5 Protesters in Singapore were bringing a lawsuit for having their protest broken up by the police. While they were a lawful assembly, the fact that they mentioned the case of a scandal of a charity in Singapore as cause for transparency in government agencies, was considered insulting and abusive, which, according to the judge, takes higher priority than the freedom of assembly.
He called their actions "tantamount to an insinuation of mismanagement and financial impropriety".
"The thrust of the protesters' case, argued by lawyer M Ravi, is that the Constitutional right of freedom of speech, assembly and association (Article 14) allows fewer than five persons to protest peacefully.
.
Justice Rajah's decision, however, hinges on the sections in the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act that deal with causing harassment, alarm or distress. Under this law, anyone who uses abusive or insulting words with the intent to harass can be found guilty of an offence."
No comments:
Post a Comment