Singapore Democratic Party v Attorney-General: POFMA, Statutory Interpretation & Online Falsehoods
The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) filed Originating Summons No 856 of 2020 in the General Division of the High Court of Singapore to set aside a Correction Direction (CD) issued by the Alternate Authority on the instruction of the Minister for National Development. The CD was issued due to SDP's claim about Singapore's population target. Woo Bih Li JAD dismissed the application, finding that SDP published a false statement of fact. The court ordered SDP to pay costs to the Attorney-General.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Originating Summons dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
SDP's appeal against a Correction Direction (CD) under POFMA was dismissed. The court found SDP published a false statement regarding Singapore's population.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attorney-General | Respondent | Government Agency | Costs Awarded | Won | Tan Ruyan Kristy of Attorney-General’s Chambers Beulah Li Sile of Attorney-General’s Chambers Pang Ru Xue of Attorney-General’s Chambers Jamie of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Singapore Democratic Party | Appellant | Association | Application Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Woo Bih Li | Judge of the Appellate Division | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Tan Ruyan Kristy | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Beulah Li Sile | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Pang Ru Xue | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Jamie | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Eugene Singarajah Thuraisingam | Eugene Thuraisingam LLP |
| Suresh Nair | P K Wong & Nair LLC |
| Joel Wong En Jie | Eugene Thuraisingam LLP |
4. Facts
- SDP published an article on Facebook claiming Singapore's population would increase to 10 million by 2030.
- The article cited a statement by HDB chief executive Dr. Cheong regarding population density.
- The Alternate Authority issued a Correction Direction (CD) requiring SDP to publish a notice stating the article contained a false statement.
- SDP applied to set aside the CD, arguing the statement was opinion and not false.
- The government argued the statement misrepresented Dr. Cheong's remarks and was factually incorrect.
- Dr. Cheong's statement referred to 'living density' in urban areas, not 'population density' across Singapore's total land area.
- HDB issued a letter clarifying that the figures cited were on living density, and it would be inaccurate to extrapolate the population size from the living density figure.
5. Formal Citations
- Singapore Democratic Party v Attorney-General, Originating Summons No 856 of 2020, [2022] SGHC 100
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Dr. Cheong delivered the IPS-Nathan Lecture. | |
| Mr. Cheang Peng Wah's letter was published in the Straits Times. | |
| Mr. Ravi Philemon posed a question to Dr. Cheong at a lecture. | |
| HDB proffered a response to Mr. Cheang’s Forum Letter through Mr. Aw’s Letter. | |
| SDP published a press release on its Facebook page entitled “10 million population”. | |
| The Alternate Authority issued the 4 July CD. | |
| SDP applied to the Minister to cancel the 4 July CD. | |
| The Minister rejected SDP's application. | |
| Hearing of OS 856 adjourned. | |
| Hearing of the present application. | |
| Judgment reserved. |
7. Legal Issues
- Whether the Subject Statement was a statement of fact or opinion
- Outcome: The court held that the Subject Statement was a statement of fact.
- Category: Substantive
- Whether the Subject Statement was false
- Outcome: The court held that the Subject Statement was false.
- Category: Substantive
- Whether the hearing ought to proceed in open court
- Outcome: The court dismissed the application to have the proceedings heard in open court.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Setting aside of Correction Direction
9. Cause of Actions
- Appeal against Correction Direction under Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act
10. Practice Areas
- Civil Litigation
- Judicial Review
11. Industries
- Politics
- Media
- Technology
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Online Citizen Pte Ltd v Attorney-General and another appeal and other matters | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2021] 2 SLR 1358 | Singapore | Upheld the constitutionality of POFMA and ruled on the burden and standard of proof. |
| Wham Kwok Han Jolovan v PP | Unknown | Yes | [2021] 1 SLR 476 | Singapore | Applied the test in this case to uphold the constitutionality of POFMA. |
| Singapore Democratic Party v Attorney-General | High Court | Yes | [2020] SGHC 25 | Singapore | Discussed public interest threshold in POFMA directions. |
| Chee Siok Chin v Attorney-General | Unknown | Yes | [2006] 3 SLR(R) 735 | Singapore | Addressed the issue of open court hearings and special reasons. |
| Chee Siok Chin and another v Attorney-General | Unknown | Yes | [2006] 4 SLR(R) 541 | Singapore | Discussed the practice of hearing originating summonses in chambers. |
| Jeyaretnam Joshua Benjamin v Attorney-General | Unknown | Yes | [1990] 1 SLR(R) 590 | Singapore | Mentioned as a case where an originating summons was conducted in chambers. |
| Ravi s/o Madasamy v Attorney-General and other matters | Unknown | Yes | [2017] 5 SLR 489 | Singapore | Addressed the issue of open court hearings for originating summonses. |
| Ong Ming Johnson v Attorney-General and other matters | High Court | Yes | [2020] SGHC 63 | Singapore | Application to have the matters heard in open court were dismissed. |
| Chen Cheng and another v Central Christian Church and other appeals | Unknown | Yes | [1998] 3 SLR(R) 236 | Singapore | Cited to define comment as opposed to a statement of fact. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Supreme Court of Judicature (Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation) Rules 2019 |
| Rules of Court (2014 Rev Ed) |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act 2019 | Singapore |
| Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (1985 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act
- POFMA
- Correction Direction
- CD
- False statement of fact
- Living density
- Population density
- IPS Lecture
- Originating Summons
15.2 Keywords
- POFMA
- Singapore Democratic Party
- Attorney-General
- Online Falsehoods
- Population
- Correction Direction
- Freedom of Speech
- Singapore
17. Areas of Law
16. Subjects
- Defamation
- Freedom of Speech
- Statutory Interpretation
- Online Regulation