The Court of Appeal has passed its landmark judgement in the case between Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) and Dr Ting Choon Meng/The Online Citizen, stating that the Singapore Government is not deemed as a “person” under the section 15 of the Protection from Harassment Act.
The three-judge CA has determined that the government cannot use the provision in the act as a person in a split judgment with Judge of Appeal Andrew Phang and Chao Hick Tin in majority with Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon dissenting.
This means it is final to say that the government is not entitled to use POHA to seek protection from the “harassment” from Dr Ting and The Online Citizen (TOC) and the two need not comply with the demands set by the court in the previous rulings.
MINDEF through the Attorney’s General Chambers (AGC) had earlier appealed against the High Court’s ruling that the government is not entitled to make an application under Section 15 of the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA) and it is not “just and equitable” for MINDEF to use Section 15 on a statement made by a local inventor against MINDEF.
The High Court had earlier ruled on 9 December 2015 that the Government cannot use the POHA to make The Online Citizen (TOC) take down statements on its site made by Dr Ting Choon Meng, co-founder of medical device firm MobileStats Technologies against the MINDEF.
Earlier on 15 January 2015, TOC reported on Dr Ting’s recount of the sequence of events which transpired between his company, MobileStats Pte Ltd and MINDEF. Dr Ting alleged that MINDEF had infringed his patent for “Mobile First Aid Post” and had the patent revoked through a ‘war of attrition’ in the courts.
In response, MINDEF disputed Dr Ting’s claims with its own statement of facts published on cyberpioneer’s facebook fanpage and sent a letter of demand to Dr Ting and TOC on 28 January via the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) threatening to use the POHA.
Dr Ting and TOC declined to accede to the AGC’s demands set out by the letter, which then led to MINDEF to proceed with legal actions against Dr Ting and TOC on 11 February via the use of POHA to seek protection of harassment from the two.
The move by the government to utilise the POHA to censor news about itself is seen as an unexpected move as the act was promoted as a legislation to protect the weak and vulnerable by the Ministry of Law, K Shanmugam in Parliament.
Dr Ting’s patent remains revoked till date.

(Above: Dr Ting’s interview with TOC that spurred the actions of MINDEF)


TOC would like to thank the efforts of the legal team from Eugene Thuraisingam LLP in defending of the website against the claims of harassment by MINDEF, especially since the legal firm is fighting the case on a pro-bono basis.
If not for their assistance, TOC would have given in to the legal suit filed by AGC/MINDEF as the site does not have the same financial backing as the government to fight the case.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

民主党上诉要人力部长撤更正指示 维持内堂审理

此前,人力部长援引《防假消息法》对民主党三则文章和网络贴文发出更正指示。民主党要求撤回遭拒绝,于是上诉高庭。民主党争取上诉在公堂(open court)审理。 不过高庭发言人告知本地媒体,在明日(16日)进行的审讯仍维持在内堂审理,意味着不会开放给公众聆听。 根据《防假消息法》的上诉程序规则,若不满要求撤销指示的申请被部长驳回,当事者可透过提呈原诉传票(originating summons)和书面证词(supporting affidavit),上诉高庭。 高庭认为所有原诉传票申诉,都安排在内堂审理,而不是在公堂。 民主党在此前的文告指出,此案涉及公共利益,且《防假消息法》也广受在野党和公民社会的诟病,更何况外籍PMET课题亦牵动国人神经。 故此,该党认为有鉴于上述课题可能成为来届选举的热门议题,希望上诉能在公堂审理,让群众亦有机会旁听。 去年12月14日,人力部援引《防止网络假信息和防止网络操纵法案》(POFMA),向民主党发布的三则贴文和文章发出更正指示。 本月6日,人力部表示“经过谨慎考量”,,认为民主党的申请没有充分理据,故此拒绝撤回指示。不过并未详细解释,民主党的申请为何理据不足。 民主党也不甘示弱回应,人力部也无法为他们的决定提出理据,并指该党提出申请时,已列出详细理由,包括人力部数据分析和该党贴文的对比。

Polling agents behaviour reinforce stereotype of PAP being “arrogant and not playing fair”, says WP polling agent

A polling agent for the Worker’s Party in Marine Parade GRC said…

Roy Ngerng reaches target of $70k to cover legal costs

Blogger Roy Ngerng has reached his target of collecting $70,000 to cover…

Christian lawyer in 377A constitutional challenge explains why his involvement is consistent with his faith

Jordan Tan is one of the lawyers bringing the constitutional challenge against…