Introduction
The Ministry of Law (“MinLaw“) and the Ministry of Digital Development and Information (“MDDI“) are seeking feedback to address the growing concerns regarding online harms with proposed measures to bolster the existing legal and regulatory regime in order to empower individuals to seek relief from harmful online content and hold responsible parties accountable.
Existing laws, such as the Online Criminal Harms Act and the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA), aim to mitigate online dangers but have limitations. Many victims find existing legal processes intimidating and costly, often preferring quicker, more straightforward remedies. Additionally, current laws cover only a narrow range of online harms, leaving gaps in protection against issues like impersonation and deepfake misuse.
The proposed measures to target these issues are contained in the “Public Consultation Paper on Enhancing Online Safety: Empowering Singaporeans to Seek Relief from Harmful Online Content and Conduct, and Hold Responsible Parties Accountable” (“Consultation Paper“) issued on 22 November 2024. The Consultation Paper is available here (on REACH website). Comments may be submitted at https://go.gov.sg/onlineharmsconsult by 5 PM on 22 December 2024.
In this Update, we highlight the key features of the proposed measures.
Proposed Measures
MinLaw and MDDI propose to strengthen the current legal and regulatory system with three key measures:
- Introduction of a complaints mechanism to provide victims with timely help when faced with online harms;
- Introduction of statutory torts to enable victims to hold responsible parties accountable through liability for online harms; and
- Increasing accountability through improved user information disclosure.
We discuss each of these proposed measures in more detail below.
New Complaints Mechanism
This complaints mechanism will be administered by a new Agency to manage complaints regarding specified online harms. This enables victims or their representatives to report incidents, such as cyberbullying, intimate image abuse, and hate speech.
Who qualify as “victims”
It is proposed that victims allowed to submit a complaint should be Singapore citizens or Permanent Residents, or foreigners with a student’s pass, work permit or work visa (including dependents who have the applicable pass).
Corporate entities based in Singapore will also be allowed to submit complaints.
What are the “specified online harms” under the complaints mechanism
- Online harassment (e.g. cyberbullying, sexual harassment, doxxing and cyberstalking)
- Intimate image abuse (i.e. non-consensual sharing of intimate images)
- Child abuse material
- Impersonation
- Misuse of inauthentic material (e.g. deepfakes)
- Online statements instigating disproportionate harm or “OSIDH”
- Hate speech
- Misuse of personal information
- False statements (about the complainant)
- Statements affecting reputation
Annex C of the Consultation Paper contains a detailed description of each proposed category of online harm.
Directions to relevant parties
The Agency will issue directions to the relevant parties below to promptly address complaints received:
- Communicator: Individual or entity who communicated the material that is the subject of a complaint.
- Administrator: Individual or entity who creates, sets up or administers an online location.
- Platforms: Individual or entity who provides the service by means of which the material complained of had been communicated through the internet (e.g. Facebook, X, TikTok).
For a detailed description of each party, please refer to Annex D of the Consultation Paper.
Directions against respective parties for all specified online harms except false statements and statements affecting reputation
The Agency may issue the following directions for all specified online harms, except for false statements and statements affecting reputation:
Directions against Communicator
- Disable access to material by users in Singapore; and
- Labelling, which will require the Communicator to communicate a notice setting out specified instances for which the Communicator has been subject to the Agency’s directions.
Directions against Administrator
- Disable access to material by users in Singapore;
- Removal from online group;
- Closure of online group; and
- Labelling, which will require the Administrator to communicate a notice setting out specified instances for which the Administrator has been subject to the Agency’s directions.
Directions against Platform
- Disable access to material by users in Singapore;
- Deactivation of the Platform’s account;
- Closure of online group; and
- Engagement reduction.
Directions available against OSIDH, false statements and statements affecting reputation
The Agency may issue the following directions in response to OSIDH, false statements and statements affecting reputation:
Directions against Communicator, Administrator and/or Platform
- Right of Reply (which means the relevant party is required to communicate a reply notice in a specified form and manner, to a specified person or description of persons).
Details of the directions for each category of online harm and persons directed against are set out in Annex E of the Consultation Paper.
Factors determining the directions issued
The directions issued will depend on the category of online harm in question.
Factors that the Agency may consider in determining the direction issued and the recipient of such direction include:
- The nature and circumstances of the case;
- The likelihood of further harm; and
- Any other relevant factors.
In certain situations, the Agency may decide not to act.
Compliance with directions
Recipients of the Agency’s directions must comply within a specified time period. Failure to comply with the directions will be a criminal offence.
For instances of non-compliance, the Agency may take additional measures, for example:
- Access blocking order to direct the internet access service providers to disable access to the online location hosting the harmful content; or
- App removal order to direct the app distribution service providers to remove the app containing the harmful content from the app store.
Statutory Torts
MinLaw and MDDI propose to introduce statutory torts for a list of specified online harms. Claims for statutory torts will be heard in the Singapore Courts. The list of online harms covered by the proposed statutory torts is set out below.
- Online harassment
- Intimate image abuse
- Child abuse material
- Impersonation
- Misuse of inauthentic material
- OSIDHs
- Hate speech (for violence-inciting content only)
Do note that to avoid duplicating the law, the statutory torts are not intended to cover all of the online harms covered under the complaints mechanism. For instance, a victim for false statements and statements affecting reputation may not be able to sue under the proposed statutory torts, but may be able to sue in defamation.
Duties owed by communicators, administrators and platforms under statutory torts
Victims will be able to choose to pursue a claim against communicators, administrators or platforms. The duties of communicators, administrators and platforms are briefly outlined below:
- Communicator: A person must not communicate and/or publish any specified online harm in Singapore with the intention, knowledge or reasonable grounds to believe that doing so might cause loss or harm to the victim.
- Administrator: An administrator has two distinct sets of duties:
- Duty 1: An administrator must not create, set up or administer an online location in a manner that encourages or increases the risk of specified online harms at the online location.
- Duty 2: An administrator must also act reasonably to address specified online harms at their online location which they have been notified of.
- Platform: A platform must take reasonable measures to address specified online harms which it has been given notice of. Platforms with greater reach and impact will be subject to additional requirements, for example, on the time taken to respond to a user report.
Further details may be found at Annex F of the Consultation Paper.
Remedies available under statutory torts
If a Court finds that a party has breached their duty under the statutory torts, the party may be liable for damages (up to a limit), subject to a defence of reasonable conduct or reasonable excuse. In addition, the Court can grant injunctions to put a stop to the harm or to prevent further harm. This is consistent with existing practices for court claims under general tort law.
Other legislative proposals also include:
- Damages for pure economic losses and an account of profits will be recoverable for specified online harms.
- Minimum and maximum damages can be prescribed for specified online harms and/or categories of respondents.
Increasing accountability through improved user information disclosure
MinLaw and MDDI propose that the user information of perpetrators should be made available to victims who have filed complaints with the Agency. While online anonymity can be beneficial, allowing vulnerable individuals or groups to express themselves without fear of reprisal, it has also been exploited by malicious actors to target victims without fear of consequences. Victims who are unaware of the perpetrator’s identity face significant challenges in seeking redress. Enhancing accountability is believed to deter perpetrators from committing such harms and improve overall user safety.
A victim who has filed a complaint with the Agency may apply for the disclosure of a perpetrator’s user information for specific purposes, such as pursuing a claim under statutory torts or safeguarding themselves from the perpetrator. If the victim meets prescribed requirements, the Agency may disclose this information to the victim.
Concluding Comments
The above proposals are noteworthy developments in addressing online harms while adapting to the evolving digital landscape. For instance, the establishment of a complaints mechanism provides victims with timely redress. This proposal helps address the challenges individuals face in navigating existing legal frameworks, which may be intimidating and costly. By allowing victims or their representatives to report specified online harms, Singapore positions itself as a leader in proactive online safety measures.
The introduction of statutory torts presents another significant enhancement, addressing the gap in the current legal framework and providing victims with an avenue to hold perpetrators accountable through civil litigation, offering a clear legal pathway for seeking compensation.
The push for increased transparency and accountability from online platforms through improved user information disclosure will foster greater trust in digital spaces. Currently, perpetrators can hide behind the anonymity offered by the internet and are often not held accountable for their wrongdoings. The enhanced user information disclosure will address the existing gap where victims find it difficult or impossible to obtain information of perpetrators and thereby undermining the ability to seek redress.
If the proposed measures are accepted, victims will be afforded avenues of redress for specified harms online, and relevant parties must take especial note of their duties to avoid falling afoul of the law.