the act will be extending each parliamentry term to 10 yrs instead of the current 5.
Anyway the PAP still rules, why waste money to host election every 5 yrs!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
One & All, PLEASE read the part within the ***** AND ======= borders most thoroughly. VERY IMPORTANT!
Folks, do read carefully the “CONS” in 78B.-(1) and compare with the “PROS” FOR:
“exceptions/exclusions IN “subsection (2)” AS STATED IN 78B,(1) upfront that “Except as otherwise provided by or under subsection (2), no person shall, ….. in an electoral division -”. So, as provided under (a) & (b) that followed….
Clearly 778C(2)(c) excludes only “Individual telephone or electronic mails”! as QUOTED below! BUT NOTE too that the “by” BEFORE “or” for “provided by or under…”
LOOKS “tricky”! Because, it isn’t A “by/or” and so THE WORD “by” suggests “by” ANOTHER PART OF The PE ACT or THIS PE (Amendment) ACT 2010?????????????????????????
*******************************************************
ANY LAWYERS here to CLARIFY this aspect of the amendment?:
As, since Internet IS NOT mentioned here in 78B(1) and (2), plus also NOT MENTIONED for exclusion/exception anywhere else in the main PE ACT too, then there is ERROR there in “by or” OR “for some other reason??????????????? Can become “TRICKY” for Internet blogs and then used for “NAILING” them Folks?
Please ANALYZE this Guys! And TR too!
*******************************************************
QUOTE
78B.—(1) Except as otherwise provided by or under subsection (2), no person shall, at any time on polling day or the eve of polling day at an election in an electoral division —
(a) knowingly publish, or knowingly cause or permit to be published, any election advertising in or among any electors in the electoral division; or
(b) knowingly display, or knowingly cause or permit to be displayed, any election advertising on any vehicle, thing or structure within the electoral division or adjoining the electoral division.
=======================================================
(2) Subsection (1) shall not apply to —
(c) the telephonic or electronic transmission by an individual to another individual of the first-mentioned individual’s own political views, on a non-commercial basis;
=======================================================
UNQUOTE
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Don’t blame PAP. Blame the voters who gave their votes to PAP.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@RDB, whats wrong with that section? Can you be a bit more clearer?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
DEAR Forecaster Extraordinarie: July 7, 2010 at 3:04 am
Thank you for asking:
@RDB, whats wrong with that section? Can you be a bit more clearer?
But oh mama! I HAVE been absolutely clear on the TWO issues I brought up! I even put them within specific horizontal borders! You like just GLOSS over it too! PLEASE go back AND read INTENTLY! And do you know what are the 2 issues and THEY ARE inter-related too?
FIRST, only telephonic OR electronic “transmission” are given EXCEPTION AND ONLY by “TWO individuals” on a “NON-commercial basis”! SO – does it also mean that like in mass emails where many are copied IS ILLEGAL?
Second, one has to know that a “/” inserted between words in place of “or”. Example: “Is he naughty/cheeky?” It can also be written as “Is he naughty OR cheeky?” Point in question is WHY was there a “by or” and not “by/or” OR just “or” without the “by” as it is grammatically incorrect BEFORE the word “under” in:
“78B.—(1) Except as otherwise provided by or under subsection (2), no person shall, at any time on polling day or the eve of polling day at an election in an electoral division —”
SO, if “Subsection (2)” IS THE ONLY List of Exceptions, WHY was it NOT SIMPLY written as:
“….. provided under subsection (2),….”???????????
Can you see THE AMBIGUITY CAUSED BY the word/words “by or” as it appeared? Clear cut to me!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I sometimes am lost what is right or wrong here.
What i think is right is wrong and what I think is wrong is right.
I am lost leh.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0