Pritam Singh
I believe there would be broad agreement about new laws that seek to prevent child pornography, although I doubt this is the central objective of these new laws the Law Minister speaks of. I am extremely skeptical about laws that cover "harassment", "cyber-bullying" and "putting out falsehoods". We need to know what the first two legally mean and who we seek to protect. As for the last, we have laws that can address such acts already.
If this were a country where there was a competitive mainstream media where different views and ideas were aired freely and former PAP members were not Chairmen of the Singapore Press Holdings, amongst others oddities, I can understand and respect the views of those who prefer netizens to state their identities.
But in the Singapore context and for the longest time, the PAP government has a rich history in clamping down on the proliferation of independent thought through the enactment of the Newspapers and Printing Presses Act. In my view, the advent of anonymity is largely the result of a one-party dominant state and how it has defined the role of the media. Mainstream media control is a central PAP governing philosophy.
It goes without saying that the advent of the internet has eroded the PAP's ability to dominate and determine the national discourse. This is a real problem for the PAP. Ultimately, I am of the opinion it is trying to find a way to regain the upperhand.
For the record, even opposition politicians get harangued by anonymous netizens. And I don't see a problem. That's life. Opposition politicians have banned netizens who cross the line as established by the rules on their facebook pages. Many people host facebook pages and even PAP politicos ban netizens who cross the lines they draw. It is plainly evident that Singaporeans are more than capable of self-regulation.
My deeper concern lies with what the introduction of the law the Minister speaks of, is what it actually means for us as a people.
I am of the view that responses to cyber-bullying and harassment (I assume the group we really want to protect are children) are best dealt with in our schools through education and by parents at home. The real world is not always a pleasant place. People sometimes say hurtful things and have negative or less than honest intentions. Instead of pretending that the world is something different, lets arm our children with a skill set that allows them to respond to such harassment and bullying, not just for the online world, but the real world, and for life. Lets put responsibility back in the hands of our parents and teachers, instead of fobbing it off to the PAP, who have repeatedly said that the Government should do less going forward, and the people should step up more. So lets walk the talk.
I will speak more about this when the Government's intentions become clearer, if and when the Bill is debated in Parliament, and after consultation with my Party colleagues. But for now, my view is that in the medium to long run, we have more to lose as a people and as a society if such a law comes to pass. It will tell the PAP that they can continue to make personal decisions for us. Thanks but no thanks.
Laws needed in online sphere for accountability, says Shanmugam
[url]www.todayonline.com
SINGAPORE — The Government is not attempting to curtail freedom of expression, but believes people should be held accountable for what they post online, said Law and Foreign Minister K Shanmugam
[/URL]