Han Hui Hui apologised for scandalising the Singapore Courts by publishing video and Facebook posts

Blogger Han Hui Hui has apologised and removed several of her online posts that accused the Singapore Courts of being politically motivated in convicting and sentencing her. In response, the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) said it would not pursue contempt of court charges against the activist and blogger.

In a press release dated 21 March 2017, the AGC said it had written previously to Ms Han on 13 March 2017 about a video published on her YouTube account and several posts on her Facebook account which were in contempt of court. The letter had also specified the dates and the relevant parts of the video and posts in question.

The AGC stated, “The relevant parts of Ms Han’s video and posts scandalised the Singapore Courts by stating that the Singapore Courts had lied, that they were politically motivated in convicting and sentencing her, and that they sought to persecute and harass her. Her statements were scurrilous, false and made without any rational basis.”

Ms Han was asked to remove all contemptuous parts of the video and posts, and to publish an apology for scandalising the Singapore Courts. She was also asked not to re-post the offending materials, or to do any other act that would amount to contempt of court. Ms Han was also warned that proceedings would be commenced against her if she did not comply with those conditions.

In its press release, the AGC noted that “Ms Han had since complied with AGC’s conditions. She had removed the contemptuous statements. She had also published the apology and undertaking required of her on her social media accounts.”

The AGC added that “contempt of court in its various forms harms the proper administration of justice in Singapore and if left unchecked, such conduct can obstruct the determination of the truth and erode respect for our judicial institutions. This would in turn harm the public interest in the proper administration of justice.

“AGC will take firm action against contempt of court, including the institution of committal proceedings in appropriate instances.”