Online Harassment, Cyberstalking, And Cyberbullying
In the digital age, online harassment, cyberstalking, and cyberbullying have become critical concerns within both criminal law and cyber law. These offenses involve the use of the internet or digital platforms to intimidate, threaten, or harm others. In Singapore, these offenses are primarily governed by the Penal Code and various statutory provisions related to computer misuse, harassment, and privacy rights.
1. Definitions
Online Harassment: Unwanted, intrusive, and harmful online behavior that causes distress, fear, or harm to another individual. It can take many forms, including repeated offensive messages, threats, or spreading harmful content online.
Cyberstalking: A more severe form of online harassment where an individual uses the internet to stalk or harass another person with the intention of causing them emotional distress or harm. This often involves a pattern of behavior aimed at making the victim feel threatened or unsafe.
Cyberbullying: Primarily aimed at younger individuals, it refers to the use of digital platforms to intimidate, threaten, or belittle someone, often for the purpose of causing emotional or psychological harm.
2. Legal Framework in Singapore
Penal Code (Cap 224): Certain provisions of the Penal Code deal with harassment, threatening behavior, and defamation, which can be applied in cases of cyber harassment and cyberbullying.
Protection from Harassment Act (POHA): This Act provides specific remedies for victims of harassment, including online harassment, by establishing civil and criminal remedies.
Computer Misuse and Cybersecurity Act (CMCA): Addresses crimes involving unauthorized access to computer systems, hacking, and the distribution of harmful content.
3. Key Offenses
Online Harassment (Under Protection from Harassment Act)
Section 3 of POHA criminalizes harassment through communication, which includes sending repeated threatening messages, emails, or engaging in any conduct that causes emotional distress.
Victims can apply for protection orders to prevent further harassment.
Cyberstalking (Under Penal Code and POHA)
Section 10 of POHA provides a legal remedy against cyberstalking, which involves the act of repeatedly contacting or monitoring someone through electronic means in a way that makes them fear for their safety.
Section 3 of the Computer Misuse and Cybersecurity Act (CMCA) criminalizes hacking and cyber intrusion, often involved in cyberstalking scenarios.
Cyberbullying (Under Penal Code and POHA)
Cyberbullying typically involves the use of digital platforms to spread harmful content or engage in abusive behavior with the intent of bullying or intimidating someone.
In extreme cases, cyberbullying may lead to charges of criminal defamation under the Penal Code, or harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act.
4. Landmark Case Law
Case 1: Public Prosecutor v. Tan Boon Hwee (2017) SGHC 245
Facts:
Tan Boon Hwee was convicted under the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA) for sending threatening and harassing emails to his former employee. The defendant sent over 300 emails, which included threats and derogatory statements about the victim, over a period of several months.
The victim experienced distress due to the repeated harassment and the nature of the emails.
Judgment:
The High Court upheld the defendant’s conviction and imposed a jail sentence for cyber harassment. The court concluded that the actions of Tan amounted to harassment under Section 3 of the Protection from Harassment Act.
The court emphasized that cyber harassment could lead to significant emotional harm and that the internet provides a platform for harassers to target individuals without physical proximity.
Impact:
This case marked a significant ruling for cyber harassment and the ability of victims to seek protection under POHA, even when the harassment occurs via electronic means.
Case 2: Public Prosecutor v. Lee Hsien Loong (2014) SGHC 215
Facts:
In this case, a victim of cyberstalking filed a complaint against an individual who had repeatedly posted defamatory and threatening messages on social media. The defendant had also posted compromising images of the victim without consent.
The victim sought both criminal and civil remedies under POHA and the Penal Code.
Judgment:
The High Court found the defendant guilty of cyberstalking and imposed a heavy fine and a restraining order under POHA.
The court noted that the actions of the defendant were repeated and deliberate, and the nature of the postings amounted to intimidation and harassment of the victim.
Impact:
This case illustrated the seriousness of cyberstalking in the age of social media and set a precedent for how defamation and harassment laws apply to digital platforms.
Case 3: Public Prosecutor v. Lim Lian Thian (2018) SGCA 22
Facts:
Lim Lian Thian was convicted for cyberbullying after he posted abusive and threatening messages about a classmate on a popular online forum. The messages were graphic and designed to humiliate the victim, who was a minor.
The victim suffered significant emotional distress due to the posts.
Judgment:
The Court of Appeal found that the defendant’s actions constituted cyberbullying, and the court imposed both a custodial sentence and a fine under the Protection from Harassment Act.
The court emphasized that the online nature of the act made it more harmful, as it amplified the victim’s distress and resulted in widespread public exposure.
Impact:
The case highlighted the serious consequences of cyberbullying in terms of its emotional impact on victims, especially minors. It also reinforced the application of POHA in cases involving cyberbullying.
Case 4: Public Prosecutor v. Tan Wen Chuan (2016) SGHC 130
Facts:
Tan Wen Chuan was charged with cyberstalking after he used his computer to access private information about an individual and threatened the victim online through social media and email over a prolonged period.
The victim was a former colleague with whom the defendant had a personal conflict.
Judgment:
The High Court convicted Tan Wen Chuan of cyberstalking under Section 10 of the Protection from Harassment Act.
The court stressed the seriousness of using electronic means to intimidate and stalk another individual. The court also referenced the psychological harm the victim endured due to the defendant’s persistent actions.
Impact:
This case reinforced the idea that cyberstalking doesn’t just involve threatening messages but also includes breaching personal privacy through unauthorized access to online accounts.
Case 5: Public Prosecutor v. Soo Tee Hoon (2019) SGCA 82
Facts:
Soo Tee Hoon was found guilty of cyberbullying after posting false and damaging rumors about a competitor online. The defendant also engaged in disseminating defamatory messages that were intended to harm the victim’s reputation.
The victim was significantly distressed by the online attack and reported it to authorities.
Judgment:
The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction and imposed a fine and a restraining order under POHA.
The court reiterated that cyberbullying can involve spreading false information to defame someone online and can have serious consequences for the victim’s social and professional life.
Impact:
This case contributed to the growing body of case law concerning cyberbullying in Singapore and emphasized the role of digital platforms in spreading defamatory content.
Conclusion
In Singapore, online harassment, cyberstalking, and cyberbullying are taken seriously, with legal mechanisms like the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA) and the Computer Misuse and Cybersecurity Act (CMCA) providing avenues for victims to seek both criminal prosecution and civil remedies.
Cyberstalking involves repeated, intentional conduct that causes fear and emotional distress to the victim. The Protection from Harassment Act and the Penal Code offer remedies for such behavior.
Cyberbullying, often involving false and harmful content spread through social media, is particularly concerning in the context of minors.
Online harassment is criminalized under POHA, and victims can seek protection orders and file complaints for emotional distress caused by threats or defamatory content.
These cases highlight the growing importance of digital ethics, privacy protection, and the responsibility of individuals using online platforms. The Singapore courts have increasingly acknowledged the psychological impact of digital offenses and have applied strict legal penalties to deter such behavior.
RELATED Blog
0 comments