Singaporean diplomats are taking the lead in defending a two-month-old “fake news” law, challenging international media outlets it says are publishing misleading claims on the contentious legislation.
Since the law was enacted in October, authorities in the Southeast Asian city-state have invoked it four times against critics and once against Facebook Inc, which was required to attach a government-issued “correction” to content deemed to contain falsehoods.
Government officials have also countered critical media coverage of the law, known as the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act.
read more
Malaysia-based NGO rejects Pofma order by MHA, says direction in breach of international law
Malaysia’s Lawyers for Liberty (LFL) has refused to comply with the Singapore Government’s latest correction direction for publishing falsehoods, claiming that its article on death row prisoners in the Republic was based on “evidence” from former and current Singapore prison officers.
Instead the Malaysian non-governmental organisation has called for the directives, which were issued under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (Pofma), to be withdrawn unconditionally and with immediate effect. The organisation also asked for the same rescission for the orders issued to freelance journalist Kirsten Han, sociopolitical site The Online Citizen (TOC) and news portal Yahoo Singapore.
In a rebuttal titled “Singapore must withdraw threats of POFMA criminal proceedings against LFL and Singapore activists”, the group defended its original Jan 16 article, which claimed that prisoners on death row in Singapore were executed in a brutal manner. It said that its article was based on “evidence” from former and current Singapore prison officers with “impeccable service records”.
read more
Rights group rejects Singapore’s fake news charge, says republic has no jurisdiction in Malaysia
Lawyers for Liberty (LFL) told Singapore today to withdraw its order for the rights group to rescind its claims of barbaric executions in the island state as the republic has no jurisdiction over Malaysians outside of its territory.
“Singapore has no business interfering with the freedom of speech of Malaysian citizens making statements within our own country.
“It is outrageous and unacceptable for Singapore to issue a notice under their Pofma to a Malaysian organisation such as LFL, which is operating and issuing statements on Malaysian soil,” said LFL director Melissa Sasidaran in a press statement today.
read more
LFL: We stand by our claims on Singapore executions
Picture used for representational purposes
Human rights group Lawyers for Liberty (LFL) has defended its claim that brutal extralegal execution methods have been carried out at Changi Prison in Singapore.
LFL director Melissa Sasidaran said their sources comprised former and current Singapore prison officers “with impeccable service records”.
The Singapore Straits Times reported that the republic’s Home Affairs Ministry had slammed LFL’s allegations about its execution methods. These claims are “untrue, baseless and preposterous”, according to the ministry.
read more
MHA refutes Malaysia NGO's claims against S'pore's execution method; issues Pofma corrections against parties
The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has slammed Malaysia-based non-governmental organisation Lawyers for Liberty's (LFL) allegations about Singapore's execution method as "untrue, baseless and preposterous".
It has also invoked the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (Pofma) and ordered the LFL and three parties that have shared the allegations - Singaporean activist Kirsten Han, The Online Citizen website and Yahoo Singapore - to correct the false statements.
This is the fifth case where Pofma has been invoked since it came into effect on Oct 2 last year.
read more
Corrections and clarifications regarding falsehoods posted by Lawyers for Liberty
The statement by the Malaysia-based Lawyers for Liberty ("LFL"), published on 16 Jan 2020, which alleged the use of unlawful methods in judicial executions conducted in Changi Prison, contains false statements of fact.
Falsehoods
LFL's allegation that the Singapore Prison Service (SPS) applies the alleged procedure for judicial executions is completely baseless.
related:
Corrections And Clarifications Regarding Falsehoods And Misleading Statements In Mr Lim Tean's FB posts on 12 Dec 2019
Corrections And Clarifications Regarding Falsehoods Posted By The Singapore Democratic Party
Corrections And Clarifications Regarding Falsehoods Posted By The States Times Review
Corrections And Clarifications Regarding Falsehoods Posted By Mr Brad Bowyer
read more
Singapore Government officials rebut Bloomberg, South China Morning Post articles on Pofma
Government officials have rebutted articles by Bloomberg and the South China Morning Post (SCMP) on Singapore's fake news law, the latest in a series of such responses to media outlets.
In her reply released on Tuesday (Dec 31), Ms Ho Hwei Ling, press secretary to Minister for Communications and Information S. Iswaran, said all three versions of an article Bloomberg ran had alleged that the Singapore Government uses the law to suppress dissent and the right to free expression.
This is untrue, she said, noting that the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (Pofma) was used to issue correction directions. This allows the public to access both the original posts and corrections, and decide for themselves which is true.
read more
Singapore defends online falsehoods law in response to articles by SCMP, Bloomberg
File photo of a man using a laptop. (Photo: AFP/Frederic J Brown)
Singapore’s law against online falsehoods has not restricted free debate, the country’s consul-general in Hong Kong has said in defence of the recently enacted legislation, which has been criticised by some foreign media.
In a letter published on Tuesday (Dec 31) in the South China Morning Post (SCMP), Ms Foo Teow Lee said that an SCMP article reported untrue accusations that the Singapore Government has wielded the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) “indiscriminately and without cause, to restrict the freedom of speech”.
“We have not restricted free debate. None of the statements subjected to POFMA directions has been removed,” said Ms Foo. “Surely, giving readers more information, and enabling them to decide for themselves where the truth lies, can only enhance public debate.”
read more
MINISTER REBUTS BLOOMBERG ARTICLE ON POFMA
The Singapore government has responded to another article from a foreign publication on the use of the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulations Act (POFMA).
Ho Hwei Ling, Press Secretary to Minister for Communications and Information S. Iswaran, said in a statement on Dec. 31, 2019 that it is untrue that the government uses POFMA to suppress dissent and the right to free expression.
Ho addressed a Dec. 27 Bloomberg article, “Singapore goes on global offensive to defend ‘Fake News’ law“. It said: “Critics say the recent cases are just the latest in a string of attacks on dissent.”
read more
S’PORE GOVT RESPONDS TO SCMP ARTICLE ON POFMA, HITS OUT AT COMMENTS FROM HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH
The Singapore government has responded to an article from the South China Morning Post (SCMP) regarding the use of the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulations Act (POFMA).
In a response letter published on Tuesday (Dec. 31), it denied assertions that the law restricts freedom of speech, arguing that at every instance the new law has been used so far, the falsehoods were identified, and the basis of public interest was also explained.
The article tracked the government’s five uses of POFMA in the past two months, beginning from the first time it was invoked on Nov. 25 against Brad Bowyer, a member of the Progress Singapore Party.
read more
Singapore Goes on Global Offensive to Defend ‘Fake News’ Law
Singaporean diplomats are taking the lead in defending a two-month-old fake news law, challenging international media outlets it says are publishing misleading claims on the contentious legislation.
Since the law was enacted in October, authorities in the Southeast Asian city-state have invoked it four times against critics and once against Facebook Inc., which was required to attach a government-issued “correction” to content deemed to contain falsehoods. Government officials have also countered critical media coverage of the law, known as the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act.
Foo Chi Hsia, Singapore’s High Commissioner to the U.K., stated the Economist had misrepresented the law, writing in a Dec. 21 letter to the editor that it “should be looked at in the same context as our belief in the right of reply, which in our view enhances rather than reduces the quality of public discourse.“
read more
Singapore’s fake news law does not restrict the freedom of speech
The national flag of Singapore flies atop its Parliament House. Photo: AFP
Your article, “Singapore’s fake news law: protecting the truth, or restricting free debate?” (December 21) reported accusations that the Singapore government was wielding the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (Pofma) indiscriminately and without cause, to restrict the freedom of speech.
This is untrue. In every case where we have issued correction notices to online posts, we have detailed the falsehoods as well as the public interest involved. Far from being matters of “interpretation of statistics” or “opinion of facts”, the statements corrected were all demonstrably factually false.
In two instances, the falsehoods were clearly intended to stir suspicion and fear of foreigners in Singapore.
read more
Singapore’s fake news law: protecting the truth, or restricting free debate?
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.
read more
Why is POFMA not applied on international media for misleading the Singapore government’s stance on POFMA?
Just recently (31 December), Ms Ho Hwei Ling, press secretary to Communication and Information Minister S. Iswaran, wrote a in a letter to Bloomberg responding to its article titled “Singapore Goes on Global Offensive to Defend ‘Fake News’ Law”.
“Your article criticises our responses to foreign media stories on POFMA. We have never shied from answering our foreign critics on any issue. They can say what they please. All we insist upon is the right of reply,” she said in the letter. She added that the Government has written to Bloomberg as the article “still contains multiple factual errors despite three attempts to get the facts right”.
read more
Singapore's envoy to UK rebuts Economist article on Pofma
An Economist article on Singapore's fake news law has drawn a rebuttal from Singapore's High Commissioner to the United Kingdom Foo Chi Hsia.
In a letter published on the magazine's website this week, Ms Foo stated that the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (Pofma) does not limit free speech - rather it enhances the quality of public discourse.
She added that the law "strengthens and safeguards proper public accountability that must necessarily underpin democracies".
read more
S’pore High Commissioner to UK rebuts Economist article on fake news law
Singapore’s High Commissioner to the United Kingdom, Foo Chi Hsia, has written a rebuttal letter to The Economist.
This time, it is over a Dec. 7 article by the 176-year-old venerable magazine about Singapore’s fake news laws. The Economist piece was titled, “Singapore strikes its first official blows against fake news“.
Foo’s main defence of the new fake news law was that it does not limit free speech, but enhances the quality of public discourse.
read more
SG High Commissioner to the UK defends Pofma after The Economist calls it part of the “government’s criticism-suppressing arsenal”
An article on The Economist criticizing Singapore’s fake news law and calling it part of the “government’s criticism-suppressing arsenal” has drawn a rebuttal from Singapore’s High Commissioner to the United Kingdom that says the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (Pofma) “enhances rather than reduces the quality of public discourse”.
Published on Dec 7, the article on The Economist titled, ‘Singapore strikes its first official blows against fake news’ outlines the incident where Pofma was invoked on the blog the States Times Review. Referring to Pofma being invoked on opposition politician Brad Bowyer as well, the Economist article states that, “The hubbub over the two orders relates more to the display of pofma’s powers than to the details of the posts themselves”. The article also states: “Facebook has said that it hopes the law will not impinge on free expression. To say it already has would presumably attract a pofma order”.
In her response, Foo Chi Hsia, Singapore’s High Commissioner to the United Kingdom, explained: “Online posts that have been corrected remain available in full, but with links to the government’s response appended. Readers can see both and decide for themselves which is the truth. How does twinning factual replies to falsehoods limit free speech?”
read more
UK High Commissioner for Singapore defends POFMA in letter to the Economist
Ms Foo Chi Hsia, UK High Commissioner for Singapore has defended the newly passed law, Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) by writing a letter to the Economist, in response to an article, “Singapore strikes its first official blows against fake news” published earlier this month, stating that Singapore’s laws are designed to meet its own context and needs.
The 7 Dec article on Economist was reporting on the correction made by US tech giant, Facebook on a post published by States Times Review (STR) in its social media platform under the instructions of the Singapore government. The article reported that the post had alleged that the country’s elections are rigged and that the next one could “possibly turn Singapore into a Christian state”.
It wrote, “The idea that the ruling People’s Action Party is trying to turn Singapore into a theocracy is absurd—even “scurrilous”, as the government put it. (The contention that it rigs elections is more defensible, although it does so not by stuffing ballot boxes, but by making life difficult for its critics and threatening adverse consequences for areas that vote for the opposition. It has won every general election in the past 60 years.)”
read more
Singapore strikes its first official blows against fake news
A tough new law adds to the government’s criticism-suppressing arsenal
Facebook is legally required to tell you that the Singapore government says this post has false information,” reads the message, which links to a government website. It appeared on November 30th on a post published by the States Times Review, a blog which delights in hectoring the Singaporean authorities. The post alleged that the country’s elections are rigged and that the next one could “possibly turn Singapore into a Christian state”.
The idea that the ruling People’s Action Party is trying to turn Singapore into a theocracy is absurd—even “scurrilous”, as the government put it. (The contention that it rigs elections is more defensible, although it does so not by stuffing ballot boxes, but by making life difficult for its critics and threatening adverse consequences for areas that vote for the opposition. It has won every general election in the past 60 years.)
read more
Government denounces Washington Post’s ‘false allegations’
The Government has called out The Washington Post for "perpetuating false allegations" after the American newspaper ran only parts of a letter from Singapore's ambassador to the United States.
Mr Ashok Kumar Mirpuri had responded to a Dec 2 article in the online edition of the Post about Facebook complying with the Government's directive to issue a correction under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (Pofma) last month.
The article had pointed out that Pofma could have a "chilling effect on online free expression" and "open the door to broad government censorship", points which Mr Mirpuri rebutted.
read more
Singapore Government says Washington Post article on online falsehoods law is ‘perpetuating false allegations’
Screengrab of The Washington Post article the Singapore Government was responding to
The Singapore Government said on Monday (Dec 16) that US publication The Washington Post's refusal to publish its response in full means it is “perpetuating false allegations” in an article about Singapore's online falsehoods law.
The Washington Post article on Dec 2 discussed Singapore’s use of directives under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA). It said Facebook had “for the first time complied with a controversial local law aimed at curbing misinformation” on a States Times Review article. The article added that critics were worried that the law could have “a chilling effect on online free expression”, quoting Mr Phil Robertson, Human Rights Watch's (HRW) deputy Asia director.
Five days after the article was published, Singapore's Ambassador to the US Ashok Kumar Mirpuri wrote a letter to the news outlet explaining Singapore's position. That letter was not published in full.
read more
In letter to Washington Post, Govt refutes Pofma criticism, saying it ‘has not suppressed anything
“Censorship entails banning or suppressing offending material. But the Government has not banned or suppressed anything. It has only required Facebook to append to the offending post a link to a factual correction. The original post remains intact,” said the letter dated Dec 7, written by Singapore’s US Ambassador Ashok Kumar Mirpuri.
“Readers can read it together with the Government’s response, and decide for themselves which tells the truth. This can no more have ‘a chilling effect on online free expression’ than your publishing this letter can stun The Washington Post into silence,” he added in the letter.
The Dec 2 Post article, titled “Facebook issues disclaimer demanded by Singapore Government”, described the way the Government had ordered Facebook under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (Pofma) on Nov 29 to run a correction with a States Times Review Facebook post that it said contained several falsehoods.
read more
Washington Post rapped for 'perpetuating false allegations' on Pofma
The Government has called out The Washington Post for "perpetuating false allegations" after the American newspaper ran only parts of a letter from Singapore's ambassador to the United States.
Mr Ashok Kumar Mirpuri had responded to a Dec 2 article in the online edition of the Post about Facebook complying with the Government's directive to issue a correction under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (Pofma) last month.
The article had pointed out that Pofma could have a "chilling effect on online free expression" and "open the door to broad government censorship", points which Mr Mirpuri rebutted.
read more
Facebook issues disclaimer demanded by Singapore government
Facebook users in Singapore spotted a correction on the social network over the weekend as the company for the first time complied with a controversial local law aimed at curbing misinformation.
“Facebook is legally required to tell you that the Singapore government says this post has false information,” said a disclaimer accompanying the post that the Singapore government ordered the social network to post, according to the Wall Street Journal.
It’s the first time an American tech company is known to have complied with the country's Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA), which took effect in October. Singapore's law is one of the most aggressive statutes drafted to date as governments around the world step up their regulation of tech giants. It allows government ministers to order tech companies to issue correction notices or remove material that officials say is false. But critics are concerned the law could open the door to broad government censorship.
read more
Singapore’s fake news law: protecting the truth, or restricting free debate?
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”.
related:
Singapore’s fake news law: a lesson to Asia in stifling dissent?
Spore’s opposition calls fake-news bill a ‘Damocles sword’ hanging over the public
read more
POFMA, a blank cheque for the government to defame?
Just last week, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) issued three correction orders under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA), upon Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) over three online postings made by the party.
MOM claims that the posts and article from SDP contained “a misleading graphic and false statements of fact”. SDP is required to carry the correction notice at the top of both Facebook posts and the article on its website, which it has done. SDP has also followed the correction notice with a statement of its own saying that while it is complying with the order, the party will also be applying to cancel the correction direction.
The full correction by MOM is posted on the government’s fact-correction site ‘Factually’.
read more
related:
Man charged in court instead of being POFMAed
Cases where POFMA has been invoked
5th case where Pofma has been invoked
First challenge against POFMA fake news law
Singapore rebuts Foreign Media on fake news law
Tis the season to be #POFMA-ed
3 Instances Of POFMA Invoked
Facebook gives way to Singapore’s ‘fake news’ law
POFMA fake news law invoked for first time
PM Lee: “POFMA would catch you!”
K Shanmugam to ‘Ah Lian’: POFMA is like a Torchlight
Singapore's fake news law passed
Singapore introduces anti-fake news law
Singapore PM sues online editor
Singapore PM threatens online editor with libel
PM Lee sues Blogger for sharing article
MDA tells The Online Citizen to register under Broadcasting Act
Mothership.sg To Register Under Broadcasting Act
Blogger asked to remove defamatory post about PM Lee
Why is Facebook in trouble?
"Can we love our Country and fear at the same time?”
The 'Dr Mahathir-Activists KL Meeting' Saga
States Times Review to shut down
Thumping of PJ Thum over ‘fake news’ hearing
Parliamentary committee on Fake News
Law to combat fake news to be introduced next year
Combating fake news in Singapore
Fakes and Frauds
Singapore public servants' computers no Internet from May 2017
