Connect with us

Legal

Timeline of Amos Yee's latest arrest by the Singapore Police Force over Section 298 of penal code

Published

8 years ago

on

A timeline of Amos Yee’s latest sedition case that led to him being investigated by the Singapore Police Force (SPF) and his experience with the police arrest.

In response to earlier media queries, the police said that Amos had been arrested for offences under Sections 174 and 298 of the Penal Code.
The police spokesman said, “The offence under section 298 of the Penal Code relates to online remarks made in November 2015 that contained offensive and disparaging remarks against various religious communities,”

The timeline of Amos’ arrest for the offences
17 November 2015: Amos publishes a post on his blog https://amosyee.wordpress.com addressing Calvin Cheng’s comments on killing the children of terrorist members.
In the post, Amos wrote “Oh yes and xxxx Islam, and Allah doesn’t exist, but say you see a prick from ISIS who wants to kill or has even killed before, don’t think that’s a scenario where it’s alright to kill him”.
This statement prompted several police reports from the public.

12 December 2015: The SPF issues a statement affirming that Amos Yee is under investigation for his comments on Islam.
13 December 2015: Amos leaves Singapore. He faces no difficulty leaving Singapore. Amos heads first to Hong Kong, then to Melbourne and Taiwan. During his time abroad he posts several pictures to his Facebook account, one of which shows him holding up a middle finger to the Quran.

21 April 2016: Amos returns to Singapore. Once again, he is not stopped at immigration.

3 May 2016: Police show up at Amos’s home in Ang Mo Kio and inform him that he is legally obliged to show up for investigation. On the same day, Amos uploads a video in which he secretly records the police at his door.

9 May 2016: Amos attempts to leave the country. He is stopped by immigration and has his passport confiscated.

10 May 2015: Amos is arrested while going to buy lunch from a flat in Jurong. 3 police officers were allegedly waiting at the void deck downstairs. Once spotted, they immediately went up and handcuffed him. In the house, the 3 police officers called for assistance. 6 more officers then showed up. The police then began to search the house, finally confiscating a slew of electrical devices.

Confiscated items include:

  • 5 phones
  • 7 laptops (1 of which is was Amos’ mother’s working laptop that had her prepared tuition notes inside and it significantly disrupted her work)
  • 1 desktop computer
  • 6 cameras
  • 3 tripods

Amos estimates that the total worth of the items is around SGD$16,000.
According to Amos, when the police decided to send him back to the police station, plastic shackles were used to secure Amos’ arms, legs and around his body. Amos said that the shackles were very tight and expressed discomfort but the officers refused to loosen them and quoted the officers saying,  ‘(until) we are back at the station’. Once the shackles were loosened, there were noticeable bruises on both arms and legs.
Amos was then brought to Jurong Police station and was questioned by ISP Doreen Chong. He said that there were 57 questions asked by the ISP during this interview.

Amos recounted that he was asked questions like:

  • “what was your intention to post the picture of you showing the middle finger on the Quran?”
  • “did you know that your words would offend people?”
  • “what do you mean by halal-snorters?”

Amos has stated that he did not answer any of the police’s questions. He noted that another male officer then threatened him saying, ‘if you don’t answer these questions, we can infer that to a different meaning and it will be to your disadvantage in court’.

Amos was subsequently released on $5,000 bail posted by his mother. 
There has been no further action by the police. Amos’ passport is currently impounded by the police and the police is still carrying out their investigation on the matter.
TOC understands that Amos has uploaded a video titled “Refuting Islam With Their Own Quran” on 19 May 2016. The video is taken off of Youtube within an hour (possibly for violating Youtube community standards). Amos then re-uploads the video on Vimeo.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Comments

Malaysian police seek Interpol’s aid in locating Jocelyn Chia, netizens criticise action as unnecessary

The Royal Malaysia Police plan to seek Interpol’s assistance in locating comedian Jocelyn Chia, according to Bernama.

However, many Malaysian netizens argue that pursuing action against Chia is unnecessary, as it would only give her the attention she desires.

Chia defended her controversial MH370 joke in a CNN interview, explaining that the context was lost when a clip of the routine circulated on social media.

She clarified that the joke was based on the friendly rivalry between Singapore and Malaysia and expressed no ill feelings toward Malaysia.

Published

1 year ago

on

13 June 2023

By

MALAYSIA —  The Royal Malaysia Police are planning to seek the support of Interpol, the International Criminal Police Organization to track down comedian Jocelyn Chia, Malaysian state news agency Bernama reported.

Inspector-General of Police Acryl Sani Abdullah Sani, as quoted by Bernama, revealed that an official application will be submitted to Interpol on Wednesday (14 June).

The purpose is to conduct further investigations under Section 504/505(c) of the Penal Code and Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998.

The police’s objective is to obtain both the “full identity” and the current whereabouts of Jocelyn Chia.

Additionally, they have applied to the Malaysian Multimedia Communications Commission (MCMC) for user profiling to aid in the investigation of the comedian’s social media accounts.

“We (police) have also transcribed the suspect’s speech from the video clip,” he said.

Malaysian netizens said action against Jocelyn Chia is unnecessary

However, a significant number of Malaysian netizens have expressed their opinion that taking action against Jocelyn Chia is unnecessary.

They believe that such actions would only serve to give her the attention she seeks, and they argue that allocating resources and taxpayer money toward addressing an individual like Chia would be a waste.

S Arutchelvan, the deputy chairperson of the Malaysian Socialist Party, expressed the opinion that it is unnecessary to waste time on pursuing Jocelyn Chia.

He believes that it is more important to focus on locating Jho Low, referring to the prominent figure involved in the 1MDB scandal, and police should prioritize addressing serious matters rather than comedic issues.

Chia’s insensitivity has drawn heavy criticism from both Malaysians and Singaporeans

Chia, in her controversial performance, portrayed Malaysia as an ex trying to reconnect with Singapore after the nations’ separation in 1965.

In a particularly distasteful jest, she associated Malaysia’s attempt to ‘visit’ Singapore with the tragic MH370 incident.

Her remarks were met with disapproval by the audience, but she unapologetically responded, “What? Malaysian Airlines going missing is not funny, huh? Some jokes don’t land. This joke kills in Singapore.”

Chia’s insensitivity has drawn heavy criticism from both Malaysians and Singaporeans, many of whom regard her comments as a stark reminder of the ongoing pain of the MH370 tragedy for victims and their families.

Chia defended her joke

Chia mentioned that Malaysian audience members often approach her after shows to express their enjoyment, indicating that they “did not take offense” to her performance.

Singapore High Commissioner distancing Jocelyn Chia as “no longer Singaporean”

Meanwhile, Singapore Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan and the Republic’s High Commissioner to Malaysia, Mr Vanu Gopala Menon, also expressed their disapproval of Chia’s comments, emphasizing that she does not represent the views of Singaporeans.

Memon posted on social media to sincerely apologise to all Malaysians for Chia’s hurtful remarks.

“The Singapore Government does not condone words or actions that cause harm or hurt to others and Chia, who is no longer Singaporean, does not in any way reflect our views.”

He reiterated that as closest neighbour, Singapore and Malaysia enjoy a strong and multi-faceted relationship, with deep and cross-cutting ties, “We also have unique historical and close people-to-people ties. ”

“Comments such as those made by Chia are unhelpful and undermine the close trust and friendship that both our countries and peoples enjoy,” Menon added.

Continue Reading

Arts & Culture

Malaysian Home Ministry withdraws appeal against High Court’s 2021 ruling on ‘Allah’ in Christian publication

Malaysia’s Home Ministry has withdrawn its appeal against a High Court ruling that overturned the ban on using the word “Allah” in Christian publications. Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail cited ‘contradictions’ between an administrative order and a 1986 Cabinet decision.

Despite this, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim stated that restrictions remain for non-Muslims in other states, a claim contested by Sarawak state assemblyman Baru Bian

Published

1 year ago

on

17 May 2023

By

MALAYSIA — The Home Ministry of Malaysia has withdrawn its appeal against the High Court’s decision in March 2021, which overturned the government’s ban on the use of the word “Allah” in Christian publications throughout the country.

Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail, the current Home Minister under Anwar’s administration, explained that his Ministry made the decision due to “contradiction found between a Home Ministry administrative order and a Cabinet decision made in 1986″.

The court record shows that The Attorney-General’s Chambers, representing the Home Ministry, notified the Court of Appeal that they would not pursue the appeal.

According to Malaysia English media outlet The Star, the Home Minister clarified that the court’s decision was based on an administrative approach and not a theological standpoint, as the court is not deemed appropriate to decide matters related to religion specifically.

“This is because the function of the Court itself is not appropriate to decide matters related to religion specifically,” he explained the matter to the reporters on Tuesday (16 May).

In Malaysia, the legal system consists of both civil courts and Shariah courts, the latter being responsible for matters concerning Islamic law.

The Home Minister said in the 10 March 2021’s judgement, it is clear that the Judge made a decision “based on an administrative approach” and it was found to be consistent with the decision of the Federal Court in the case of the Titular Roman Catholic Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur vs the Home Affairs Minister in 2014.

“Regarding this, the Government’s decision not to proceed with the appeal is made on a case-by-case basis; without affecting the facts of each case that is currently in court,” he added.

Saifuddin added that the government intends to review and update a comprehensive directive on the use of words like “Allah” to align with the interests of the multi-racial and multi-religious community in Malaysia.

Malaysian PM acknowledges rights of Christians in Sarawak

In the meantime, when responding to the Home Ministry’s decision to withdraw its appeal in the case, Malaysia Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim acknowledged that Christians in Sarawak can use the word “Allah,” but restrictions remain for non-Muslims in other states.

“The court had ruled (in favour of Sarawak) and we must understand that it is Sarawak’s prerogative,” he said in an event on Tuesday.

However, Baru Bian, a lawyer and a state assemblyman in Sarawak challenged the Prime Minister’s statement, emphasizing that the High Court’s ruling applies to the entire country and not just Sarawak.

“The judgment of the High Court applies throughout the whole of Malaysia,” he reiterated.

One of the high-profile cases in Malaysia

On May 11, 2008, Malaysia’s Home Ministry seized eight educational CDs and books from Jill Ireland Bill, a Sarawak Christian of the Melanau tribe, at an airport in Sepang.

The CDs containing titles including ‘Cara Menggunakan Kunci Kerajaan Allah’, ‘Cara Hidup Dalam Kerajaan Allah’, and ‘Ibadah Yang Benar Dalam Kerajaan Allah’, which Jill brought back from Indonesia.

In August 2008, Jill Ireland filed a lawsuit against the Home Minister and the Malaysian government, challenging their decision to confiscate the materials.

This legal battle spanned over a decade and focused on Jill Ireland’s constitutional rights to freely practice her religion and seek recognition for those rights.

A significant breakthrough came on 10 March 2021, when the Malaysian High Court delivered a landmark ruling in favour of Jill Ireland.

The court granted her the right to use the word “Allah” in her religious education, overturning a 1986 directive by the Home Ministry that prohibited its use in Christian publications.

During the ruling, Judge Datuk Nor Bee stated that the four Arabic words, including “Allah,” could be used by Christians in their publications, provided it is clearly indicated as “For Christians Only” on the front page.

The judge deemed the 1986 directive “illegal and unlawful,” as it lacked justification on the grounds of public order or potential confusion.

Furthermore, the judge pointed out that the use of the word “Allah” in Bahasa Malaysia by the Christian communities of Sabah and Sarawak since 1629 had not caused any significant problems leading to public disorder over the centuries.

Sabah church drops its 16-year-long legal challenge 

While the High Court made landmark decision for Sarawak’s Jill Ireland case, Malay Mail reported on Wednesday (17 May) that a Sabah church, Sidang Injil Borneo’s (SIB), has chosen to end its 16-year-long legal challenge against the Malaysian government’s 1986 ban on the use of the word “Allah” in Christian publications.

SIB’s case was linked to the Home Ministry’s 2007 decision to seize and withhold the release of the church’s Christian educational materials containing the word “Allah.”

On 15 August 2007, the customs department seized three boxes of educational materials belonging to SIB at the Low-Cost Carrier Terminal (LCCT) airport in Sepang.

Despite SIB’s explanation that the materials were intended for educational purposes within the church and not for sale, the Home Ministry initially refused to return them, citing a directive from 19 May 1986.

However, in January 2008, the Home Ministry returned the publications to SIB with the condition that they could only be distributed if the front page was stamped with the symbol of the “cross” and labelled as a Christian publication.

Despite this, SIB decided to continue pursuing the case, which involved constitutional rights such as freedom of religion, equality before the law, and protection against religious discrimination.

The legal process surrounding the case has been ongoing since 2008 and continues to the present day.

Continue Reading

Trending