Singapore judiciary demands apology for web backlash

[loveikan]

Will the freedom of speech be curbed by the govt it if the court gives in to the demand?

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/singapore-j...082014930.html

Singapore judiciary demands apology for web backlash
AFP News – 22 hours ago

Yahoo! Newsroom/Yahoo file photo - Websites and Facebook pages have suggested that a Singapore court had been lenient to Yuan Zhenghua, 31, who hijacked a taxi last year and crashed it into the driveway of …more

RELATED CONTENT
Article: Suspect in Budget Terminal taxi hijack charged
Singapore's state prosecution arm has demanded an apology from several websites over posts which it said cast doubt on the judiciary's integrity in a case involving a China national.

The websites and Facebook pages involved had suggested that a Singapore court had been lenient to Yuan Zhenghua, 31, who hijacked a taxi last year and crashed it into the driveway of Changi Airport's budget terminal, killing a Malaysian airport worker.
Yuan, a technician, was sentenced by a district court to 25 months in jail Monday.

Singaporeans took to Internet websites and Facebook pages to criticise the verdict, prompting the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) to issue letters asking for an apology and that the postings be taken down.

A spokesman for the AGC told AFP the online comments and postings had accused the court of bias in favour of the China national.
"These comments include allegations that the courts did not wish to offend the People's Republic of China, that Singaporeans would get heavier sentences in comparison, that the judge lacked integrity, and that leniency was shown," the spokesman said.
"These and similar comments pose a real risk that public confidence in the administration of justice would be undermined."

The spokesman added that the online comments ignored the fact that the court took into account Yuan's "psychotic disorder" in its decision.
While the AGC did not identify the websites involved, the administrators of Facebook page "EDMW loves Singapore" put up an apology for committing an "act of contempt of court" in its posts about Yuan and said it had taken them down.

Some bloggers voiced dismay with the apology demand, citing it as an example of an attempt by the government to clamp down on rising online dissent.
"Our public institutions and public officials should accept and allow a wider threshold for criticisms from the public, including those online," Andrew Loh, a socio-political blogger, told AFP.

The government says attacks on the judiciary will undermine public confidence in the institution.
In July last year, the AGC also sent a letter to prominent Singaporean blogger Alex Au after he alleged in a post that the city-state's courts are biased in favour of the well-connected.

In 2010, a Singapore court jailed British author Alan Shadrake for six weeks for publishing a book critical of the city-state's administration of the death penalty.

[globalcookie]

I better watch my words and be more subtle now on. Else get AF into such issue for nothing.

[loveikan]

Originally Posted by globalcookie

I better watch my words and be more subtle now on. Else get AF into such issue for nothing.

Yalor, that's one of my problem too.

[dzylim]

Originally Posted by loveikan

The government says attacks on the judiciary will undermine public confidence in the institution.

if it is a handful , this statement will hold water. if it is more then a few handfuls, then public confidence is already undermined.

[dzylim]

Originally Posted by globalcookie

I better watch my words and be more subtle now on. Else get AF into such issue for nothing.

Bubblebubble is worse then you wor...

[globalcookie]

We are all disappointed in how things have unfolded in recent years. But we have to be a bit watchful in our choice of words, else incur unnecessary troubles for ourselves and in the platform we posted our views in. So it is still best to be careful.

How did dissent grew so strong? It didn't come overnight. But since they like to use e law, than it is better to live another day and expressed it when the time comes with the pen and cross.

[ymmij]

http://therealsingapore.com/content/...-legal-threats

TRS WILL NOT APOLOGISE TO THE SINGAPORE COURT DESPITE LEGAL THREATS



As some of you may be aware, a number of Facebook pages were issued letters from the Attorney-General’s Chamber Singapore demanding the removal of certain posts and comments claiming a contempt of court. (See: Facebook Pages Served Letters from AGC Regarding Contempt Of Court)

We at TheRealSingapore.com had also published a photo and some details on The Real Singapore Facebook Page (As pictured above; Original Link Here)

In response to this post, many readers made comments implying that the courts were unfair, justice was not served, or that bias was shown because of the defendant’s nationality. Although we respect the views and opinion of our readers, The Real Singapore did not create such opinions nor promote them.

We were also contacted by the Attorney-General’s Chambers to remove the offending comments and post a public apology for the contemptuous comments left by our readers. We have removed many offending comments; but will not be issuing an apology. (The apology they wanted below. It does not help readers to understand what is considered contempt of court and won’t do much to help prevent it in the future)



We have done our part to remove contemptuous comments but we cannot be held responsible for the views and opinion of all our readers. No high traffic facebook pages in the world has the resources to keep all comments free of infringing content 24/7 and it would be ridiculous to hold the page responsible for comments posted by other facebook users.

We would like to remind readers that comments that question the integrity of the judiciary are considered to be a contempt of court ; this includes implying that the courts are unjust, bias, unfair, corrupt, or any other similar allegations. We hope that this might clarify the issue for some readers to help prevent it occurring again in the future.

Our effort to educate readers and remove the infringing comments, however, doesn’t seem to be enough for the AGC.

Below is a copy of the emails exchanged between The Real Singapore and Jin Haw LI from the AGC:

The original demand and details of what they felt was contemptuous:



A copy of the demand:




Feeling that a simple apology would not help reduce the posting of contemptuous comments by readers in the future, we suggested an alternative, only to be shut down by a one-line reply 2 hours later:



Since they were so demanding and inflexible on a solution, we feel the public should be allowed to know:



We do not condone comments which are contemptuous of courts and have made efforts to remove some comments and educate readers, but the demands by the AGC are simply unreasonable and totally inflexible.

The law is in place to outline what is considered acceptable conduct, but it is not always the best solution to certain problems. Sometimes, making legal demands is not the way to provide a long-term solution to an issue.

This demand is in relation to facebook comments made by numerous individuals and we feel that providing information to the public would be a better approach than issuing legal letters to facebook pages. These heavy-handed tactics are very common in Singapore and it seems that it's difficult to break the trend.

We urge everyone to share this post if you agree that individual Singaporeans should not live in fear of costly legal suits over every small issue or comment.

[loveikan]

Originally Posted by globalcookie

We are all disappointed in how things have unfolded in recent years. But we have to be a bit watchful in our choice of words, else incur unnecessary troubles for ourselves and in the platform we posted our views in. So it is still best to be careful.

How did dissent grew so strong? It didn't come overnight. But since they like to use e law, than it is better to live another day and expressed it when the time comes with the pen and cross.

Well, they prefer to be VERY SELECTIVE in responding to issue .

[dzylim]

What if the comments were posted in a PAP MP's facebook... what will happened?

[dave6238]

What happened to the national conversation initiated by the gahmen? bad feedbacks dun want oni want good ones arr?
.