PP v Yue Mun Yew Gary: Incitement to Violence on Facebook & Freedom of Expression

In Public Prosecutor v Yue Mun Yew Gary, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal by the prosecution against the sentence imposed on Gary Yue Mun Yew for two charges under s 267C of the Penal Code for incitement to violence. The Respondent posted a comment on Temasek Review’s Facebook page with a link to a video of President Sadat’s assassination, suggesting a reenactment at Singapore’s National Day Parade. The High Court allowed the appeal, finding the original fine manifestly inadequate, and enhanced the sentence to two months' imprisonment.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Allowed

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Gary Yue Mun Yew was convicted under s 267C of the Penal Code for inciting violence on Facebook. The High Court enhanced his sentence to 2 months' imprisonment.

1.7 Decision Date

13 September 2012

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Public Prosecutor	Appellant	Government Agency	Appeal Allowed	Won	DPP Ng Yiwen, DPP Sarah Ong
Yue Mun Yew Gary	Respondent	Individual	Sentence Enhanced	Lost	N Sreenivasan, S Balamurugan

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Quentin Loh	Judge	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
DPP Ng Yiwen	Attorney-General's Chambers
DPP Sarah Ong	Attorney-General's Chambers
N Sreenivasan	Straits Law Practice LLC
S Balamurugan	Straits Law Practice LLC

4. Facts

Respondent posted a comment on Temasek Review’s Facebook page on National Day 2010.
The post contained a link to a YouTube video entitled “Sadat Assassination”.
Respondent’s comment read: “We should re-enact a live version of this on our own grand-stand during our national’s parade!!!!!!”.
An informant lodged a Police Report after seeing the post.
Respondent was arrested and charged under s 267C of the Penal Code.
The District Judge found that the Respondent intended his post to contain an incitement to violence.
The High Court found that the Respondent intended to incite violence with the posting.

5. Formal Citations

Public Prosecutor v Yue Mun Yew Gary, Magistrate's Appeal No 58 of 2012, [2012] SGHC 188

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2010-08-09	Respondent posted comment on Temasek Review’s Facebook page
2010-09-01	Informant lodged a Police Report
2010-09-09	Respondent was arrested
2012-01-18	Respondent was charged
2012-03-12	Respondent was convicted and sentenced
2012-09-14	Judgment reserved

7. Legal Issues

Incitement to Violence
- Outcome: The court found that the Respondent's actions constituted incitement to violence and that the mens rea requirement was satisfied.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Interpretation of 'incitement'
  - Mens rea requirement
  - Balancing free expression with public safety
Manifest Inadequacy of Sentence
- Outcome: The court held that the original fine was manifestly inadequate and enhanced the sentence to a custodial sentence.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
  - Application of sentencing principles
  - Consideration of mitigating factors
  - General deterrence
Mens Rea
- Outcome: The court determined that s 267C of the Penal Code requires mens rea and is not a strict liability offence.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Presumption of mens rea
  - Strict liability offences
  - Statutory interpretation
- Related Cases:
  - [2002] 2 SLR(R) 122
  - [1963] AC 160
  - [1992] 2 SLR(R) 560

8. Remedies Sought

Custodial Sentence

9. Cause of Actions

Incitement to Violence

10. Practice Areas

Criminal Appeals
Constitutional Litigation

11. Industries

Technology
Social Media

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Tan Cheng Kwee v Public Prosecutor	Singapore High Court	Yes	[2002] 2 SLR(R) 122	Singapore	Cited for the principle that mens rea is a necessary ingredient of a statutory provision that creates an offence.
Lim Chin Aik v R	Privy Council	Yes	[1963] AC 160	United Kingdom	Cited regarding the displacement of the presumption of mens rea in situations where the statutory offence pertains to issues of social concern.
PP v Teo Kwang Kiang	Singapore High Court	Yes	[1992] 2 SLR(R) 560	Singapore	Cited regarding the rebuttal of the presumption of mens rea by the wider interest in protecting the public.
Public Prosecutor v Ong Kian Cheong and Another	Singapore District Court	Yes	[2009] SGDC 163	Singapore	Cited for the proposition that the provisions of the Sedition Act should be given a plain and literal interpretation.
Public Prosecutor v Ooi Kee Saik & ors	Malaysian High Court	Yes	[1971] 2 MLJ 108	Malaysia	Cited by the Prosecution regarding the application of the Sedition Act in Malaysia.
Public Prosecutor v Param Cumaraswamy (No 2)	Malaysian High Court	Yes	[1986] 1 MLJ 512	Malaysia	Cited by the Prosecution regarding the application of the Sedition Act in Malaysia.
Wallace-Johnson v The King	Privy Council	Yes	[1940] 1 AC 231	United Kingdom	Considered the meaning of “seditious intention” within the application of s 326(8) of the Criminal Code of the Gold Coast.
Angliss Singapore Pte Ltd v PP	Singapore Court of Appeal	Yes	[2006] 4 SLR(R) 653	Singapore	Cited for guidance on the principle of general deterrence in sentencing.
PP v Koh Song Huat Benjamin	Singapore District Court	Yes	[2005] SGDC 272	Singapore	Involved the first conviction under s 4(1)(a) of the Sedition Act for posting anti-Malay and anti-Muslim remarks on the internet.
Leong Mun Kwai v PP	Singapore High Court	Yes	[1971-1973] SLR(R) 707	Singapore	The appellant had made general statements at a political rally during general elections which were adjudged to be “likely to incite people to violence.
R v Blackshaw	England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)	Yes	[2012] 1 WLR 1126	England and Wales	Sentencing appeals for cases arising from the August 2011 riots in England, where defendants used social media to incite unrest.
Lee Hsien Loong v Review Publishing Co Ltd	Singapore High Court	Yes	[2007] 2 SLR(R) 453	Singapore	Explored the impact of the internet on mass media and communication.
Public Prosecutor v Tan Fook Sum	Singapore High Court	Yes	[1999] 1 SLR(R) 1022	Singapore	Hardship caused to the family by way of financial loss occasioned by imprisonment is of little weight today.
Yoganathan R v Public Prosecutor and another appeal	Singapore High Court	Yes	[1999] 3 SLR(R) 346	Singapore	Save in exceptional circumstances, little or no weight would be given during mitigation to the fact that the accused had sickly or aged parents to support, especially if the imprisonment term is short.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed) s 267C	Singapore
Penal Code s 504	Singapore
Penal Code s 505	Singapore
Penal Code s 298	Singapore
Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act (Cap 184, 1997 Rev Ed) s 13(f)	Singapore
Miscellaneous Offences Act ss 13A	Singapore
Miscellaneous Offences Act s 13C	Singapore
Sedition Act (Cap 290, 1985 Rev Ed) s 3(3)	Singapore
Sedition Act s 3(1)	Singapore
Undesirable Publications Act (Cap 338, 1998 Rev Ed) s 6(1)	Singapore
Criminal Procedure Code 2010 (Act 15 of 2010) s 23(1)	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Incitement to violence
Facebook
National Day Parade
Sedition
Freedom of expression
Mens rea
Public order
Social media
Internet
General deterrence

15.2 Keywords

Incitement
Violence
Facebook
Singapore
Penal Code
Freedom of expression
Sedition
Social media
Internet
Criminal law

16. Subjects

Criminal Law
Freedom of Speech
Incitement to Violence
Sedition

17. Areas of Law

Criminal Law
Constitutional Law
Freedom of Speech
Sedition Law