By Choo Zheng Xi / Co-Founder

For and on behalf of The Online Citizen

After facing a wall of public anger, MDA has tried to explain away the most sweeping limitations to Singaporeans’ constitutionally protected right to free speech by issuing belated and non-binding assurances today.

Before we examine these “assurances”, let’s do a brief recap.

The MDA has succeeded in gazetting legislation that has re-defined the plain English understanding of what a “news program” is.

Under MDA doublespeak (which is now enshrined in law), a Singapore news program is defined as everything:

“any programme (whether or not the programme is presenter-based and whether or not the programme is provided by a third party) containing any news, intelligence, report of occurrence, or any matter of public interest, about any social, economic, political, cultural, artistic, sporting, scientific or any other aspect of Singapore in any language (whether paid or free and whether at regular intervals or otherwise) but does not include any programme produced by or on behalf of the Government”.

Backtracking but not backing down

MDA “assures” us that it will not apply the licensing regime on “an individual publishing views on current affairs and trends on his/her personal website or blog which does not amount to news reporting”.

The MDA “assurances” do not address the direct concerns of the public about the width of the legislation. This is because MDA’s “assurances” are absolutely not what the licensing regime states in black and white.

All that the MDA’s “assurance” really means is that it will, for the time being arbitrarily exercise their discretion not to apply the full extent of their powers under law to individual bloggers.

MDA can’t even give a coherent explanation about why sites like TOC don’t fall under the licensing regime despite objective site statistics.

Do they have a coherent game plan as to how to apply the regime to the rest of the country? I don’t think so. It sounds like they’re making policy parameters up on the fly.

Let’s be clear: there is absolutely nothing stopping MDA from applying the licensing regime to individual bloggers down the line. And, because of their creative re-definition of the term “Singapore news programme”, they will be able to do so with complete impunity.

Keep being engaged

I wrote an earlier piece generally setting out why YOU should care about this hurriedly passed piece of legislation as a Singaporean citizen.

Here’s a couple more.

The movement against the licensing regime isn’t about politics.

Pro-government bloggers should be just as concerned as bloggers who are critical of the current government.

The current government will not remain in power forever, and today’s pro-government blogger could easily be 2016’s opposition internet activist.

If the licensing regime remains on the books, it leaves the door open for you to be licensed somewhere in the future despite the MDA’s non-binding “assurances” of today. The re-definition of “Singapore news program” has left the licensing regime wide open to potential abuse.

If you’re a governing party MP, you need to oppose the licensing regime because the manner in which the license regime was gazetted renders you even more useless than a rubber stamp. Rubber stamps typically go through the motions of scrutinizing and debating legislation.

MDA hasn’t even bothered to ask you to rubber stamp their restrictions on freedom of speech this time around. They’ve just gone ahead and done it.

To my fellow Singaporeans, remember this: fool us once, shame on you. Fool us twice, shame on us.

After the bamboozling license regime MDA’s rammed into place, will we continue to let them talk circles around us with “assurances”?

If so, shame on us indeed.

You May Also Like

Migrant worker NGOs’ appeal against rejection for vehicle procession

Mr K Shanmugam Minister for Home Affairs and Law New Phoenix Park…

Netizens do not buy Law Minister’s explanation on why the offender of Monica Baey’s case was only given conditional warning

Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam said in Parliament on Monday…

Derogatory term used by ST to describe deaf people

The following letter was rejected for publication by the Straits Times’ Forum…

网传视频揭鸽子被诱杀惹议

数只鸽子似乎是吃了某些食物后,开始在地上挣扎,飞不起来。有数人站在不远处的树下,看到大部分鸽子飞不起来了,就戴上面罩,将鸽子捡起来,一一丢到黑色大垃圾袋内处理掉。网传的这段视频引来网民纷纷关注,其中有反对诱杀手段者,也有赞成的一群。 昨日,关爱动物研究协会(ACRES)上载了一段有关诱杀鸽子的视频,引起网民注意。 有关的视频也接合了脸书用户Suraiyah K Abdulla于2018年9月上载的诱杀鸽子视频,并表示有关的诱杀行为非常不人道,令人感到不安。 视频中除了看见人们将无法动弹的活鸽子,装入黑色大垃圾袋内,也可见到他们或扫、或踢地将鸽子装进簸箕内。 食用了毒药的鸽子大部分都无法逃离被捕捉的命运,只有疑似食用较少有毒物品的鸽子得以逃离被消灭的命运。 网民对有关的诱杀行动感到震惊和愤怒,纷纷在社交媒体上表达他们的不满和难以置信。 “诱杀鸽子是不对的,但是可以考虑不要饲养鸽子。我住家附近都是鸽子的繁殖地和排泄场所,因为有一批不体谅的人士正在喂养这些鸽子。” 为他人想想 但是,部分网民则觉得这是不得不进行的工作。因为一些鸟类可能是病原带菌体,且粪便不清理也会导致污染环境和水的卫生。 “鸽子四处觅食,它们身上可能携带诸如禽流感、H5N1等病菌。试想像这些携带病菌的鸟类到小贩中心的桌上觅食的情况。你的免疫系统若不够强壮,你最终将会生病。想象一下那些体弱的小孩和老人们。”