Connect with us

Civil Society

Power, politics and fear: when sorry is not the hardest word

Published

on

by Community Action Network (CAN)
Donald Low’s apology to Singapore’s Law Minister K Shanmugam is another setback for freedom of expression and will reinforce self-censorship. In a facebook post last month, the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public policy academic criticized the Minister’s remarks, reported in Today, that penalties for crime need to reflect public opinion. The Minister had said that if penalties do not reflect the weight of public opinion and people do not find them fair, the law would lose its credibility and would not be enforceable. In his post, Donald Low wrote that public opinion can be “ignorant”, “ill informed” and “excessively emotional” and the Minister was wrong in his view.
This provoked a rebuttal from the Law Minister and he chastised Donald Low for “seriously misconstruing” what he said. He clarified that while public opinion was important in deciding criminal penalties, it was not the only determinant. He ended his admonishment by implying that Donald Low had damaged his own credibility and brought ill repute to “an institution which carries Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s name.”
The following day, Donald Low wrote a facebook apology to the Minister for having caused “any trouble or offence.” But it seems as if this wasn’t enough to satisfy the Minister because a few days later, another more ingratiating one was posted.
I realize my first apology was insincere. I am therefore writing now to apologize unreservedly…I have let the LKY School down…Many do not know this, but when I was out of a job in 2012, it was Minister Shanmugam who spoke with me and offered his help. He then put in a good word for me with LKYSPP, and gave me a recommendation. I decided that I should come clean about someone who had in fact helped me, and I should set out the facts in public”
This is not the first time that someone has had to apologise to the Law Minister. In 2015, activist Sangeetha Thanapal wrote a similar one after she accused him of being an “Islamaphobic bigot who thinks Malay-Muslims are a threat.” Mr Shanmugam denounced this characterisation of him and threatened to report her to the police. Faced with such pressure most people would have little choice but to acquiesce.
In Donald Low’s case, Shanmugam mentioned that he welcomes criticism and that academics have a right to comment on issues of public importance. One would expect the matter to end with a simple rebuttal. However, the apologies which followed show that it was no longer just a public exchange of views. Donald Low probably thought twice about where he stood in relation to the all-powerful Minister and it had to be written in as humiliating a way as possible.
Networks of power are so far reaching and deeply entrenched in Singapore it is easy for any politician of the PAP, especially a senior one to wield his influence. As Donald Low himself admitted, Shanmugam put in a good word to the LKY School of Public Policy. The backing of a minister can be beneficial but things can also sour pretty quickly.
Spaces for civil society resistance have either been obliterated or co-opted. There hasn’t been any public support or solidarity from fellow academics for Donald Low.  A chicken has been slaughtered and the monkeys are scared.
Crippling defamation suits which have destroyed the livelihoods of those who are critical of the regime is a hallmark of PAP politics and one of the most shameful characteristics of the regime. Petty threats of reports to the police by a powerful political figure, and remarks which result in a critic having to capitulate not once but twice in apology should not happen in a free, open and democratic society.
Public and academic discourse in Singapore already suffers from a high degree of self censorship and there are many who fear that being too critical will cost them a promotion or even their jobs. But boundaries cannot be pushed and ideas cannot flourish when there is no tolerance for transgressions. When a public exchange of views results in an obsequious apology, academics, activists and journalists can only view this latest saga as yet another cautionary tale in the politics of fear.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Civil Society

RSF Director General meets Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te, proposes measures to combat disinformation

Thibaut Bruttin, Director General of Reporters Without Borders (RSF), met Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te on 16 October 2024 to discuss measures for strengthening Taiwan’s democracy against disinformation. Bruttin highlighted the importance of media reform, citing Taiwan’s improved press freedom ranking and RSF’s global initiatives.

Published

on

Thibaut Bruttin, Director General of Reporters Without Borders (RSF), met with Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te in Taipei on 16 October 2024.

The meeting focused on strategies to bolster Taiwan’s democratic resilience against disinformation. Bruttin was accompanied by key figures from RSF and Taiwan’s leadership, including Secretary-General of the National Security Council Joseph Wu and Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs François Wu.

The delegation also included notable figures from RSF’s Taipei Bureau, such as Director Cédric Alviani, Advocacy Manager Aleksandra Bielakowska, and Development and Projects Manager Shataakshi Verma.

The talks were held in the context of Taiwan’s rising prominence in global press freedom, with the nation moving from 35th to 27th place in RSF’s 2024 World Press Freedom Index.

Bruttin praised Taiwan’s advancement but emphasised the importance of continued reforms to ensure that Taiwan’s media remains resilient in the face of increasing disinformation campaigns, particularly given the island’s tense geopolitical situation with the People’s Republic of China.

“Taiwan, as a regional leader in press freedom and the only democracy in the Chinese-speaking world, has everything to gain from aligning its media regulations with international standards,” Bruttin stated. He argued that reforms are crucial not only for combating disinformation but also for restoring public trust in the Taiwanese media, which he noted is alarmingly low.

According to recent studies, only three out of ten Taiwanese citizens trust the media, a figure that ranks among the lowest in democratic nations. Bruttin attributed this in part to Taiwan’s polarised and sensationalist media landscape.

During the meeting, Bruttin outlined several key RSF initiatives that Taiwan could adopt to enhance its media environment.

Among these was the Journalism Trust Initiative (JTI), the world’s first ISO-certified media quality standard, designed to promote reliable and transparent journalism.

He also discussed the Paris Charter on Artificial Intelligence and Journalism, which aims to ensure ethical standards in the use of AI within the media.

Additionally, Bruttin introduced RSF’s Propaganda Monitor, a project that tracks and counters propaganda and disinformation worldwide, including efforts by state actors.

Bruttin stressed that implementing these initiatives could help Taiwan build a more transparent and trusted media sector, crucial for democratic stability. He also addressed the role of international platforms, which often dominate local media landscapes, posing a long-term threat to the viability of independent journalism.

Bruttin’s visit coincided with two significant events for RSF in Taiwan.

Firstly, the organisation held its inaugural Asia-Pacific Correspondents Seminar, which gathered regional representatives from RSF for internal discussions on the state of press freedom across Asia.

Secondly, RSF celebrated the seventh anniversary of its Taipei Bureau, which was opened in 2017 to strengthen RSF’s presence in the region. The anniversary reception saw over 200 prominent figures from the media and academic spheres attend, highlighting the increasing significance of RSF’s work in Asia.

Taiwan’s media landscape has long been under pressure due to aggressive efforts by the People’s Republic of China to assert sovereignty over the island. China’s state-sponsored disinformation campaigns are frequently aimed at destabilising Taiwan’s democratic institutions.

These efforts have exacerbated divisions within Taiwan’s media sector, which is already fragmented and prone to sensationalist reporting. Bruttin’s recommendations reflect a broader push to enhance Taiwan’s ability to resist such external interference through robust media governance and public trust-building measures.

Bruttin’s discussions with President Lai follow a similar visit by RSF’s previous Director General, Christophe Deloire, in 2017, when he met with then-President Tsai Ing-wen. RSF has consistently praised Taiwan for its commitment to press freedom but continues to advocate for further regulatory improvements.

Continue Reading

Civil Society

Meta and X served targeted POFMA order after activist’s non-compliance

Meta and X received targeted correction directions under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act on 11 Oct after activist Kokila Annamalai failed to comply with a correction order. The Ministry of Home Affairs stated her misleading posts claimed the government executes arbitrarily without due legal process and will refer her to the POFMA Office for investigation.

Published

on

SINGAPORE: Two social media platforms have been served with targeted correction directions under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) on Friday (11 October), after activist Kokila Annamalai failed to comply with a correction order issued to her last week.

Ms Annamalai received the order on 5 October for misleading posts made on Facebook and X.

In a statement, The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) said the posts falsely claimed that “the government schedules and stays executions arbitrarily and without regard for due legal process, and that the State does not bear the legal burden of proving a drug trafficking charge against the accused person.”

MHA noted that an article on the government fact-checking website Factually elaborated on why Ms Annamalai’s assertions were false.

The order mandated that she post a correction notice on the two posts; however, she has not complied.

In light of this non-compliance, the Minister for Home Affairs has directed the POFMA Office to issue a targeted correction direction to Meta Platforms and X.

This order requires the platforms to notify users who have seen the posts that they contain false statements and to provide a link to the Factually article explaining the inaccuracies.

MHA also announced that it would refer Ms Annamalai to the POFMA Office for investigations regarding her failure to comply with the correction direction issued on 5 October.

Earlier, the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN), an organisation advocating for the abolition of the death penalty in the Asia-Pacific region, was also served with a correction order by the Singapore government under POFMA.

This order, initiated by Minister for Home Affairs and Law K Shanmugam, was in response to alleged false claims made by ADPAN in social media posts on 3 October 2024.

The posts, which were circulated on Facebook, Instagram, and LinkedIn, related to Singapore’s legal processes for death row prisoners and the treatment of activists opposing the death penalty.

They were released just before the scheduled execution of Mohammad Azwan Bohari, a drug trafficking convict sentenced to death for possessing over 26.5 grammes of pure heroin.

While ADPAN has since complied with the correction order by adding a notice to the original posts across its social media accounts, the group has expressed its intention to engage further with the order.

ADPAN reiterated its commitment to its statements and opinions, which it asserts are protected by international human rights law and standards, and expressed solidarity with human rights defenders and groups on the ground.

The organisation also reserved the right to issue additional statements on the matter.

Continue Reading

Trending