Dear A.S.S. Editor

Very funny reading about the debate between opposing MPs on the appointment of the Attorney General, 63 year old Mr Lucien Wong.


We have the opposition MP questioning whether the appointment was constitutional because of his age. After all, an Article in the Constitution said the AG must leave the office when he turns 60, if he had hold the post for some time before that. Then we have the government saying the appointment was in accordance with the Constitution, with even a precedent being mentioned in the form of Judge of Appeal Chao Hick Tin, who was 63 when appointed as Attorney-General for a two-year term. Govt said age does not matter, what matters is the suitability of the candidate.

All good and well, but do we see this happening to the average Singaporean? What if you are 63 years old, with all the necessary experience and qualifications, and very suitable for a post. But when it comes to appointment to an important post, likely that would go to a younger person? After all who would appoint an old, almost retirement age fella, when you can appoint someone much younger and with more years ahead of him?

Seems like the age and suitability factor only comes into effect when it is in the favour of the employers.

Lee AL

A.S.S. Contributor

Editor's Note: 

Do you have a story to share? Please use our submission form or email us at If not, why not give us a 'Like'?

Filed Under: 



Your Views