Connect with us

Civil Society

Singapore: Blogger’s conviction violates free speech

Published

on

Human-Rights-Watch

Revoke Colonial-Era ‘Scandalizing the Judiciary’ Offense

(New York, February 23, 2015) – A Singapore court’s conviction of a prominent blogger for contempt of court violates his right to freedom of expression, Human Rights Watch said today. Alex Au Wai Pang faces a fine and imprisonment when he is sentenced on March 5, 2015.

Singapore’s parliament should revise the penal code to eliminate the archaic, colonial-era offense of “scandalizing the judiciary,” Human Rights Watch said.

“Alex Au’s blogging on judicial accountability in Singapore furthers the public’s right to information,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Sending him to prison would merely highlight the injustice of Singapore’s archaic crime of ‘scandalizing the judiciary.’”

On January 22, the High Court convicted Au of contempt of court for a blog posting in October 2013 on his website Yawning Bread. The blog, “377 Wheels Come off Supreme Court’s Best Laid Plans,” deals broadly with two cases involving the criminalization of consensual sex between adult men as defined in penal code section 377A.

The charge against Au focused on his published observations about court scheduling. He wrote that a court challenge to section 377A in a case involving a man named Tang Eng Hong, who was arrested in a public toilet with another man, was filed before another challenge, involving the case against the gay couple, Kenneth Chee and Gary Lim. Au pointed out the discrepancy that the couple’s case was to be heard at the Court of Appeal before Tan Eng Hong’s case, which had been filed first. He raised questions about the role of Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon in setting the court’s calendar to ensure his participation in hearing the constitutional challenge against section 377A.

During the trial, Au’s lawyers argued that “innuendo, insinuation, and imputation” do not make for contempt. They noted that in a similar case against the author Alan Shadrake in 2011, the sentencing decision stated that comments considered to be “scandalizing to the judiciary” had to not only pose a credible threat to the reputation of the judiciary but also qualify as unfair criticism – that is, irrational, dishonest, or abusive. As Au wrote on his blog, “I take the view that my writings constituted fair criticism, and that the concept of fair criticism is to protect the individual’s right to freedom of speech and expression.”

International human rights law protects the right to freedom of expression. Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which is broadly recognized as reflective of customary law, states that, “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media.”

International standards only allow content-based restrictions on expression in extremely narrow circumstances, such as defamation or threats to national security or public order. Restrictions must be provided by law, strictly construed, and necessary and proportionate to the interest protected.

The United Nations Human Rights Committee, in its General Comment No. 34 on the right to freedom of expression, states that “the mere fact that forms of expression are considered to be insulting to a public figure is not sufficient to justify the imposition of penalties.” The Human Rights Committee monitors the compliance of states parties to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Singapore has not ratified.

In addition, Singapore, as a member of the Commonwealth, should take into account the Commonwealth Principles on the Accountability of and the Relationship Between the Three Branches of Government, which state in article 7(b) that “criminal law and contempt proceeding should not be used to restrict legitimate criticism of the performance of judicial functions.”

Several months before Au’s blogs were posted, the British parliament, noting that the offense was last prosecuted in the United Kingdom in 1931, passed the Crimes and Courts Act of 2013, which abolished “scandalizing the judiciary” as a form of contempt of court. Other Commonwealth countries, including New ZealandCanada, and Brunei Darussalam, have also long since ceased to prosecute this contempt charge.

“Singapore’s courts, like any other public institution, are strengthened, not weakened, by open debate on issues of general concern,” Robertson said. “The prosecution of Alex Au for speaking out is just one more example of Singapore’s willingness to misuse law to gag its critics.”

Continue Reading
3 Comments
Subscribe
Notify of
3 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