We refer to the MDA’s comments in The Straits Times today. The comments state that TOC does not, at present, meet the new licensing requirements for online news sites announced yesterday.

MDA’s failure to explain application of licensing criteria

MDA’s statement fails to explain why the requirements do not apply to TOC at present, while hinting obliquely that they could apply to the website in the future.

Our internal statistics, a screenshot of which is attached, indicate that we meet the visitorship requirement for licensing. The nature of our coverage appears to fall within MDA’s second requirement for licensing.

tocstats_cloudflare

MDA’s failure to explain how it’s new policy is to be applied at present suggest that the manner in which it is being introduced is opaque and arbitrary, and does not give Singaporeans confidence in its clear application in the future.

TOC, as a largely volunteer run enterprise, cannot afford to labour under such continued legal uncertainty. The legal black hole we will be forced to operate in will hamstring our ability to recruit new volunteers.The licensing regime, if applied to volunteer run socio-political websites like TOC, will effectively cripple us. While the S$50,000 performance bond is a drop in the ocean for a mainstream news outlet with an online presence, it would potentially be beyond our means to raise.Hence, MDA’s claim that these regulations are intended to equalize the playing field between online and offline news is incorrect.

The opposite is true: the regulations will have a disproportionate and unequal impact on volunteer run websites like ours and effectively impair our ability to continue operating.

We call on MDA to provide much needed clarity on its new regulations, and to defer their implementation until such clarity is provided.

Call for full Parliamentary debate

Separately, we call on the Ministry of Communications and Information to table the licensing regime for a full debate in Parliament and to defer the implementation of the licensing regime.

It is not appropriate for Singaporeans’ constitutionally protected right to freedom of speech to be sweepingly curtailed by a regulating authority without any public consultation or oversight by our democratically elected legislature.

 

Choo Zheng Xi: Co-Founder, Consultant Editor
Terry Xu: Executive Editor
Howard Lee: Deputy Chief Editor
Lee Song Kwang: Core Team Member, Treasurer

You May Also Like

总理称教育部已全面采取足够防疫措施 确保教职员安全

总理李显龙表示,目前教育部已全面采取足够的防疫措施,确保老师和职员们的安全。 昨日(2日)是我国阻断措施结束后,正式复课的第一天,李显龙于昨日晚间在脸书上帖文写道,如今已进入第三学期,这也是近两个月以来,首度返校,学生与教师相信也难掩兴奋的心情,因为自4月起,师生们都居家学习,5月又是年中假期,能够见到许久未见的老师和朋友,想必会非常高兴。 他也指出,如今居家学习已然成为“新常态“。随着第一阶段的开放,家长可能会为踏入校园而感到紧张,因此也请家长放心,目前教育部已采取全面措施,确保学生和教师,以及其他工作人员的安全。 “我们需要时间适应,但这些措施将足以保护大家。我们仍在密切监督情况,并会竭尽所能,在确保师生安全的同时,逐渐恢复日常活动。”

林鼎办集会 力数执政党滥用程序罪状

“人民之声”党(Peoples Voice)创办人林鼎,成功于本月26日(星期六)在芳林公园举办主题为“新加坡怎么了?—2019滥用程序议题”的演说集会,获得约1500民众出席。 林鼎在集会上指出,总理李显龙可以对梁实轩穷追猛打,但是他对梁的每一次攻击,就会得到民间双倍的反击,直到双方在法庭对质,真相就会浮上台面。 他相信梁实轩的诉讼有望成为典范案例,足以影响国家政策。 例如美国的民权主义者罗莎帕克斯,因为拒绝巴士司机“黑人应让座白人”的命令而被逮捕。最终最高法院判定公车种族隔离政策违宪,捍卫了黑人的平等权益。 “诚如丘吉尔说过,勇气是人类品德之首。梁实轩捍卫言论自由。在一些事项上,终得要拿出勇气,站稳立场。” 林鼎也再度质问,有上千人,同样也分享了那份有争议的文章,为何只有梁实轩被告?为何总理不是控告原作者或刊载文章的新闻网站Coverage? 林鼎也是梁实轩在诽谤诉讼案中的辩护律师。 林鼎在演说中,也提及我国的一些课题。他说,唯才是举政策(meritocracy)是行动党的政治哲学,她老告诉国人,在新加坡,所有事都是平等的,只要努力表现好就会被提拔。是真的吗? “做不好的应下台” “要做到真正的唯才是举,就要确保没有表现的领袖必须下台。这不是已故建国总理李光耀一再向行动党强调的吗?” 他举例,健保集团网袭病患个资泄露,有任何高层为此负责?过去16个月来,有8名国民服役军人因事故牺牲,有任何将领为此被撤职?人民只看到一系列的调查委员会,但情况仍未改善。…