|
|
|
|
|
by angelsl
2718 days ago
|
|
Why is everyone focusing on the fact that someone spoke via Skype? The fact is that 1. Jolovan Wham did organise a physical gathering of people
2. The gathering/assembly meets the definition as in the Public Order Act[1]
3. The venue, The Agora, meets the definition of a public place as in the Public Order Act [1]: https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/POA2009 They could have been watching a recorded video and it would have been the same. |
|
> The Singapore Police Force in an earlier statement, said that Wham had organised an indoor public assembly featuring a foreign speaker, which required a Police permit.
Although given that political films are also banned, maybe a prerecorded video would have been illegal under a different law.