Is it fair to limit the term of presidency?

I fail to understand why the President’s term is restricted to two terms. It has been proven beyond doubt that if this rule prevailed in Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew would never have had the opportunity of steering the country to be a major force in the world. It should be left to the choice of the citizens to decide, especially as it was proven recently that we have a mature electorate and they have given the necessary power to the most stable political party to make the necessary changes in the form of amendments and a new constitution for the benefit of all.

My argument is that if a rejected presidential candidate has the right to contest several times why is a person who has completed two terms successfully deprived of contesting again. As a result, we, the voters are put in a quandary having to choose the best out of the candidates, who may have been rejected by the voters previously or some unpopular person, while the more capable person is deprived of contesting for the third time. In fairness, this rule has to be changed where it clearly defines that all citizens have the right to contest the presidency any number of times. It is up to the voters to decide whom they want as their president for the next five years and vote accordingly and allow any citizen the basic right to contest any number of times. The other alternative is to bring in the clause that any person has the right to contest the presidency only twice.

If the term of office of a President is restricted to two, in that case the term of office of a Prime Minister also should be restricted to two terms. However, under the present system, while a person who has served two terms of presidency is ineligible to contest again, a Prime Minister who has held that post for more than two terms is eligible to continue, regardless of any restrictions. Isn’t it unfair that a President who has been directly elected by the people is restricted to two terms, while a person who is elected by one district is eligible to continue as Prime Minister for many terms? Therefore, it is high time an amendment is passed in Parliament restricting the term of Prime Minister also to two terms regardless whether he/she has served consecutively or not.

This amendment will provide frustrated young members with leadership qualities an opportunity to serve the country better. They will be given the opportunity to practise their new ideals and principles without having to spend many years under the thumb of one person. Thus it is more important we amend the constitution to restrict the period of office of a Prime Minister to a maximum of two terms. Or in fairness to all citizens, the people should have the right to serve the country as President or Prime Minister for any number of terms. It is unfair that a president who is elected by the electorate directly is limited to two terms due to no fault of his/hers.