Connect with us

Legal

Singapore’s AGC directs Police to not take further action against PAP MP Louis Ng over act of holding placard in 2020

Published

2 years ago

on

The Singapore Attorney-General’s Chamber (AGC) has told local media that Nee Soon Group Representative Constituency (GRC) Member of Parliament, Louis Ng will not be charged for his act of holding a placard next to hawkers in June 2020.

This comes after one and a half year of investigation by the Singapore Police over a possible offence of public assembly without a permit after holding a placard next to hawkers.

A spokesman for the AGC told The Straits Times on Wednesday that AGC directed the police to take no further action against Mr Ng under the Public Order Act.

The Police had earlier said on 3 March last year that Mr Ng was interviewed by them and that they were carrying out investigations.

“Investigations have revealed that Mr Ng was exercising his duty as a Member of Parliament, in expressing care and support for the welfare of the hawkers in his constituency during the Covid-19 pandemic,” said the spokesman to Straits Times.

The spokesman added that the nature of the act and the intent of the person performing the act are key considerations in deciding whether an offence has been committed or whether there is any public interest in prosecuting the offence.

In June 2020, the People’s Action Party MP uploaded photographs of himself holding a placard in support of the hawkers at the Yishun Park Hawker Centre.

The placard stated “Support Them“, with a smiley face next to the wording.

He was seen posing next to hawkers at their respective stalls at the said hawker centre.

Source: Louis Ng Kok Kwang / Facebook

Mr Ng said in an earlier Facebook post last year that he was at the Yishun Park Hawker Centre in June 2020 during a walkabout to “make sure our hawkers were doing okay”.

“As we all know, they suffered badly during the circuit breaker,” he said.

Mr Ng added that he wanted to “urge our residents to support our hawkers“, which was why he “held a sign indicating this and took photos together with the hawkers”.

“Separately, in January this year, I also held up a sign for the climate change video introducing the first-ever parliamentary motion on climate change.

“To clarify, that sign was an empty piece of cardboard. The words were superimposed into the video which I posted,” said Mr Ng.

Mr Ng was investigated after activist Jolovan Wham was charged with holding up a piece of cardboard with a smiley face drawn on it in Toa Payoh Central in March 2020.

Jolovan Wham holding a cardboard with a smiley face

Mr Wham had done so in support of two youth climate activists who were investigated by the police for holding up placards of their own on separate occasions.

He was informed by the police that he had flouted the Public Order Act despite having “left immediately after” holding the placard and having his photo taken with it.

The charge against him for this offence was dropped subsequently in January this year.

In response to TOC’s query on Mr Ng not being charged by AGC for his actions, Mr Wham said: “I have to thank Louis Ng for his one man assembly. If he hadn’t done it, the AGC would probably not have dropped their charge against me.”

The Public Order Act is drafted widely and could bind anyone — even a lone individual such as Mr Wham — for trying to do any of the following without a valid police permit:

  • Demonstrate support for or opposition to the views or actions of any persons/groups/government;
  • Publicise a cause or campaign; or
  • Initiate or commemorate any event.

Even those who do not plan to hold any placards at a particular place are required to apply for a police permit.

A person found guilty of partaking in a public assembly without a permit may face a fine of up to S$5,000.

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