Apr 4, 2019 | News
Today, the ICJ urged Singapore’s Parliament not to pass the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Bill 2019 (‘Online Falsehoods Bill’), which was tabled on Monday, 1 April.
The ICJ said that the bill, if passed into law, would result in far-reaching limitations on freedom of expression, opinion and information in Singapore, and could be wielded to curtail important discussion of matters of public interest, including content critical of the government.
“This bill, if passed, would make the government the sole arbiter of what information is permissible online and what is not, creating a real risk that the law will be misused to clamp down on opinions or information critical of the government,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ Director for Asia and the Pacific.
The bill authorizes ministers to direct individuals, owners or operators of online platforms, digital advertising and internet intermediaries to remove, make corrections to, disable or block access to a “false statement of fact”, if such action is deemed to be “in the public interest”. Such ministerial directions can be made even if a false statement “has been amended or has ceased to be communicated in Singapore”.
The bill does not provide any real definition of “false statement of fact” and does not clarify what constitutes “public interest”. The bill also fails to provide for exceptions or defences such as honest mistake, parody, artistic merit, or public interest. Executive discretion is also not subject to judicial review or oversight under its provisions.
Criminal penalties for non-compliance with the law are severe, and include hefty fines and up to ten years’ imprisonment for violations.
These may be imposed on individuals and/or owners or operators of online platforms, as well as intermediaries who facilitate the communication of such statements, including social networking services, search engine services, internet-based messaging services and video-sharing services.
The bill is also clear that communications through SMS (Short Message Service) and MMS (Multimedia Messaging Service) fall under its remit.
“The spread of misinformation online is a complex problem that cannot be effectively addressed by simply granting broad discretion to government officials to censor online expression,” said Rawski.
“A multi-pronged approach that protects the rights to free expression, opinion and information is required, beginning with better media literacy education and free access to information, including to opinions critical of the government,” he added.
Contact
Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director (Bangkok), e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org
Singapore-fake news bill-News-web story-2019-ENG (full story with additional information, in PDF)
Jun 22, 2018 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today issued a statement on online violence against women and girls.
The statement was issued on the occasion of an interactive dialogue at the UN Human Rights Council, with the UN Working Group on discrimination against women. The ICJ was unable to read the statement due to the limited time provided for NGO statements. The statement is as follows:
“International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) welcomes the Report of the Special Rapporteur focusing on online violence against women and girls.
This is timely considering the noted rise in incidents of women being attacked online for expressing their opinions. In many countries, women political dissenters and women human rights defenders, who express their views through social media, face backlash from the subjects of their criticisms and their supporters. They are persecuted and are threatened with sexual and physical violence. Many of the attacks against them clearly embody harmful gender stereotypes.
The ICJ notes that these harmful stereotypes exist in many countries around the world and they hinder women from accessing justice. Unfortunately, technology and social media play a role in spreading and proliferating these harmful gender stereotypes.
The ICJ continues to assist in strengthening the capacities of formal justice actors such as judges to help women access justice and to eliminate gender stereotypes. In 2016, the ICJ engaged with judges from the Philippines, Thailand, Timor Leste, and Indonesia when they developed and adopted the Bangkok General Guidance for Judges in Applying a Gender Perspective.
The ICJ joins the Special Rapporteur’s recommendation for States to provide training for all justice actors, including judges, to ensure their ability to bring perpetrators of cases of online and ICT-facilitated violence to justice. The ICJ offers the General Guidance as a tool for justice actors to consider evidence in these cases without resorting to gender stereotypes and to decide cases based on the principle of equality under international human rights standards.
The ICJ shall persist in its work to enable women to access justice and to eliminate gender-based violence and discrimination.”
Jun 20, 2018 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
At the UN the ICJ today addressed abuse of laws in Southeast Asia to restrict freedom of expression.The statement was made in an interactive dialogue with the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression, at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. It read as follows:
“The ICJ welcomes the report of the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression (A/HRC/38/35), on online expression. Such concerns are reflected in the continued weaponization of laws to criminalize and unduly restrict freedom of expression in Southeast Asia. Increasingly, laws are misused to harass and intimidate civil society, journalists, politicians and ordinary individuals.
For example, in Cambodia, three persons were arrested – two charged and detained in May, and one reportedly arrested this past weekend – for sharing content on Facebook in alleged violation of a recent lèse majesté law. Another man was similarly detained, and a woman extradited from Thailand to Cambodia and imprisoned, for Facebook posts deemed critical of the government. An inter-ministerial order signed last month now allows government agencies to monitor and censor information on websites and social media.
Another example is Vietnam, where as well-known bloggers remain in jail, last week lawmakers adopted a cybersecurity law that will compel companies to store users’ data in-country, pass personal data to government authorities, and censor information online when directed to do so by the government.
A further example is Thailand, where this year alone at least 132 people were charged for “illegal assembly” after protesting for elections to be held – 27 were also charged with a sedition-like offence carrying a maximum penalty of seven years’ imprisonment. Last week, arrest warrants were reportedly issued alleging dissemination of false information on Facebook, which may lead to charges under the Computer Crimes Act carrying a maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment, despite international standards precluding imprisonment as an appropriate penalty.
The ICJ urges all States to implement the recommendations in the report of the Special Rapporteur, and to ensure the right to freedom of expression by revoking or amending all laws, orders, policies or other actions which unjustifiably restrict this fundamental freedom.”
