Singapore’s Response To ‘Fake News’ – The Protection From Online Falsehoods And Manipulation Bill.

On 1 April 2019, the Ministry of Law of Singapore (MoL) tabled the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Bill for its First Reading in Parliament (the Bill). The Bill aims at dealing with damage to society by malicious actors who spread online falsehoods.

 

The Bill seeks to, amongst other things, prevent the electronic communication of false statements of fact, suppress support for and counteract the effects of such communication and safeguard against the use of online accounts for such communication and for information manipulation. It is expected that the Bill will be passed this year.

1. WHAT AMOUNTS TO A ‘FALSE STATEMENT OF FACT’?

Under the Bill:

• a statement of fact is a statement which a reasonable person seeing, hearing or otherwise perceiving it would consider to be a representation of fact; and

• a statement is false if it is false or misleading, whether wholly or in part, and whether on its own or in the context of which it appears.

The MoL has stated that opinions, criticism, satire and parody are not covered by the definition for a statement of fact.

2. OFFENCES UNDER THE BILL

Under the Bill, the communication of false statements of fact or the making or altering of bots for communication of false statement of facts in Singapore will be prohibited and offenders (individuals or companies) will face criminal liabilities including a fine and/or imprisonment.

Further, a person (individual or company) who solicits, receives or agrees to receive any financial or other material benefit as an inducement or reward for providing any service, knowing that the service is or will be used in the communication of false statements of facts in Singapore, will also face criminal liabilities punishable by a fine and/or imprisonment.

For the above offences, it does not matter whether the offender is in or outside Singapore.

Also, non-compliance with any of the Directions described below is a criminal offence.

3. DIRECTIONS UNDER THE BILL

The Bill empowers the Competent Authority to issue various directions to (i) persons (individuals or companies) who have communicated false statements of fact in Singapore, and (ii) internet intermediaries and mass media service providers.

 

3.1 Directions to those who have communicated false statements of fact in Singapore

 

For a person (individual or company) who have communicated false statements of fact in Singapore, the Competent Authority may issue to them (i) a Correction Direction; and/ or (ii) a Stop Communication Direction.

 

• A Correction Direction requires the person to communicate in Singapore a statement that the specified material contains a false statement of fact. It may also require the person to communicate a correction notice in the specified form and manner; and/ or place the correction notice in proximity to every copy of the false statement of fact or a substantially similar statement that is communicated by that person in Singapore.

• A Stop Communication Direction requires the person to stop communicating in Singapore the subject statement or any statement that is substantially similar to the subject statement. It may also require the person to communicate a correction notice in the specified form and manner; and/or publish a correction notice in a specified newspaper or other printed publication of Singapore.

 

Access Blocking Order to ISP: In the event that a person does not comply with any of the Directions above, the Minister may direct the Info-communications Media Development Authority (IMDA) to order the internet service provider (ISP) to take reasonable steps to disable access by end-users in Singapore to the online locations.

 

3.2 Directions to internet intermediaries and mass media service providers

 

For internet intermediaries and mass media service providers, the Competent Authority may issue to them (i) a Target Correction Direction; (ii) a Disabling Direction; and/ or (iii) a General Correction Direction.

 

• A Targeted Correction Direction requires the internet intermediaries to communicate by means of that service to all end-users in Singapore who have accessed false statements of fact on their platforms to inform them that the statement is false.

• A Disabling Direction requires the internet intermediaries to disable access to users of any subject material on their platform that contains a false statement of fact.

• A General Correction Direction requires, amongst other things, a prescribed internet intermediary or a prescribed newspaper/ broadcasting/ telecoms licence holder, to issue correction notices to all users of their services, i.e. by contacting all users of an internet intermediary service, publish a correction notice in a newspaper or printed publication, or broadcast a correction notice on television, etc.

 

Access Blocking Order to ISP: In the event that a person does not comply with any of the Directions above, the Minister may direct the IMDA to order the ISP to take reasonable steps to disable access by end-users in Singapore to the online locations.

 

3.3 Directions to counteract inauthentic online accounts and coordinated inauthentic behaviour

 

For a prescribed internet intermediary, the Competent Authority may issue to it an Account Restriction Direction if a false statement of fact has been communicated in Singapore using the specified online account or coordinated inauthentic behaviour has been carried out using the specified online account.

 

• Account Restriction Direction requires a prescribed internet intermediary to disallow its services from being used to communicate any statement in Singapore through the specified online accounts; and/or disallow any person from using the specified online accounts to interact with any end-user of its internet intermediary service in Singapore.

 

Access Blocking Order to ISP: In the event that an internet intermediary fails to comply with the Direction above, the Minister may direct the IMDA to order the ISP to take reasonable steps to disable access by end-users in Singapore to the online locations.

 

3.4 Prescribed digital advertising intermediary or internet intermediary to disable access in Singapore to certain paid content

 

A prescribed digital advertising intermediary or a prescribed internet intermediary must take reasonable steps (both in and outside Singapore) to ensure that it does not facilitate the communication in Singapore of any paid content that gives publicity or otherwise promotes an online location that includes the false statements of fact.

 

The Minister may instruct the Competent Authority to direct a prescribed digital advertising intermediary or a prescribed internet intermediary to designate a channel by which the Competent Authority may notify it of any online location that includes a false statement of fact.

The Directions outlined above should only be issued if:

 

1. the relevant false statements of fact are made to end users in Singapore (i.e. if a person can access the statement by using the internet, this will be satisfied); and
2. the Minister is of the opinion that it is in the ‘public interest’ to issue the Direction.
3. The Bill provides a very broad definition of ‘public interest’ which includes any act that is necessary or expedient:

 

• in the interests of the security of Singapore;

• to protect public health, public finances or to secure public safety or public tranquillity;

• in the interests of friendly relations of Singapore with other countries;

• to prevent any influence of the outcome of an election or referendum;

• to prevent incitement of feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different groups of persons; or

• to prevent a diminution of public confidence in the performance of any duty or function of the Singapore Government.

5. APPEALING A DIRECTION

A person (individual or company) to whom a Direction is issued may appeal to the High Court against the Direction if an application to the Minister to have the Direction set aside has been made and refused in the first instance.

6. OUR COMMENTS

The Bill in Singapore joins similar legislative developments in the U.K. and Australia to regulate harmful or violent online contents rather than relying on self-regulation. Once the Bill is passed, internet intermediaries, digital advertising intermediaries, mass media service providers and ISPs need to be proactive and have robust processes in place to respond to Directions promptly and in accordance with the law.

 

Note: Herbert Smith Freehills’ Singapore office is in a formal law alliance with Prolegis LLC.