In the second reading of the Parliamentary Elections (Amendments) Bill, Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) Viswa Sadasivan raised the issue of amendment to Section 61 of the Act where the words in the original Act, “the transmission by an individual to another individual, on a non-commercial basis on what is commonly known as internet, of his own political views (is allowed)” is deleted and substituted with “telephonic or electronic transmission by an individual to another individual ”.
In asking the Minister to clarify if electronic transmission also includes online publications, Mr Sadasivan said:
“What this means is that online publications – which include popular bulletins such as “theonlinecitizen.com”, “Yawning Bread” and “Temasek Review”, as well as some very popular blogs – which, by their very nature, are not officially licensed, will now not be permitted to publish election news. If this interpretation of the Bill is correct, it is disappointing.”
Mr Sadasivan then went on to say that restricting non-mainstream perspectives only serves to deprive the voters of having the benefit of a wide spectrum of views, interpretations and perspectives to make considered, informed and balanced choices at the Poll.
He stressed that any perception of restriction of communicating ideas and views through the electronic means from the people’s point of view, will be deemed as unjustifiable and as an erosion of basic rights, especially since Singapore continues to project itself as an open, progressive society.
He said that besides being unjustifiable, such an amendment to the Act would not be too difficult to circumvent or defy and would in all likelihood bring increased traffic to such websites.
In response to Mr Sadasivan’s queries the Minister for Law K Shanmugam clarified that the term ‘electronic’ replaced the term ‘internet’ as the amendment purposed to include other new mediums besides the internet, which now becomes allowable.
The Minister further clarified that the amendment also lifted the restriction of communicating ‘individual to individual’.
The amendment to the Act however legislates that on the “cooling-off” day and “polling day”, only the mainstream media will be allowed to provide election coverage.
Despite criticisms, the Parliamentary Elections (Amendments) Bill was passed, which paves the way for the next General Elections, due by February 2012.
————————–
Links: NMP Viswa Sadasivan’s Speech, Parliamentary Elections (Amendment) Bill
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
TOC, PLEASE continue to post Election news nonetheless. It means the whole world to many Singaporeans.
I’m confused, so what is the final word here? are websites like TOC allowed or not allowed to do their things during the cooling period.
Change this act, change that act. Why so many meaningless changes? It does reflect on the government stance to stump out opposing views. We all know that mainstream media are being controlled by our media gatekeeper and it acts as a legal propaganda. Now they are trying to restrict non mainstream media? Is this not oppression to freedom of speech? Looking at the sites mentioned, which focus mainly on political stance in Singapore, this act is targeted to benefit the ruling parties in all ways. Welcome to Singapore, the politically oppressed developed country.
This sounds like an ominous move by the NMP, under the pretext that he is asking a valid and relevant question, while at the same time ensuring that whatever loopholes that remain, are now completely closed up.
-
I don’t know about you guys but I find this Viswa too good to be true.
I don’t know about you guys but I find this Viswa too good to be true.
>> On the contrary, they have demonstrated time and again that NMP system has failed again.
This is just so sick!!! Why deprive Singaporeans of a more balanced view from the internet about politics when we know PAP are not gentlemen enough to tell the truth and main stream media only want to report news PAP likes to hear. In this kind of restrictive and kiasu bill, it is confirmed PAP has a lot of flaws to hide and don’t want people to know. Such bills prove beyond doubt PAP is behaving like North Korea leader.
I will give NMP Viswas the benefit of doubt since he has brought to attention an important issue to the political blogsphere.
As a backgrounder, subsection 61(6) of the Parliamentary Elections Act (Cap 218) is an exclusion clause for the general prohibition of publication during an election under subsection 61(1)(c).
Hence the latest amendment to 61(6)(d) concerning the Internet may appear as a relaxation, now that a wider area is excluded from the prohibition, but only for an individual to another individual on a non-commercial basis. But there is a catch.
The exclusion accorded to “news in any medium” in the original subsection 61(6)(d) has been removed completely. So the first question is whether sites like TOC and TR qualify as individual-to-individual. YB and other personal blogs probably do qualify. The second question is whether these sites if they receive payment for advertisement and/or other forms of payment, whether they qualify as non-commercial.
In addition, there were various other amendments concerning the delay, relocation and cancellation at the polling stations, particularly for overseas voting which were hardly debated and reported. Powers are now invested in an individual election official who can decide on the fate of thousands of votes. It may translate into a hazard, subject to misuse and abuse.
In my mind, these changes are unconstitutional as they interfere with the voter’s right to free expression, information and the general rights to a free and fair election.
Gemami,
“I don’t know about you guys but I find this Viswa too good to be true.”
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Speak up or don’t speak up, kena condemned. What is true for you then? Why aren’t you being truthful to whatever moral highground you profess?
As you’ve brought us to the SALIENT POINT as to why govt left them unlicensed in the first place?
Because licensing them will go against PM’s “Open & Inclusive Civil Society”?
Because they are registered outside of Singapore? And if they are won’t they then be automatic free of govt control? In that case, is govt’s new bill a “tongue in cheek” ploy to get at citizens who blog in them with comments and opinions not “palatable” to PAP?
Another backdoor avenue to stifle “Open & Inclusive Civil Society” which HAD To MIGRATE to New Media in the first place!
Is PAP so weak that they always need to resort to high handed bankrupt lawsuits or other questionable and disrespectful means to look credible? What VALUE of credibility is that when credibility is obtained otherwise than HONESTLY EARNED?
Looks like PAP has yet to learn about what CREDIBILITY is actually. Just one read into a good dictionary will suffice! Unless it’s harden hearts of course!
ADIOS!
Another self perservation speech
One who runs with the hare and hunts with the hounds is bereft of principles and ethics n morals.
Yes, only imbeciles can relate to this hogwash of a melodrama lah.
NMP – nominated so only nominal lor. How can be impartial? Intuitively i see thru this bluff. I dont know about others lah.
NMPs, just like Chiam (a LKY relative) perform their scripted duties.
Real MPs voted in by the people have political power and political mandate.
The majority of PAP MPs are like NMPs. They were never voted in. They were assigned the role, and behave just like NMPs.
Reality is that the entire parliament consists of NMPs.
You mean Chiam as in Chiam See Tong? And he is what kind or relative to LKY? First time am getting this confirmed by the way you put it. But then there re even siblings and children who differ greatly in values good and bad.
Be shock if Chiam really is?
‘..The amendment to the Act however legislates that on the “cooling-off” day and “polling day”, only the mainstream media will be allowed to provide election coverage…’.
What kinda Nonsenses is this? I remembered even the mainstream media not supposed to published any news related to GE during cooling off and actual Election Day???
One minister just said so recently right??
That’s absolutely BIAS & UNJUSTIFIED.
How DEMOCRATIC SINGAPORE is! OUTRAGING..
What is the difference between TOC and TR?
now cannot publish election news during cooling off period.
next time, cannot publish election news during campigning period.
then, cannot publish news concering singapore
then, cannot publish news criticising singapore
then cannot publish news criticising PAP
then cannot publish news
then cannot publish
then everything cannot.
Short of a TV debate (as yet), NSP Sec-Gen Goh Meng Seng has been invited to Talking Point. The recording session has just finished earlier this afternoon. The program will be aired this Sunday, May 2, 10:10PM on CNA. Also in the program is Alvin Yeo, SC and MP in Hong Kah GRC. The topic is about constitutional ammendments.
Come on lah.
This is the digital age.
We now have CNN, BBC, CNBC, CCTV9, Australian Network, etc. on TV.
Practically everything. Even live streaming!
Non-mainstream opinions abound.
Check it out . . . .
TOC should continue to report regardless. If they dare to shut you down they’ll further infuriate a whole group of interllectual politically concerned citizens.
May I suggest that TOC have guest book that will allow forumers write their well wishes and whatever that they feel are the reasons behind their well wishes during the election campaign and maybe cooling off period. At least the cooling off period could be a day where we catch up on the older posts in the guest book.
LEFdLE http://gdjI3b7VaWpU1m0dGpvjRrcu9Fk.com