Committee Not Satisfied With George Goh’s Experience & Ability, Thus Didn’t Give Him An Eligibility Certificate
On Friday (18 Aug), entrepreneur George Goh found that the Presidential Elections Committee (PEC) didn’t award him an eligibility certificate to run in the Presidential Election.
Understandably disappointed in the decision, he claimed that the PEC didn’t explain their choice.
However, the PEC has refuted this, maintaining that they explained the reason for his rejection in a letter.
Basically, they decided that his experience in five different companies wasn’t equivalent to a single private-sector organisation.
Presidential Elections Committee publishes their letter to George Goh
In a press release on Friday (18 Aug) night, the PEC “firmly rejected” Mr Goh’s suggestion that they didn’t explain their decision to him.
In fact, they explained their rationale in a letter to him, they added.
Thus, they decided to make their letter to him public.
Applicant must have served in 1 organisation, not 5: PEC
In their letter, the PEC noted that Mr Goh’s application relied on his service in five different companies:
- Group Executive Chairman of Ossia International
- Executive Deputy Chairman of Pertama Holdings
- Group Executive Chairman of ITG International
- Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Crown Essentials
- Chief Executive Officer of Vernal Ventures
However, to be eligible under the private-sector deliberative track, the applicant must have served for three years or more in “a private sector organisation”, the PEC said.
Specifically, they added,
This refers to one office in one private sector organisation, and not various offices in multiple private sector organisations.
Committee not satisfied with George Goh’s experience & ability
The PEC needs to be satisfied, considering the applicant’s service, that he or she has the requisite experience and ability, they said.
This experience and ability should be comparable to that of a person who has served as the CEO of “a typical company with at least S$500 million in shareholders’ equity”.
Unfortunately for Mr Goh, the PEC maintained that the experience and ability from managing multiple smaller private sector organisations is not equivalent to managing a very large private sector organisation.
5 companies not equivalent to a single organisation: PEC
The PEC considered Mr Goh’s submission that the five companies be regarded as a single private sector organisation.
However, they were ultimately not satisfied that the companies were so.
This took into account the companies’ ownership, management and operation, they said.
Thus, the PEC didn’t aggregate the shareholders’ equity of the five companies.
Taken singly, each of the five companies had a shareholders’ equity that was “significantly below” S$500 million.
George Goh says committee took a narrow interpretation
Speaking to the press earlier on Friday (18 Aug), Mr Goh said his legal and financial team submitted “a very strong case” and he was convinced that he met the criteria.
Two teams of experts — including a “CFO”, former Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) official and “senior constitution professor” — assured him that he would be eligible, he noted, adding,
These two group[s] of people are the top, top people in Singapore. Are you saying they’re all wrong? Cannot be.
Mr Goh thus believed that “[the PEC] took a very narrow interpretation of the requirements without explaining the rationale behind its decision”.
Unfortunately for him, the PEC believed otherwise.
We wish Mr Goh all the best for his future as we prepare to head to the polls on 1 Sep.
Have news you must share? Get in touch with us via email at news@mustsharenews.com.
Featured image by MS News, photography by Chankit Pongdhana & adapted from Google Maps.
