KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysian lawyers have filed a legal action against Singapore’s Minister of Home Affairs K.Shanmugam for directing its online falsehood law against the former over a statement on Singapore’s ‘brutal executions'.
The legal action by rights group Lawyers for Liberty (LFL), its advisor N.Surendran and director Melissa Sasidaran was filed by way of an originating summons at the High Court registry here through Messrs Daim & Gamany today.
They claimed that Shanmugam had directed its Protection from Online Falsehoods and manipulation Act (Pofma) 2019 for the plaintiffs to issue a Correction Direction over the statement published on LFL's website.
Sunrendran in his affidavit in support said the defendant (Shanmugam) had on Jan 22, directed them to issue a Correction Notice at the top of the statement on the website stating that the article contained false statement of fact before Jan 23.
He said the notice stated that failure to comply with the Correction Direction without a reasonable excuse was an offence under Section 15 of Pofma.
He said the plaintiffs not complying to the direction could ultimately be liable to a fine not exceeding SGD$20,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months for the two lawyers or a fine not exceeding SGD$500,000 for LFL.
The plaintiffs claim that Singapore law could not impose liability on them in the circumstance of this case or at all because it seeks to assume extra territorial effect as it would be a breach of the principle of comity of nations.
This means that Singapore cannot interfere with the sovereignty of another state by enacting legislation extending to Malaysian citizens exercising their right within Malaysia.
They claim that the legislation could not be applied to Malaysians particularly in this case where the alleged communication was not in Singapore.
They also claim that the defendant had directed Pofma and issued the directions to interfere with their rights to exercise freedom of speech in Malaysia pursuant to Article 10 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia.
As such, they are seeking a declaration that the direction dated Jan 22, 2020, issued by the defendant under Section 11 of Pofma was null and void and could not be enforced against them.
They are also seeking for a declaration that the defendant or anyone under his authority cannot take action to enforce any provision of Pofma against them.
On Jan 16, Surendran issued a press statement regarding the method of death execution in Singapore stating that it was unlawful and brutal methods were being used.
He said the statement was issued as it is in the public interest as there were many Malaysians facing death penalty at the Changi Prison in Singapore.
Counsel Datuk Gurdial Singh Nijar who represented the plaintiffs said this was a very unusual action because Singapore was taking action on citizens of Malaysia.
He said the originating summons would be served to the defendant soon.