One of the famous quotes of this classical political satire is that All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others. This state of affair came to passé when the pigs usurped the power given to them by default by the other animals in the farm. The pigs conveniently took over the farm and treat the farm as their rightful inheritance and the rest of the animals as their slave workers.
In our Constitution, every citizen is equal under the law, has equal rights to what everyone should have as a citizen of the state. No one is more equal than others unless one achieves greatness, or appointed/employed to positions of power and authority when the power and authority are vested in those positions. Before that, everyone is just an ordinary citizen, everyone is an Ah Kow, Ahmad or a Muthu, equal under the law.
There is now a Constitutional Commission to rewrite the laws and regulations on the eligibility to be a candidate to stand for election as the Elected President? Before this, it is already regulated that only some clever and powerful people have the right to be Elected Presidents, in other words more equal than other citizens. Is this a violation of the rights of the citizens provided in the Constitution?
So far no legal minds have stood up to say anything about this change, that some are more equal than others. Does this silence mean that it is legally right, constitutionally right, to legislate that some are more equal than others by virtue of wealth and position?
The Constitutional Commission is reviewing the eligibility criteria for the Elected President. Maybe, with the privilege of having two high court judges in the Commission, that this issue be aired and cleared once and for all. The privilege and rights of the people as equals provided by the Constitution is sacred and must not be violated and legislated away.
No, the Constitution can be changed and some should be made more equal than others? Would Singapore turn into an Animal Farm like the animals allowing their rights to be taken away without any resistance or protest?
What do you think? Anyone writing to the Commission wants to bring this point up? Non issue? Not important, no need to defend this right? Ok, I heard it, the legal minds and all the wise men and wise women have spoken, in silence. And they said silence is consent.
I rest my case. Four legs are good, two legs are better.