S'pore girls, secret cameras & Internet photos
BY AMY CHIEW
Sept 28, 2002
SOME of them may not have allowed it. They may not even know about
it.
But pictures of a number of Singapore girls have been put up on a
website.
The photos, contributed by the site's supporters, ranged from
makeover portraits to snapshots of unsuspecting girls on the
bus.
Taking pictures without anyone noticing is easy these days: Digital
cameras are getting smaller, and there are nifty gadgets like
handphones that can also record images.
And most people we spoke to are uneasy about it.
Said Lingehswari Eisvran, 17, a first-year college student: "It's
disrespectful to others and I'll be disgusted if someone did it to
me."
Miss Teng Peiyun, 20, an undergraduate, agreed.
"It's an invasion of privacy, and it's sick because it's no
different from any other peeping-tom type of voyeurism," she
said.
But the question is: Can these photo snappers be stopped? The
answer, for now, is no.
According to criminal lawyer Ng Wee Jin, there is no law in
Singapore to do so.
"If a person takes your photo without your permission, it is his
camera and negatives.
"This means that the photos are his property," he said.
Said Mr Chia Boon Teck, a partner at Chia Yeo Partnership: "A woman
would have recourse when her modesty is insulted or where the
picture taken intrudes upon her privacy.
"Whereas if a photo is taken of her in circumstances where her
modesty has not been insulted nor her privacy intruded upon, then
she has very little recourse, if any."
But Mr Chia, who is also the vice-chairman of the Law Society's
Criminal Practice Committee, pointed out that there could be a case
for defamation.
YOU CAN SUE IF...
Let's say a photo of a well-known person is taken outside a sleazy
place.
If the photo is accompanied with words that suggest that the person
is patronising the place, then the person may find cause for
defamation.
This is Mr Chia's advice to girls: "If a woman feels that her
modesty has been insulted or her privacy intruded upon, she should
make a police report.
"Then, it'll be up to the authorities to follow-up on the matter as
they deem fit."
In Singapore, however, upskirting - or filming up women's skirts -
would be an offence, though a recent ruling in a US court said it
was okay. (See report, below.)
NEW LAW NEEDED?
Should there be a law in Singapore against snapping pictures of
people without their knowledge?
Lawyers The New Paper spoke to felt that it was difficult to draw
the line.
Mr Chia felt that it would be difficult to enforce.
"It is really quite difficult to have a law like that. How would
you implement or enforce it?
"For example, you'll have situations where you can't accuse the
photographer of targeting a particular person unless he or she is
the only person in the photo," he said.
Lawyer Gloria James, also said that she didn't know where and how
to draw the line. Different people, she said, will have different
views on what is acceptable.
Mr Ng felt that having a law like that might result in a society
that is litigious.
This means that we might have the tendency to engage in lawsuits -
never mind whether it's necessary.
"We need to strike a balance - if someone just takes a picture
without any evil intention, then wouldn't it be too much to arrest
him?" he asked.
And how do our young feel? Students The Y Scene spoke to also felt
that a law totally banning this would be too extreme.
Explained Tan Lay Boon, 17, a first-year college student: "I think
we need to know the purpose for which the photos are being used.
The law should only be for those who take the pictures with evil
intentions in mind."
Another college student, who wanted to be known only as Jeremiah,
18, had the same views.
"It should be fine if I'm taking a picture of someone ill-treating
a cat. But I wouldn't say the same for those taking pictures of
others for viewing pleasure," he said.
Ivan Gn, 18, a second-year college student was more careful.
"I wouldn't want a blanket rule as then, there would be no freedom
of expression.
"But if there is no law, then we'll have people abusing the
situation," he said.
Lawyers said the photos may be taken "out of context" and posted on
a site considered undesirable.
By association, this may become a nuisance to you - hence you may
have a case.
Said Mr Ng: "If your photos are portrayed in any way that is
offensive or indecent, you may sue on the grounds of outrage of
modesty."
UPSKIRTING...
PEEPING under skirts is okay, ruled a US court recently.
The Washington State Supreme Court in Olympia set free Richard
Sorrells last week.
He had been caught for "upskirting" - for filming up women's skirts
at a street festival.
The court said that the state's voyeurism law does not apply as the
women were taped in a public place, such as a park, where there's
no reasonable expectation of privacy.
In Singapore, however, upskirting is an offence.
In May, Tan Chin Wee, 30, an engineer was jailed three weeks for
using a video camera to film the underwear of women at Northpoint
Shopping Centre.
WATCH WHAT YOU WEAR...
THE legal debate aside, there are some other issues for our young
to consider.
It's obvious that girls these days don't dress the way their
mothers did. That's something that comes as the society
changes.
But some of the photos on the site clearly show that the girls have
no qualms dressing in a sexy manner.
Do girls know what they are doing? Do they realise that they may be
attracting unwanted attention?
What can then be done?
Girls The Y Scene spoke to felt that the key word is
"responsibility".
They didn't approve of the suggestion of restricting what they
could or could not wear.
Said college student Tan Lay Boon, 17: "I think we should have a
right to dress whichever way we want to."
But she added that there are people out there with evil intent so
precaution should be taken.
Added Lingehswari Eisvran, 17, also a college student: "We can have
fun but there must be a limit.
We cannot be sending out the wrong signals."
Ivan Gn was more blunt.
"If they want to dress provocatively, then that's their own
problem. They must be responsible for themselves."
Miss Cecilia Tan, 25, a civil servant, however, emphasised that
there is a difference between one's dressing and behaviour.
"A girl may dress sexily but she may not behave so. It isn't fair
to generalise," she said.
But Miss Tan said that she was concerned that young girls may not
know what they get themselves into.
"A friend of theirs might tell them to pose for fun - who knows
what the friend might do with those pictures?" she said.
Madam Lee Ling Li, 45, a mother of two girls, also said that girls
should be responsible in their dressing.
By dressing revealingly, she said, there's no wonder that they'll
attract attention.
Miss Angeline Tan, 25, a software development project manager, had
an interesting view.
"Young girls are able to say that they should be able to dress in
any way they want because we live in a safe country.
"If we were to live in a more dangerous city, I don't think they'll
say the same thing," she said.
