This morning, I received a Correction Direction from the POFMA Office, issued by Minister for Home Affairs K Shanmugam. I have until 8:00AM on 23 January to comply with the direction. In the correction direction, the government says that the Singapore Prison Service doesn't use any of the steps alleged by Lawyers for Liberty in their statement. You can find their response here: https://www.gov.sg/article/factually-clarifications-on-falsehoods-posted-by-lawyers-for-liberty After reading LFL's statement, I sent a follow-up to the Singapore Prison Service on 16 January asking for their response, as well as other questions about executions in prison and their standard protocol. Such information is usually very hard to come by, but in the light of such disturbing claims, I thought it was important for there to be more information about what actually happens in the execution chamber. As someone who has been invested in the issue of the death penalty for a long time, I was extremely interested in doing a story taking into account both LFL and the prison's statements. When I received no response, I followed up with the prison on 17 January. Still no response. Instead of responding to media queries, a POFMA order was made instead. During the Universal Periodic Review at the United Nations in 2011, the government of Singapore had supported recommendations to "make available statistics and other factual information on the use of the death penalty". They considered such a recommendation to be either already implemented, or in the process of implementation (see: https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G11/145/27/PDF/G1114527.pdf), but in my opinion, this has never been implemented in any meaningful way and details related to the use of capital punishment are as opaque as ever. I'll be using the rest of the time given under the Correction Direction to decide how I should proceed.
https://www.facebook.com/kixes/posts/505034192473
PAP ordered IMDA to block LFL's website liao.
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/imda-to-block-malaysian-ngo-website-after-it-fails-to-comply-with-pofma-correction-mci
POFMA soaring abroad now.....let the fun begin!
Humans rights group Lawyers for Liberty will file a suit tomorrow against Singapore Home Minister K Shanmugam over a "correction direction" pursuant to Singapore's Protection From Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act 2019 (Pofma).
LFL said it received the direction on Wednesday and accused Singapore of abusing its new fake news laws to muzzle critics, noting that similar notices had been issued to Singaporean citizens and organisations, including an online portal, The Online Citizen (TOC) and prominent activist Kirsten Han.
The suit against K Shanmugam will be filed at the Kuala Lumpur Court Complex. LFL will be represented by Ambiga Sreenevasan and Gurdial Singh Nijar.
Looks like POFMA is fast becoming the real 纸老虎.....
Oh please, just because SG ministers are the best paid leaders in the world they therefore reckon their stupid POFMA law is enforceable worldwide? Even our neighbours are mocking us these days. If this bunch of expensive, useless JLBs continue with those pompous antics undeterred, we will eventually become the laughing stock of everyone on Earth.
Lawyers for Liberty will NOT comply with MHA POFMA order
Press Statement Singapore must withdraw threats of POFMA criminal proceedings against LFL and Singapore activists 22 January 2020 We refer to the Singapore government’s denial of Lawyers for Liberty’s (LFL) statement that prisoners in Changi prison are executed in a brutal and unlawful manner, as well as the Correction Notice under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act 2019 (POFMA) issued to LFL demanding that we publish a correction or face criminal proceedings in Singapore. Firstly, we absolutely stand by our statement that prisoners on death row in Changi prison are executed brutally and unlawfully by kicks to the neck whenever the rope breaks. Our statement is based upon evidence from former and current Singapore prison officers. These are officers with impeccable service records. Secondly, POFMA is an oppressive and undemocratic law which was passed recently by Singapore amidst controversy. It has been condemned internationally as a weapon by Singapore to stifle dissent or criticism. Thirdly, it is outrageous and unacceptable for Singapore to issue a notice under their POFMA to a Malaysian organisation such as LFL, which is operating and issuing statements on Malaysian soil. Singapore has no business interfering with the freedom of speech of Malaysian citizens making statements within our own country. This is nothing short of an attempt to silence us and prevent the truth about the manner of executions from coming out. Singapore should learn to accept criticism. They have no monopoly over what constitutes facts and the truth. This attempt by Singapore to extend their jurisdiction to Malaysian citizens across the causeway is provocative, illegal and in breach of international law. We will not comply with the unlawful and oppressive Correction Notice given by the Singapore government to LFL demanding that we withdraw our statement. We further demand that the Correction Notice issued under section 11 of POFMA be unconditionally withdrawn with immediate effect by the Singapore government. We note with concern that similar notices have been issued to Singaporean citizens and organisations, including The Online Citizen (TOC) and prominent activist Kirsten Han, and these notices should also be withdrawn. Issued by, Melissa Sasidaran Director Lawyers for Liberty
All I can say is, dead men tell no tales.
https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/124720671-post26.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/21/opinion/fake-news-law-singapore.html
Singapore invokes online falsehoods law against Malaysian rights group's 'preposterous' claims on execution methods
SINGAPORE: Claims by a Malaysian human rights group that Singapore carries out "brutal" executions are "untrue, baseless and preposterous", said the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), which on Wednesday (Jan 22) invoked the online falsehoods law against Lawyers for Liberty (LFL) and three parties for spreading the allegations.
Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam has instructed the POFMA (Protection From Online Falsehoods And Manipulation Act) Office to issue a correction direction against LFL’s statement on its website, Kirsten Han’s Facebook post, an online article by The Online Citizen and a Facebook post by Yahoo Singapore, said MHA in a press release.
They will be required to carry a correction notice, stating that their posts or articles contain falsehoods.
More at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/pofma-malaysia-lawyers-for-liberty-drugs-execution-falsehoods-12299384
Press Statement
Disclosure of the brutal & unlawful hanging methods in Changi prison – brutal kicks inflicted to snap prisoners’ necks
16 January 2020
In November last year, we had revealed to the public in this country that brutal and unlawful methods were being used to execute prisoners in Singapore’s notorious Changi prison. This was of importance here, as many Malaysians are on death row in Changi prison, mainly being convicted drug mules.
We had also written to the Singapore authorities and informed them that we are prepared to meet them and handover the evidence in our possession.
However, the Singapore government has met our disclosures with deafening silence. Significantly, they have also not denied our allegation of brutality in carrying out hangings, which has been widely reported.
In the circumstances, we are compelled to disclose some details of the brutal hanging method, in order that the ensuing public scrutiny will bring to an end these methods.
We received this information from a Singapore Prison Services (SPS) officer who had served at the execution chamber in Changi prison, and himself carried out hangings.
This officer is prepared to come forward and testify at the appropriate forum. His evidence follows below:
He and other prison officers were instructed to carry out the following brutal procedure whenever the rope breaks during a hanging, which happens from time to time.
a) The prison officer is instructed to pull the rope around the neck of the prisoner towards him.
b) Meanwhile, another prison officer will apply pressure by pulling the body in the opposite direction.
c) The first officer must then kick the back of the neck of the prisoner with great force in order to break it.
d) The officers are told to kick the back of the neck because that would be consistent with death by hanging.
e) The officers are told not to kick more than 2 times, so that there will be no tell-tale marks in case there is an autopsy.
f) Strict orders are also given not to divulge the above to other prison staff not involved in executions.
We have been informed that prison officers were given special training to carry out the above brutal execution method.
This execution method is unlawful as the mode of execution prescribed by law is hanging by the neck, and not execution by brutal kicking of the neck.
Every death row prisoner in Changi, including the Malaysians, are in danger of suffering this excruciating death, should the rope break during the hanging.
It is particularly disturbing that this is being done surreptitiously, with specific measures adopted to ensure that nothing incriminating is revealed during any subsequent autopsy. This is blatant deception and illegality by the Singapore authorities.
It is in flagrant breach of Article 9 of the Singapore Constitution, the effect of which is to prohibit cruel and unusual punishments.
This could not have been done without the knowledge and approval of the Home Minister and government. Quite clearly, the Republic of Singapore has been knowingly carrying out executions by methods prohibited by both Singapore law, as well as international law.
At this point, we cannot say how many Malaysians or other nationals have been executed in Changi prison by this horrendous method. Only the Singapore government has that information.
We call upon the Singapore Government to consider the following steps:
i) To immediately impose a moratorium on all executions in Singapore pending investigations or a Commission of Inquiry into this matter.
ii) To handover a copy of the findings to Malaysia, many of whose citizens have been executed in Changi or are facing execution.
iii) To reveal the number and identities of Malaysian prisoners who have been executed using this brutal method in Changi.
iv) To agree to compensate families for the unlawful execution of their loved ones.
We further call upon the Malaysian government to take urgent steps to protect the safety and basic rights of all Malaysian prisoners now on death row in Singapore.
Issued by, N Surendran Advisor Lawyers for Liberty
https://www.lawyersforliberty.org/2020/01/16/18875/
“CORRECTION NOTICE:
This Facebook post contains false statements of fact made by Lawyers for Liberty. The Singapore Prison Service does not use any of the steps in the alleged procedure for judicial executions. For the correct facts, click here: https://www.gov.sg/article/factually-clarifications-on-falsehoods-posted-by-lawyers-for-liberty
Under POFMA, I’m legally required to append the above Correction Notice to this post. I originally shared this post because the allegations that were made by Lawyers For Liberty, concerning a process about which very little information is publicly available, were extremely serious and disturbing.
Since I wanted to follow up on the issue, and perhaps write about it as both a journalist and an anti-death penalty activist who has spent years documenting the use of capital punishment in Singapore, I sent questions on 16 January to the Singapore Prison Service following up on the matter and seeking more information about executions and how they are carried out in Singapore. I followed up on 17 January. I received no response. I understand that The Online Citizen also followed up on the matter.
Instead of receiving responses to our queries, TOC and I, along with Yahoo! Singapore, have received POFMA orders alongside Lawyers for Liberty. (LFL has since issued a statement saying that they are standing by their claims and will not be complying with the order.)
I am concerned about how this affects the ability of journalists, activists, and ordinary citizens to follow up on allegations. This is particularly relevant in daily journalism where things move quickly, deadlines are tight, and more information emerges as stories develop. These points were made in April last year, in an open letter to Minister for Communications and Information S Iswaran from journalists: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16pVee1fGx9cU6qADARrgfTtcV60-tVFpm46UGF1-j0o/edit
In the interests of dealing with “fake news”, I hope that government and public agencies can be more responsive to queries from journalists and/or civil society groups when they are seeking information that can clarify matters.