Parliament passes law to protect Singaporeans from online harm; some MPs express concern over democratic freedom

SINGAPORE — Parliament on Wednesday (Nov 9) passed a Bill to protect Singaporeans from harmful online content, though several Members of Parliament (MPs) called for the law to cover more kinds of online harm. 

The Online Safety (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill gives the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) the power to issue directions to online communication services to ensure Singapore users are protected from harmful online content such as sexual violence and terrorism. 

This could include disabling access by Singapore users to such content or blocking their access to platforms carrying such material. 

Providers who fail to comply with these directions could be subjected to fines of up to S$1 million. 

Under the new law, social media services are also required to implement measures on their services to mitigate the risks of danger to Singapore users from exposure to harmful content. 

In the lead-up to the passing of the Bill, 16 MPs from both sides of the aisle debated the amendment in Parliament over two days. 

Five MPs spoke on Tuesday while the other 11 spoke on Wednesday. 

TYPES OF CONTENT COVERED 

According to a press release on the Bill by the Ministry of Communications and Information on Oct 3, harmful content includes those that

• Advocate suicide or self-harm
• Advocate physical or sexual violence 
• Advocate terrorism
• Depict child sexual exploitation
• Pose a public health risk in Singapore
• Are likely to cause racial and religious disharmony in Singapore

Some MPs called for the legislation to have an even broader reach, covering content such as animal abuse and material that promotes unrealistic beauty standards. 

Mr Saktiandi Supaat of Bishan-Toa Payoh Group Representation Constituency (GRC) said: “Why do we stop at violence or cruelty, abuse or torture on human beings? Are videos of animal cruelty or abuse not equally offensive?” 

However, Communications and Information Minister Josephine Teo responded that the law would become “unwieldy, our proposals lacking in focus and the results likely ineffective” if it covered other types of material prematurely. 

Workers' Party (WP) MP Leon Perera of Aljunied GRC and Nominated MP Mark Chay also spoke about the dangers of online games that contain harmful content such as coarse language, threats and violence. 

Mr Chay added that online gaming can expose vulnerable groups to loot boxes, which “create an element of chance and reward”, causing players to become attached to these games. 

To this, Mrs Teo said that the issue falls under the Gambling Control Act, adding that the Government had made significant updates to that law earlier this year to ensure that it would address emerging trends and products. 

Ms Tin Pei Ling of Macpherson Single-Member Constituency (SMC) raised concerns over the adequacy of the Bill to address new and emerging technologies. 

“With the rise of the metaverse and the increasing number of young people immersing in it, our legislations and protection mechanisms must catch up quickly,” she said. 

CURTAILING DEMOCRATIC FREEDOM 

Another issue raised by several MPs was the curtailing of democratic freedom, given that the law would provide IMDA with the power to block harmful content. 

Mr Gerald Giam of Aljunied GRC asked: “How will Singapore’s Bill safeguard democratic freedoms while protecting the young from online harms?” 

Agreeing, Mr Perera said: “I strongly support Mr Giam’s call on the Government to provide clear and unequivocal assurances that this law will not be used to curtail the exercise of legitimate free speech that touches on the public acts of public figures and that is not of a vicious, personal nature.” 

Mrs Teo affirmed that this would not be the case. 

“I would also like to remind members of the overarching purpose of the Bill – that is, to provide a safe environment and conditions that protect online users, while respecting freedom of speech and expression,” she said. 

REMOVING EGREGIOUS CONTENT IN A ‘TIMELY MANNER’

Nominated MP Shahira Abdullah and Mr Melvin Yong of Radin Mas SMC also asked whether there would be a specified amount of time online communication services would have to disable the egregious content. 

Ms Shahira said: “Certain content may be more harmful and may need to be disabled immediately to mitigate damages.” 

In response, Mrs Teo said that IMDA will stipulate a specific timeline for disabling access to such content. 

“For egregious content that could cause serious harm, the timeline would generally be within hours,” she said. 

She added: “IMDA will also require social media services to act on user reports in a timely and diligent manner that is proportionate to the severity of the potential harm.” 

CONCERNS OVER YOUNG USERS 

Several MPs also voiced concerns over young social media users and whether there are measures in place to protect them from online harm. 

Mr Yong called for social media companies to put in place “speed humps” to slow down children’s use of such services, such as implementing a mandatory age verification for all new sign-ups. 

Mr Desmond Choo of Tampines GRC expressed concern that the current age-verification process for social media platforms is "very much circumventable". 

"For example, what if a 12-year-old could falsely input their age as a 21-year-old? Hence, they would not be treated as a minor as far as the services are concerned," he said. 

To these points, Mrs Teo said that most major social media services already require users to be at least 13 years old to register for an account. 

She added that personal data may be used to implement such age-appropriate policies on social media services.

For false age declarations, Mrs Teo said that there is currently no international consensus on the standards for effective and reliable age verification by social media services which Singapore could use as a reference.

"Instead, we will continue to closely monitor and extensively consult on the latest developments in age verification technology, taking into account data protection safeguards, and consider viable regulatory options."