Who needs filtering? Defamation in Singapore

1. Who needs filtering? Defamation in Singapore James Gomez www.jamesgomeznews.com www.jamesgomeznews.com

2. The Big Picture • Efforts at political filtering exist even before new media. Used a mixture of laws and sanction to effect “filtering”. Same methods are still used in the new technology environment. • Over the years this has led to an emergence of “culture” – self-censorship. We need bear in mind culture in the midst of technology. • Infrastructure of technical control is there for new technology but not used, but can be used. As it is the case in some countries. • We talk about technical solutions – but also need a political solutions. Hence we need a combination of both. www.jamesgomeznews.com

3. Rationale for political filtering in Spore • To prevent robust criticism of the ruling regime and its policies in a manner that might challenge its political dominance • Deny, negate or limit coverage of the opposition. • First step was to eliminate or control platforms that might facilitate the dissemination of such criticisms • Second step to actually stop the articulators at the source www.jamesgomeznews.com

4. Defamation and the media • The use of defamation has been widely used in the suppression of independent media (local) – up to the late 70s/80s. • Such defamation suits were then extended to the foreign media from the 80s onwards. • Most of the defamation were civil suits, aimed at financially damaging media companies. • The content in many cases where criticism of the PAP, Lee Kuan Yew discussed in the context of reporting the opposition in S’pore. www.jamesgomeznews.com

5. Defamation and Opposition Politicians • Aimed largely at opposition politicians largely in the context of election rallies • Cannot claim political privilege/fair comment during political campaigning • JBJ, Tang Liang Hong, Chee Soon Juan (aimed at bankruptcy) • Contempt of Court - fine and jail terms • Internal Security Act-detention without trial • Singapore courts/judiciary role is seen as not independent in such political cases. www.jamesgomeznews.com

6. Defamation and Civil Society (New Media) • Registration of political “sites” – (political parties and political associations [gazetted]) • comprehensive registration form • Fateha.com, Zulfikar Mohd Shariff, Use of criminal defamation • SFD (0verseas), Robert Ho, Mental Health • Unpublished instances settled privately www.jamesgomeznews.com

7. New Media and Elections • Online Election Reportage (Forums) • 1997 no election advertisement allowed • 2001 some election advertisement allowed • Political NGOs not allowed to advertise • 2006 further streamlining targeting bloggers • Overseas reportage still unregulated www.jamesgomeznews.com

8. Bloggers • Civil Defamation – Student Bond Breakers • Sedition Act – Anti-Muslim Comments • Student commentary – policed by Ministry of Education staff • Political Films Act – Singapore Rebel (MS), Hosts • Election Act • discuss politics in a consistent way • no podcasting • No vodcasting • No rally photos www.jamesgomeznews.com

9. Impact on politics (offline and online) • Reduction in robust criticisms • Robust criticism elicits strong reprisals • Changing the nature of political expression in Singapore • Moderate political expression (to operate within harsh laws) • Civil disobedience (to challenge bad laws) www.jamesgomeznews.com

10. Moving ahead – leveraging on external networks • Connecting local activists to regional and international networks (embassy, academic) • Providing external platforms for Singapore alternative news to be published • Filling or supplementing the civil society gap in the interim • Application of defamation laws in other jurisdictions often take cues from Singapore • Need to have a focused regional defamation law conference and follow up advocacy action – a political accompaniment to the technical approach of by-passing filtering www.jamesgomeznews.com