Singapore: Despite UN review, first charges brought under POFMA while journalists and activists continue to be targeted

Singapore’s civic space is rated as ‘repressed’ by the CIVICUS Monitor. There are ongoing concerns about the use of restrictive laws as well as the harassment of human rights defenders. The 2019 Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) provides excessive powers to the government and has been used to target activists and critics, and block websites, while there are ongoing restrictions on peaceful assembly under the 2009 Public Order Act (POA).

In April 2026, Amnesty International stated that government suppression of freedom of expression and peaceful assembly remained relentless, and repressive laws targeted activists, journalists and political opponents.

The country’s human rights record was reviewed by the UN Human Rights Council in May 2026. CIVICUS and FORUM-ASIA had submitted a joint report to the 4th cycle of the UN Universal Periodic Review (UPR), examining Singapore’s human rights practices.

During the review the country received recommendations from states to ensure that laws and policies on the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association comply with the relevant international human rights standards. There were also calls to amend or repeal overly restrictive legislation, including the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) and the 2009 Public Order Act and to ensure journalists, human rights defenders and civil society organisations can fully exercise their freedoms.

In recent months, POFMA charges were brought against a government critic as well as an activist for defying a correction direction. POFMA has also been used against the media outlet TOC who was ordered to pay costs to ministers over an article. An activist was pressured to delete social media posts to access her children. An activist was charged and convicted under the Public Order Act while the court overturned an acquittal decision on three activists for a walk in support of Palestine. Students receive conditional warnings over their activism and a Malaysian lawyer and activist was barred from entry into Singapore.

Expression

Critic faces criminal charges under POFMA

On 11th March 2026, Jay Ish’haq Rajoo, a vocal critic of the government, was charged by the Singapore Police Force (SPF) and the POFMA Office over four videos posted between 2023 and 2025, which allegedly contained content that ‘promoted ill-will between different racial groups’ as well as false statements of fact.

He faced six charges in total, including three counts of communicating ‘false statements of fact’ under Section 7 of the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA). In addition, he was charged with two counts of defamation involving former Prime Minister and Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong and Minister for National Development, Chee Hong Tat, as well as one count of promoting ill will between different racial groups under Sections 500 and 298A(a) of the Penal Code.

In 2023, several ministers including the Minister for National Development issued Rajoo with POFMA Correction Direction orders for posting TikTok videos raising concerns about the use of the Central Provident Funds, a compulsory savings and pension plan for Singaporeans, and alleging that the government penalised citizens who did not vote for them.

In 2024, Rajoo was issued a two-year conditional warning by the police and POFMA Office for the videos, requiring him to refrain from ‘criminal conduct’ within this period. However, in 2025, the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth issued Rajoo with another POFMA Correction Direction order for a TikTok video that allegedly contained false claims stating that National Development Minister Chee Hong Tat had announced government plans to provide funding and resources to attract mainland Chinese to Singapore and groom them for leadership positions. Rajoo posted the required correction notice.

On 27th March 2026, FORUM-ASIA, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and CIVICUS called on the Singapore government to immediately drop all criminal charges against him and repeal POFMA.

Since its introduction in 2019, POFMA has overwhelmingly been used to target human rights defenders and government critics, including anti-death penalty campaigners. The law grants authorities sweeping powers to criminalise online expression and lacks a public interest defence. Overly broad restrictions on sharing information, including those based on concepts such as ‘false news’ or ‘misinformation’ are incompatible with international human rights law and risk being used to silence critics, activists and human rights defenders.

Activist charged for defying POFMA direction

On 23rd April 2026, activist Kokila Annamalai was charged with failing to comply with a correction direction issued to her in October 2024 under Section 15 of POFMA.

The posts she allegedly failed to correct concerned a death row inmate, Mohammad Azwan Bohari, and described his and his family’s experiences surrounding scheduled execution dates.

Authorities later stated that Annamalai’s posts contained false claims, including that the government sets and postpones executions arbitrarily without respecting due legal process, and that the state does not carry the legal burden of proving a drug trafficking charge against an accused person.

As previously documented, Annamalai had also faced charges in a separate case alongside two other women for organising a pro-Palestinian procession to the Istana.

POFMA order for correction notice issued against news editor and its publisher

On 23rd March 2026, The Online Citizen (TOC), an independent news site, received a Correction Direction as issued to Xu Yuan Chen (alias Terry Xu) and Miao Yi Infotech Ltd, the Taiwan-registered entity through which TOC operates.

It was the first time the POFMA clause section 11(3)(b) was utilised requiring a correction notice in The Straits Times.

The correction direction identified three statements in an article published on 9th March 2026 as false over an article on the re-appointment of Attorney-General Lucien Wong. It required the publication of correction notices on the website and social media platforms, as well as a quarter-page notice in The Straits Times, with costs borne by the publisher. The cost of ad space came up to S$10,400 (USD 7,714).

Another POFMA Correction Direction was issued on 26th March for a second article published on 5th March 2026. It detailed the government’s response to allegations that two Singaporean nationals are serving in the Israeli Defence Forces. TOC complied with both Correction Directions as required by law. For the second article Xu was required to publish another notice in The Straits Times.

Journalist Terry Xu and the TOC has systematically been targeted by the government for its independent and critical reporting of issues in Singapore.

Journalist ordered to pay costs to ministers over article dispute

On 11th May 2026, the High Court ordered The Online Citizen (TOC) chief editor Terry Xu to pay a total of S$154,462.50 (USD 119,000) in legal costs and disbursements to ministers K. Shanmugam and Dr Tan See Leng in defamation proceedings linked to reporting on Good Class Bungalow (GCB) property transactions.

The latest order comes on top of the S$420,000 (USD 324,000) in damages previously awarded to the two ministers in March 2026, bringing the total costs and damages ordered against Xu in the case to S$574,462.50 (USD 443,000).

The dispute arose from TOC's republication of a Bloomberg article published in December 2024 concerning transparency issues in Singapore's luxury property market and selected GCB transactions.

On 25th December 2024, Xu publicly rejected demands from both ministers to remove articles concerning their GCB transactions and issue an apology. Xu argued at the time that the reporting raised legitimate public-interest questions regarding transparency in Singapore’s luxury property market. He also maintained that the facts reported were accurate.

Xu further stated that he would not contest any defamation lawsuit in Singapore, arguing that the country’s legal framework was “unfavourable to independent journalism and press freedom”.

The defamation trial against Bloomberg and reporter Low De Wei wrapped up in May 2026 and a verdict has yet to be issued.

The Singapore government has systematically used defamation suits to harass and prosecute critical voices, including activists, bloggers and journalists.

Activist pressured to delete social media posts to access children

On 8th March 2026, the Southeast Asia Freedom of Expression Network (SAFEnet), together with regional civil society partners, released a statement expressing grave concern over reports that activist Han Hui Hui was being pressured to delete social media content as a condition for access to her children. They argued that making a mother’s visitation rights contingent on removing her online activism constitutes a serious violation of freedom of expression and digital autonomy.

According to SAFEnet, increased access to her children - restricted to one supervised hour per week - was made contingent on Han deleting social media posts related to her activism.

On 15th February 2026, her children were removed from Han Hui Hui’s care after police assistance was sought following an alleged altercation between her mother-in-law and the children. They were subsequently taken to KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital (KKH), and the Singapore Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) conducted a comprehensive social investigation, including a review of the safety plan. The ministry assessed that it was necessary to establish additional safeguards before the children could be returned to the family.

On 16th March 2026, the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) and the Singapore Police Force (SPF) stated that activist Han Hui Hui had been reunited with her children.

She was also issued a POFMA correction direction for allegedly making false statements in a Facebook livestream about the removal of her children. On 28th February, in the said livestream, she claimed that she was not allowed to see her children at the hospital and that they had been taken away from her two weeks earlier.

Peaceful Assembly

Activist charged and convicted under Public Order Act

On 3rd February 2026, activist Jolovan Wham was charged with five counts under the Public Order Act for allegedly participating in public assemblies conducted without permits. These charges relate to his involvement in five candlelight vigils for death row inmates held between March 2022 and April 2023.

Three of these vigils were held in the vicinity of Changi Prison. He also allegedly attended candlelight vigils near a bus stop opposite Changi Women’s Prison in March 2022, and at a playground near Mariam Walk in April 2022.

Individuals found guilty of taking part in a public assembly without a permit may face fines of up to S$3,000 (USD 2,314), while repeat offenders can be fined up to S$5,000 (USD 3,857).

On 5th April 2026, FORUM-ASIA, Amnesty International, and CIVICUS urged the government to drop all charges against Wham and take meaningful steps to protect the right to peaceful assembly.

Wham stood trial in Singapore’s State Courts on 6th April 2026. On 13th May 2026, he was sentenced to a fine of S$3,500 (USD 2,700) per charge for three Public Order Act (POA) offences, amounting to a total of S$10,500 (USD 8,100). The sentence was related to the candlelight vigils held outside Changi Prison. Two other charges are still pending.

Human rights groups have long documented the pattern of judicial harassment of Wham for his activism.

Court overturns acquittal decision of three activists for walk on Palestine

On 30th April 2026, the High Court overturned a decision to acquit three activists - Mossammad Sobikun Nahar, Siti Amirah Mohamed Asrori and Annamalai Kokila Parvathi - following an appeal by the prosecution. They were handed down a fine of S$3,000 (USD 2,314).

As previously documented, in October 2025, a court in Singapore acquitted three women activists who organised a walk to the presidential office to show support for the Palestinian cause. The three were among approximately 70 individuals that walked along Orchard Road towards the Istana - the office of the President – in February 2024, carrying umbrellas decorated with watermelon images as a symbolic show of support for the Palestinian cause.

Their aim was to deliver letters to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. Following this, three women activists were charged under the Public Order Act 2009 for organising a procession around the perimeter of the Istana, a designated prohibited area, without a permit.

Association

Students receive conditional warnings

On 10th March 2026, eight students received conditional warnings after a two-year police investigation into a June 2024 incident in which letters were delivered to the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). Seven others from the group remain under investigation as they were involved in other cases.

The group identified itself as “Students for Palestine” and were required to maintain a one-year crime-free period as part of the conditional warnings issued by the Singapore Police Force.

The case originated in June 2024 when a group of approximately 30 individuals approached the MHA to deliver 40 letters expressing opposition to the proposed Maintenance of Racial Harmony Bill, arguing that it could lead to the “persecution and policing of discourse” on Palestine and other global issues.

At the time, the police stated they were looking into the group's conduct for possible offences under the Public Order Act 2009, which prohibits organising a public procession without a permit.

There are strict controls in Singapore on students seeking to exercise their freedoms.

Malaysian lawyer and activist barred from entry into Singapore

On 27th March 2026, Fadiah Nadwa Fikri, a Malaysian human rights lawyer and anti-corruption activist known for her pro-Palestinian advocacy on social media, was denied entry into Singapore, with the Ministry of Home Affairs describing her as an ‘undesirable visitor’.

Fadiah had planned to visit the country to collect her PhD certificate from the National University of Singapore, which she obtained in January 2026. She posted a photo of what appears to be a notice from immigration authorities stating that she was “ineligible for the issuance of a pass under current immigration policies.”

Fadiah stated that her denial of entry into Singapore was “tantamount to a deliberate attack” on her academic work, which focuses on decolonisation and anti-imperialism. In contrast, the Ministry of Home Affairs said she had encouraged youths to “go beyond protests” and “undertake disruptive and violent actions to support specific causes”.

Report on challenges and persistence of the pro-Palestine movement

In February 2026, the Transformative Justice Collective launched ‘Still Steadfast: Punishment and Perseverance in Singapore's Movement Against Genocide’, a report on Singapore's pro-Palestine movement and how it has persisted despite a hostile authoritarian environment that has been particularly keen to keep a lid on pro-Palestine activism.

According to the report, the authorities are particularly sensitive and quick to respond to pro-Palestinian discourse and action. Seeking to manage public discontent, the government has responded to grassroots actions with oppression and suppression. Despite this, grassroots activists and organisers have not backed down. Through these efforts, the pro-Palestine movement has arguably won some concessions from those in power, reflecting the potential of direct action in challenging the state narrative and shifting public sentiment on Palestine.