Singapore orders curb on 3 foreigners' Facebook posts for election interference
Singapore has ordered Facebook parent Meta to block Singaporeans' access to posts made by foreigners, ahead of an election under rules restricting their social media posts.
Advertisement
The Infocomm Media Development Authority issued the orders after some posts by foreigners were deemed as 'intended to promote or prejudice the electoral success or standing of a political party or candidate', the Elections Department and Ministry of Home Affairs said in a statement on Friday.
The city state's election on May 3, the first under the social media rules put in place by the government in 2023, is almost certain to be dominated by the People's Action Party, which has won the most seats in every election since independence in 1965.
The rules bar foreigners from publishing online election advertising, which it defines as online materials that could help or hurt any political parties or candidates.
Friday's statement identified the foreigners as Iskandar Abdul Samad, national treasurer of the Islamist party Parti Islam Se-Malaysia; Mohamed Sukri Omar, the party's youth chief in the Malaysian state of Selangor; and Facebook user 'Zai Nal', identified as Zulfikar bin Mohamad Shariff, an Australian who renounced his Singapore citizenship in 2020.
Advertisement
Iskandar had expressed support for the opposition Workers' Party's Faisal Manap in a social media post.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Asia Times
5 days ago
- Asia Times
Anwar's immunity bid fails in rule-of-law test for Malaysia
In a landmark June 4 ruling, Malaysia's High Court denied Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim's controversial attempt to shield himself from civil proceedings by invoking a constitutional mechanism — a move critics say was a veiled attempt at political immunity. The court's rejection of Anwar's bid marks the beginning of a legal confrontation unprecedented in Malaysian history: a sitting prime minister now stands to defend himself in court while governing the nation. The decision arrives on the heels of a motion by Anwar's legal team seeking to refer eight constitutional questions to the Federal Court. These questions, according to the defense, pertained to the burdens placed on the Prime Minister's Office by an ongoing civil suit and were framed not as an immunity plea but as a request for a 'constitutional filter.' Yet the distinction was semantic at best. 'We are not claiming immunity,' Anwar's counsel asserted on June 3. 'We are simply seeking clarity to protect the executive's function.' But the subtext was clear: Anwar wanted out of the dock. The case in question — a civil suit filed by Muhammed Yusoff Rawther alleging sexual misconduct by Anwar — predates Anwar's premiership. The incident allegedly occurred in 2018, and Rawther filed the suit in 2020. Notably, Anwar did not attempt to strike out the suit at any point over the past three years. Only on May 23, 2025 — a staggering 912 days after he assumed office — did he pivot to constitutional arguments. Rawther's lawyer, Muhammad Rafique Rashid Ali, minced no words in court. 'Why did the Prime Minister take 912 days to raise this issue?' he asked. 'If the matter truly affected his ability to discharge executive functions, he should have addressed it long ago.' Rafique also pointed out that Anwar's affidavit failed to provide any reason for the delay — a procedural omission that, in the eyes of many, exposed the real motivation behind the application. More damningly, Rafique invoked Article 8 of the Federal Constitution, which guarantees equal protection under the law. 'No man — not even the Prime Minister — can stand above that,' he said. 'Immunity, whether cloaked as a filter or wrapped in legalese, is still immunity.' Presiding Judge Roz Mawar Rozain dismissed all eight questions as 'untenable, abstract and speculative.' She ruled that the Federal Court need not be burdened with academic hypotheticals. The trial, she affirmed, will proceed as scheduled on June 16, and 20,000 ringgit (US$4,700) in legal costs were awarded to Rawther. Anwar's team immediately sought an urgent stay of the ruling, but it also was dismissed. They now have 30 days to file an appeal to the Court of Appeal, though the countdown to the trial has already begun. In her oral judgment, Roz Mawar made it clear: Articles 39, 40, and 43 of the Constitution — which Anwar's team cited to support their plea — contain no implicit or explicit provision for immunity. The Constitution, she emphasized, enshrines accountability, not executive insulation. Anwar's maneuver has drawn comparisons to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's 2020 attempt to sidestep legal scrutiny. Facing multiple indictments, Netanyahu petitioned the Knesset for parliamentary immunity, claiming the charges were politically motivated. While Israel's system at least provides a legal pathway for such immunity via legislative vote, Malaysia's does not. Anwar's attempt to manufacture a similar buffer through the courts was both bold and, ultimately, unsuccessful. In both cases, the public response was the same: dismay at the spectacle of a sitting prime minister attempting to rewrite the rules mid-game. Anwar's critics say his move reeks of the same hubris — a desperate attempt to evade moral reckoning while cloaked in constitutional garb. For a man who once stood as the face of Reformasi, the optics are devastating. Here is Anwar — long celebrated as a martyr of political injustice, imprisoned under Mahathir Mohamad's authoritarian regime — now attempting to insulate himself from due process using the very levers of power he once opposed. This isn't Anwar's first brush with accusations of overreach. His 1999 conviction for abuse of power — widely seen as politically charged — is now being unearthed in conversations across social media and political circles alike. History, as they say, echoes. The parallel doesn't stop there. Like Thailand's Thaksin Shinawatra — another leader accused of self-enrichment and later pardoned — Anwar has blurred the lines between public service and political dynasty. His appointment of Thaksin as ASEAN adviser and his own daughter Nurul Izzah as Deputy President of the PKR have raised questions about nepotism and political insulation, further damaging his image as a reformer. Conversely, Rawther's credibility has only been strengthened by this legal victory. He has, for years, insisted that his pursuit of justice is not politically motivated. The June 4 ruling — which affirms the legitimacy of his claim and the court's commitment to due process — lends weight to that assertion. In a political landscape often defined by backroom deals and unaccountable elites, Rawther has emerged as a symbol of perseverance — a private citizen holding the nation's most powerful man to legal scrutiny. This verdict could well reshape how Malaysia is seen on the regional stage. As the country currently chairing ASEAN, the world is watching. The failure of Anwar's immunity gambit is a litmus test of Malaysia's democratic maturity. What signal would it have sent if a sitting Prime Minister could so easily erect a legal wall around himself? The judiciary, by rejecting this narrative, has reaffirmed Malaysia's commitment to constitutional supremacy and rule of law. In Rafique's words outside the court, 'This ruling ensures that in Malaysia, no executive, no prime Minister, no monarch can place himself above the people.' This episode will linger in the nation's political memory — not just for what it reveals about Anwar's instincts, but for what it says about the resilience of Malaysia's institutions. The prime minister now finds himself in uncharted territory: governing while on trial, a dual burden with no modern precedent in Malaysia. Anwar once said, 'Justice is the soul of governance.' It remains to be seen whether he will honor that creed — or be judged by it.
HKFP
5 days ago
- HKFP
Foreign diplomatic missions in Hong Kong mourn Tiananmen crackdown with social media posts
Four diplomatic missions in Hong Kong – the consulates general of Australia, Canada, the UK, and the US – have taken to social media to commemorate the 36th anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen crackdown in Beijing. The US, Canadian, and Australian consulates general shared photos of candles on Facebook on Wednesday. In a caption accompanying the photo, the Australian mission wrote: 'On this day, we join communities around the world to remember the loss of life at Tiananmen Square on 4 June 1989.' It added: 'Australia remains committed to protecting and supporting human rights – including freedom of association, freedom of expression and freedom of political participation.' The Canadian consulate wrote: 'We won't forget #June4,1989: the tragic date when peaceful demonstrators were violently suppressed in and around Beijing's #TiananmenSquare. Canada joins Hong Kong and the international community in solemn remembrance.' The US mission also shared a statement by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, saying that 'the world will never forget' the crackdown, although Beijing 'actively tries to censor the facts.' Meanwhile, the UK consulate general posted a black-and-white photo showing an empty chair, the Roman numerals 'VIIV' – an apparent reference to June 4, the date of the 1989 crackdown, and a Chinese phrase: 'Don't want to remember; don't dare to forget.' The phrase is a slogan chanted during Hong Kong's annual Tiananmen candlelight vigils before they were banned in 2020. Vigils banned The Tiananmen crackdown occurred on June 4, 1989, ending months of student-led demonstrations in China. It is estimated that hundreds, perhaps thousands, died when the People's Liberation Army cracked down on protesters in Beijing. Hong Kong used to be the only place on Chinese soil – besides Macau – where commemoration of the crackdown could be held in public. Tens of thousands of residents gathered annually in Victoria Park in Causeway Bay for candlelight vigils on June 4 every year to mourn the victims. But authorities banned the Tiananmen vigil gathering at Victoria Park for the first time in 2020, citing Covid-19 restrictions, and imposed the ban again in 2021, nearly a year after a national security law imposed by Beijing came into effect. The Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, which organised the vigils, disbanded in September 2021 after several of its members were arrested. With public commemoration of the crackdown becoming rare, some foreign consulates in the city continue to remember the event openly. For the third year, a days-long patriotic food carnival organised by pro-Beijing groups is being held in Victoria Park on the crackdown anniversary day. A heavy police presence can be spotted patrolling the park, the former site of the candelight vigils, on Wednesday. Detained barrister-activist Chow Hang-tung, formerly vice chairperson of the Alliance, said in a social media post on Sunday that she would launch a 36-hour hunger strike in prison to mark the 36th anniversary of the Tiananmen crackdown. Chow, two former Alliance chairpersons, and the Alliance itself stand accused of subversion under the Beijing-imposed national security law. They face life behind bars if convicted.
HKFP
6 days ago
- HKFP
Ex-district councillor's candle shop inspected by Hong Kong customs officers on eve of Tiananmen anniversary
Hong Kong customs officers inspected ex-district councillor Katrina Chan's incense shop for hours on the eve of the Tiananmen crackdown anniversary, accusing her of failing to comply with product safety regulations. Two plainclothes officers, who later introduced themselves as Customs and Excise Department (C&ED) personnel, visited Chan's shop, Heung Together, in Dragon Centre in Sham Shui Po with three other customs officers on Tuesday evening. The plainclothes officers bought products from the shop twice within the span of 20 minutes on Tuesday evening. They told her she was suspected of violating the Consumer Goods Safety Regulation because she had failed to include bilingual safety labels on products. Inspections of the products lasted more than four hours, from 7.30pm to around 11.40pm, after the mall had already closed. The officers photographed and seized some of the products Chan was selling but did not arrest her. Candles for $6.4 Chan, who served as Tsuen Wan district councillor from 2019 to 2021, sold soy wax candles for '$6.4' on Tuesday, one day before June 4, the anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen crackdown. A customs officer at the scene said that Tuesday's operation was part of a routine inspection. When asked if the team had inspected other shops at Dragon Centre on the same day, he said he could not reveal operational details. At least five other plainclothes officers, who a customs officer said were not part of the department's team, stood in the vicinity of the shop, regularly rotating positions. Just before midnight, two of the officers identified themselves as police officers to Chan, saying they were at the scene to observe the customs officers and that they did not know the other unidentified men in plainclothes. Throughout the inspections, Chan said the presence of the unidentified men left her feeling uneasy. When reporters on the scene began recording the exchange between Chan and the two police officers, the officers asked them to stop, saying it was a 'private conversation.' HKFP has reached out to the C&ED and the police force for comment. Chan said last month that she was being 'silenced' after being ousted from her job and a theatre production she was part of. In May last year, she and five others were arrested under the city's homegrown security law, also known as Article 23. Their arrests were linked to a Facebook page called 'Chow Hang-tung Club,' named after the activist who was the vice chairperson of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China. The Alliance once organised the city's annual Tiananmen vigils until Hong Kong police banned the Tiananmen vigil gathering at Victoria Park for the first time in 2020, citing Covid-19 restrictions. The ban was imposed again in 2021, nearly a year after a national security law imposed by Beijing came into effect. The Tiananmen crackdown occurred on June 4, 1989, ending months of student-led demonstrations in China. It is estimated that hundreds, perhaps thousands, died when the People's Liberation Army cracked down on protesters in Beijing.
