Twenty years ago, Louis Ng was known as the passionate animal rights activist who personified the spirit of independent advocacy in Singapore’s civil society. Ten years ago, Louis Ng Kok Kwang was officially announced a ruling party candidate for the 2015 General Election. This year, he quit electoral politics. LIEW KAI KHIUN, an independent scholar active in civil society, traces Ng’s career and what it says about Singapore’s changing relationship between civil society and the political establishment. Mainstream politicians have adopted causes once in the domain of civil society. Some activists have engaged their MPs directly, as in the case of Monday for Palestine Solidarity (MPS). Others wait to cross the line from civil society to electoral politics. Once seen as distinct and antagonistic spheres, civil society and mainstream politics — “Louis Ng and Louis Ng Kok Kwang” — are more intersections than binaries, Liew suggests.
It was an afternoon in the early 2010s. A meeting had been called for representatives from various animal welfare groups or AWGs. Back then, my civil society involvement had extended from migrant workers and heritage conservation to animal rights (relabeled “animal welfare” in Singapore to disassociate us from more radical Western approaches). I attended the meeting as a representative of one AWG.
We were well acquainted with one another, so the mood in the venue was relaxed. But there was also an air of expectancy. What made this meeting different was the anticipated arrival of a senior public figure. That VIP was Minister for Home Affairs and Law K. Shanmugam, who had taken an interest in animal welfare. He showed up as promised, with a few other officials. They were all dressed in office attire. He was chaperoned by Louis Ng, the only one wearing black.
Ng had founded the non-government organisation ACRES (Animal Concern and Research Education Society) in 2001, when he was in his early 20s. Everyone knew Louis, a lanky man with unfashionably centre-parted hair, usually seen in his black polo shirt with the ACRES logo. When not at the centre of AWG meetings, he was probably puffing away with fellow smokers at any available corner. “You know when he first started ACRES, how hard the government came down on him?” volunteers of ACRES whom I interacted with would say of him.
ACRES had led the protests against the government’s decision to allow then new theme park and casino Resort World Singapore (RWS) to bring in captive dolphins into its aquarium collection. At this meeting, the main issue was what AWGs considered dated, inhumane and counterproductive practices of culling of stray animals (mainly dogs and macaques) by the government’s animal control unit, the Agri-Veterinary Authority (AVA). Public disquiet had been growing. Social media posts showed some residents deliberately obstructing AVA contractors tasked with catching stray dogs (now increasingly described as “community dogs”) with snare poles (long stick with metal loop at its end).
When Ng walked into the AWG meeting with Shanmugam, it may have been a moment of cognitive dissonance for some in the room. But, aside from ACRES, Ng had also been serving as a grassroots volunteer in Shanmugan’s ward since 2008. For years, AWGs had tried shouting at the system from “with-out”, either in regular closed-door meetings with AVA or in the public sphere. The experience had been frustrating. Ng used his unique access to facilitate securing venues for dialogue sessions and fund-raising events for AWGs.
Civil society organisers subsequently named Ng as one of the three recipients of the inaugural Singapore Advocacy Award in 2014. Shortly after receiving the award, Ng formally announced his candidature under the PAP flag for the upcoming General Elections. This raised eyebrows among some of the very people who had held him up as a civil society icon. For his advocacy, Ng had been assumed to be on “our side” of civil society against hegemonic government and business. Now, the ACRES founder seemed to some to have crossed the line into complicity. Some whispered accusations that Ng used the Award to embellish his political credentials.
The animal welfare community has generally regarded Ng’s bridging role favourably, particularly welcoming his ability to sustain the interest of a powerful office holder in what could otherwise be dismissed as a politically irrelevant topic, since animals are not part of the electorate. Although Shanmugam had often cast himself as a champion of the AWGs from “with-out”, it felt to me as if we were working more substantially “with” the power centres of the Singapore government.
Civil Society and Civic Society
The exclusion of animal welfare is symptomatic of a fundamental gulf in Singapore’s political culture between parliamentary electoral politics devoted to everyday “bread and butter” issues (a term commonly deployed by the PAP) and cause-based advocacy focused on peripheralized “idealistic” concerns of civil society. Civil society is generally understood as an autonomous and organic set of actors connecting the state and society. In Singapore, its scale has been significantly reduced by the highly interventionist PAP government. Since taking office in 1959, it has exerted extensive influence over labour unions, public media, charities and cultural associations, atrophying and subordinating them as part of the more apolitical ‘civic society’ that either supports national policies or provides supplementary community assistance.
It has been left to more niche interest groups to engage in rights-based or singular cause-based advocacy based on progressive notions of justice for more marginalized minorities whose presence and interests are neglected in electoral calculations. Often composed of and fronted by middle-class segments of Singapore, these include the women’s group AWARE (Association of Women for Action and Research), a collection of organizations for LGBTQ rights, anti-death penalty abolition champions, migrant and sex workers, as well as those related to heritage and conservation. Highlighting socially marginalized and displaced groups, these more autonomous and consciously non-partisan advocacy groups constitute what is commonly termed in Singapore as ‘civil society.’
The Singapore government’s public engagement of this segment of civil society has been calibrated, depending on how it perceives the potential impact of the various groups on its governing authority and legitimacy. At the more defensive end of its spectrum of responses are muscular rebukes, denial of registration for organisations and refusal to allow their activities. Such treatment is dished out to more ‘adversarial’ or radical groups like anti-death penalty campaigners shouting from “with-out”. At the other end of the spectrum are more conciliatory public forums and closed-door dialogue sessions “with” stakeholders in consultation sessions and coopted committees. A more formalized process of including civil society groups into the political process came with the Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) scheme in the 1990s, which witnessed the inclusion of representatives from civil society circles as non-elected parliamentarians.
At the middle of the range of tools is the establishment of counter-organisations to compete with more independent civil society groups. One example is generously state-funded Migrant Workers Center, with representatives usually seconded from the mainstream trade unions, to counter TWC2 and HOME, which are known for their more active public advocacy. The state has also leveraged its control of public sites like the Speakers’ Corner in restricting participation to Singaporean citizens, which has affected significantly the annual LGBTQ event Pink Dot. All these measures by Singapore officialdom oscillate between restrictions on working “with-out”, cooption, and encouraging groups to work “with” the system.
Louis Ng and K. Shanmugam at the 2011 forum on animal protection policies and the announcement of Ng’s withdrawal from the Nee Soon GRC team just before the 2025 General Election.
Louis Ng and Louis Ng Kok Kwang
Louis Ng’s entry into politics represented a new kind of PAP response to civil society — recruitment. The PAP thus went beyond its traditional recruiting grounds of civil service, the armed forces, business, the professions, media, and academia. The practice is not new on the side of the political opposition. Two candidates from civil society, namely Gerald Giam, one of the former editors of the alternative digital journalism portal The Online Citizen (TOC), and Vincent Wijeysingha, the Executive Director from the Transient Workers Count Too (TWC2) were candidates for the Workers Party (WP) and Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) respectively in the 2011 General Elections. Ravi Philemon, another former editor of TOC, contested in the 2015 General Elections under the Singapore People’s Party (SPP) and went on to form another political party Red Dot United (RDU) for the 2020 General Elections. The entry of civil society activists into parliamentary politics on the side of the opposition seems in some way as a logical extension of independent advocacy in Singapore against the establishment. Ng went the other way.
He changed from his black ACRES shirt to white shirt and trousers, the dominant party’s colours. “I realised that working from within, I could affect policy. It wasn’t just about rescuing more animals but about fundamental policy changes,” he stated. On 26 August 2015, he was formally introduced as one of the new candidates for the Group Representative Constituency (GRC) in which Shanmugam serves as the anchor minister.
The large number of new PAP candidates as well as their broadly similar profiles means that they tend to generate little public interest. However, Cherian George, an academic observer of Singapore’s political scene, noted something novel in the 2015 slate of new candidates: “A funny thing happened on the way to GE2015. The former public servant and scholar, Leon Perera, became a Workers’ Party candidate. The animal rights activist, Louis Ng, is running for the PAP. It’s as if they’re in some trading-places reality show […] Since nobody knows the future, I figure it is a good thing that not all of Singapore’s best eggs are in just one basket.”
Before 2015, AWGs and the media would usually identify Ng with his first name, Louis. During Nomination Day for the General Elections on 26 August 2015, we got to know his full name when he was presented officially by the PAP as Louis Ng Kok Kwang, candidate for Nee Soon GRC. His team won 66.83% of the popular vote, and 61.9% five years later in the 2020 General Elections for the district.
Fast forward to 2025. The future is now the past where both candidates were voted in and bowed out of the political stage within two terms. Perera resigned on 19 July 2023 over an affair with fellow party member Nicole Seah. Ng served out the full second term before formally announcing tearfully (with Shanmugam wiping the tears from his eyes) his retirement on 22 April 2025. Ng subsequently joined the National University of Singapore as an Associate Professor, a rank accorded as acknowledgement of his work. Prior to the announcement of his retirement, the backbencher shared on his official Facebook page on 13 April 2025 his parliamentary record for the past two terms. It included:
- 1,055 Parliamentary Questions
- 15 Adjournment Motions
- 2 Private Member’s Motions
- 2 Private Member’s Bills
- 1 Parliamentary Petition
He helped to shape 269 pieces of legislation through his Bill speeches, he added. For Ng, what was more important was he had made use of his parliamentary position to put forward what would otherwise be considered as “woke” issues usually associated with the progressive left. As he stated in the Facebook post, “I’m especially glad to have spoken up for single unwed parents, teachers, nurses, junior doctors, social workers, LGBTQ+ community, those facing fertility issues, breastfeeding mothers, abused children, sex workers, migrant workers, refugees, on secondhand smoke, climate change, animal welfare, wildlife crime, parental leave and many more ❤️”
Ng’s parliamentary report card provides statistical evidence of the benefits of public advocacy within the system as a parliamentarian of the ruling PAP. As for the issue discussed at the start of this essay, the management of community dogs, the revamped Animal and Veterinary Services or AVS has moved gradually over the years from the antiquated practices of culling to the more humane and efficient strategy of sterilization or “Trap-neuter and Release (TnR)”, as championed by AWGs. Once officially banned, domestic cats were also allowed in public housing during Ng’s tenure. The decade witnessed more public awareness about animal welfare.
There were also fewer public spats between AWGs and the authorities. Such open disputes, as uncomfortably confrontational as they can be, are often seen as an indicator of the independence of civil society vis-à-vis the state. However, Ng has publicly acknowledged being convinced by Shanmugan to veer away from what can be considered combative approaches such as open criticism and lobbying against public policies and industry practices. Ng continued to run ACRES until the beginning of his second term as an MP and handed his leadership to non-party affiliated successors in 2021.
As an MP, he refrained from joining PAP backbenchers in publicly countering the small number of opposition MPs. Most importantly, he was at times willing to serve as a public critic, particularly in a parliamentary speech in 2018 that accused the civil service of a culture of mediocrity arising from a fear of speaking up. This earned him a stiff rebuke from his parliamentary seniors, ministers Teo Chee Hean and Ong Ye Kung. Nonetheless Ng was fielded again in the subsequent General Elections in 2020. Also in 2020 and 2025, the PAP fielded Carrie Tan, a businesswoman who founded Daughters of Tomorrow, and Cai Yinzhou, the Director of the Citizen Adventure, a community group committed to heritage walking tours , who is described as a social entrepreneur . Ng had probably opened up more options for the PAP.
Vincent Wijeysingha delivering a Singapore Democratic Party election broadcast in 2011, and Deryne Sim campaigning as a potential People’s Action Party candidate in 2025. Wijeysingha, the country’s first openly gay candidate for Parliament was questioned about his “agenda” by the PAP’s Vivian Balakrishnan. Sim, an LGBTQ activist, faced a backlash and was not fielded by the PAP.
MPS and MPS, Gay and Straight
During the decade of Ng’s groundbreaking tenure as parliamentarian, there have also been indicators of the limits of crossovers between civil society and establishment politics. Some activists have engaged their MPs directly. The Monday for Palestine Solidarity (MPS) initiative to press their case at MPs’ Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS) was regarded by the PAP as gatecrashing. A pair of activists related to this cause were shown to be nervously confronting Shanmugam at his MPS and roundly demonized.
In the run-up to the 2025 General Election, another new face, Deryne Sim, was seen taking part in constituency walksabouts with Shanmugam, with a PAP badge pinned on her white shirt. What caught the eye of the public was not her professional credentials in the legal field, but her activist role as one of the committee members of the LGBTQ+ annual event, Pink Dot, as well as her position as executive director of Same But Different, a group that offers legal resources to help sexual and gender minorities in Singapore. Unlike Ng, Sim’s emergence as a would-be PAP candidate immediately met with angry reactions. A veteran of the political opposition, Goh Meng Seng, accused the PAP of endorsing gay lifestyles. It was reminiscent of PAP minister Vivian Balakrishan’s questioning whether Vincent Wijeysingha had a gay agenda back in the 2011 General Election. The tactic did not work for Goh. Despite or because of his memorable “I am not gay” declaration from the rally stage, his Peoples Power Party team secured only 596 votes (0.43% of the total) in Tampines GRC.
But Goh declared his mission accomplished: the PAP did not field Sim in the 2025 General Election. Despite what can be considered as a positive legacy left by Ng, the PAP seems wary of fielding more civil society activists to work within their ranks, especially for a cause such as LGBTQ+ rights, which is probably less electorally palatable in Singapore than animal welfare. Most civil society activists probably remain cautious about riding on electoral politics, too.
Having said that, Singapore’s political culture is still evolving. Perhaps the relationship between civil society and PAP may transcend the current binaries to move towards a more layered environment where activists work simultaneously with-out, with and within the contours of political parties. This can be akin to how Ng has been comfortable in both ACRES black and PAP white instead of choosing either black or white for all time. Such fluidity provides the mutual benefits of mainstreaming causes and support for activists, enlarging the electoral pool for political parties, and most critically, giving greater diversity to Singapore’s parliamentary politics.
— Liew Kai Khiun (M.A., PhD) has been an academic observer for two decades on civil society and social movements in colonial and contemporary Singapore. He was also actively involved in NGOs in Singapore from the areas of conservation, migrant workers and built and natural heritage.