by Jolovan Wham
The right to freedom of assembly is a fundamental and constitutional right of all Singaporeans. Louis Ng should never have been investigated for holding up a sign, taking a picture and posting his act on social media.
The Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) has justified not charging him in court or even issuing a warning letter because “he 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 ”
But the Public Order Act makes no such distinction. Any public assembly, even a one person assembly which is ’cause-related’ requires a permit. And it is very clear that Louis was promoting a cause: the welfare and livelihood of hawkers. Yet, me and several others involved in one person assemblies have been issued warning letters and charged.
Even Luke levy, the student who held up a sign at his graduation was given an ‘advisory’ by the Police. But no such consequence applied to Louis. What people can infer from this episode is that one set of rules exists for People’s Action Party Members of Parliament and another for ordinary citizens, even though everyone is theoretically speaking, equal before the law.
If the government and the civil service are supposed to be ‘politically neutral’, how is this acceptable? If some individuals and some cause-related events are more worthy of permits than others, then the AGC should say so: put their list of criteria in the Public Order Act. How are ordinary citizens supposed to exercise their constitutional rights to free expression and assembly when the criteria is vague and arbitrarily decided?
This was first posted by Wham on his Facebook page.
In June 2020, Louis Ng, MP for Nee Soon GRC, 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.
“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”.
At the same time, Jolovan Wham, a social worker and activist in Singapore, held up a piece of cardboard with a smiley face drawn on it in Toa Payoh Central in March 2020 and uploaded the photo to his Facebook page.
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.
Wham was later charged in Nov 2020 for the alleged offence.
Following the investigation launched upon Mr Ng by the Police in 3 March last year, the charge against Mr Wham for him holding the smiley face was dropped against him in January this year.
Just this Wednesday, AGC told local media that Ng will not charged for his actions.
“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.
As for Luke Levy whom Mr Wham mentioned in his post, he had held up an anti-death penalty sign during his graduation ceremony in July this year.
Two months later, the Singapore police issued an advisory to the National University of Singapore (NUS) graduate.
“In response to media queries, the police, in consultation with the Attorney-General’s Chambers, have issued a written advisory to a 24-year-old man for holding an anti-death penalty sign at the NUS commencement ceremony on Jul 6 at the NUS Cultural Centre Auditorium,” said the police.
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.
