Current Affairs
Vietnamese activist and YouTuber Anh Chi sentenced to five years in prison amidst international outcry
![](https://theonlinecitizen.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/2024/08/22133734/Nguyen-Chi-Tuyen-FCcOeP.png)
Nguyen Chi Tuyen, better known by his online alias Anh Chi, has been sentenced to five years in prison by the Hanoi People’s Court after a swift five-hour trial on 15 August 2024.
Anh Chi, a prominent Vietnamese activist and YouTuber, was found guilty of “propaganda against the state” under Article 117 of Vietnam’s Penal Code, a charge that has been widely condemned by international human rights organizations.
Anh Chi, 50, was arrested on 29 February 2024 in what many view as part of a broader crackdown on dissent in Vietnam.
His social media presence, including his two YouTube channels—AC Media and Anh Chi Rau Den—has made him a formidable voice in the fight for land rights, environmental protection, and political freedoms in Vietnam. Combined, these channels have nearly 160,000 subscribers, and his Facebook page has garnered over 40,000 followers.
A Voice for Change
Anh Chi first came to public attention in 2015 when he participated in protests that successfully pressured the Vietnamese government to abandon a controversial plan to cut down 7,000 trees in Hanoi.
This activism laid the foundation for his role in subsequent movements, including protests against a massive fish kill in 2016 caused by industrial waste dumping.
He also emerged as a prominent critic of China’s nine-dash line policy in the South China Sea, which encroaches on Vietnam’s maritime territory. To circumvent government restrictions on assembly, Anh Chi and his colleagues formed a football club named No-U FC—a symbolic nod to their opposition to China’s U-shaped demarcation line in the disputed waters.
Anh Chi has consistently used social media as a tool to amplify his activism, emphasizing the platform’s importance in giving a voice to the otherwise voiceless in Vietnam.
“Social media is a very important tool for us. We have only that tool to express our opinions, to exchange ideas, to connect each other,” Anh Chi said in a 2017 interview with Mekong Review. “Without social media, it would be a big challenge for us.”
International Condemnation
The sentencing of Anh Chi has drawn sharp criticism from human rights organizations and advocates worldwide. Patricia Gossman, associate Asia director at Human Rights Watch, condemned the Vietnamese government’s actions, stating, “Vietnam’s authorities have targeted Nguyen Chi Tuyen for expressing views they don’t like. The government should stop jailing peaceful critics, repeal its draconian penal laws, and end the systematic violation of basic rights.”
Gossman further warned that Vietnam’s international relations could suffer due to its ongoing human rights abuses. “The Vietnamese government will remain mired in oppression so long as it continues to lock up dissidents like Nguyen Chi Tuyen who dare to speak their minds,” she said. “Vietnam’s international donors and trade partners shouldn’t have any illusions when dealing with this rights-abusing government.”
Anh Chi’s conviction is the latest in a series of actions by the Vietnamese government aimed at suppressing dissent.
The 88 Project, a civil society organization that monitors political repression in Vietnam, reported that from 2018 to 2023, at least 330 individuals were arrested on political charges. The organization highlighted Anh Chi’s arrest as part of an escalating trend where the government not only targets anti-state dissidents but also criminalizes policy activism and places severe restrictions on civil society.
A Chilling Effect
The impact of Anh Chi’s sentencing is expected to reverberate throughout Vietnam’s activist community. Former prisoner of conscience Le Anh Hung, who was once jailed for his peaceful activism, warned of the chilling effect this case could have on others who might otherwise speak out.
In an interview with Radio Free Asia Vietnamese, Hung stated, “This is clearly an unjust sentence for someone who peacefully speaks out for the country’s progress. Arrests and sentences like this will make people hesitant and afraid to speak up. No country or nation can grow or develop when its people have to live in fear.”
Anh Chi’s legal team has vowed to continue fighting for his release, describing the sentence as “inappropriate” and indicative of the Vietnamese government’s broader strategy to silence opposition. They are currently exploring the possibility of filing an appeal.
Calls for Release
The Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA) has also condemned the sentencing, calling for Anh Chi’s immediate release.
Mary Aileen Diez-Bacalso, Executive Director of FORUM-ASIA, noted that Vietnam’s actions are in direct violation of its international obligations. “Vietnam has been a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights since 1982 and guarantees freedom of expression under Article 25 of its Constitution. The sentencing of Anh Chi starkly contradicts these obligations. We call on the Vietnamese Government to immediately release Anh Chi and to uphold people’s freedom of expression and right to information.”
Ongoing Repression
Anh Chi’s arrest and conviction are part of a broader pattern of repression in Vietnam, where the government has increasingly targeted individuals who challenge its authority.
Despite the risks, Anh Chi and others like him continue to advocate for a more open and democratic Vietnam. As Vietnam’s authorities intensify their efforts to silence dissent, the international community’s response will be crucial in determining whether voices like Anh Chi’s will continue to be heard.
Anh Chi’s case has now become emblematic of the struggle for human rights in Vietnam, highlighting the ongoing tension between the state and those who dare to challenge it.
The post Vietnamese activist and YouTuber Anh Chi sentenced to five years in prison amidst international outcry appeared first on Gutzy Asia.
![](https://theonlinecitizen.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/2023/03/26202010/TOC_newlogo_small.webp)
Current Affairs
Reforming Singapore’s defamation laws: Preventing legal weapons against free speech
Opinion: The tragic suicide of Geno Ong, linked to the financial stress from a defamation lawsuit, raises a critical issue: Singapore’s defamation laws need reform. These laws must not be weaponized to silence individuals.
![](https://theonlinecitizen.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/2020/09/27020206/SupremeCourtBuilding-Singapore-20070210.jpg)
by Alexandar Chia
This week, we hear the tragic story of the suicide of Geno Ong, with Ong citing the financial stress from the defamation lawsuit against her by Raymond Ng and Iris Koh.
Regardless of who’s right and who’s wrong, this Koh/Ng vs Ong affair raises a wider question at play – the issue of Singapore’s defamation laws and how it needs to be tightened.
Why is this needed? This is because defamation suits cannot be weaponised the way they have been in Singapore law. It cannot be used to threaten people into “shutting up”.
Article 14(2)(a) of the Constitution may permit laws to be passed to restrict free speech in the area of defamation, but it does not remove the fact that Article 14(1)(a) is still law, and it permits freedom of speech.
As such, although Article 14(2)(a) allows restrictions to be placed on freedom of speech with regard to the issue of defamation, it must not be to the extent where Article 14(1)(a)’s rights and liberties are not curtailed completely or heavily infringed on.
Sadly, that is the case with regard to precedence in defamation suits.
Let’s have a look at the defamation suit then-PM Goh Chok Tong filed against Dr Chee Soon Juan after GE 2001 for questions Dr Chee asked publicly about a $17 billion loan made to Suharto.
If we look at point 12 of the above link, in the “lawyer’s letter” sent to Dr Chee, Goh’s case of himself being defamed centred on lines Dr Chee used in his question, such as “you can run but you can’t hide”, and “did he not tell you about the $17 billion loan”?
In the West, such lines of questioning are easily understood at worse as hyperbolically figurative expressions with the gist of the meaning behind such questioning on why the loan to Suharto was made.
Unfortunately, Singapore’s defamation laws saw Dr Chee’s actions of imputing ill motives on Goh, when in the West, it is expected of incumbents to take the kind of questions Dr Chee asked, and such questions asked of incumbent office holders are not uncommon.
And the law permits pretty flimsy reasons such as “withdrawal of allegations” to be used as a deciding factor if a statement is defamatory or not – this is as per points 66-69 of the judgement.
This is not to imply or impute ill intent on Singapore courts. Rather, it shows how defamation laws in Singapore needs to be tightened, to ensure that a possible future scenario where it is weaponised as a “shut-up tool”, occurs.
These are how I suggest it is to be done –
- The law has to make mandatory, that for a case to go into a full lawsuit, there has to be a 3-round exchange of talking points and two attempts at legal mediation.
- Summary judgment should be banned from defamation suits, unless if one party fails to adduce evidence or a defence.
- A statement is to be proven false, hence, defamatory, if there is strictly material along with circumstantial evidence showing that the statement is false. Apologies and related should not be used as main determinants, given how many of these statements are made in the heat of the moment, from the natural feelings of threat and intimidation from a defamation suit.
- A question should only be considered defamatory if it has been repeated, after material facts of evidence are produced showing, beyond reasonable doubt, that the message behind the question, is “not so”, and if there is a directly mentioned subject in the question. For example, if an Opposition MP, Mr A, was found to be poisoned with a banned substance, and I ask openly on how Mr A got access to that substance, given that its banned, I can’t be found to have “defamed the government” with the question as 1) the government was not mentioned directly and 2) if the government has not produced material evidence that they indeed had no role in the poisoning affair, if they were directly mentioned.
- Damages should be tiered, with these tiers coded into the Defamation Act – the highest quantum of damages (i.e. those of a six-figured nature) is only to be reserved if the subject of defamation lost any form of office, revenue or position, or directly quantifiable public standing, or was subjected to criminal action, because of the act of defamation. If none of such occur, the maximum amount of damages a plaintiff in a defamation can claim is a 4-figure amount capped at $2000. This will prevent rich and powerful figures from using defamation suits and 6-figure damages to intimidate their questioners and detractors.
- All defendants of defamation suit should be allowed full access to legal aid schemes.
Again, this piece does not suggest bad-faith malpractice by the courts in Singapore. Rather, it is to suggest how to tighten up defamation laws to avoid it being used as the silencing hatchet.
Current Affairs
Man arrested for alleged housebreaking and theft of mobile phones in Yishun
A 23-year-old man was arrested for allegedly breaking into a Yishun Ring Road rental flat and stealing eight mobile phones worth S$3,400 from five tenants. The Singapore Police responded swiftly on 1 September, identifying and apprehending the suspect on the same day. The man has been charged with housebreaking, which carries a potential 10-year jail term.
![](https://theonlinecitizen.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/2024/09/03132151/PHONE3.jpg)
SINGAPORE: A 23-year-old man has been arrested for allegedly breaking into a rental flat along Yishun Ring Road and stealing eight mobile phones from five tenants.
The incident occurred in the early hours on Sunday (1 September), according to a statement from the Singapore Police Force.
The authorities reported that they received a call for assistance at around 5 a.m. on that day.
Officers from the Woodlands Police Division quickly responded and, through ground enquiries and police camera footage, were able to identify and apprehend the suspect on the same day.
The stolen mobile phones, with an estimated total value of approximately S$3,400, were recovered hidden under a nearby bin.
The suspect was charged in court on Monday with housebreaking with the intent to commit theft.
If convicted, he could face a jail term of up to 10 years and a fine.
In light of this incident, the police have advised property owners to take precautions to prevent similar crimes.
They recommend securing all doors, windows, and other openings with good quality grilles and padlocks when leaving premises unattended, even for short periods.
The installation of burglar alarms, motion sensor lights, and CCTV cameras to cover access points is also advised. Additionally, residents are urged to avoid keeping large sums of cash and valuables in their homes.
The investigation is ongoing.
Last month, police disclosed that a recent uptick in housebreaking incidents in private residential estates across Singapore has been traced to foreign syndicates, primarily involving Chinese nationals.
Preliminary investigations indicate that these syndicates operate in small groups, targeting homes by scaling perimeter walls or fences.
The suspects are believed to be transient travelers who enter Singapore on Social Visit Passes, typically just a day or two before committing the crimes.
Before this recent surge in break-ins, housebreaking cases were on the decline, with 59 reported in the first half of this year compared to 70 during the same period last year.
However, between 1 June and 4 August 2024, there were 10 reported housebreaking incidents, predominantly in private estates around the Rail Corridor and Bukit Timah Road.
The SPF has intensified efforts to engage residents near high-risk areas by distributing crime prevention advisories, erecting alert signs, and training them to patrol their neighborhoods, leading to an increase in reports of suspicious activity.
-
Singapore5 days ago
Singapore woman’s suicide amidst legal battle raises concerns over legal system
-
Diplomacy1 week ago
India PM Narendra Modi meets with PM Lawrence Wong; Four MoUs signed
-
Opinion1 week ago
Singaporean voters and the ‘Battered Wife Syndrome’
-
Parliament2 days ago
Minister Shanmugam rejects request for detailed information on visa-free visitor offences: Cites bilateral considerations
-
Singapore13 hours ago
Minister K Shanmugam transfers Astrid Hill GCB to UBS Trustees for S$88 Million following Ridout Road controversy
-
Parliament3 days ago
PAP MPs attack WP Gerald Giam in Parliament over NTUC independence from ruling party
-
Politics7 days ago
PAP adopts SDP policies after criticizing them: Dr Chee urges Singaporeans to see through tactics
-
Food1 week ago
NTU stall food prices questioned after parent pays S$6.30 for meal