Singapore’s fake news law: protecting the truth, or restricting free debate?

The government has invoked Pofma four times in the past four weeks, on the basis of what some critics say are flawed interpretations of their points

But the People’s Action Party has bristled against claims the law is being used for censorship, stressing that the offending posts and articles remain online

Reading Time:7 minutes

Singapore first used the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act on November 25, against opposition politician Brad Bowyer. Photo: AFP

Bhavan Jaipragasin Hong KongandDewey Simin Beijing

Published: 8:00am, 21 Dec 2019Updated: 10:06pm, 21 Dec 2019

In May, as Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s top ministers took turns in parliament to hammer home just why they thought the country needed a new law to fight “fake news” despite reservations from activists and academics, the opposition leader rose to dampen their parade.

Workers’ Party chief Pritam Singh said his party would not back the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (Pofma) over fears that it could be used as a “proverbial Damocles sword” against those who “do not support the government’s narrative or toe the government’s line”.

Still, the law was easily passed because of the parliamentary supermajority held by Lee’s People’s Action Party (PAP) for decades.

K. Shanmugam, the home and law minister who vigorously campaigned to beat back local and international criticism of the law, said at the time that free speech proponents had little to worry about as Pofma only targeted “falsehoods”, “bots”, “trolls” and “fake accounts”.

Seven months on, Pofma is fully in effect – and while neither Singh nor his party have been ensnared, it is the opposition leader’s comments, not Shanmugam’s, that are proving prescient for other critics entangled by the law.

The government has invoked Pofma four times in the past four weeks, after using it for the first time on November 25 against opposition politician Brad Bowyer.