Challenging the Dominant Political Party in Singapore: Opposition Parties
By. Ruixi Chen
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
Istana Singapore, Choo Yut Shing, licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0
Singapore’s political landscape has remained unchanged since it gained independence in 1965. The People’s Action Party (PAP) was first elected in 1959, winning the general election under the leadership of Lee Kuan Yew. Since then, it has been continually re-elected, with Goh Chok Tong and Lee Hsien Loong succeeding Lee Kuan Yew as prime ministers. For more than six decades, the PAP has been the dominant political party, encountering limited opposition. This hegemony has led to questions about whether the one-party system had enough check and balance to run successfully. Internationally, questions were raised about the viability of this political model in a democratic context, and whether the PAP wields excessive, unchallenged authority. The PAP has denied the accusations of silencing opposition parties and defended the system they have upheld for decades.
​
In recent years, opposition parties such as The Workers’ Party and the Progress Singapore Party have come into prominence. Initially, these parties held no power and did not occupy any seats in parliament or other official positions. But they slowly received more media attention, and in the 2020 election, The Workers’ Party won 10 seats in parliament while the Progress Singapore Party won 2. Nonetheless, they still face difficulties and challenges in spreading their message and gaining more votes. Members of opposition parties and candidates face unfavorable treatment by local media, human rights violations, and even legal challenges.
​
Singapore’s laws and legislations are often used to silence alternative media and opposition parties. A prominent example is the case of The Online Citizen, an alternative media committed to raising awareness on subjects typically overlooked by mainstream media. According to Human Rights Watch, “The Singapore Government ramped up its control over speech and association in 2021 with a new law aimed at ostensible foreign interference, and unrelenting harassment and prosecutions of the few critical voices” (Human Rights Watch). The Singapore government cites laws like these that target dissent from alternative media by classifying it as false or inaccurate information. These laws usually allow the government to censor or remove information online and are used regularly against activists and alternative media to stifle their viewpoints. This leads to a lack of freedom of speech online and on social media, particularly given the strong and supportive relationship between mainstream media and the dominant political party.
​
Members of opposition parties have even faced lawsuits through campaigns for seats in political office. Aforementioned, the dominant political party employs legislation to silence or censor the messages of alternative media and opposition parties. Another such law is the Protection of Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Bill (POFMA), which has been used to “target critics and political opponents” (Amnesty International). This bill focuses on removing information deemed to be untruthful online, and on social media. However, individuals have also been targeted with lawsuits and libels. Some examples are the late J.B. Jeyaretnam and Chee Soon Juan, both of whom were sued by PAP members that ultimately led to their bankruptcy. PAP leaders have said that this was “necessary to protect their reputations” (Reuters). As members of the ruling party have enough power to sue opposition party members, candidates of opposition parties face lawsuits and even risk going bankrupt.
​
The 2020 election saw a historic increase in the representation of opposition parties in the government, and a large part of that was due to social media. Social media reached audiences and demographics that traditional media could not, such as the younger generation. It also played an important role in spreading the messages of opposition parties, especially when mainstream media provided limited coverage. Apps like Facebook and Instagram were large platforms for opposition candidates and parties to gain traction. However, they were still affected by censorship and alternative voices still faced restrictions. Leaders of the PAP have previously said that “press freedoms must be practised with national interests in mind” (Reuters). Regulations and laws set by the government still regularly censor information to accommodate their views. Nevertheless, social media is a very useful tool for opposition parties and candidates to effectively spread their message and reach wider audiences online.
In conclusion, candidates of opposition parties face censorship and restrictions in spreading their message from the ruling political party, both in traditional and mainstream media sources. However, platforms like social media have made their presence more prominent than ever before and have helped them grow their support base.
​
Works Cited:
“Explainer: Why one party dominates Singapore politics.” Reuters, 5 July 2020, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-singapore-election-opposition-file-ex-idUSKBN24702X. Accessed 17 October 2023.
“Singapore: Social media companies forced to cooperate with abusive fake news law.” Amnesty International, 19 February 2020, https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/02/singapore-social-media-abusive-fake-news-law/. Accessed 17 October 2023.
“Singapore: Tightening the Screws on Speech.” Human Rights Watch, 13 January 2022, https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/01/13/singapore-tightening-screws-speech. Accessed 17 October 2023.
​
