[CNN] Malaysia to abolish mandatory death penalty in move welcomed by rights campaigners

12 June 2022

By Heather Chen, CNN

Updated 0716 GMT (1516 HKT) June 10, 2022 – https://edition.cnn.com/2022/06/10/asia/malaysia-death-penalty-abolish-human-rights-intl-hnk/index.html

(CNN) Malaysia will abolish the mandatory death penalty, the government said Friday, in a move cautiously welcomed by rights groups as a rare progressive step on the issue for the region.

In a statement, Malaysian law minister Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar said mandatory death sentences for serious crimes would be replaced by “alternative punishments” at the discretion of the courts.

“This shows the government’s emphasis on ensuring that the rights of all parties are protected and guaranteed, reflecting the transparency of the country’s leadership in improving the criminal justice system,” he said.

Relevant laws will be amended, the statement said, adding that further research would be carried out on alternative sentences for a number of crimes that carry the death penalty, including drug offenses.

Like many of its neighbors in Southeast Asia, Malaysia has notoriously tough drug laws, including capital punishment for traffickers.

The country declared a moratorium on executions in 2018 but laws imposing the death penalty remained and courts were required to impose the mandatory death sentence on convicted drug traffickers. Terrorist acts, murder, and rape resulting in death also still warranted a mandatory death penalty.

Friday’s decision comes three years after human rights campaigners had criticized the government for making a U-turn on an earlier pledge to abolish capital punishment entirely.

Cautious welcome

The move Friday was welcomed by rights groups who said it was an “important step forward” for the country and wider region.

“Malaysia’s public pronouncement that it will do away with the mandatory death penalty is an important step forward — especially when one considers how trends on capital punishment are headed in precisely the opposite direction in neighboring countries like Singapore, Myanmar, and Vietnam,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director of Human Rights Watch.

No executions were carried out in Malaysia throughout 2021, according to a recent Amnesty International report about global executions.

“As of 12 October [2021], 1,359 people were under sentence of death, including 850 with their death sentences being final and appealing for pardon and 925 convicted of drug-related offences,” the report said. Out of the 1,359 sentenced to death, 526 were foreigners, it noted.

However, executions have been on the rise in other parts of Southeast Asia like Myanmar, Vietnam and Singapore, which recently executed an intellectually disabled prisoner from Malaysia despite global condemnation.

This week, Myanmar announced scheduled executions for two men accused of “being involved in terrorist acts” in what would mark the first judicial executions in the country in decades since the military coup.

Although he welcomed Malaysia’s move as a sign of progress, Human Rights Watch’s Robertson said the government needed to follow through on its statement with action.

“We need to see Malaysia pass the actual legislative amendments to put this pledge into effect because we have been down this road before, with successive Malaysian governments promising much on human rights but ultimately delivering very little,” he said.

“The Malaysian government … knows the international community will take this as a sign of the country progressing forward but hopefully, they really mean it this time and move quickly to do away with the mandatory death penalty once and for all.”

Leave a Comment » | Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by jamestan2019

[Malay Mail] Malaysia’s abolishment of death penalty not done deal yet until Parliament passes law, Human Rights Watch rep says

12 June 2022

By John Bunyan

Friday, 10 Jun 2022 4:35 PM MYT – https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2022/06/10/malaysias-abolishment-of-death-penalty-not-done-deal-yet-until-parliament-passes-law-human-rights-watch-says/11669

KUALA LUMPUR, June 10 — A Human Rights Watch (HRW) representative Phil Robertson has insisted today that any abolishment of the mandatory death penalty in Malaysia needs to be accompanied by a legislative amendment in the Parliament before the pledge can be put into effect.

The deputy director of the human rights watchdog’s Asia division said Malaysians must instead to take a wait-and-see approach as Putrajaya has historically only delivered little of its promises despite promising so much on human rights.

“Malaysia’s public pronouncement that it will do away with the mandatory death penalty is an important step forward, especially when one considers how trends on capital punishment are headed in precisely the opposite direction in neighbouring countries like Singapore, Myanmar, and Vietnam.

“But before everyone starts cheering, we need to see Malaysia pass the actual legislative amendments to put this pledge into effect because we have been down this road before, with successive Malaysian governments promising much on human rights but ultimately delivering very little,” he said in a statement.

Earlier, Malaysia’s de facto law minister Datuk Seri Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar announced that the government has agreed to abolish the mandatory death penalty and substitute sentences at the discretion of the court.

Wan Junaidi also confirmed that the Cabinet has agreed that further scrutiny and study be carried out on the proposed substitute sentence for 11 offences carrying the mandatory death penalty, one offence under section 39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 [Act 234] 2 and 22 other offences which carry the death penalty but at the discretion of the court.

This further study will be carried out in collaboration with the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) Legal Affairs Division, the Prime Minister’s Department and other interested ministries and departments.

Robertson described the latest announcement on the death penalty by the Malaysian government as merely to show the international community that the country is progressing forward.

“The Malaysian government loves to float trial balloons about human rights initiatives because it knows the international community has a short attention span and will take this as a sign of Malaysia progressing forward.

“But the reality is often more complicated, so we’ve learned to be wary. Hopefully, Malaysia will do the right thing by immediately implementing this pledge to do away with the mandatory death penalty,” he said.

Malaysia has had a moratorium on all executions since 2018 while awaiting recommendations from the committee.

In August 2019, the Pakatan Harapan (PH) administration formed the Special Committee to Review Alternative Punishments to the Mandatory Death Penalty to examine alternatives to the mandatory death sentence.

However, the PH government collapsed in February 2020 before the Bill for the abolition of the death penalty could be tabled in the March meeting of Parliament that year.

Leave a Comment » | Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by jamestan2019

[APHR] Southeast Asian MPs alarmed by planned executions of four Myanmar political prisoners

12 June 2022

JAKARTA, 6 June 2022 – Parliamentarians from Southeast Asia are alarmed by the announcement by the Myanmar junta that it will carry out the death sentences handed down to four political prisoners, including prominent former member of Parliament, Ko Phyo Zeya Thaw, and well-known pro-democracy activist, Kyaw Min Yu, better known as “Ko Jimmy”, both convicted on charges of terrorism.

These death sentences would be the first known judicial executions in the country since 1988, according to Amnesty International, which considers Myanmar as “Abolitionist in Practice”, as it retains the death penalty in law, but has not applied it for decades. Ever since the coup in February last year that ousted the democratically elected government, Myanmar has seen a drastic surge in the number of people sentenced to death with at least 86 people, including minors who were under 18 at the time.

“ASEAN and the international community must use every means at their disposal to prevent these executions from taking place. If they are carried out they will be nothing less than cold blooded political assassination. These executions would further contribute to prevent the already remote possibility of a sustainable political dialogue, as prescribed over one year ago in the Five-Point Consensus agreed by ASEAN member states and Min Aung Hlaing’s junta, which has not made any effort whatsoever in that direction,” said Charles Santiago, Member of Parliament from Malaysia, and APHR Chairperson. 

The Myanmar military has killed at least 1,887 protesters since the coup, but it is attempting to give a veneer of legality to the execution of the four men. Yet it is abundantly clear that, as in dozens of sentences handed by military tribunals, there was no respect for fair trial rights.

ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR) unreservedly supports the recent United Nations Secretary General’s statement reminding Myanmar’s military that the death sentences are a blatant violation of the right to life, liberty and security of person, as per Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. We also join him in emphasizing that the Declaration also enshrines the principles of equality before the law, the presumption of innocence, the right to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, and all of the guarantees necessary for a person’s defense.

“This announcement should be viewed in the context of the increasingly brazen atrocities being committed by the Myanmar military in order to consolidate its power in the face of widespread popular resistance. The junta is killing, torturing and arbitrarily arresting Myanmar people with an impunity that owes a great deal to the failure of the international community to hold it accountable for its crimes,” said Santiago.

APHR calls on each and every member state of ASEAN, as well as its Dialogue Partners, to urgently demand an unconditional and immediate stay of execution and release of the four detainees by the self-declared State Administration Council. They must individually and collectively make a stand before it is too late, not only for these four, but for all those currently arbitrarily detained who should be immediately and unconditionally released.

Click here to read this statement on APHR’s website.

For more information please contact info@aseanmp.org.

Leave a Comment » | Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by jamestan2019

[APHR] Southeast Asian MPs call Indonesia to give a voice to the Global South at the G20

11 June 2022

JAKARTA, 9 June 2022 – Parliamentarians from Southeast Asia have called Indonesia, the only G20 member in Southeast Asia and its President this year, to “give voice to the aspirations of the Global South” and bring to the table issues that particularly affect the region, but also the world in general, at the group’s Summit which will be held in November this year in Jakarta.

In a position paper published today, ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR) has urged Indonesia to advocate at the Summit for stronger and more creative global responses to the devastation caused by conflicts like that of Myanmar, a substantial increase in global financial support for a sustainable energy transition, and to find ways to reduce the impact of the world’s digital transformation on human rights and democracy.

“We, Parliamentarians from Southeast Asia, are urging the Indonesian Government to use its preeminent position to promote at the G20 a form of collective and inclusive collaboration among nations to address challenges that, having a specific resonance to our region, affect humanity as a whole,” said APHR in the Position Paper.

APHR suggests that new creative ways are necessary to prevent the human and economic costs of crises such as those devastating Myanmar, Ukraine, Yemen or Syria. As international organizations like the UN, or regional groups like ASEAN, have often failed to prevent atrocities, Indonesia should propose a new Working Group at the G20 to discuss responses from the largest economies in the world to those crises.

On the climate change front, it has become evident that current pledges from states to reduce carbon emissions will not be sufficient to slow climate change, and the necessity to transition to renewable sources of energy is more urgent than ever. APHR urges Indonesia to lead the G20 to agree to accelerate the phasing out from coal and fossil fuels, but it must also substantially increase global financial support for such a transition.

Lastly, and in face of the challenges posed by the spread online of disinformation campaigns, divisiveness and hate-speech, APHR urges the G20 to discuss and identify measures that can be adopted to regulate the digital marketplace along democratic lines, put an end to invasive use of people’s personal data, and hold online platforms accountable for their harmful business models.

Click here to read the position paper.

Click here to read this press release on APHR’s website.

For more information please contact info@aseanmp.org.

Leave a Comment » | Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by jamestan2019

[ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights] Quotes: On ASEAN Envoy to Myanmar’s planned trip to the country next week

27 March 2022

Dear Members of the Press, 

Please see below quotes from Charles Santiago, APHR Chair and a Malaysian MP, on the planned visit to Myanmar by Prak Sokhonn, Cambodian Foreign Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and ASEAN Special Envoy on Myanmar, from 21 to 23 March 2022.

“It is absolutely disgraceful that in a week when the United Nations Human Rights Commissioner has released such a damning first report on conditions in Myanmar since the coup, that the Cambodian government of Prime Minister Hun Sen is once again normalizing the illegal junta in Myanmar on multiple levels, having already invited a Myanmar military delegation to the country this week. Hun Sen and Min Aung Hlaing’s contempt for the collective will of ASEAN is seriously damaging the reputation of the bloc and the region.” 

“As ASEAN chair, it is in the Cambodian government’s best interests to strengthen its own, and ASEAN’s, credibility by remaining fully committed to the Five-Point Consensus. It should provide a roadmap to explain how it plans to progress the agreed action points. Instead, Prak Sokhonn’s visit, which comes without any conditions or demands on the junta to meet its obligations under the Five Point Consensus, is a betrayal of the collective decision of ASEAN, and the will of the Myanmar people. We all witnessed how PM Hun Sen’s similarly condition-free visit in January did nothing to deter, and possibly emboldened, the junta to undertake operations the very next day that may amount to crimes against humanity. Cambodia’s continued reckless departure from the ASEAN consensus puts more innocent Myanmar people’s lives at risk from this junta.”

“It is ridiculous that the ASEAN Special Envoy says his visit to Myanmar is aimed at “creating a favourable condition” to end the violence. It is way past time to stop holding hands with these accused war criminals. ASEAN and its Chair must demand the military junta cease all violence and attacks immediately against the people, in line with the five-point consensus agreed by the leaders of ASEAN Member States. Anything less risks giving the military council a licence to commit further crimes against humanity.”

Leave a Comment » | Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by jamestan2019

[Featured] Braema as an alumnus of the Diplomacy Training Program

22 February 2022

Braema Mathiaparanam

Photo of Braema Mathi


Role: Secretary* of MARUAH

Active in Country: Singapore

DTP Trainer and Alumna: 2006 Migrant Workers Program – Malaysia as a participant and 2008 Migrant Workers Program – Philippines as a trainer

Braema Mathiaparanam is a prominent Singaporean human rights activist, a former journalist with Singapore’s most prestigious newspaper The Straits Times and an ex-Nominated Member of Singapore’s Parliament.

Braema began her human rights advocacy work in 1992. She has championed gender rights, LGBTQ rights, civil liberties (especially anti-death penalty campaign), political pluralism, and the rights of the migrant workers in Singapore. Braema participated in two DTP courses – on the rights of migrant workers, and on Business and Human Rights.   

With others she founded Maruah, a human rights NGO, and led the organisation for a number of years and is now its Secretary.* ‘Maruah’ in Malay, Singapore’s native language, means ‘dignity’. The organisation is also the Singapore civil society focal point to the Regional Working Group on ASEAN Human Rights Mechanisms.

Braema reflects that defending human rights in Singapore is complex and challenging, and a difficult path to take. Work on civil and political rights is particularly difficult, given legal restrictions.  

Singapore has ratified some of the core human rights treaties – but neither of the core conventions on Civil and Political Rights or Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Singapore is host, rather than home, to many migrant workers from elsewhere in Asia, and their treatment is one of the key human rights concerns. Singapore has not ratified the Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and their Families (CMW). Many of these migrant workers are women domestic workers and advocates have used the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, which Singapore has ratified, to promote the rights of these domestic workers.

Despite the many challenges, Braema’s motivation remains high. She said if you are aware, often it stays with you. This stems from values built up within the home and reinforced in school.  

“When you grow up with this increased awareness, you see gaps, and you start thinking how to patch up the gaps,” said Braema.

She said one result of her attending the DTP training on defending the rights of migrant workers was to become more focused on including regional CSOs, diplomats, and representatives of the business sector in advocacy campaigns. She reached out to embassies of the countries sending migrant workers to Singapore to develop collaboration for the well-being of their citizens who are Singapore’s migrant workers.

“I contacted embassies such as Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, and Bangladesh, in the early years of working on migrant workers’ rights. Together we created a mutual-learning environment so that they could share and develop ways to offer more protection to their citizens working in Singapore.”  

They also encouraged embassies to also collaborate in defence of migrants and to learn from each others’ good practices. The embassies of Indonesia and Thailand introduced educational materials, booklets, and set up hotlines for the migrant workers as an outcome of this advocacy, following what they had learnt from Philippines.

Her reflections on DTP’s course on business and human rights is also highly positive. Before participating in the program, she said her knowledge of “business and human rights was very weak.” “I found that DTP program excellent and had effectively presented complex issues.”

“What was really good to learn,” she said, “was learning that European/OECD governments had specific commitments to guide the private sector on business and human rights – and the OECD Guidelines established National Contact Points that could hear complaints.”

As a whole she thinks the DTP training facilitators and the core content experts were excellent in mapping out the basic theories and the advanced knowledge that activists needed to know to spearhead their activism on the ground.

“It was intense upliftment in terms of knowledge from experts, an open discourse where I had many opportunities to ask questions and understand issues better, plus a reading list. All which help you to move fast in a short period.”

Braema thinks that against the backdrop of the renewed global attention on climate change, DTP does have the potential to expand its training work on climate change, business, and human rights. She said corporate social responsibility (CSR), is still the dominant mindset in the corporate sector. “This mindset needs to be pushed out to connect effectively with climate change. Business and human rights, sustainability frameworks, worker’s rights, meeting people’s basic needs to food, water are all taking centrestage now, more than ever before Perhaps DTP could ponder expanding its program into this sector,” Braema suggested.

“I still have all my DTP training files on my shelf. Anytime I’m unsure. I pull out those files to clarify. Or If I need to contacts to participants, I look into those files, to check on the participants’ lists,” said Braema.


*At time of profile in December 2021. Braema stepped down as Secretary in Jan 2022 but remains active in Maruah.

Leave a Comment » | Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by jamestan2019

Human Rights Day 2021 – “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights”

10 December 2021

Leave a Comment » | Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by jamestan2019

[Webinar] Voices of Democracy: Civil Societies and the UN

18 November 2021

Ever wondered what the UPR was? Every few years, the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) by the United Nations Human Rights Council sets about examining the human rights records of all UN Member States. Join changemakers from Pink Dot and MARUAH for an online panel discussion about the role of the UPR in Singaporean advocacy, policymaking and discourse this Friday, Nov 19, from 3pm-5pm! Proudly organised by the Yale-NUS/NUS Community for Advocacy and Political Education (CAPE)


Sign up at bit.ly/UPRCAPE or scan the QR code

Leave a Comment » | Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by jamestan2019

[ANFREL] Asian Electoral Stakeholders Forum 5 – Memorandum (The Way Forward for Elections Beyond the Covid-19 Pandemic)

27 October 2021

Asian Electoral Stakeholders Forum 5 was hosted online this year on 20-21 October 2021. There were four panel discussions on (1) addressing electoral challenges and democratic backsliding in Asia, (2) success stories of holding elections during COVID-19, (3) promoting electoral reforms through cooperation between EMBs and CSOs, and (4) improving electoral integrity using technology and open data.

The memorandum – The Way Forward for Elections Beyond the Covid-19 Pandemic (click to view), was adopted by consensus at the end of the forum. It is hoped that this memo can guide election stakeholders, such as election management bodies, civil society organisations and observer groups, to strive to improve electoral processes in their respective countries in pursuit of genuine democracy.

The panel speakers’ presentation slides can be found in this Google Drive folder.

Recordings of the forum can be found on ANFREL’s Facebook page (Day 1 | Day 2).

Thank you.

Leave a Comment » | Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by jamestan2019

[ICJ] Singapore: Withdraw Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Bill 

14 October 2021

OCTOBER 13, 2021 – https://www.icj.org/singapore-withdraw-foreign-interference-countermeasures-bill/

Today, ICJ and nine others organizations called on the Government of Singapore to withdraw the Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Bill (‘FICA’). FICA’s provisions contravene international legal and human rights principles – including the rights to freedom of expression, association, participation in public affairs, and privacy – and will further curtail civic space, both online and offline.

On October 4, 2021, the Parliament of Singapore passed FICA, three weeks after it was tabled on September 13 by the Ministry of Home Affairs purportedly to “prevent, detect and disrupt foreign interference in (…) domestic politics”. This was despite serious concerns that the law could undermine civic freedoms – raised by members of the public, civil society, legal fraternity, independent media, political opposition, academia and industry in Singapore. The bill went through both its second and third readings in one parliament sitting and FICA was passed without significant amendments to address key concerns.

While the protection of national security may be a legitimate aim, FICA contravenes the rule of law and the principles of legality, necessity and proportionality under international human rights law. Overbroad and ambiguous provisions draw within its scope a wide range of conduct, activities and communications “directed towards a political end in Singapore”. As a result, almost any form of expression and association relating to politics, social justice or other matters of public interest in Singapore may be ensnarled within the ambit of the legislation – making it difficult, in turn, for the average individual to reasonably predict with precision what conduct may fall foul of the law. Vague provisions also allow for unfettered executive discretion in interpretation and implementation of the law. Unlimited executive discretion – together with severe penalties under the law – can result in executive overreach into what it deems permissible as civic discussion and public debate. FICA also provides no mechanism for independent judicial oversight or provision of remedy where human rights violations occur as a result of the enforcement of its provisions. The law thus fails to provide for the least intrusive mechanisms to achieve its stated aim of protecting national security while greatly enhancing the risk of executive abuse.

FICA empowers the Minister for Home Affairs to order the removal or disabling of online content – undermining the right to freedom of expression. The Minister is, for example, empowered to order publication of mandatory messages drafted by the authorities, ban apps from being downloadable in Singapore, and order disclosure of private communications and information, when the Minister “suspects or believes” that someone is undertaking or planning to undertake online communications activity “on behalf of a foreign principal”, and that it is in the “public interest” to act. The law makes it a criminal offence to undertake “clandestine” electronic communications on behalf of a foreign principal under certain circumstances, including when that activity “diminishes or is likely to diminish public confidence in (…) the Government or a public authority” or “is likely to be directed towards a political end in Singapore”. Activity “directed towards a public end” includes conduct influencing or seeking to influence government decisions or public opinion on matters of “public controversy” or “political debate” in Singapore. The government can also designate individuals as “politically significant persons” after which they can be required to follow strict limits on sources of funding and disclose all links with foreigners or foreign entities.

FICA’s provisions can also facilitate violations of the rights to freedom of association and participation in public affairs. “Conduct” committed in connection with a “foreign principal” and “directed towards a political end in Singapore” is criminalized where this involves “covert” communication or “deception” – which is defined as including any “deliberate” use of “encrypted communication platforms”. The expansive and vaguely worded definition of activities “directed towards a political end” can cover a broad range of activities – including social justice advocacy, artistic commentary, academic research, social enterprise or journalistic reporting – carried out by, among others, members of civil society, academia, media, the arts and industry. Meanwhile, the overbroad configuration of connection with a “foreign principal” as “arrangements” with any “foreigner” or “non-Singapore registered entity” that can be “written or unwritten” brings within the law’s remit nearly all forms of cross-border collaboration or engagement. Use of “encrypted platforms” as a reflection of “covert” communications also allows for criminal intent to be inferred from a wide range of modes of communications via modern electronic devices and platforms – including through encrypted messaging and email services; and the use of online platforms through secure connection services, such as virtual private networks (VPNs).

FICA will disproportionately impact members of civil society, independent journalists, academics, researchers, artists, writers and other individuals who express opinions, share information and collaborate to advocate on socio-political issues and matters of public interest. As their work can involve critical opinions and is often underpinned and supported by cross-border collaboration, research and funding, they are exposed to increased scrutiny and sanctions under FICA. The issues on which they work will also come under increased State oversight and control. Executive oversight and control can, in turn, infringe not only their rights to freedom of expression and association but the rights of other individuals in Singapore who rely on their work to participate in public affairs, which includes conduct of citizens to “exert influence through public debate and dialogue with their representatives or through their capacity to organize”.

Severe penalties under FICA are disproportionate. In addition, many of those penalties may be imposed without adequate independent oversight or remedy in case of human rights violations, which can result in a chilling effect on civic space and discussion. Directions can be issued by the authorities to censor, restrict or block access to online content, accounts, services, apps or locations deemed to violate the law. The law also allows for the authorities to designate “politically significant” individuals and entities and order them to “disclose foreign affiliations” and “arrangements” or to end “reportable arrangements”. However, there is a lack of independent oversight over these restrictions and designations. These directions may only be appealed to a Reviewing Tribunal appointed by the President on advice of the Cabinet, and decisions made by this Tribunal cannot be appealed to the High Court except for non-compliance with procedural requirements. Further, individuals can face criminal sanctions under the law for “clandestine foreign interference by electronic communications activity” and non-compliance with directions, which may result in steep fines and imprisonment terms. These criminal offences are arrestable and non-bailable.

These penalties and restrictions not only risk undermining the right to privacy, but increase the risk of individuals self-censoring and deliberately deciding not to participate in or engage with cross-border networks to avoid potentially falling foul of the law. Their negative impacts can be particularly severe on independent online platforms, which can be banned from receiving funding or other financial support from foreign individuals or entities, and on journalists, political commentators, civil society members and community researchers who often nurture public opinion and debate through information, opinions and advocacy shared online.

In light of these significant concerns, we request that the Government of Singapore withdraw FICA. The law risks imminently and substantially narrowing already limited civic space in the country – particularly where this space is significantly restricted through abuse of other existing laws such as defamation and contempt of court provisions; the Protection Against Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA), the Public Order Act and the Administration of Justice (Protection) Act. The imminent enactment and future enforcement of FICA will significantly undermine the Government of Singapore’s obligations under international law to protect, promote and fulfil human rights – instead allowing for the State to expand curtailment of civic freedoms to the detriment of its people.

Signatories

Access Now

Amnesty International

ARTICLE 19

ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights

Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)

CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation

Digital Defenders Partnership

Human Rights Watch

International Commission of Jurists

Lawyers’ Rights Watch Canada

Download

Full statement with a summary legal analysis, click here.

Contact

Osama Motiwala, ICJ Asia-Pacific Communications Officer, t: +66-62-702-6369 e: osama.motiwala(a)icj.org

Leave a Comment » | Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by jamestan2019

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »