The High Court dismissed the challenge launched by the lawyers of blogger Amos Yee Pang Sang, 16, to vary his bail conditions after seeing no reason to do so.

Amos was charged on 31 March for uploading an obscene image online and content with the intention to wound the religious feelings of Christians. Earlier, he was also charged under the Protection from Harassment Act 2014 as it “contained remarks about Mr Lee Kuan Yew which was intended to be heard and seen by persons likely to be distressed”, however the charge has since been stood down and put on hold.

Defence lawyers Alfred Dodwell and Ervin Tan had sought a reduction of Amos’ S$30,000 bail amount,  and for him to be allowed to post content online apart from content amounting to the defense of his case.

Appearing in court in purple prison clothing handcuffed and legs shackled, Amos appears composed as the hearing went on.

Amos was placed back into police remand after declining bail on 30 April. On the morning of the bail review, Amos broke bail conditions of bail by posting two blog posts on his blog.

At the start of the hearing, Deputy Public Prosecutor Hay Hung Chun told Justice Tay Yong Kwang in court that the prosecution learnt only yesterday from the police that Amos’ mother had taken her son to the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) on 2 April.

When Justice Tay asked how would this information affect the actions by Attorney General’s Chamber (AGC), DPP Hay said that the AGC would have offered the bail terms at a lower condition and went on to state that if Amos was to agree to go for psychiatric counselling, AGC would agree to set the bail amount at S$10,000 and remove the requirement for Amos to report daily to Bedok Neighbourhood Police Post which takes Amos one and a half hour of travelling time from his home at Shunfu.

Representing lawyer, Mr Dodwell said that it is wrong to say that Amos’ mother is implying that something is wrong with her son with her police report that her son needs counselling and that she was simply doing what a mother would do to protect her son.

He went on to state that the visits to IMH was simply for the purpose of assessment and does not mean that there is something wrong with Amos. As a lawyer, he does not understand why is there a point to communicate this to the AGC unless there are any findings.

Mr Tan argued to the court that the bail condition to cast a blanket ban on posting to any social media platform is too broad and disproportionate and does not meet the purpose for what bail conditions were meant for, to prevent a person from absconding from court or to commit further offense.

Mr Tan also stated it is not accurate to say that an offense has been committed from Amos’ video posting as it is yet to be determined in court.

However, DPP Hay argued that Amos had already breached his bail conditions by making two blog postings while he was out on bail.

When Mr Tan asked if he would accept the offer by DPP Hay to go for psychiatric counselling in exchange for lower bail conditions, Amos declined with a firm “No” from the glass screen he was behind.

Mr Dodwell went on to argue that Amos has been using the internet since eight years old and has been using social media for engagement. Amos also use the internet to produce videos and commenting on the videos to engage viewers.

Mr Dodwell said that social media engagement is akin to drinking water for Amos and in the age of the internet, a lot of things are said online. If people are offended by something, they can walk away from the website or walk away from

Mr Dodwell also said to the judge that if the condition to stop Amos from posting on social media and blog is removed, Amos’ mother and Mr Vincent Law will be willing to act as Amos’ bailor on the spot.

DPP Hay in his argument, say that he do not see that social media engagement is akin to drinking water but see it as coke to Amos, which he could do without and went on to say that Amos could still go shopping online and chat with others through private messaging.

Justice Tay said, “What so hard about that?” when Mr Dodwell told the judge that his client feels that by disallowing him to post on social media and blogging is tantamount to gagging him up. Mr Dodwell explained that teenagers at the age of 16 might not think in the way how adults think in. Justice Tay then commented that they just have to learn to curb themselves.

In his judgement, Justice Tay said that he sees no reason to vary conditions set out in the bail and dismissed the criminal motion.

Amos is back to remand at Changi Prison and will appear again in court for his two-day trial on the charges upon him. The trial is set to begin on Thursday, 9.30am at the state court.

Notify of
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

增疗养院 采用医疗小组护理模式 裕廊诊疗所将重建

裕廊综合诊疗所将重新被发展、扩大现有范围,建设更宽敞、方便轮椅使用者行动的走廊,在医疗模式上还会采用更全面关注慢性病患的医疗小组护理模式。同时,同一地点也将增设一间可容纳700张床位的疗养院,以便与诊疗所相辅相成,更好地照顾当地的年长者。 卫生部兼交通部高级政务部长蓝彬明医生于4月30日,参观裕廊综合诊疗所后,做出以上宣布。 年长居民比率全国居冠 他表示,裕廊人口快速老龄化,年长居民比率是全国冠军,预计到了2025年,每四名居民中就有一人年龄超过65岁了。因此将会在裕廊建设全国第二所结合疗养院的综合诊疗所,首家综合诊疗所的疗养院设立于武吉班让。 蓝彬明也指出,慢性疾病会随着人口老化变得更常见,且更复杂,因此继续为人民提供方便和可负担医疗保健是非常重要的。“这也是为什么我们要建设更多综合诊疗所,支持公共领域的基础护理。” 据《联合早报》指出,建设于1988年的裕廊综合诊所,是先驱综合诊所营业前最为繁忙的诊所之一。 裕廊集选区议员洪维能指出,历时30的该诊所曾于2007年翻新,但是仍然接到不少民众投诉,指空间不足、设施老旧,因此他希望新诊所能提供更舒适的环境,并且减短候诊时间。 蓝彬明指出,新的裕廊综合诊疗将设立于距离原址150米外的现有学生宿舍,会比目前大2.5倍,预计在2025年完工,并且继续由国大综合诊疗所集团负责管理。而现有的学生宿舍将会被拆除。 他也提到,现有的综合诊疗所会继续营业,一直到新诊疗所完全投入运作为止。 新诊所将采用医疗小组护理模式,除了更全面关注慢性疾病病患外,还会协助幼儿疫苗、女性医疗和牙科服务等,与目前所提供的服务相同。 除了裕廊,实龙岗和登加预计也将在2025年拥有新的综合诊疗所,而到了2030年,我国预计将有30到32家综合诊疗所。

840,000 Singaporean HBD households to receive U-Save rebate GST voucher in October

The Ministry of Finance (MOF) announced on Sunday (2 October) that about…

吐口水、怒骂快餐店职员 妇女明被控上庭

今年4月22日,一名女子被拍到对着肯德基服务店员大声斥责,离去前还向店员吐口水,行为引起网民议论。警方较后确认女子身份,并在两天后将她逮捕。 这名42岁妇女将在明日被控上法庭,罪状包括蓄意骚扰、动粗以及违法安全距离措施。 据了解,这名妇女疑因久等外带食物的准备而发怒,在快餐店前怒骂职员“全家去死”并吐口水。 一旦公共滋扰罪名成立,妇女将可能被罚款2000元,而在知情下导致受害者受伤、感到危险或烦扰,惩罚或会改成长达三个月的监禁、或不超过2000元的罚款,或两者兼施。


工人党阿裕尼集选区议员毕丹星在本月29日发文,文章开端以“PA(P)基层”(PA为人民协会简写,毕君将之与行动党(PAP)关联在一起),揶揄人民协会与行动党密不可分的关系,直言现有透过人民协会的社区服务之精神价值观亟需改革,使之能与诸如正义、平等、民主等价值观相一致。 是什么事让毕丹星撂下重话?事缘本周一,友诺士基层组织“Simply Eunos”分享,声称两位基层领袖郭先生(译音)和爱丽丝女士,接到新加坡民防部队手机应用程式myResponder App的警示后,赶到勿洛水池路大牌602座组屋,处理一场火患。 该帖文指当时有垃圾槽起火,但所幸在民防部队赶来前就已扑灭,并提醒大家别把燃烧中的物品丢入垃圾槽里。 居民留言打脸基层组织 不过,却由一名网民Rosalind Lee,声称是也是该组屋的居民打脸友诺士基层组织的贴文有误导性,企图把灭火功劳归给基层领袖。 李女士指出,她在看到垃圾槽冒烟就通知阿裕尼-后港市镇会,不久就有清洁工人赶到现场,空手把垃圾槽拉出空地,并扑灭火势。尔后两辆警车和民防队车辆前来调查起火原因。 “我当时正好在组屋楼下观察该事件,除了好几个好奇路人,以及灭火的清洁工友,我很肯定没有其他人来处理这个火患。” 至于友诺士基层组织则留言澄清,两位基层领袖抵达时,火势已经被扑灭,该则贴文只是为了了提醒居民小心处理易燃品。 毕丹星也在脸书分享友诺士基层组织和Rosalind…