Law Minister says norms of engagement as in physical world apply
By Walter Sim, The Straits Times, 24 May 2014
By Walter Sim, The Straits Times, 24 May 2014
SINGAPORE is finding its way forward as it opens up space for public discussion and civic engagement, and the growing use of online platforms makes some rules of engagement necessary.
"We are finding our way in this regime but my own philosophical approach is that it is no different from physical space," Law Minister K. Shanmugam said.
"When we make it a no man's land, everyone is fair game and then we get people lynched.
"The worst instincts of people come out sometimes when they have anonymity and they feel they can say and do everything without the controlling framework of social norms," he said.
"I don't think the concept of freedom justifies that... There is a line between bad manners and harmful conduct."
He said this yesterday at the Rule of Law Symposium at the Supreme Court in a 45-minute session moderated by National University of Singapore law professor Dr Thio Li-ann.
The law symposium was attended by more than 400 participants from Singapore and abroad, including Chief Justices, top lawyers and academics.
Responding to a question on political criticism, Mr Shanmugam, who is also Minister for Foreign Affairs, said that people were free to criticise the Government or its policies, but a line is drawn when unsubstantiated and false allegations of fact are made against individuals.
Responding to a question on political criticism, Mr Shanmugam, who is also Minister for Foreign Affairs, said that people were free to criticise the Government or its policies, but a line is drawn when unsubstantiated and false allegations of fact are made against individuals.
"There is nothing to prevent people from criticising government policies, and you can be as hard as you like," he said, noting that the Government already gets criticised on a "regular basis" on an array of issues ranging from education to immigration.
He added that when allegations are made against public officials, it hurts their integrity - and it is crucial for them to be seen as people of character.
Citing a "purely hypothetical example" of someone alleging that the Prime Minister is taking money from pension funds, he said: "You can say they are dishonest, but please go to court and prove it. Let the politician take the stand and be cross-examined, and indeed if he is dishonest, he will be destroyed."
Citing a "purely hypothetical example" of someone alleging that the Prime Minister is taking money from pension funds, he said: "You can say they are dishonest, but please go to court and prove it. Let the politician take the stand and be cross-examined, and indeed if he is dishonest, he will be destroyed."
He added that civil society participation is axiomatic in a developed economy.
Yet the encroachment of cyberspace means the need for new laws such as the Protection from Harassment Act.
"It's the nature of societies, and you must accept the change and go with it," he said. But he cautioned against political instability in a small country like Singapore.
"It would lead to economic paralysis, simply because decision-making in the Government would become difficult," he said.
"The smaller you are, the more nimble you have to be. The system has got to be stable. It is not the same as saying it must be unrepresentative."
DANGERS OF ONLINE ANONYMITY
We are finding our way in this regime but my own philosophical approach is that it is no different from physical space. When we make it a no man's land, everyone is fair game and then we get people lynched. The worst instincts of people come out sometimes when they have anonymity and they feel they can say and do everything without the controlling framework of social norms. I don't think the concept of freedom justifies that... There is a line between bad manners and harmful conduct.
- Law Minister K. Shanmugam
- Law Minister K. Shanmugam
Allegations against politicians must stand up in court: Shanmugam
By Neo Chai Chin, TODAY, 24 May 2014
Countries that allow false accusations against politicians as part of public life are neither wrong nor illogical, but Singapore has taken an alternate stance where those who make similar allegations against politicians here must be prepared to prove their case in court, said Law and Foreign Affairs Minister K Shanmugam yesterday.
This is because it is important for public officials here to maintain their integrity and be seen as people of character, he said.
“When you make allegations which are personal, then prove them. That keeps integrity as a factor in politics. And is that important, that the public knows that if a politician is personally impugned, he will seek to clear his name? We think it’s important.”
Mr Shanmugam made these remarks yesterday at the Rule of Law Symposium, jointly organised by the Singapore Academy of Law and the Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law, which was attended by more than 400 participants from Asia, including the Indian, Malaysian and Indonesian embassies.
He was responding to questions on defamation laws here and whether the Republic’s policy towards political criticism had seen any calibrated changes.
In Singapore, there is nothing to prevent people from criticising government policies, said Mr Shanmugam. “The law allows you to fully criticise and it doesn’t have to be fair, nor does it have to be reasonable, nor does it have to be true ... we do get criticised on a regular basis.”
He added: “What you can’t do under our framework of law is make a personal allegation of fact against anyone, including a politician. So if you say the Prime Minister steals from pension funds, then you better be prepared to prove it.”
Mr Shanmugam said he was speaking hypothetically.
This week, blogger Roy Ngerng Yi Ling was served a letter of demand by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s lawyers for alleging that money had been misappropriated from the Central Provident Fund.
He has apologised and taken down the post, but has yet to make a written offer of damages to Mr Lee.
Mr Shanmugam noted that there are other countries where people are allowed to make allegations against public figures as part and parcel of public life, and politicians may defend themselves or deny the allegations.
This, however, is not without a price.
“I think often in systems where politicians are fair game, you can say this guy is a crook, he’s taken money, he’s corrupt — politicians, in terms of public opinion, rank somewhere above lawyers and below used-car salesmen. So, take your pick,” he said.
Mr Shanmugam also emphasised the importance of political stability, even while the desire for political participation and plurality grows with a better-educated population. Political instability would lead to economic paralysis for most countries, including Singapore, because decision-making in government becomes difficult, he said.
Larger and more resource-rich countries like the United States can afford to take “a slightly longer time to make decisions”, but smaller countries have to be nimbler.
He noted: “I think the smaller you are, the nimbler you have to be. The system has to be stable, which is not the same as saying, therefore, it’s got to be unrepresentative. It can be representative, but the key is, it has to be stable.”
No comments:
Post a Comment