Other suggested amendments include making the government’s restraining orders – issued to those who make statements offensive to religious communities – take effect immediately instead of after a 14-day notice period, and consolidating Penal Code offences that pertain to religion under the MRHA.

These offences cover acts that incite violence or feelings of enmity and hostility against a religious group and hurting the religious feelings of another person. Religious leaders would be prosecuted more harshly because of their influence, the ministry said, and the offences would apply even if the acts were committed overseas.

“This is necessary as today, the internet and social media allow an individual to disrupt religious harmony in Singapore, even when the offences are conducted overseas,” it said.

The MRHA came into effect in 1992 and has never been invoked. The proposed changes to it would affect the leadership of about 100 of the 2,500 religious organisations in Singapore, according to the ministry.

Rising sea levels plunge Singapore into battle to stay above water

Describing the amendments as “timely”, the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Singapore wrote in a statement that it was “fully supportive” of the move. It said that the country was vulnerable to “malicious foreign actors who may make use of religion to divide society”, and Singaporeans should not take religious harmony for granted.

“With the pervasiveness of the internet and social media, hateful messages that can deepen and fracture religious harmony can spread faster and wider than before,” it said in a statement, adding that the updated act would ensure threats were tackled more effectively.

Eugene Tan, a law professor at Singapore Management University, suggested possible motivations behind the government’s planned changes.

“As I see it, the government is concerned that religious organisations may, knowingly or unknowingly, allow themselves to be manipulated by foreigners or foreign organisations and harm the maintenance of religious harmony in Singapore,” he said, adding that religion could be used as a tool for foreign interference and subversion.

The second reading of the amendment bill will take place next month and the changes are expected to be passed by parliament, which is dominated by members of the ruling People’s Action Party.

The changes would equip the authorities with more information about Singapore’s religious institutions and their donors, Tan said.

Monday’s announcement likely stemmed from a combination of domestic developments and those abroad, “where religion has become a wedge to drive societal divisions, even in societies known for their religious tolerance”, he said.

“It could also be a case of the government acting pre-emptively and ensuring that it has the requisite enforcement levers to deal with foreign interference in the religious sphere.”

Despite there being “nothing much [that] could be done” if someone living abroad broke the rules, Tan said the changes would still act as a deterrent as they introduce legal consequences. However, he said there is a “legitimate concern” that the government, in seeking to regulate religious organisations, may cross the line between the secular and the sacred.

“The issue is not ‘why regulate’ religious organisations but rather ‘how to regulate’ sensitively in a manner that does not in the politicisation of the religious sphere,” Tan said.

“The task falls on the government to show why the proposed laws are needed and how they will contribute to religious harmony.”