Talk:Singapore

Government system
It says on this article that Singapore is a Parliamentary Republic but how so? Ever since the amendment that allowed for the direct election of the President, I thought that Singapore should be considered as a Semi-Presidential System. 161.142.11.225 (talk) 05:10, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 April 2024
This article states that Singapore is ranked 6th by the WHO for healthcare, but the source is 24 years old. I think that should be made clear, or a more modern source found. Fredfsr (talk) 08:46, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting question.svg Question: Do you have a source you'd like to update with?  (talk | contribs) 08:53, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Lead mention of human rights / freedom of speech
Have rewritten last portion of the lead. I would argue the lead needs to summarise Singapore's political framework and its illiberal democratic system. This article's lead at current leaves that out. Saying the PAP "wields dominance" without explaining to some extent why or what that means isnt useful. It's also necessary to explain how Singapore differs from othwr developed Western countries in its framework ("Asian values" versus democracy, etc). Here is what i propose the lead be changed to.

''singapore is a unitary parliamentary republic with a Westminster system of unicameral parliamentary government, and its legal system is based on common law. It retains both corporal punishment for minor offences and capital punishment for serious ones. While the country is de jure a multi-party democracy, the government under the People's Action Party (PAP) wields widespread control over politics and society without serious electoral competition. In 2023, Singapore was ranked 129th out of 180 nations on the global Press Freedom Index due to government restrictions on freedom of speech and freedom of the press. For these reasons, Singapore has been described by scholars as a soft authoritarian state or an illiberal democracy. The PAP has governed the country continuously since full internal self-government was achieved in 1959, and currently holds a supermajority with 79 out of 93 elected seats in Parliament. One of the five founding members of ASEAN, Singapore is also the headquarters of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Secretariat, the Pacific Economic Cooperation Council Secretariat, and is the host city of many international conferences and events. Singapore is also a member of the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, the East Asia Summit, the Non-Aligned Movement, and the Commonwealth of Nations.'' Dhantegge (talk) 14:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Hello @Dhantegge! I see that you are suggesting restoring an earlier mention of capital and corporal punishment into this paragraph. I don't think it belongs here: the rest of the paragraph is about the system and style of government, not the existence of specific laws or penalties. In fact I wonder if it significant enough to go in the lead at all. The articles on the United States and Japan (both full democracies) don't mention that they have capital punishment. -- Alarics (talk) 12:37, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, to say that corporal punishment is for "minor offences" is very misleading. Trivial crimes such as jaywalking, littering, or importing chewing gum do not attract caning. Many canings are awarded (always combined with imprisonment) for quite serious offences like rape, gang violence, drugs, robbery, rioting, etc. True, there are also a lot of canings for illegal immigration, arguably a "minor offence" in western eyes but the Singapore authorities plainly don't regard it as such. -- Alarics (talk) 13:29, 29 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Okay, well argued. But you only addressed one sentence? The main issue here that should be in the lead isn't corporal / capital punishment, it's Singapore's illiberal democratic framework. A nation that restricts political dissent to such a degree (forcing protestors to apply for permits and limit their numbers unless they situate their protest within a single park, for example) that it is listed as "partly free" should have that pointed out somehow, regardless if it is a de jure democracy.
 * The article at present only hints at Singapore being a dominant party state, but does so in a way that could confuse the reader into thinking it is like South Africa, a true (if weak) democracy which the ANC has governed for 30 years despite freedom of speech / dissent being tolerated (ranked as "free" by Freedom House). There's also a vast difference between weaknesses in South Africa's democracy and the deliberately constrictive nature of Singapore's profoundly illiberal and partially authoritarian "democracy".
 * Therefore, I suggest the lead include the following:
 * Singapore is a unitary parliamentary republic with a Westminster system of unicameral parliamentary government, and its legal system is based on common law. While the country is de jure a multi-party democracy, Singapore has been governed by the People's Action Party (PAP) continuously since full internal self-government was achieved in 1959, currently holding a supermajority in the Parliament. The government wields widespread control over politics and society without serious electoral competition, and imposes restrictions on freedom of speech and freedom of the press. For these reasons, Singapore has been described by some scholars as a soft authoritarian state or an illiberal democracy. In 2023, Singapore was ranked 129th out of 180 nations on the global Press Freedom Index. One of the five founding members of ASEAN, Singapore is also the headquarters of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Secretariat, the Pacific Economic Cooperation Council Secretariat, and is the host city of many international conferences and events. Singapore is also a member of the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, the East Asia Summit, the Non-Aligned Movement, and the Commonwealth of Nations
 * Please note I am not criticising Singaporean politics or being biased. It's just useful in political science articles to adequately explain regime types in the leads of articles, whether a democratic regime or an authoritarian one. Dhantegge (talk) 06:44, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * There are also numerous sources by academics describing Singapore in those terms. Dhantegge (talk) 06:48, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think a reader will naturally compare to South Africa, nor that the lead currently only "hints" at anything. It states outright that "While the country is de jure a multi-party democracy with free elections"..."the People's Action Party (PAP) wields widespread control and dominance over politics and society without much electoral competition" (emphasis partly mine). This explicitly covers the broad strokes, and going into "some scholars" and similar equivocating is too detailed for a lead. (I would say in general the lead should be pared back a bit. For example, I don't think the current supermajority status is lead-relevant given how it pales in importance to the already mentioned continuous rule.) CMD (talk) 06:57, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 June 2024
Archivecard0 (talk) 13:03, 2 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Pictogram voting question.svg Question: Where would you like this added?   [[User:CanonNi ]]  (talk • contribs) 13:17, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Removal of modified version of Singapore State Crest
Under Singapore's National Symbols Act with effect on 1 August 2023, distortion or modification of the design of the State Crest and Presidential Crest will not be allowed. If there's no contest to this in 3 days, I will remove it to comply with local regulations. SecretSquirrel78 (talk) 16:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is not bound by Singapore's laws. The image complies with copyright considerations.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 21:52, 8 June 2024 (UTC)