Wong Souk Yee v AG [2019] SGCA 25 (B) If the provision is ambiguous or obscure on its face, extraneous material can be used to ascertain the meaning of the provision. (C) If the ordinary meaning of the provision (taking into account its context in the written law and the purpose or object underlying the written law) leads to a result that is manifestly absurd or unreasonable, extraneous material can be used to ascertain the meaning of the provision. (iv) In deciding whether to consider extraneous material, and if so what weight to place on it, the court should have regard to the desirability of persons being able to rely on the ordinary meaning conveyed by the text of the provision (taking into account its context in the written law and the purpose or object underlying the written law); and the need to avoid prolonging legal or other proceedings without compensating advantage. The court should also have regard to (A) whether the material is clear and unequivocal; (B) whether it discloses the mischief aimed at or the legislative intention underlying the statutory provision; and (C) whether it is directed to the very point of statutory interpretation in dispute. [emphasis added] Whether the proper interpretation of Art 49(1) of the Constitution mandates that a by-election must be called in MYT GRC 23 For convenience, we reproduce Art 49(1) of the Constitution again below: Filling of vacancies 49.—(1) Whenever the seat of a Member, not being a nonconstituency Member, has become vacant for any reason other than a dissolution of Parliament, the vacancy shall be filled by election in the manner provided by or under any law relating to Parliamentary elections for the time being in force. 24 The Appellant suggests that on a true construction of Art 49(1), any vacant seat, including one in a GRC, cannot be allowed to remain vacant but must be filled through a by-election. According to the Appellant, the ordinary meaning of Art 49(1) is clear, and hence does not invite recourse to extraneous 11