miyagi.sg | My Very Own Glob {Curiosa Felicitas}

View Comments

• Gary Ler’s Journal wrote:

  January 21, 2006 at 5:10 pm

  My RSSs Mr Brown Rock­son Roy Ng Style­my­words Scott Adams RSSMiyagi
• Agagooga wrote:

  September 12, 2005 at 1:34 pm

  Die liao
• candyfeehily wrote:

  September 12, 2005 at 1:37 pm

  what remark did they make?
• Tym wrote:

  September 12, 2005 at 1:43 pm

  I quote from the CNA arti­cle: “A per­son is deemed to have com­mit­ted an offence under the Sedi­tion Act if he does, or con­spires with any per­son to do, any act which has a sedi­tious tendency.

  It is also an offence to utter any sedi­tious words or to print, pub­lish, sell, dis­trib­ute, repro­duce or import any sedi­tious publication.

  Among oth­ers, a sedi­tious ten­dency is defined under the Act as one to raise dis­con­tent or dis­af­fec­tion among the cit­i­zens or res­i­dents and to pro­mote feel­ings of ill-will and hos­til­ity between dif­fer­ent races or classes of the pop­u­la­tion of Singapore.”

  Am I the only one who still doesn’t really get what a “sedi­tious ten­dency” is? If it’s any­thing that raises dis­con­tent or dis­af­fec­tion, or pro­motes feel­ings of ill-will and hos­til­ity, how does that dif­fer from any num­ber of casual remarks made by a per­son — whether it’s Joe HDB or an esteemed Min­is­ter — in the course of a given day?
• mercermachine wrote:

  September 12, 2005 at 3:41 pm

  half of me is cheer­ing the fact that these two racists are being pun­ished. the other half is cring­ing at the utter lack of free­dom of speach…
• Unknown wrote:

  September 12, 2005 at 3:43 pm

  Inter­est­ing.

  Like what Tym was say­ing, how do you cat­e­go­rize sedi­tious tendency?

  And how is the gov­ern­ment crack­ing down on this form on crime (excuse me, I mean offense), espe­cially ones done online? Are every com­ments made tracked? And more impor­tanty, just to make things fair for every­one, how thor­ough are the searches for sedi­tion terrorists?

  Of course, they shouldn’t start in the first place…making racist remarks. Silly people
• My Very Own Glob {Curiosa Felicitas} wrote:

  September 12, 2005 at 4:55 pm

  Laws of our land Part III: Sedi­tion Act & Racism

  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 yo…
• Edan wrote:

  September 12, 2005 at 5:02 pm

  (from a post I made) …

  For my part, I have no idea what the com­ments were, but I can bring you through the leg­is­la­tion: (irrel­e­vant por­tions deleted):

  s4 of the Sedi­tion Act (the “Act”) states that any per­son who to does any act which has a sedi­tious ten­dency; utters any sedi­tious words; or prints, pub­lishes, sells, offers for sale, dis­trib­utes or repro­duces any sedi­tious pub­li­ca­tion shall be guilty of an offence and liable on con­vic­tion for a first offence to be fined up to S$5,000, or jailed up to three years, or both.

  s3(1) of the Act defines 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.

  The blog­gers might be saved by s3(2), which states that (this is set out in full) any act, speech, words, pub­li­ca­tion or other thing shall not be deemed to be sedi­tious by rea­son only that it has a ten­dency
  (a) to show that the Gov­ern­ment has been mis­led or mis­taken in any of its mea­sures;
  (b) to point out errors or defects in the Gov­ern­ment or the Con­sti­tu­tion as by law estab­lished or in leg­is­la­tion or in the admin­is­tra­tion of jus­tice with a view to the rem­e­dy­ing of such errors or defects;
  © to per­suade the cit­i­zens of Sin­ga­pore or the res­i­dents in Sin­ga­pore to attempt to pro­cure by law­ful means the alter­ation of any mat­ter in Sin­ga­pore; or
  (d) to point out, with a view to their removal, any mat­ters pro­duc­ing or hav­ing a ten­dency to pro­duce feel­ings of ill-will and enmity between dif­fer­ent races or classes of the pop­u­la­tion of Sin­ga­pore,
  if such act, speech, words, pub­li­ca­tion or other thing has not oth­er­wise in fact a sedi­tious tendency.

  …

  http://singasingapore.blogspot.com/2005/09/two-bloggers-charged-under-sedition.html
• Elia Diodati wrote:

  September 13, 2005 at 1:34 pm

  Track­back: e pur si muove, Blog­gers Charged Under Sedi­tion Act