- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 33,627
- Points
- 0
<TABLE id=msgUN border=0 cellSpacing=3 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD id=msgUNsubj vAlign=top>
Coffeeshop Chit Chat - Distributing anti-PAP flyer, seditious?</TD><TD id=msgunetc noWrap align=right> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=msgtable cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="96%"><TBODY><TR><TD class=msg vAlign=top><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR class=msghead><TD class=msgbfr1 width="1%"> </TD><TD><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR class=msghead vAlign=top><TD class=msgF width="1%" noWrap align=right>From: </TD><TD class=msgFname width="68%" noWrap>kojakbt_89 <NOBR></NOBR> </TD><TD class=msgDate width="30%" noWrap align=right>3:13 am </TD></TR><TR class=msghead><TD class=msgT height=20 width="1%" noWrap align=right>To: </TD><TD class=msgTname width="68%" noWrap>ALL <NOBR></NOBR></TD><TD class=msgNum noWrap align=right> (1 of 3) </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD class=msgleft rowSpan=4 width="1%"> </TD><TD class=wintiny noWrap align=right>31464.1 </TD></TR><TR><TD height=8></TD></TR><TR><TD class=msgtxt>Distribution of anti-PAP fliers: Is it an offence under the Sedition Act?
April 10, 2010 by admin
Filed under Opinion
Leave a comment
http://www.temasekreview.com/2010/04/10/distribution-of-anti-pap-fliers-is-it-an-offence-under-the-sedition-act/
OPINION
The involvement of the Singapore Police in the investigation of anti-PAP fliers being distributed to Seng Kang and Marine Parade residents has sparked a controversy among Singaporeans who wonder why the police are called upon in the first place when they have more pressing cases at hand to solve.
The mainstream media tried to cast aspersions on the author of the fliers, but dared not publish its contents its full.
The Singapore police is currently investigating the case under the Sedition Act which was first used against three men for making racist remarks on the internet in September 2005.
The most recent case in which the Act was employed was a few weeks ago when two Chinese polytechnic students were arrested by the police for posting racist comments on Facebook.
For some strange reasons, the Singapore police did not bother to take any action against a Christian Pastor Rony Tan for mocking the Buddhist and Taoist faiths during a sermon to his congregation.
What exactly does the Sedition Act entails?
Sedition Act (CAP 290)
A seditious tendency is a tendency —
(a) to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the Government;
(b) to excite the citizens of Singapore or the residents in Singapore to attempt to procure in Singapore, the alteration, otherwise than by lawful means, of any matter as by law established;
(c) to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the administration of justice in Singapore;
(d) to raise discontent or disaffection amongst the citizens of Singapore or the residents in Singapore;
(e) to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Singapore.
Below is the copy of the flier in English:
The gist of the article can be divided into three parts:
1. Accusing PAP leaders of not revealing their assets and sources of income.
2. Blaming the PAP for causing suffering to Singaporeans with its misguided policies.
3. A call on Singaporeans to unite and take action against the PAP, possibly by voting it out in the next general election.
Since the content does not involve race, religion or legal matters, sections (b), (c) and (e) of the Sedition Act are automatically excluded which leaves us with only sections (a) and (d).
Strictly speaking, the article simply expressed some grouses commonly heard among Singaporeans and though the allegations are not substantiated per se, it is hard to reach a reasonable conclusion that its content will ”raise discontent or disaffection among the citizens of Singapore” when many Singaporeans are already unhappy with the PAP in the first place.
It is a gray area here and it will be interesting to see how the culprit will be prosecuted should he/she be apprehended and charged in court.
The Sedition Act has been used only against “inflammatory” remarks of a racist or religious nature so far and this will mark the first time that it is used to criminalize civil activism which is legitimate elsewhere.
Every Singapore citizen has the right to criticize the government and to call for collective action to remove it from office (via legal means) if its performance is not satisfactory.
Nowhere in the world is it a crime to hate or detest a government except in totalitarian states like Myanmar and North Korea.
The PAP should seriously reflect on why somebody will bother to write, print and distribute such fliers rather than to dismiss its contents cursorily again.
</TD></TR><TR><TD> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD class=msgleft width="1%"> </TD><TD class=msgopt width="24%" noWrap>
Options</TD><TD class=msgrde width="50%" noWrap align=middle> 
Reply</TD><TD class=wintiny width="25%" noWrap align=right> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=msgbfrbot> </TD><TD colSpan=3> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
April 10, 2010 by admin
Filed under Opinion
Leave a comment
http://www.temasekreview.com/2010/04/10/distribution-of-anti-pap-fliers-is-it-an-offence-under-the-sedition-act/
OPINION
The involvement of the Singapore Police in the investigation of anti-PAP fliers being distributed to Seng Kang and Marine Parade residents has sparked a controversy among Singaporeans who wonder why the police are called upon in the first place when they have more pressing cases at hand to solve.
The mainstream media tried to cast aspersions on the author of the fliers, but dared not publish its contents its full.
The Singapore police is currently investigating the case under the Sedition Act which was first used against three men for making racist remarks on the internet in September 2005.
The most recent case in which the Act was employed was a few weeks ago when two Chinese polytechnic students were arrested by the police for posting racist comments on Facebook.
For some strange reasons, the Singapore police did not bother to take any action against a Christian Pastor Rony Tan for mocking the Buddhist and Taoist faiths during a sermon to his congregation.
What exactly does the Sedition Act entails?
Sedition Act (CAP 290)
A seditious tendency is a tendency —
(a) to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the Government;
(b) to excite the citizens of Singapore or the residents in Singapore to attempt to procure in Singapore, the alteration, otherwise than by lawful means, of any matter as by law established;
(c) to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the administration of justice in Singapore;
(d) to raise discontent or disaffection amongst the citizens of Singapore or the residents in Singapore;
(e) to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Singapore.
Below is the copy of the flier in English:
The gist of the article can be divided into three parts:
1. Accusing PAP leaders of not revealing their assets and sources of income.
2. Blaming the PAP for causing suffering to Singaporeans with its misguided policies.
3. A call on Singaporeans to unite and take action against the PAP, possibly by voting it out in the next general election.
Since the content does not involve race, religion or legal matters, sections (b), (c) and (e) of the Sedition Act are automatically excluded which leaves us with only sections (a) and (d).
Strictly speaking, the article simply expressed some grouses commonly heard among Singaporeans and though the allegations are not substantiated per se, it is hard to reach a reasonable conclusion that its content will ”raise discontent or disaffection among the citizens of Singapore” when many Singaporeans are already unhappy with the PAP in the first place.
It is a gray area here and it will be interesting to see how the culprit will be prosecuted should he/she be apprehended and charged in court.
The Sedition Act has been used only against “inflammatory” remarks of a racist or religious nature so far and this will mark the first time that it is used to criminalize civil activism which is legitimate elsewhere.
Every Singapore citizen has the right to criticize the government and to call for collective action to remove it from office (via legal means) if its performance is not satisfactory.
Nowhere in the world is it a crime to hate or detest a government except in totalitarian states like Myanmar and North Korea.
The PAP should seriously reflect on why somebody will bother to write, print and distribute such fliers rather than to dismiss its contents cursorily again.
</TD></TR><TR><TD> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD class=msgleft width="1%"> </TD><TD class=msgopt width="24%" noWrap>
