Progress Singapore Party (PSP) member Brad Bowyer's Facebook post made false statements about investments by GIC, Temasek; correction notice issued under POFMA
By Tham Yuen-C, Senior Political Correspondent, The Straits Times, 26 Nov 2019
Singapore's law against fake news has been used for the first time, with Progress Singapore Party (PSP) member Brad Bowyer being asked to correct false statements he made about investments by GIC, Temasek and other government-linked companies (GLCs).
A Nov 13 Facebook post he made "contains clearly false statements of fact, and undermines public trust in the Government", the Ministry of Finance (MOF) said yesterday.
In particular, Mr Bowyer had implied that the Government controls Temasek's and GIC's commercial decisions, which is false, the Government said on its fact-checking website Factually.
Mr Bowyer, who was born in Britain but is now a Singaporean, was issued a correction direction yesterday under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA).
By late morning, he had put up a note at the top of his post stating that it "contains false statements of fact", along with a link to the correct facts.
POFMA, which took effect on Oct 2, gives ministers the power to act against a piece of online falsehood when it is in the public interest to do so. They can order that it be taken down or ask for corrections to be put up alongside it.
Critics had said that it could have a chilling effect, but the Government said it would resort to take-down orders only in the more egregious cases.
In the latest case, Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat had instructed the POFMA Office to issue a correction direction, which requires that Mr Bowyer put up in full a correction note along with his post, which remained online.
Mr Bowyer told The Straits Times that he had no issue with the correction direction.
He later added in a second Facebook post that he had based his opinions on public facts and "details I have access to".
He also said: "I feel it is fair to have both points of view and clarifications and corrections of fact when necessary."
Mr Bowyer, who had previously been a People's Action Party member before he left to join the People's Voice Party, and eventually PSP, also said the incident would not deter him from being vocal about social and political issues.
In his Nov 13 Facebook post, he had criticised GIC and Temasek for certain investments that he said would rack up huge financial losses.
He also said the Government had a "fiduciary responsibility" to account for the losses.
Describing these statements as falsehoods, the Government said on its fact-checking website Factually: "Mr Bowyer implies that the Singapore Government controls Temasek's and GIC's commercial decisions. This is false."
In the article providing corrections and clarifications to the falsehoods, it also said Mr Bowyer had used "false and misleading statements to smear the reputation of Temasek and GIC".
The Factually article said that the investment company and sovereign wealth fund are run on market principles, independent of the Government.
"The Government's role is to ensure that Temasek and GIC have competent boards, which ensure that their respective mandates are met. The Government also holds the boards of Temasek and GIC accountable for their respective overall performances," said the article.
The MOF, echoing this, said that Temasek and GIC have made positive returns over the long term and have contributed significantly to the national budget, contrary to Mr Bowyer's claims.
In a third Facebook post, Mr Bowyer said he had merely been asking fair questions about the Government's oversight of GIC and Temasek, given that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong is the chairman of GIC and his wife Ho Ching is chief executive officer of Temasek.
He wrote: "I feel we should all do our best to comment factually and responsibly. However, when questions arise, just asserting something is false or giving irrelevant information does not answer valid questions."
For POFMA to apply, two criteria must be satisfied: There must be a falsehood, and it must be in the public interest for the Government to act.
"With a general election round the corner, I suppose there is the concern that public debate on Temasek, GIC and the GLCs will be on the basis of incorrect information if a clarification was not made," said Singapore Management University law don Eugene Tan. "This is especially so because Mr Bowyer is a member of an opposition party that has said it will campaign on a platform about these issues."
The PSP declined to comment, saying that Mr Bowyer had posted the comments in his personal capacity.
LIGHT SHED ON HOW LAW IS USED
The approach taken for the first case under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) has shed light on how the law will be used, said Singapore Management University Associate Professor of Law Eugene Tan.
Commenting on the first invocation of the fake news law, he said: "I think (people) can see that POFMA, properly invoked, doesn't seek to quell dissent or to shut out opposing views."
A correction direction was issued by the POFMA office, which administers the law, to Progress Singapore Party member Brad Bowyer over statements he posted on Facebook on Nov 13.
This was done yesterday under instruction from Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat.
Mr Bowyer was required to run a correction note in full alongside his post, and also include a link to the correct facts.
In passing the POFMA Bill in Parliament in May, the Government had said that ministers who are domain experts in these areas are in the best position to decide when to act.
A spokesman for the Ministry of Finance said that the ministry, along with other government agencies, had carefully reviewed the contents of Mr Bowyer's post after it was first published.
When it was determined that it contained false statements of fact, she added, "the Government decided that it was in the public interest to issue a correction direction... to post a notice to address the false statements of fact in his original post".
He also had to add a link to an article on the Government's fact-checking website Factually that corrected the falsehoods in his post using publicly available information.
Prof Tan, noting that Mr Bowyer's post remains available online, added that this case showed clearly that while people are entitled to their point of view, they are not entitled to inaccurate facts.
Those who do not agree with a minister's decision can challenge it in court.
An appeal can be heard in the High Court as early as nine days after a challenge is first brought to the minister. Such a challenge could cost about $200.
A correction direction is among the remedies available under the law, designed to give the Government the tools to deal with falsehoods on the Internet.
Websites, social media platforms and individual users can also be asked to take down the false information completely. In serious cases, people who are found to have spread falsehoods intentionally to destabilise society can be charged.
* Rights to free speech not hit by use of fake news law: Ministries
Law invoked twice recently, but in both cases, original posts that were corrected can still be read
By Tham Yuen-C, Senior Political Correspondent, The Straits Times, 12 Dec 2019
The recent use of Singapore's fake news law to correct a Facebook post by Progress Singapore Party (PSP) member Brad Bowyer does not affect his rights to free speech, said the Ministry of Law (MinLaw) and Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI) yesterday.
Their joint statement comes amid scrutiny over the use of the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA), which has attracted media attention across the world.
Critics have raised the spectre of the law being used to squelch dissent after it was invoked twice in recent weeks, but some others have pointed out that in both instances, the original posts that were corrected have not been removed.
This was pointed out by MCI and MinLaw, which said in a statement posted on Facebook that Mr Bowyer's original Facebook post remains available for anyone to read.
After he was required to put up a correction alongside his post, he went on to issue repeated clarifications in further posts, the ministries added.
"Requiring a factual statement to be posted in order to correct a false statement does not curtail anyone's free speech," they said.
Their statement was sparked by PSP's criticism that the law falls short of the values of transparency, independence and accountability, after it was used on Mr Bowyer.
On Nov 25, he became the first person to get a correction direction under POFMA for a Facebook post about investments by GIC, Temasek and other government-linked companies.
He had to put up a note on his post as well as link it to the correct facts on the Government's fact-checking site Factually. He complied on the same day.
In the other incident, the owner of the States Times Review Facebook page did not comply and Facebook was issued a direction to put up a correction on his post.
Facebook complied.
On Tuesday, the PSP, responding to Mr Bowyer's incident for the first time, said a minister has the power to declare something as false without any "justification, criteria or standards".
"This does not measure up to the standards of transparency and accountability. And where the news involves the Government, it also fails the standard of independence," the party added.
Rebutting this, MCI and MinLaw said the law explicitly requires ministers to state why the specified statements are false and there are legal precedents on how falsehoods should be determined.
The ministries added that the law also states clearly it can be used only when clear criteria are met: If there is a false statement of fact and it affects the public interest.
"When POFMA was used recently, the reasons why the statements were false were explained clearly. Significantly, PSP and Mr Brad Bowyer do not deny that his post contained falsehoods," they noted.
They also said a minister's decision can be challenged in court "at minimal cost", setting "a high standard of accountability".
The PSP had also said that while it agrees the Government needs to be able to act swiftly to prevent fake news from going viral, it is the courts that should decide what is false and what penalties to impose for independence.
"The courts would also have an established system and precedents of determining falsehood from its handling of cases like fraud, thereby ensuring transparency and accountability," the party said.
MCI and MinLaw replied that it was untrue that ministers can impose any penalties they wish.
If a minister's direction is not complied with, only the courts can impose penalties after due process is followed and in accordance with established legal principles, the ministries added.
They also took issue with a picture in the PSP post that depicted people's mouths being taped shut.
Noting that Mr Bowyer's post remains online, the ministries said: "Readers can make up their own minds as to what is the truth.
"How has Mr Bowyer's mouth been taped? His original post remains available for anyone to read. His rights to free speech remain unaffected."
Separately, the Finance Ministry responded yesterday to a Forum letter on The Straits Times website on Monday, to explain the distinction between fact and opinion.
Letter writer Avantika Narayan said some of Mr Bowyer's claims seemed more like opinion than fact, like the recently scrapped Amaravati City project between India and Singapore.
The ministry's director of reserves & investment Lim Zhi Jian said Mr Bowyer had made several false assertions, including that a substantial part of $4 billion had been poured into the project.
Mr Lim added: "POFMA was not used against Mr Bowyer's opinion on the performance of the specific investments. Mr Bowyer is entitled to his opinion.
"But the Government has to clarify Mr Bowyer's false statements of fact, which he used to build a misleading narrative about our reserves to discredit the Government and smear the reputations of Temasek and GIC."
By Tham Yuen-C, Senior Political Correspondent, The Straits Times, 26 Nov 2019
A Nov 13 Facebook post he made "contains clearly false statements of fact, and undermines public trust in the Government", the Ministry of Finance (MOF) said yesterday.
In particular, Mr Bowyer had implied that the Government controls Temasek's and GIC's commercial decisions, which is false, the Government said on its fact-checking website Factually.
Mr Bowyer, who was born in Britain but is now a Singaporean, was issued a correction direction yesterday under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA).
By late morning, he had put up a note at the top of his post stating that it "contains false statements of fact", along with a link to the correct facts.
POFMA, which took effect on Oct 2, gives ministers the power to act against a piece of online falsehood when it is in the public interest to do so. They can order that it be taken down or ask for corrections to be put up alongside it.
Critics had said that it could have a chilling effect, but the Government said it would resort to take-down orders only in the more egregious cases.
In the latest case, Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat had instructed the POFMA Office to issue a correction direction, which requires that Mr Bowyer put up in full a correction note along with his post, which remained online.
Mr Bowyer told The Straits Times that he had no issue with the correction direction.
He later added in a second Facebook post that he had based his opinions on public facts and "details I have access to".
He also said: "I feel it is fair to have both points of view and clarifications and corrections of fact when necessary."
Mr Bowyer, who had previously been a People's Action Party member before he left to join the People's Voice Party, and eventually PSP, also said the incident would not deter him from being vocal about social and political issues.
In his Nov 13 Facebook post, he had criticised GIC and Temasek for certain investments that he said would rack up huge financial losses.
He also said the Government had a "fiduciary responsibility" to account for the losses.
Describing these statements as falsehoods, the Government said on its fact-checking website Factually: "Mr Bowyer implies that the Singapore Government controls Temasek's and GIC's commercial decisions. This is false."
In the article providing corrections and clarifications to the falsehoods, it also said Mr Bowyer had used "false and misleading statements to smear the reputation of Temasek and GIC".
The Factually article said that the investment company and sovereign wealth fund are run on market principles, independent of the Government.
"The Government's role is to ensure that Temasek and GIC have competent boards, which ensure that their respective mandates are met. The Government also holds the boards of Temasek and GIC accountable for their respective overall performances," said the article.
The MOF, echoing this, said that Temasek and GIC have made positive returns over the long term and have contributed significantly to the national budget, contrary to Mr Bowyer's claims.
In a third Facebook post, Mr Bowyer said he had merely been asking fair questions about the Government's oversight of GIC and Temasek, given that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong is the chairman of GIC and his wife Ho Ching is chief executive officer of Temasek.
He wrote: "I feel we should all do our best to comment factually and responsibly. However, when questions arise, just asserting something is false or giving irrelevant information does not answer valid questions."
For POFMA to apply, two criteria must be satisfied: There must be a falsehood, and it must be in the public interest for the Government to act.
"With a general election round the corner, I suppose there is the concern that public debate on Temasek, GIC and the GLCs will be on the basis of incorrect information if a clarification was not made," said Singapore Management University law don Eugene Tan. "This is especially so because Mr Bowyer is a member of an opposition party that has said it will campaign on a platform about these issues."
The PSP declined to comment, saying that Mr Bowyer had posted the comments in his personal capacity.
LIGHT SHED ON HOW LAW IS USED
The approach taken for the first case under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) has shed light on how the law will be used, said Singapore Management University Associate Professor of Law Eugene Tan.
Commenting on the first invocation of the fake news law, he said: "I think (people) can see that POFMA, properly invoked, doesn't seek to quell dissent or to shut out opposing views."
A correction direction was issued by the POFMA office, which administers the law, to Progress Singapore Party member Brad Bowyer over statements he posted on Facebook on Nov 13.
This was done yesterday under instruction from Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat.
Mr Bowyer was required to run a correction note in full alongside his post, and also include a link to the correct facts.
In passing the POFMA Bill in Parliament in May, the Government had said that ministers who are domain experts in these areas are in the best position to decide when to act.
A spokesman for the Ministry of Finance said that the ministry, along with other government agencies, had carefully reviewed the contents of Mr Bowyer's post after it was first published.
When it was determined that it contained false statements of fact, she added, "the Government decided that it was in the public interest to issue a correction direction... to post a notice to address the false statements of fact in his original post".
He also had to add a link to an article on the Government's fact-checking website Factually that corrected the falsehoods in his post using publicly available information.
Prof Tan, noting that Mr Bowyer's post remains available online, added that this case showed clearly that while people are entitled to their point of view, they are not entitled to inaccurate facts.
Those who do not agree with a minister's decision can challenge it in court.
An appeal can be heard in the High Court as early as nine days after a challenge is first brought to the minister. Such a challenge could cost about $200.
A correction direction is among the remedies available under the law, designed to give the Government the tools to deal with falsehoods on the Internet.
Websites, social media platforms and individual users can also be asked to take down the false information completely. In serious cases, people who are found to have spread falsehoods intentionally to destabilise society can be charged.
* Rights to free speech not hit by use of fake news law: Ministries
Law invoked twice recently, but in both cases, original posts that were corrected can still be read
By Tham Yuen-C, Senior Political Correspondent, The Straits Times, 12 Dec 2019
The recent use of Singapore's fake news law to correct a Facebook post by Progress Singapore Party (PSP) member Brad Bowyer does not affect his rights to free speech, said the Ministry of Law (MinLaw) and Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI) yesterday.
Their joint statement comes amid scrutiny over the use of the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA), which has attracted media attention across the world.
Critics have raised the spectre of the law being used to squelch dissent after it was invoked twice in recent weeks, but some others have pointed out that in both instances, the original posts that were corrected have not been removed.
This was pointed out by MCI and MinLaw, which said in a statement posted on Facebook that Mr Bowyer's original Facebook post remains available for anyone to read.
After he was required to put up a correction alongside his post, he went on to issue repeated clarifications in further posts, the ministries added.
"Requiring a factual statement to be posted in order to correct a false statement does not curtail anyone's free speech," they said.
Their statement was sparked by PSP's criticism that the law falls short of the values of transparency, independence and accountability, after it was used on Mr Bowyer.
On Nov 25, he became the first person to get a correction direction under POFMA for a Facebook post about investments by GIC, Temasek and other government-linked companies.
He had to put up a note on his post as well as link it to the correct facts on the Government's fact-checking site Factually. He complied on the same day.
In the other incident, the owner of the States Times Review Facebook page did not comply and Facebook was issued a direction to put up a correction on his post.
Facebook complied.
On Tuesday, the PSP, responding to Mr Bowyer's incident for the first time, said a minister has the power to declare something as false without any "justification, criteria or standards".
"This does not measure up to the standards of transparency and accountability. And where the news involves the Government, it also fails the standard of independence," the party added.
Rebutting this, MCI and MinLaw said the law explicitly requires ministers to state why the specified statements are false and there are legal precedents on how falsehoods should be determined.
The ministries added that the law also states clearly it can be used only when clear criteria are met: If there is a false statement of fact and it affects the public interest.
"When POFMA was used recently, the reasons why the statements were false were explained clearly. Significantly, PSP and Mr Brad Bowyer do not deny that his post contained falsehoods," they noted.
They also said a minister's decision can be challenged in court "at minimal cost", setting "a high standard of accountability".
The PSP had also said that while it agrees the Government needs to be able to act swiftly to prevent fake news from going viral, it is the courts that should decide what is false and what penalties to impose for independence.
"The courts would also have an established system and precedents of determining falsehood from its handling of cases like fraud, thereby ensuring transparency and accountability," the party said.
MCI and MinLaw replied that it was untrue that ministers can impose any penalties they wish.
If a minister's direction is not complied with, only the courts can impose penalties after due process is followed and in accordance with established legal principles, the ministries added.
They also took issue with a picture in the PSP post that depicted people's mouths being taped shut.
Noting that Mr Bowyer's post remains online, the ministries said: "Readers can make up their own minds as to what is the truth.
"How has Mr Bowyer's mouth been taped? His original post remains available for anyone to read. His rights to free speech remain unaffected."
Separately, the Finance Ministry responded yesterday to a Forum letter on The Straits Times website on Monday, to explain the distinction between fact and opinion.
Letter writer Avantika Narayan said some of Mr Bowyer's claims seemed more like opinion than fact, like the recently scrapped Amaravati City project between India and Singapore.
The ministry's director of reserves & investment Lim Zhi Jian said Mr Bowyer had made several false assertions, including that a substantial part of $4 billion had been poured into the project.
Mr Lim added: "POFMA was not used against Mr Bowyer's opinion on the performance of the specific investments. Mr Bowyer is entitled to his opinion.
"But the Government has to clarify Mr Bowyer's false statements of fact, which he used to build a misleading narrative about our reserves to discredit the Government and smear the reputations of Temasek and GIC."
POFMA case: Brad Bowyer's Facebook post contained several factual falsehoods
Ms Avantika Narayan sought clarifications on the distinction between fact and opinion, in relation to the use of the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) against a Facebook post put up by Mr Brad Bowyer (POFMA: Can the distinction between fact and opinion be clarified?, ST Online, Dec 9).
POFMA does not prevent expression of opinions. It is intended to prevent the spread of false statements of fact. Mr Bowyer's Facebook post contained several such factual falsehoods.
First, Mr Bowyer asserted that a substantial part of "$4 billion" was put in the Amaravati project. This is false because the $4 billion figure refers to investments in Andhra Pradesh state as a whole, and not Amaravati alone. The private sector consortium had incurred a few million dollars in costs in Amaravati, rather than the billions claimed by Mr Bowyer.
Furthermore, Mr Bowyer asserted that the investments in Andhra Pradesh have been entirely by government-linked companies and related parties, whereas other Singaporean companies with no links to the Government have also invested in Andhra Pradesh.
Second, in relation to Salt Bae, Mr Bowyer falsely asserted that Temasek had invested in a debt-ridden company, whereas Temasek had invested in a different entity.
Third, based on these false examples, Mr Bowyer implied that the Singapore Government controls Temasek's and GIC's commercial decisions. This is also false. The Government does not influence or direct individual investment decisions made by Temasek or GIC.
POFMA was not used against Mr Bowyer's opinion on the performance of the specific investments.
Mr Bowyer is entitled to his opinion. But the Government has to clarify Mr Bowyer's false statements of fact, which he used to build a misleading narrative about our reserves to discredit the Government and smear the reputations of Temasek and GIC.
Temasek's portfolio value has tripled from under $100 billion to $313 billion since 2002. Temasek, GIC and the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) contribute around 20 per cent of government revenues. Far from being a drain on the exchequer, the Net Investment Returns from Temasek, GIC and MAS form our single largest revenue source.
Furthermore, Mr Bowyer's Facebook post has not been removed. Mr Bowyer is required under POFMA to only display the correction notice that directs readers to the Factually article (Corrections and clarifications regarding falsehoods posted by Mr Brad Bowyer) which contains the correct facts. Readers can study the clarification and draw their own conclusions.
Lim Zhi Jian
Director, Reserves & Investment
Ministry of Finance
ST Forum, 12 Dec 2019
POFMA does not prevent expression of opinions. It is intended to prevent the spread of false statements of fact. Mr Bowyer's Facebook post contained several such factual falsehoods.
First, Mr Bowyer asserted that a substantial part of "$4 billion" was put in the Amaravati project. This is false because the $4 billion figure refers to investments in Andhra Pradesh state as a whole, and not Amaravati alone. The private sector consortium had incurred a few million dollars in costs in Amaravati, rather than the billions claimed by Mr Bowyer.
Furthermore, Mr Bowyer asserted that the investments in Andhra Pradesh have been entirely by government-linked companies and related parties, whereas other Singaporean companies with no links to the Government have also invested in Andhra Pradesh.
Second, in relation to Salt Bae, Mr Bowyer falsely asserted that Temasek had invested in a debt-ridden company, whereas Temasek had invested in a different entity.
Third, based on these false examples, Mr Bowyer implied that the Singapore Government controls Temasek's and GIC's commercial decisions. This is also false. The Government does not influence or direct individual investment decisions made by Temasek or GIC.
POFMA was not used against Mr Bowyer's opinion on the performance of the specific investments.
Mr Bowyer is entitled to his opinion. But the Government has to clarify Mr Bowyer's false statements of fact, which he used to build a misleading narrative about our reserves to discredit the Government and smear the reputations of Temasek and GIC.
Temasek's portfolio value has tripled from under $100 billion to $313 billion since 2002. Temasek, GIC and the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) contribute around 20 per cent of government revenues. Far from being a drain on the exchequer, the Net Investment Returns from Temasek, GIC and MAS form our single largest revenue source.
Furthermore, Mr Bowyer's Facebook post has not been removed. Mr Bowyer is required under POFMA to only display the correction notice that directs readers to the Factually article (Corrections and clarifications regarding falsehoods posted by Mr Brad Bowyer) which contains the correct facts. Readers can study the clarification and draw their own conclusions.
Lim Zhi Jian
Director, Reserves & Investment
Ministry of Finance
ST Forum, 12 Dec 2019
Related
Use of POFMA on an online posting by Mr Brad Bowyer -25 Nov 2019
Factually: Corrections and clarifications regarding falsehoods posted by Mr Brad Bowyer Misleading and false statements were made by Brad Bowyer on Temasek and GIC
Singapore Fake news law passed by Parliament on 8 May 2019
Facebook takes down fake NUS student group page accused of ‘sowing discord’ by Home Affairs and Law Minister K Shanmugam’s press secretary / Facebook issues correction notice on States Times Review's post
Use of POFMA on an online posting by Mr Brad Bowyer -25 Nov 2019
Factually: Corrections and clarifications regarding falsehoods posted by Mr Brad Bowyer Misleading and false statements were made by Brad Bowyer on Temasek and GIC
Singapore Fake news law passed by Parliament on 8 May 2019
Facebook takes down fake NUS student group page accused of ‘sowing discord’ by Home Affairs and Law Minister K Shanmugam’s press secretary / Facebook issues correction notice on States Times Review's post
No comments:
Post a Comment