Advertisement
Advertisement
Singapore
Get more with myNEWS
A personalised news feed of stories that matter to you
Learn more
A journalist checks news sites for examples of fake news. Photo: AFP

Singapore’s fake news law: a lesson to Asia in stifling dissent?

  • The Lion City has pushed through a law against fake news despite criticisms that it grants the government too much power
  • Campaigners now fear other countries will follow suit in an effort to stifle dissent
Singapore

After six decades in power, Singapore’s People’s Action Party has plenty of experience in deflecting criticism from civil rights campaigners.

Still, even the PAP appears to have been taken aback by the fierce opposition to its plan for a law to combat “fake news”. Controversy over the law compelled the government to launch a last-minute public relations campaign before it pushed through its fake news bill in parliament on Wednesday.

With the bill soon to be made law – it will be need to be signed off by President Halimah Yacob first – activists say they will now concentrate on convincing regional governments not to follow in Singapore’s footsteps.

Singapore’s opposition calls fake-news bill a ‘Damocles sword’ hanging over the public

The Protection Against Online Falsehoods and Manipulation (Pofma) bill passed the 101-seat parliament late on Wednesday after 71 PAPs voted for it.

All nine opposition Workers’ Party MPs in the house voted against it, while three appointed lawmakers whose amendments to the bill were rejected by the government abstained.

While many people have welcomed aspects of the new law, activists, academics and journalists have argued that it grants the government too much power in deciding what is fact and what is not – claims echoed by the Workers’ Party MPs.

Singapore President Halimah Yacob, who must sign off on the bill, and Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. Photo: AFP

In a marathon two-day debate, government officials led by the powerful home and law minister K. Shanmugam deflected criticism of the law, suggesting the dissenters were misinformed. The minister also said the law narrowed, rather than broadened the government’s powers.

Under the law, all ministers will have the power to issue “takedown orders” or ask for corrections from online portals if they are found to have published deliberate falsehoods that are deemed against the public interest.

Those who disagree with the executive decision can file an appeal with the courts.

The law not only applies to operators of websites and social media platforms – who face sanctions if they do not comply with Singapore government orders – but also can be applied to closed private platforms such as messaging apps.

“Free speech should not be affected by this bill. We are talking here about falsehoods... bots... trolls... fake accounts and so on,” Shanmugam said.

“The working of a democratic society depends on the members of that society being informed and not misinformed.”

Education Minister Ong Ye Kung, recipient of a letter from some 100 academics who voiced concern about the possible stifling effect the law could have on research, said they had nothing to be anxious about. The government, Ong said, would not use the law to curb opinion-based research critical of the PAP, but would continue its policy of responding robustly in public debates.

“Please expect government agencies – if we do not agree with you – to present the facts, our arguments and to convince the public otherwise,” the minister said. “If that has a chilling effect, please chill,” Ong said, to reported laughter in parliament.

The Workers’ Party stalwart Low Thia Khiang, meanwhile, slammed the government in a speech in Mandarin, accusing the PAP of using the law to throttle democracy.

Could Singapore’s new law against fake news be one others follow?

“[The bill] is more like the actions of a dictatorial government that will resort to any means to hold on to absolute power,” said Low, an opposition MP of nearly three decades.

Activists, who for months have been urging the government to reconsider enacting the bill, on Thursday said they knew all along they were facing an uphill task.

Now, they are hoping their campaign will help opposition to similar moves elsewhere in Asia, where governments looking to put a lid on online dissent are likely to view Singapore as worthy of emulation.

Singaporean journalist and activist Kirsten Han said the disquiet from different groups – journalists and academics included – was because many of them had real life experiences of laws being used to curb criticism of the ruling party.

“Journalists, activists, academics, opposition politicians… these are the people who know that there can be repercussions if you are too critical or dissent too much from the establishment line,” said the chief editor of the New Naratif portal.

“And this is before a law like Pofma was introduced – so I think the idea of yet another tool that the government can use against selected targets spurred people into action,” she said.

Parliament House in Singapore. Photo: AFP

Outside Singapore, regional campaigners say they will watch carefully to see if other governments follow suit.

Malaysia’s previous government months before last year’s election enacted a fake news law despite widespread criticism.

That administration was toppled at the polls, and the new government of Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad is hoping to scrap it. Its attempt to do so last year was scuppered by the opposition.

Mahathir has previously said that the existence of a law that prevents people from airing their views “[breeds fear] that the government itself may abuse the law”.

Phil Robertson of Human Rights Watch said the Singapore law would “certainly prompt copycat laws by authoritarian governments because this law sets out how a minister can unilaterally determine what gets posted online”.

Singapore introduces anti-fake news law to counter falsehoods aimed at ‘exploiting’ the city’s ‘fault lines’

He said the law was “like the magic wand of online censorship and control, granting to its user the power to decide what is ‘false’ or ‘misleading’ and compel compliance.”

“You can bet authoritarian governments in Asia and around will leap at this opportunity,” Robertson said.

And James Gomez, the Singaporean executive director of the Asia Centre think tank, warned there was a trend of Southeast Asian governments “using the argument of maintaining social harmony to pass legislation to control hate speech”.

“Operationally, such laws are often used to curb political criticism of long standing regimes. You often see this played out during elections,” he said.

Within Southeast Asia, Singapore joins Vietnam and Thailand, which both have new laws granting sweeping powers over online content. Rights groups say these laws are likely to be used to curb dissent.

Post