Public Consultation on Enhancing Online Safety

MinLaw Civil and Legislative Policy Division

Consultation Period: 22 Nov 2024 - 22 Dec 2024

Status: Closed - Summary of Responses

Consultation Outcome

Summary of Responses to Public Consultation on Enhancing Online Safety: Empowering Singaporeans to Seek Relief from Harmful Online Content and Conduct, and Hold Responsible Parties Accountable

1. The Ministry of Law (MinLaw) and the Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI) conducted a joint public consultation on proposed measures to enhance online safety and better protect Singaporeans from harmful online content from 22 November 2024 to 22 December 2024. A series of closed-door engagement sessions was also held with industry partners (such as social media platforms), academics, community groups (such as those working with youths, and women and girls), and other experts to gather their feedback and suggestions. At the close of the public consultation and engagement exercise, MinLaw and MDDI received over 100 responses from a wide range of stakeholders.

2. Overall, respondents to the public consultation were supportive of the measures proposed and provided their suggestions and feedback on the proposals. While industry partners similarly expressed support for the Government’s goal of enhancing online safety, they sought assurances about the implications of the measures on their businesses and their ability to comply with any directions that may be made to them. A summary of the key feedback received, as well as MinLaw and MDDI’s joint response, is set out below.

A. Proposal to introduce a new complaints mechanism to be administered by a new Agency

3. Over 90% of respondents expressed strong support for establishing a dedicated agency to address online harms. They recognised the growing prevalence of online harms and the consequent need for a specialised body with relevant expertise to provide timely and effective assistance to victims.

4. Many highlighted the ills of online harms perpetuated through social media, and several flagged out the impact of cyberbullying on youths. Respondents agreed that a government-backed agency would add credibility and provide reassurance to those affected by online harms.

5. Furthermore, respondents said that the proposed agency would set a positive tone for responsible online behaviour, and signal that the Government is taking the issue of online harms seriously. Many appreciated the simplification of the process of seeking help through the agency. By enabling victims to seek redress without having to go through lengthy and expensive court processes, it would make relief from online harms more accessible, especially for the young and the elderly.

6. Industry partners provided feedback that the agency should adopt a balanced and proportionate approach when addressing complaints. Their feedback contained reminders that the agency should adopt well-defined parameters and fair processes. They sought clarifications on the definitions of the categories of harms and their relationship to existing laws. Industry partners also stressed the importance of having a transparent appeals mechanism and realistic timelines for compliance.

7. Regarding the feedback for clearer definitions of online harms, we will set out the definitions of online harms in legislation, so that the elements of each online harm will be clear. Where appropriate, we will provide illustrative examples and guidelines to explain the scope of online harms to be addressed, and how the agency would generally respond to archetypal complaints.

8. We recognise that appeals against agency decisions have to be fairly dealt with, while also being time and cost efficient for the affected parties. The aim of creating a dedicated agency is to enhance access to relief – victims should not be dissuaded and deterred from seeking relief for fear of being bogged down by onerous and time-consuming processes. We intend to make provisions for complainants and persons directly affected by agency decisions to appeal to an independent panel. The same persons may also apply for judicial review of the decision of the independent panel. The measures will be designed to strike a balance between providing effective relief to victims and fair, transparent processes for parties involved.

9. Additionally, the proposed agency will issue directions that are practical and workable for recipients and provide reasonable timelines for compliance. This balances the intent to act on online harms in a timely and effective manner, and avoiding onerous obligations. The proposed agency will work closely with industry partners, who we recognise are partners in our mission to address online harms on their platforms.

B. Proposal for new statutory torts for specified online harms to be heard in the Singapore Courts

10. Over 95% of respondents supported allowing victims to take legal action against those responsible for online harm. Most agreed that victims should be able to seek compensation in court for the damage they have suffered.

11. There was also broad agreement that communicators, administrators, and platforms should be subject to the duties not to commit online harms or to act on online harms that are brought to their notice, and may be sued for damages if they breach those duties. This support was primarily driven by several key factors: the desire to hold perpetrators accountable and deter harmful behaviour, the need to provide compensation for victims, and the importance of compelling platforms to be accountable to their users and create safer online environments.

12. Industry partners were concerned about the blurring of lines between communicator liability and platform liability, and being held liable for content posted by communicators. They also gave feedback that the obligations under the statutory torts could result in defensive practices and excessive removal of content. Other key concerns raised include the potential for frivolous and vexatious claims, that certain types of harms appeared to be of a subjective nature, and the need for clearer definitions of legal terms.

13. Some respondents and industry partners also expressed concern about the potential negative impact on innovation and free speech. Suggestions for improvement included broadening and clarifying the meaning of “reasonable steps” and strengthening existing legal remedies. The interaction of these new regulations with existing laws and the need for special considerations for minors who commit online harm were also highlighted as areas requiring further clarification.

14. These concerns were not unexpected. We agree with the need to balance the primary objective of the statutory torts proposal (which is to encourage responsible online behaviour) while mitigating unwanted outcomes (such as promoting litigation).

15. In our view, the statutory torts are needed to encourage administrators and platforms to act reasonably in response to reports of online harms. The duties of communicators, administrators and platforms are also carefully calibrated to reflect their respective roles in the online ecosystem.

16. At the same time, we agree that clarity and certainty of the obligations under the statutory torts are important, and that frivolous complaints and litigation should be discouraged. We recognise that vexatious complaints and lawsuits divert resources and attention from genuine cases and must be addressed with suitably strong deterrent measures. We had also anticipated concerns about the impact of the new statutory torts on online public discourse. Our proposals therefore contain safeguards to respect free expression.

17. Ultimately, the statutory torts are meant to preserve and protect our ability to speak freely, not stifle public discourse. A survey conducted in 2023 shows that 76% of Singaporeans are uncomfortable expressing their personal views on potentially controversial topics for fear that people would target and cause harm to them¹. In a separate survey conducted in 2024, 73% among youth respondents reported that the fear of being cancelled affects how they behave and communicate online². Through the statutory torts, we hope to engender a safer online environment, free from the fear of online harms, so that more people can benefit from an open internet.

18. Some respondents and industry partners asked how the new measures would interact with the existing Singapore online content regulatory framework. We recognise that the new agency will have to work closely with existing agencies to ensure that cases are dealt with in a timely and effective way, using the full complement of measures and powers available under the law. We will work towards providing greater clarity on how the various laws complement each other in due course. We also intend for the agency to work closely with community partners to serve the public more effectively.

C. Proposal on increasing accountability through improved user information disclosure

19. About 80% of respondents agreed that it would be useful to disclose a perpetrator’s user information to the victim for certain specified purposes (e.g. to bring a claim under the statutory torts, safeguard oneself from the perpetrator) to improve accountability and deter perpetrators of online harms. The main reasons cited were: (i) ensuring accountability by preventing wrongdoers from hiding behind online anonymity, (ii) meeting victims' needs for self-protection, healing, and legal recourse, and (iii) deterring potential perpetrators.

20. At the same time, respondents and industry partners raised concerns about information misuse and privacy, including risks of doxxing, vigilante justice, and inadvertent disclosure of innocent individuals' information. Suggestions included implementing robust safeguards, limiting information handling to trusted entities, and adopting civil procedure principles to disclosure. Other issues raised were victim safety and protection, the need for stricter disclosure criteria, and concerns about the efficacy of the proposed measures, particularly regarding anonymous accounts. Some respondents suggested using SingPass for identification and called for consistency with approaches to offline harms.

21. Some respondents expressed reservations about the ability of internet platforms to collect identity information of their users. In particular, industry partners told us about their difficulties in the collection and disclosure of data for the Singapore market due to their own data minimisation principles and foreign laws. Apart from that, we also received feedback from respondents that anonymity should be safeguarded for legitimate purposes such as whistleblowing.

22. We acknowledge the feedback given. The agency will work closely with industry partners to ensure that any requirements for user information collection and disclosure are workable, and that the context is taken into account before any directions are made to request for and disclose user information.

23. We also acknowledge the concerns over information misuse and privacy. Information should only be used for the victim to pursue legal proceedings or for the protection of the victim. It should not be used for collateral purposes such as doxxing or harming the other party in return. We will ensure that the proposals balance transparency with privacy protection through strict safeguards and penalties for misuse. These safeguards include disclosure of user information only to the necessary parties and sensitive information handled only by authorised entities. All measures will also have to comply with the existing data protection provisions, including the Personal Data Protection Act 2012.

D. Ensuring that measures and support services are accessible to all victims of online harms

24. Respondents also provided additional suggestions on ensuring solutions are accessible to all victims and implementing comprehensive victim support systems, such as referrals to counselling if necessary. We will work with suitable partners, including those who have been playing an important role in the online safety ecosystem, to develop a holistic approach that prioritises accessibility and victim support.

Creating a Safer Online Space for All

25. We thank all who provided feedback on the proposed measures. While this summary does not include every concern or suggestion raised, all feedback have been noted and will be carefully considered. Any further feedback and suggestions to enhance online safety for users in Singapore are welcome.

¹Page 15 of the Study on Online Harms in Singapore 2023: Topline Findings, SG Her Empowerment (“SHE”)

²Page 19 of the SHE and Global Shapers Community Singapore’s Safeguarding Online Spaces (SOS) Study 2024

Ministry of Law, and Ministry of Digital Development and Information

6 March 2025

Detailed Description

Introduction

1. The Ministry of Law (MinLaw) and the Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI) propose new measures to help victims of online harms and improve accountability of those who are responsible for these online harms. 

Background

2. Harmful online content and conduct continue to affect many in Singapore and around the world. At the launch of Smart Nation 2.0 on 1 October 2024, Prime Minister Lawrence Wong announced that the Government would introduce new legislation and measures to provide stronger assurance to victims, including setting up a dedicated agency to improve protection for them.
   

3. These proposals form part of the Government’s commitment to tackling online harms and will enable victims to remedy the damage suffered from online harms. They will also help shape the norms of acceptable online conduct and improve accountability among members of the online ecosystem. These proposals complement our existing regulatory framework and the criminal justice system.
   

4. In summary, the proposed reforms will:

   1. Introduce a complaints mechanism, administered by the new agency to provide timely assistance to victims of online harms.

   2. Introduce statutory torts for various online harms, to provide legal certainty should victims of online harms choose to pursue redress against responsible parties in court to hold them accountable through liability for online harms.

   3. Increase accountability through improved user information disclosure.

Request for feedback

5. MinLaw and MDDI are seeking feedback on these proposed reforms. The full public consultation paper may be viewed here.
   

6. We invite members of the public and interested stakeholders to provide your feedback on these proposals by 22 December 2024, 5pm via the "Share Your Feedback" button below.

7. MinLaw and MDDI may publish a summary of the key feedback received, together with our response, following the end of the public consultation. Please be assured that the identities of respondents will be kept confidential.

Online Harms Full Public Consultation Paper [PDF, 299 KB]