Petition
Speakers
Summary
This statement concerns a petition presented by Nominated Member Mr Kok Heng Leun on behalf of several citizens regarding concerns over the Administration of Justice (Protection) Bill. The petitioners argue that the Bill’s provisions are vague and could expand the scope of criminal liability and punishment beyond the current laws governing contempt of court. They express concern that these changes may restrict legitimate public discussion and expression on matters of public interest by blurring the lines of what is legally permissible. To address these issues, the petition calls for a delay in the passage of the Bill to facilitate more extensive public consultation and clarification of its provisions. Finally, the petitioners pray that Parliament refers the Bill to a Select Committee for further open deliberation to ensure its implications are fully understood and addressed.
Transcript
Mdm Speaker: Presentation of Petition. The Nominated Member Mr Kok Heng Leun wishes to present a Petition. Mr Kok.
Mr Kok Heng Leun (Nominated Member): Mdm Speaker, I present to Parliament a Petition under Standing Order No 18. The Clerk has endorsed the Petition as being in accordance with the rules of the Standing Order No 18(5).
This Petition is presented on behalf of Ms Kirsten Han Li Ying, Ms Lisa Li, Dr Thum Ping Tjin, Mr Jolovan Wham, Ms Rachel Zeng and others of like opinion. Including the five petitioners named above, there were a total of nine valid signatures. [Please refer to "Personal Explanation", Official Report, 15 August 2016, Vol 94, Issue No 22, Personal Explanation section.]
Madam, the material allegations raised in the Petition related to the concern that the Bill goes beyond its stated goal of consolidating key elements of the law of contempt into statute. If and when the Bill passes, more persons could be liable for prosecution over a wider range of activities and subject to heavier punishment than is currently the case. The petitioners argue that the key provisions in the Bill are vague and further blur the lines between permissible discussions and impermissible discussions on legal proceedings. They believe that, together with what they see as disproportionately heavy punishment for contempt, these elements in the Bill can, unintentionally or otherwise, restrict legitimate expression and discussion on matters of public interest.
The petitioners ask for a delay in the passage of the Bill, pending open and more extensive public consultation to reconsider and clarify provisions in the Bill and its full implications and open deliberation in Select Committee.
The petitioners pray, "Given the wide and far-reaching implications of the Bill on individuals, we, the Undersigned, humbly pray and urge the Parliament of Singapore to:
(a) delay passage of this Bill pending greater and more extensive public consultation on the implementation, effects and implications of the Bill for the general public;
(b) to reconsider and clarify provisions of the Bill as stated in the text of the Petition to Parliament to ensure that it does not intentionally or otherwise restrict legitimate expressions and discussion on matters of public interest; and
(c) refer this Bill to a Select Committee for further consultation and deliberation."
I will now hand the Petition to the Clerk.
Petition handed to the Clerk at the Table.