High Court dismisses TOC's challenge to suspension of its social media pages, Chinese-language website

SINGAPORE — The High Court has dismissed an application for a judicial review filed by sociopolitical website The Online Citizen (TOC). TOC had wanted to dispute an order by the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) to suspend its social media pages and Chinese-language website. 

In court documents released on Thursday (Dec 16), High Court Judge Valerie Thean said that TOC failed to establish "any unequivocal representation" that its class licence covered only its registered websites and does not include other platforms that also carry TOC's content. Its licence was suspended by IMDA in September.

Two weeks after IMDA's order, TOC launched this judicial review seeking to quash IMDA's suspension order against its social media platforms and Chinese-language website.

TOC earlier shut down these platforms, as well as its main English website as part of meeting the requirements of the suspension order, which IMDA had issued because TOC had failed to declare its funding sources.

The broadcasting class licence requires content providers that engage in the online promotion or discussion of Singapore’s politics to be transparent about their sources of funding. This is to prevent them from being controlled by foreign actors or coming under the influence of foreign entities and funding.

In Justice Thean's judgement, she stated that services provided by TOC's social media platforms and Chinese-language website are considered "computer online services", "as their primary purpose is undoubtedly to entertain, educate or inform all or part of the public".

Given that all "computer online services" can operate only with a class licence, IMDA's suspension of TOC's class licence would mean its social media platforms and Chinese-language websites would have to be shut as well.

Justice Thean also noted that the Broadcasting Act allows TOC to appeal against IMDA's decision to suspend its class licence to the Minister for Communications and Information, and that such alternative remedies ought to have been exhausted first before launching a judicial review. 

To challenge the legal effect of its class licence suspension on its Chinese website and social media platforms, TOC would have needed to appeal against the suspension of the class licence itself, the judgement stated. 

The judgement also pointed out that IMDA's suspension order affects only TOC's ability to provide its services in or from Singapore. 

However, it "did not purport to prohibit the provision of services from other countries". 

When asked by TODAY whether he would look to operate TOC from outside of Singapore, its chief editor Terry Xu said: "Not at the moment, as I have no idea what IMDA intends to do if I were to do so. I am of the mind to resolve all my outstanding court cases before deciding the next phase of actions."

TOC had argued that the class licence suspension should not have affected its social media pages because “no social media user in Singapore has had to be licensed by the IMDA," the judgement stated. 

TOC also said that IMDA had told the socio-political site that only its main English websites were subject to the class licence. 

However, Justice Thean said that TOC's argument reveals its fundamental misunderstanding of the Broadcasting Act's licensing regime. 

TOC assumed that its class licence was conferred only when it registered its website, which is a condition imposed by the class licence on internet content providers. 

However, Justice Thean said that TOC's "registration of its two main websites was in fact independent of, and irrelevant to, the scope of its computer online services that were subject to the class licence". 

As for why it did not exhaust alternative remedies provided for under the Act, TOC argued that provisions were made clear that the minister's decision on an appeal would be final, and would supersede a judicial review. 

Justice Thean said, though, that the regulation of broadcasting services concerns wider issues of policy and its implementation and administration.

"In a statutory appeal to the minister, all matters, whether substantive or procedural, would be fully and fairly considered," she added.

"A statutory appeal ensures that the full merits are considered by the relevant minister who is charged with the policy in issue. An aggrieved person is not well-served by ignoring such a route for reconsideration, save in exceptional circumstances which justify such a course."