Thursday, September 15, 2005

MOVING IMAGES

Parliament amended the Films Act to declare moving pictures to be an illegal medium for furthering any political objective. The Government’s justification for such a sweeping move was basically that video is an irrational and emotional medium, and should not be exploited for political competition. The additional impact is to control a medium that has become increasingly accessible to small producers, in terms of technology and cost.

The Act bans anyone from importing, making, reproducing, exhibiting, or possessing for the purpose of distributing, a “party political film”. If found guilty, the offender can be fined up to $100,000 or imprisoned up to two years.

If you think there’s a loophole in the “party political” label, think again. The law defines this genre to cover not only “an advertisement made by or on behalf of any political party in Singapore” but even any film “made by any person and directed towards any political end in Singapore”. A film is deemed "directed towards a political end" if it includes "any matter which is intended or likely to affect voting in any election or national referendum in Singapore" or "either partisan or biased references to or comments on any political matter".

Although the old-fashioned term “film” is used, the Act defines this medium broadly, to include not just celluloid, but also digital material that can be displayed “as wholly or partly visual moving pictures”. This seems to cover CD-ROMs with some video content, streaming video on the internet, and so on.

So, at its broadest, the Act bans anyone from having anything to do with showing any moving images intended to further any political cause.

The only apparent wiggle-room is in the intentions of the offenders. A person is said to commit an offence if he distributes or shows a film “knowing or having reasonable cause to believe” that the film is party-political.

Therefore, it looks as if the Act is not meant to catch the filmmaker who makes a political film by accident (which could happen if a film’s message is exploited for political ends after it is made – for example, Jack Neo’s “The Best Bet” could be screened to serve an anti-casino platform during an election, even if such use wasn’t Neo’s original intent; in such a scenario, Neo would probably be safe). In addition, distributors oblivious to the content of a film could plead ignorance.

It should also be pointed out that the Act does not appear to make it an offence to watch a party political film. Possession of any film without a valid certificate is a crime. However, since the Singapore authorities' broad approach to censorship is to tackle producers and distributors, rather than go after individual consumers, it may be safe to assume that the state will not prosecute individuals who possess a political film for personal consumption.

In a letter to the media in May 2005, the information ministry (MICA) clarified how it would interpret the Act’s provisions. MICA said that “it is not true that all films with political themes will be disallowed”.

“The ban here is only on films which deal with political issues in a partisan manner, such as a film aimed at furthering the cause of a political party or influencing the outcome of an election, or which presents a one-sided view of political issues of the day. Unbiased reporting of political issues on film would not be unlawful,” MICA’s letter said.

MICA also restated the official rationale for the ban: “ ‘Party political films' are disallowed because they are an undesirable medium for political debate in Singapore. They can present political issues in a sensational manner, evoking emotional rather than rational reactions, without affording the opportunity for a meaningful rebuttal or explanation to audience and viewers.”

In principle, the legislation applies equally to the ruling party and to the Opposition. However, it disadvantages the Opposition disproportionately, for two reasons.

First, with government-supervised mainstream media already biased towards the ruling party, the Opposition is more dependent than the PAP on alternative channels such as video (and the internet). Second, the PAP’s ideological dominance is such that much of its platform now sounds like “common sense” rather than patently “political”. Third, the Act does not apply to "any film sponsored by the Government". Being the government of the day allows it to couch its messages as ostensibly apolitical “national education”. Thus, while a video biography of JB Jeyaretnam would probably fall foul of the Films Act as furthering a “political end”, a video biography of Lee Kuan Yew would be regarded by regulators as part of the Singapore story; and if that documentary were sponsored by MDA, it would be automatically exempt from the Films Act.

[Thanks to Mr Wang Says So for correcting some of the details in an earlier version of this post.]

12 comments:

Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wang said...

Cherian

I think that some parts of your post are inaccurate. For example, you say that:

"First, the phrase “directed towards” any political end suggests that the political effect of the film must be intentional."

This is not correct because the meaning of "directed towards any political end in Singapore" is specifically defined in the Films Act. And the meaning is not what you think it is.

What it actually means:

"For the purposes of this Act, a film is directed towards a political end in Singapore if the film —

(a) contains wholly or partly any matter which is intended or likely to affect voting in any election or national referendum in Singapore; or

(b) contains wholly or partly either partisan or biased references to or comments on any political matter, including but not limited to any of the following:

(i) an election or a national referendum in Singapore;

(ii) a candidate or group of candidates in an election;

(iii) an issue submitted or otherwise before electors in an election or a national referendum in Singapore;

(iv) the Government or a previous Government or the opposition to the Government or previous Government;

(v) a Member of Parliament;

(vi) a current policy of the Government or an issue of public controversy in Singapore; or

(vii) a political party in Singapore or any body whose objects relate wholly or mainly to politics in Singapore, or any branch of such party or body."

As you can see, (a) already says that intention may not be necessary. If the filmmaker intends it, then he is caught; but if the filmmaker does not intend it but his film refers to matters likely to affect boting, he is caight too.

For more about the Films Act, you can refer to Gilbert Koh's 13 April 2005 post over here.

Also, you are not correct to say that it would be okay to be in possession of a party political film. The Films Act does not specifically say that possession of such a film is a crime; however, section 21 does say that possession of any film without a valid certificate is a crime (and party political films certainly would not come with valid certificates from the Board of Censors).

Section 35 also allows the Minister to prohibit Singaporeans from possessing specific films - thus the Minister can say, for example, that it shall be an offence for Singaporeans to possess a copy of the film "Singapore Rebel" by Martyn See.

Also thought you might be interested in this.

Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wang said...

I have a few comments on your second version too. Firstly I do believe that the relevant amendments to the Film Act were made around 1998, not 2002.

Secondly, and much more importantly, the Opposition is disadvantaged because of section 40(1)(a) of the Films Act which reads as follows:

"40. —(1) This Act shall not apply to —

(a) any film sponsored by the Government;"

... and also section 40(2):

"(2) The Minister may, subject to such conditions as he thinks fit, exempt any person or class of persons or any film or class of films from all or any of the provisions of this Act."

Under section 40(2), the Minister can effectively exempt, say, a film by the PAP about the PAP, from all provisions in the Act relating to party political films. In other words, if the Minister makes such an exemption, then for the PAP, it would be as if the Films Act did not exist at all.

Cherian said...

I agree about the effect of 40(1), but doubt that 40(2) would be used to exempt PAP films. The government is on the record as saying that the ban is meant to cover all parties. It's improbable that it violate this principle so flagrantly. It doesn't need to. I think this provision allowing the Minister to exempt persons/films was not meant for the political films provisions, but to expedite the censorship procedures for educational films, corporate videos etc. For some years, there's been a fast-track, honour-system procedure for such films.

Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wang said...

You may be right about section 40(2). It makes me uneasy, however, that the provision is so broadly worded that the Minister, if he wanted to, could jolly well exempt a pornographic film that he wanted to watch, and by virtue of the exemption, then be able to legally own the film. If this provision was indeed meant to create a fast-track, honour-system procedure for non-contentious types of films like corporate videos etc, it would be so much more desirable if the provision contained some wording to that effect.

You will also be interested to watch closely the development in this event - where a private citizen has filed a police report against Channel News Asia for screening films about PAP leaders.

Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wang said...

Oh, the amendments WERE made in 1998; you can see it from http://statutes.agc.gov.sg.

Click F to get to Films Act, then see the History section, and also note the little notation [10/98] next to the relevant provisions. 10/98 means the 10th legislative act made by Parliament in the year 1998 (this 10th legislative act being an amendment to the Films Act).

Anonymous said...

As such, one could question if PAP members should wear their party uniform to the National Day Parade, knowing fully well that the entire event will be televised.

Buying WOW Gold said...

Effectively on-line it is easy to go to a video exactly where among the list of event scientific studies that had got to experiment with the actual guidebook indicates the amount silver they've got produced in addition to illustrates which he or she is within the actual hosting server.

Anonymous said...

This is simplyRS Gold not correct because the concise explaination "directed toward any kind of political trigger Singapore" is exclusively identified within the Motion pictures Act. Along with the meaningBuy MapleStory Mesos is not what you believe it can be.

Anonymous said...

good
artikel obat ambeien yang sudah parah
artikel obat ambeien yg sudah parah
artikel obat ambeien sudah parah
artikel obat ambeien parah
artikel pengobatan ambeien parah
resep obat ambeien yang sudah parah
resep obat ambeien sudah parah
obat ambeien yang sudah parah
resep pengobatan ambeien yang sudah parah
resep obat ambeien yang parah

Anonymous said...

thank you
home design
home theatre set up
home theatre seating ideas
my gallery
home theatre room design
good room
cool room
home theatre design
categories home
theatre room
modern home theatre
futuristic theatre room ideas
basement home theatre
cool theatre room
special theatre room
futuristic theatre room
awesome theatre room

Anonymous said...

good
Obat Kutil Kelamin
Obat Kondiloma Akuminata
Pengobatan Kondiloma Akuminata
Obat Alami Kondiloma Akuminata Kutil Kelamin
Mengobati Infeksi Kutil di Kemaluan
Mengobati Infeksi Kutil yang Ada di Kelamin
Mengobati Infeksi Kutil Kemaluan
Mengobati Infeksi Kutil Ada di Kemaluan
Mengobati Kutil yang Ada di Kemaluan
Mengobati Kutil di Sekitar Kemaluan
Mengobati Kutil Sekitar Kemaluan
Mengobati Kutil yang Ada di Sekitar Kelamin
Mengobati Virus Kutil yang Ada Kemaluan
Mengobati Virus Kutil Kemaluan
Mengobati Virus Kutil di Kemaluan
Mengobati Virus Kutil yang Ada di Kelamin
Mengobati Kemaluan Wanita Bernanah
Mengobati Kemaluan yang Bernanah
Mengobati Kemaluan Bernanah
Mengobati Kelamin Wanita yang Bernanah
Mengobati Ujung Kemaluan Bernanah
Mengobati Kemaluan yang Bernanah
Mengobati Kemaluan Bernanah
Mengobati Ujung Kelamin yang Bernanah
Mengobati Virus Kemaluan Bernanah
Mengobati Virus di Kemaluan yang Bernanah
Mengobati Kemaluan yang Bernanah
Mengobati Virus Kelamin yang Bernanah
Cara Mengobati Benjolan Ambeien Wasir
Mengobati Benjolan Ambeien
Cara Mengobati Ambeyen
Cara Mengobati Benjolan Ambeien dan Wasir
Cara mengobati sakit wasir
Cara ampuh mengobati wasir
Cara tradisional mengobati wasir
Cara herbal mengobati wasir
Cara Alami Mengobati Wasir Ambeien
Cara Mengobati Wasir
Cara Mengobati Ambeien
Cara Mengobati Wasir Ambeyen
Cara Mengobati Wasir Alami
Cara Mengobati Wasir Herbal
Cara Mengobati Wasir
Cara Alami Mengobati Wasir Ambeien
Mengobati Wasir Tanpa Operasi
Cara Mengobati Wasir Ambeien Tanpa Operasi
Cara Mengobati Wasir Ambeien
Cara Ampuh Mengobati Wasir Tanpa Operasi

ken said...



trung tâm tư vấn du học canada vnsava



công ty tư vấn du học canada vnsava
trung tâm tư vấn du học canada vnsava uy tín
công ty tư vấn du học canada vnsava uy tín
trung tâm tư vấn du học canada vnsava tại tphcm
công ty tư vấn du học canada vnsava tại tphcm
điều kiện du học canada vnsava
chi phí du học canada vnsava
#vnsava
@vnsava