A lot of us (me included, though I’ve suspected for awhile) found out this morning that if you make a racist comment on a forum or a blog and you can be charged under the Sedition Act.
In fact, there are a variety of things you could do on your blog that might be construed as an act with a seditious tendency (s.3.1), even this blog post, if I’m not careful, and in my stream of consciousness, end up writing things that “raise discontent or disaffection amongst the citizens of Singapore or the residents in Singapore” (s.3.1(d))
So, the fellas charged this morning allegedly made racist remarks on an open forum and on a website/blog, and would have been charged under ss. 4.1©, 4.2, 3.1(e). (Anyone with detailed information, please leave comments or trackback).
I’ll say now that I’m all against racism and racist remarks online and off, and that regardless of the law, I think it is repulsive and wrongful behaviour.
And as regards the law, outlawing racism is obviously not unique to Singapore. There are the Australian anti-racial vilification laws (e.g. Racial Vilification Act 1996 (South Australia), where you will find that the punishments are quite severe, even when compared with our very own Sedition Act.
Even as I write this post as quickly as I can, newswires around the world have already or are about to pick up on the screaming headline ‘Bloggers Charged With Sedition in Singapore’, (with Steven McDermott probably sharpening his scissors and thickening his glue for a bit of cut and paste action as I write), which as you can see, isn’t really the issue.
For mine, the issue is a public relations related one. We have laws to protect against racism, and while these laws ain’t broke, they sure could do with a little polishing. Enact an anti-racial vilification law, fellas. Leave the Sedition Act for specific seditious acts against the State.
[Series: Laws of our land Part II, Part I]
Surf stop: Tomorrow.sg: Two bloggers charged under Sedition Act over racist remarks
Technorati Tags: blog, racism, sedition, Singapore
Surely better to cut and paste for archive than merely throw-up via keyboard onto computer screen, then call it a news worthy article. The world press will be screaming it, how about a nice glossy article in the TODAY paper?
now now, behave yourselves boys.
Coming right up. I learnt copy and pasting from the best, Steven! Heh.
[…] “Sedition”: Singasingapore has extracts of relevant portions of the Sedition Act the two were probably charged under. Isn’t sedition “conduct or language inciting to rebellion against the constituted authority in a state” (OED)? Why does S3(1) define “seditious tendency as a tendency to raise discontent or disaffection amongst the citizens of Singapore or the residents in Singapore; or to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Singapore.” Mr. Miyagi too objects to this ambiguous usage. […]
Re: The Sedition Act
Miyagi and Singapore Ink have suggested that the relevant definitions (see below) of seditious tendency in the seditious blogger incident are “ambiguous and nonstandard” or that “there are a variety of things you could do on your blog that might be …
monday links
Today, AsiaPundit has the Shanghai flu (
Wow, that serious..?
Makes one think twice what to post online.
what about chua cheng zhan?
Two charged with sedition for racist remarks onlin
The backstory according to the report is that on June 14, ST Forum Page published a letter asking if “cab companies allowed uncaged pets to be transported in taxis, after she saw a dog standing on a taxi seat next to its owner.”
For some reason, I couldn’t access your site until now. But you’re cross-referenced on the wiki now.
Bloggers and the Sedition Act
Can these two bloggers be charged under Singapore law? They MAY be Singapore citizens, but perhaps their comments resided in an offshore server. Does the long arm of Singapore law reach all the way to say, Bahrain? A quick check with uwhois.com showe…
[…] I broadly agree with Mr Miyagi’s contention that the Sedition Act is a blunt instrument to deal with this kind of thing, compared to other states with specific hate crimes legislation. However, race, religion and inciting the overthrow of the government through unconstitutional and illegal activity have and will continue, for the forseeable future, to be The Out of Bounds markers in Sg. The issue of race with respect to Sg’s independence, as written for us in our history books, is a central one to the political integrity of our polity. With such existential assumptions, the ruling party will probably see invoking the Sedition Act as an appropriate and proportionate response towards racism since it believes that racism threatens the very political foundations of the state and the social contract between our citizens. Of course I would prefer it if the Sedition Act was used and defined more specifically but I am not entirely surprised either. […]
[…] The issue also made it onto the U.S. techno-news blog Slashdot, with popular Singaporean blogger Mr Miyagi mentioned in one of the comments. The comments on Slashdot have been fast and furious and, to quote Singapore Angle, “most of it very…American.” […]
Bloggers Charged with Sedition
Two bloggers in Singapore have been charged with sedition for posting racist comments online. This is the first time bloggers are being charged in Singapore and it is sending shockwaves through the local blogging community (I bet!), and Singapore̵…
you’re quoted here too.
http://zdnetasia.com/news/internet/0,39044246,39254280,00.htm
S’pore blogger charged for racist comments
One was quoted in a media report to say that the incident conjured up negative publicity for the blogger community in Singapore.
Never Be Rude to an Arab, and Sit On My Face
In the spirit of the recent anti-racist rhetoric, let me post up the wise words of Monty Python. Vive la Sedition Act!
Never be rude to an Arab,
An Israeli, or Saudi, or Jew,
Never be rude to an Irishman,
No matter what you do.
Never poke fun …
[…] On the other hand, Benjamin Lee aka Mr Miyagi, who entertained his blog readers without ruffling racial and cultural feathers, told ChannelNewsAsia the following: “A lot of them will be looking at their blogs and wondering if they made any legally seditious remarks. I think because of the way this will be played up, it’s negative publicity for the Singapore blogging community.” […]
How can Lee Hsien Loong call his PAP a first world government?
For starters, only third world governments run a government without calling Parliament for its first sitting until more than six months after winning a general election.
For another thing, third world governments which resort to the above measure do not even go through the pretense of calling an election.
Stop mouthing empty nothings, Lee Hsien Loong.
helping my friend.
what if someone accidently wrote a racist comment on an online forum..and this post cannot be deleted..could he be charged? but he already deleted his account in the forum?
thank you!
San Francisco DUI Lawyer, Criminal Defense Attorney David Wise is a San Francisco Drunk Driving Lawyer, Criminal Defense Attorney, Marijuana Lawyer, Computer and Domestic Violence Attorney for San Mateo, Oakland, Hayward, Alameda, Marin and San Francisco.
I’m so love this blog, already bookmarked it! Thanks.