That minority group of people in action to protect political
interests at the expense of all Singaporeans.
))))))))))
Andrew Loh questions MP Baey Yam Keng whether MCI was
consulted on the MDA regulations before they were
announced. …
As I wrote in an
earlier article, after the Media Development Authority (MDA)
announced the new set of Internet regulations, the government
continues to lose touch with the common man and woman.
The reaction
following the announcements of the new laws last Tuesday has been
sharp, deeply critical and continues even after six days.
There are two main
points to the whole sorry saga of a out-of-touch government
flailing to impose control through regulatory fiat, instead of open
and transparent consultation and dialogue with stakeholders.
Mostly
silence from MPs
One is the
entirely abhorrent manner not only in how the regulations were
sprung on the public, but also the government’s – and its MPs’ –
behaviour following the MDA statement last week.
Ministers and PAP
MPs suddenly became totally silent online – except for Baey Yam
Keng who gave brief comments to the media. The collective silence
is deafening indeed and does not speak well of elected MPs who are
supposed to not only be accountable to the public but to also speak
up and engage the public on important matters.
There seems to be
a coordinated campaign to not engage netizens on the regulations
but only to speak to the mainstream media. Bloggers too seem to
have been barred from being interviewed or quoted in the local
media.
Singaporeans
should condemn such cowardly behaviour of elected MPs.
Little
consultation
The second point
is how easily the government, through its agency of unelected
members, can make changes to the law without regard at all for
public interest.
The MDA,
especially, should be ashamed of how it went about removing what is
a citizens’ right to free expression as laid down in our
Constitution – “every citizen of Singapore has the right to freedom
of speech and expression.”
The only
consultation which the MDA did apparently only involved its
speaking to “industry players”, whatever that means.
MP Baey Yam Keng,
who is the deputy chairman of the Government Parliamentary
Committee (GPC) on Communications and Information, revealed on his
Facebook chat with netizens on Sunday night that his committee “was
briefed before the announcement was made.”
The MP, whom
netizens expressed appreciation for in engaging them on the matter,
did not directly answer the question of whether he was involved in
the process of crafting, proposing or even scrutinising the
regulations in its formatting stages.
If the deputy
chairman of the GPC for MCI was not involved, what more of other
MPs? No wonder all of them have chosen to remain silent the entire
week.
But they could
also perhaps be unhappy with the regulations and how they were
sprung on everyone. This is not implausible as even Baey said that
he preferred education and trusting the public to make the right
judgements on things online.
'Not the
solution'
Another person who
would be against such regulation would be the chairman of the Media
Literacy Council (MLC), which also seems to be rather quiet and has
not made any statements to the media on the regulations.
Its chairman, Tan
Cheng Han, told the Straits Times last year that
regulating the Internet was “not the solution”.
"His remarks
sought to assuage fears among some in blogosphere that the council,
convened by the Government, will impose rules to govern online
behaviour,” the Straits Times reported. "Prof
Tan also believes the government has no intention of using a code
of conduct as a regulatory tool."
He said: "I don't
think it was ever on the cards that netizens must comply or else
face criminal sanctions."
It would be good
if Tan and his council could state their positions now on the new
MDA regulations.
Call for
withdrawal
A group of
bloggers and online practitioners, known as #FreeMyInternet, has
come together to call for the withdrawal of the regulations.
It is the right
thing to call for.
A right that is
guaranteed in the Constitution should not and must not be so easily
and conveniently circumscribed, pared down or removed by unelected,
faceless bureaucrats with a stroke of the pen.
The government has
explained that the matter did not have to go through Parliament
because the changes are subsidiary ones, and not an Act itself.
That is being technical. There have been instances when the
government tabled issues in the House for debate – such as the
population White Paper and ministerial salaries – which aren’t Acts
by themselves too.
So, why not table
the proposed regulations before the House?
Surely, curbing
Singaporeans’ constitutionally guaranteed right to free expression
is a major issue which must be discussed and debated openly, and
not decided in a completely opaque manner by some bureaucrats
behind closed doors.
Non-legally binding clarifications
The MDA and the
Minister for Communications and Information, Yaacob Ibrahim,
belatedly sought to explain and assuage fears emerging from last
week’s announcement. But these are not binding legally.
The MDA, for
example, issued a statement which it posted on its Facebook page,
saying that “an individual publishing views on current affairs and
trends on his/her personal website or blog does not amount to news
reporting.”
How is that
legally binding? Or even legally credible? And how was this
definition of what amounts to “news reporting” was made?
Arbitrarily? Is that how our regulations are created? Should
Singaporeans be expected to observe such arbitrary laws?
And Yaacob giving
assurances through the media is just as irrelevant.
If the minister
and the MDA mean what they say, why not include these in the
regulations themselves?
Otherwise, the
government should explain how is it that a bureaucrat has such
powers over elected MPs and Parliament, to sign off on regulations
which affect everyone in the country.
It is thus correct
and responsible for bloggers and netizens – and in fact, all
Singaporeans (because the regulations affect more than just
bloggers) – to come together and reject outright what is
effectively the usurpation of our rights by the State, done in the
most opaque and irrational manner, by nameless and unaccountable
civil servants.
The
#FreeMyInternet campaign is not just a group of bloggers trying to
do this with a
protest at Hong Lim Park on 8 June - it is also a
demonstration, hopefully a powerful one, to the PAP Government that
it will no longer be allowed to do as it pleases.
All Singaporeans
should pause and ponder on this: if your rights are so easily
removed, the next time you face a problem and need help, who will
you turn to? How will you speak – when all the State has to do to
shut you up is to issue you a “take-down order”?
