More ways proposed for victims of online harms to seek redress, including getting content blocked
Source: Straits Times
Article Date: 23 Nov 2024
Author: Zhaki Abdullah
The idea is to introduce a complaints mechanism, administered by the new agency to provide timely assistance to victims of online harms has been.
Victims of online harms such as cyber bullying and sexual harassment could soon have access to a broad suite of measures to seek redress.
They will be able to submit complaints about such harms to a new agency dedicated to enhancing online safety and supporting victims of online harms, the Ministry of Law (MinLaw) and Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI) said on Nov 22.
Directions can be issued to people who post such content online, in addition to online platforms such as TikTok or X, as well as the administrators of online locations such as Facebook groups or Telegram channels, where such material is made available.
The agency can instruct these parties to disable access to harmful content or, in cases of false statements or statements affecting the reputation of victims, grant complainants the right of reply to defend themselves against such statements.
This comes after Prime Minister Lawrence Wong announced in October that a new government agency would be established to provide victims of online harms with more timely and effective relief.
These proposals form part of the Government’s commitment to tackling online harms and will enable victims to remedy damage suffered, said the two ministries.
They will also help shape the norms of acceptable online conduct and improve accountability among members of the online ecosystem, and complement the existing regulatory framework and the criminal justice system, the ministries said in a statement.
The idea is to introduce a complaints mechanism, administered by the new agency to provide timely help to victims of online harms.
The agency will also introduce statutory torts (a type of civil wrong) for various online harms, to provide legal certainty should victims of such harms choose to pursue redress against responsible parties in court to hold them accountable through liability for online harms.
It also aims to increase accountability through improved user information disclosure.
The Government has introduced a series of measures to address various aspects of online harms, strengthening its ability to act against online criminal harms under the Online Criminal Harms Act. It also introduced the Online Safety (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act, which amended the Broadcasting Act to impose greater regulatory requirements on online communication services.
Some forms of online harassment are addressed in the Protection from Harassment Act. This is on top of public education efforts such as the creation of the Media Literacy Council and the teaching of internet safety in schools, said MDDI and MinLaw.
A survey in April of more than 2,000 people here, conducted by MDDI, found 74 per cent saying they had encountered harmful content such as cyber bullying or sexual content online.
In such cases, the agency, which has yet to be named, can issue directions to multiple parties involved in spreading 10 categories of online harms, including impersonation, the non-consensual sharing of intimate images and hate speech.
In more serious instances, such as those of repeat offenders or if an online account is used primarily to perpetuate online harms, the agency could direct that a perpetrator’s account be deactivated or an online group be closed.
The agency will also introduce mechanisms that allow victims of seven types of online harms, such as child abuse materials or violence-inciting hate speech, to hold responsible parties liable for damages.
MDDI and MinLaw said they are also exploring a proposal to make the user information of perpetrators of online harms available to victims, as part of efforts to improve online accountability.
The two ministries noted that while online anonymity has allowed vulnerable people and groups to speak up without fear of reprisal, it has also been exploited by bad actors to target victims without fear of repercussion.
“We believe improving accountability will deter perpetrators from committing such harms, and also serve to improve the overall safety of users,” the ministries said.
They added that, subject to certain requirements, victims who have filed complaints with the new agency may be able to request that the perpetrator’s user information be disclosed for specific purposes.
These include safeguarding themselves or seeking claims from the individual or group in question.
The ministries noted that such measures are needed due to limitations in existing laws. For example, victims face challenges in seeking redress, such as finding the court process costly and difficult to navigate, preferring instead a simpler and faster way of seeking remedy.
Existing laws also typically cover only a narrow set of harms, MDDI and MinLaw said, pointing to the example of the Protection from Harassment Act, which remains “mostly untested” in providing relief for online harms other than harassment or false statements.
In addition, victims can find it difficult to obtain the identities of perpetrators in order to sue them.
Dr Carol Soon, the Institute of Policy Studies’ principal research fellow and head of society and culture, said the new agency will act as a one-stop source of assistance for victims of online harms, whose distress may be aggravated by the existing “thick web of legal and platform remedies”.
“Besides acting on their behalf to require administrators, communicators and platforms to take speedy action, the agency can also investigate claims and help victims by connecting them with organisations which can render further counsel and assistance,” she said.
While there is a risk of false reports disrupting the agency’s work, Dr Soon said, making complainants identify themselves and substantiate their complaints is important in minimising potential abuse.
MDDI and MinLaw aim to table the relevant legislation for these measures in Parliament in 2025.
From Nov 22 to Dec 22, members of the public can provide feedback on the proposed measures at https://go.gov.sg/onlineharmsconsult
How can new laws help victims of online harms?: askST
Victims of certain online harms will have access to a range of measures to seek more timely redress under a new, as yet unnamed agency dedicated to enhancing online safety, the Ministry of Law (MinLaw) and Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI) announced on Nov 22.
With a recent poll of more than 2,000 people here finding that three-quarters of them had encountered harmful content online, The Straits Times looks at how the proposed measures could help these victims against online harassment, hate speech and false statements.
Q: What avenues does the new agency provide to help victims of online harms?
A: The agency will allow victims to submit complaints about specific online harms, so they can quickly put a stop to such harms.
It will also introduce statutory torts – a type of civil wrong – allowing them to hold responsible parties liable for online harms and seek claims from them.
MDDI and MinLaw are also exploring the possibility of making the user information of perpetrators available to complainants, subject to certain requirements, to increase online accountability.
Q: What online harms can victims submit complaints about?
A: The proposed complaints mechanism will allow victims to seek redress for 10 types of online harms: online harassment (including cyber stalking and doxxing), abuse of intimate images through non-consensual sharing, child abuse materials, impersonation, misuse of inauthentic materials such as deepfakes, online statements instigating disproportionate harm, hate speech, misuse of personal information, as well as false statements and statements affecting the reputation of the complainant.
Q: What will the proposed measures do to address such harms?
A: Once a complaint is made, the agency will be able to issue directions against three categories of parties involved in making such harmful online content available – communicators (referring to individuals or groups that post such content online), administrators (people who set up or manage online locations such as Facebook groups where the material can be viewed), and platforms (referring to entities such as Facebook or TikTok that provide services where such material is available).
These parties can first be directed to disable access to such content for users in Singapore, or allow complainants the right of reply to defend themselves against false statements or statements affecting their reputation.
Individuals or groups who post such materials will also have to include a notice indicating that they have been subjected to the agency’s directions, similar to correction notices under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act.
In more serious cases, online groups can be closed or an individual’s account deactivated.
These directions must be complied with within a specified timeframe.
Non-compliance could result in the agency taking steps such as directing internet service providers to disable access to online locations hosting the harmful content, or instructing app stores to remove applications containing such harmful content.
Q: What are statutory torts, and how can they help victims of online harms?
A: Statutory torts refer to wrongful acts, as determined by legislation, that cause harm or injury to others, leading to civil liability.
The proposal covers seven online harms – online harassment, intimate image abuse, child abuse material, impersonation, misuse of inauthentic material, online statements instigating disproportionate harm and hate speech.
It does not cover all the harms addressed by the complaints mechanism, so as to avoid duplicating existing laws.
Victims can pursue claims against communicators, who must not publish the seven specified harms.
For administrators or platforms, they must not administer online locations encouraging the risk of these harms, and must take reasonable steps to address harms they have been made aware of.
Those who fail to do so will be liable for losses or harm suffered by the victim, up to a certain limit.
Q: How can disclosing user information make people safer?
A: Making the user information of perpetrators of online harms available to complainants can improve accountability by deterring people from committing such harms.
Complainants can use such information for reasons such as protecting themselves against these users or bringing claims against these users under the statutory torts.
Source: Straits Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction.
809