Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has issued a statement to condemn the actions of Singapore’s police in seizing electronic devices from this news website, The Online Citizen (TOC), and interrogating its editor and a blogger who posted a comment on the site.

The international non-government organisation, which advocates freedom of expression and freedom of the press, wrote that these actions which were carried out on spurious grounds, have all the hallmarks of an unacceptable act of intimidation.

In a note posted on 26 November, TOC editor Terry Xu reported that that he now fears that he could be arrested any day. It was the first message to appear on the site since five police officers arrived at his home on 20 November, confiscated all of the site’s electronic equipment and took him away for an interrogation that lasted eight hours.the pretext for this show of force was a comment posted on the site on 4 September by a blogger using the pseudonym of Willy Sum, who criticized “corruption at the highest echelons” of the ruling party leadership and “tampering with the constitution.” He was himself questioned by the police on 26 November on the allegation of commiting “criminal defamation.”

On 18 September, two weeks after the comment was posted, TOC was ordered to remove it within six hours by the Info-Communications Media Development Authority (IMDA), an information ministry offshoot.

Although TOC complied immediately, the police nonetheless used this case a pretext for seizing its equipment two months later, on 20 November. It was only thanks to the support of its readers that TOC was able to acquire new equipment and resume publishing on 26 November.

“Exhuming this old case in order to intimidate The Online Citizen’s editor and deprive it of the means of publishing was a crude harassment ploy,” said Daniel Bastard, the head of RSF’s Asia-Pacific desk. “These summary interrogations must stop and the confiscated equipment must be returned at once. We call on the Singaporean authorities to stop trying to censor all content that displeases them.”

This is not the first time that TOC has been targeted by the city state’s government. In 2016, RSF expressed concern about the interior ministry’s repeated attempts to get the site shut down on the basis of spurious complaints.

Singapore is ranked 151st out of 180 countries in RSF’s 2018 World Press Freedom Index.

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

因“个人失检”离职的新捷运总裁 去年所得120万元

61岁的新捷运总裁颜睿杰,为其“个人失检”(personal indiscretion)行为负上责任,在上周五宣布辞职。 颜睿杰被指与女下属发展婚外情,私家侦探公司Kokusai Security则在社交媒体爆料,指该公司受某人所托,追踪颜睿杰并收集其搞外遇的证据。 在获得委托人同意后,Kokusai也上载了经马赛克的视频和照片,并指出颜睿杰在办公时间、周末和到海外时,与不同女性约会。 不过,对于受何人所托,有关公司则三缄其口。   在 Instagram 查看這則貼文   Catch Cheating…

Cousin says Nelson Loh left SG but police say can’t confirm while ICA says can’t discuss

In Sep, the police started an investigation into a complaint filed by…

为何不公开社会关怀计划的批核准绳?

何不公布社会关怀计划下,发放短期援助金额的计算准则? 参考《海峡时报》今日报导,《社发部:更多家庭仰仗政府长期财务援助》,其中提到: “因为年迈、病痛或缺乏亲人支持的年长者人数增多,致使接受长期财务援助的家庭数量平稳增长。” 在2017财政年,有4千409家庭,接受社会与家庭发展部的长期援助,比起前年的4千387户更多。 数据也显示,去年接受长期援助的家庭,比起2013年的3千568户增加高达24巴仙。 社会关怀计划共发出1亿3100万元,在至今年3月前的12个月,共援助了7万9470人,比起2016财政年发放1亿3千万元,援助8万3333人稍有增加。 长期援助,也被称为公共辅助,乃针对因年迈、疾病、残疾而永久无法工作,并缺乏家庭支持者,协助他们应付生活困境。 一个单身家庭可以得到每月500元的补贴,而双人家庭则可得870元,也能在政府诊所的到免费看诊。 社工曾言,这类补贴从每月数百元起跳– 但,为何媒体和政府,都没有公布个体和家庭,所获得的实际财务援助金额,以及决定受惠者得到多少援助补贴的计算法和准绳? 既然长期援助可以开诚布公,那么中短期援助的呢? 在社发部的官网文告写道:“在2017年财政年,有2万7986家庭,以及6万4191个人,获得中短期援助,援助总额达到8千529万元。…

毕丹星回应《一条无障碍坡道》评论 点评“P.A.(P)式”民主

在上月26日,《联合早报》发布一篇由高级记者黄伟曼撰写的评论《一条无障碍坡道》,其中提及: “以目前围绕这起事件的舆论来评断,多数选民估计不太懂,也不太在乎在反对党区内市镇会与人协之间微妙的相处模式。 他们的思考逻辑很简单,即一条应惠及老弱残病等有需要者的无障碍通道的建造被拖延了,而若这背后可能有基层政治操作,那必然违反公平原则,在这过程中也牺牲了人民的利益,不能被接受。” 对此,工人党秘书长暨阿裕尼集选区议员毕丹星回应,针对上述第一段的说法,或许作者就已忽略,败选行动党候选人,仍能被委任为人民协会基层顾问,本身就有违民主。 至于是否公平原则,毕丹星认为,要探究人协在反对党选区的立场,不仅仅限于讨论对坡道建设的冷漠态度。他解释,败选行动党基层顾问不仅掌控纳税人的钱,他们的影响力更为深远和政治化,早已不是什么秘密。 他在昨日发布的脸书贴文列举其中一些例子:包括公民权仪式,由行动党政府委任的基层顾问主持,而在反对党选区,新公民是从败选行动党候选人手上领过身份证的,“难道总统旗下的公务员,或非政治人物来主持这类仪式,不是更妥当吗?” 至于市镇理事会靠“两条腿”:民选议员和基层领袖方能成事。市镇会不仅把建屋局权限赋予议员,也交予基层领袖。然而,如果不是在人协旗下的基层代表,行动党政府是不会予以承认的,反对党志愿者也不会得到基层身份。 故此,毕丹星指出在反对党选区,市镇会无基层代表;而基层领袖是由败选行动党候选人委任、受基层顾问管理的。 其三,社区设施改进委员会(CIPC)审批拨款,在人协缺席的情况,反对党市镇会只好依靠自己的盈余来支撑惠民项目,他指阿裕尼-后港市镇会多年来都是这么做;但与此同时行动党市镇会却可以透过CIPC拨款进行项目,而得以保持财政盈余。 即便如此,当阿裕尼-后港市镇会在2011年出现赤字,《海峡时报》甚至还质问“市镇会此前的300万盈余去了哪?” 最后,毕丹星反问,行动党在管理人协上,究竟政治和国人利益孰轻孰重? “答案或许不言而喻,我希望更多记者和政治观察员,可以超越国内目前最著名坡道议题,看得更为深远,去分析拖延建设的政治机制。诚如“选民的逻辑”,建设性政治岂非更应着重公平吗?”