Instead, walkovers by a single government-backed candidate look set to be the norm.

This follows Saturday's news that President S R Nathan was the only one of four applicants to qualify as a candidate.

The 81-year-old incumbent is set for his second walkover in as many elections.

It's a blow to the many Singaporeans who wanted a contest and a chance to exercise their constitutional right to vote in the man of their choice.

But government leaders take a different view.

Minister in the Prime Minister's Office Lim Swee Say last week urged Singaporeans against hoping 'for a contest just for the sake of having a contest, because we must accept that in any contest, any of the candidates may win'.

What accounts for the gap in expectations?

Why does one camp view a contest as crucial and the other as not always critical?

And how can such differing views exist about a single institution whose terms and references are spelt out in the Constitution?

The crux of the matter lies in who you think the President is meant to check.

For the People's Action Party (PAP) leaders who designed this institution, the Elected President (EP) exists to check a rogue government, and a rogue government alone.

For them, the checking role of the EP should only kick in when there is a freak election - that is, the PAP loses a majority of seats in Parliament.

If that happens, they want the EP there to block any possible squandering of the reserves by a wasteful government.

That was why Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew created the office.

He came up with the idea in 1984, after the PAP's monopoly of Parliament was broken by then Workers Party chief J B Jeyaretnam's win in the Anson by-election.

Spelling out for the first time why Singapore needed an EP, Mr Lee said in his 1984 National Day Rally

'The danger is that there is nothing to prevent a future government from running through these reserves. In one five-year spending spree, Singapore can be rendered prostrate and bankrupt.

'Therefore we are working out a blocking mechanism whereby the President can block the spending of any reserve which the government in office has not itself accumulated.'

It was better for the President to be elected by the people, instead of Parliament, so he could have the moral authority to intervene, he added.

In 1999, Mr Lee further clarified the EP's role after a political storm broke over a public disagreement between the Government and then president Ong Teng Cheong.

Mr Lee confirmed then that with a PAP government in power, the president's role would be largely ceremonial, as it was before the post became an elected one.

'Provided the Government is doing right, I think that should be the position,' he said.

With a responsible PAP government at the helm, the political leadership's priority in any presidential election is not to ensure a contest, but to keep out those who would needlessly thwart and hamper its work.

An untested and unpredictable man in the post could do so by raising red flags and questioning government decisions and procedures that are well within the law.

The last thing the Government wants is a repeat of the very public dispute that marked the end of the first EP's term in office.

President Ong revealed shortly before stepping down in 1999 his 'long list' of problems with the Government.

Among other things, he claimed civil servants resisted his requests for more information on the reserves.

He also said the Government had changed the way it treated income earned from investing past reserves so as to avoid asking his assent to draw down on the reserves.

The Government later said Mr Ong had got it wrong.

Since then, it has tried to make clear the EP's carefully circumscribed role.

Yet there remains a strong desire among many for the Elected President to operate outside this role, to act as a counterweight to the Government.

These sentiments are not restricted to a small minority.

In 1993, the Government persuaded retired Accountant General Chua Kim Yeow to stand against Mr Ong.

Even though Mr Chua was a reluctant candidate, he managed to secure 41.3 per cent of the valid votes by implying that a vote for him was a vote against PAP dominance.

'In Singapore, as you know, the PAP dominates the Government and dominates the legislature. Do you want the PAP to dominate the presidency as well?' he said in a political broadcast.

From the excitement that greeted Mr Andrew Kuan's recent foray into the presidential race, it would appear that the desire for an independent candidate remains unabated.

Will that desire ever be fulfilled?

That depends on a small select group of men and women who have occupied the top positions in Singapore's public- and private-sector organisations.

These are the former ministers, chief justices, permanent secretaries and CEOs who would qualify to be presidential candidates.