House passes foreign interference law after 10-hour debate

Singapore

A NEW law to deal with foreign interference in Singapore will go further than existing laws with executory powers to explicitly cover global platforms that are often vectors for hostile information campaigns, Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam said on Monday.

The law - the Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Act (Fica) - was passed in Parliament after 75 MPs from the ruling People's Action Party voted overwhelmingly in support of it, following two calls for division by Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh at the end of a 10-hour marathon debate that began shortly after noon.

They outnumbered the 11 votes against the legislation, cast by all 10 Workers' Party (WP) MPs as well as Progress Singapore Party's Non-Constituency MP Leong Mun Wai. Mr Leong's fellow NCMP Hazel Poa was absent.

Nominated MPs Tan Yia Swam and Shahira Abdullah abstained from the vote.

First tabled three weeks ago, Fica targets hostile information campaigns conducted by foreign parties while dealing with foreign interference through local proxies.

It grants the Minister for Home Affairs a suite of powers that include directing entities such as social media services to block "hostile communications" of foreign origin, as well as to compel politically significant persons to disclose foreign affiliations or donations.

Mr Shanmugam told the House that the risk of foreign interference has already been discussed extensively since 2018.

At that time, 20 persons and organisations, including experts gave testimonies at the Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods, he noted.

"Some have said there have been no discussions, why is the Bill being put through so quickly, and have there been no discussions? We have been talking about this very seriously for more than three years extensively," he said during the Second Reading of the Bill.

He reiterated this point, both during the debate of the bill and in response to questions from Mr Singh and Mr Leong, on why there have not been any public consultations before the Bill was passed.

Mr Shanmugam said experts had highlighted during the select committee that Singapore has been targetted and is especially vulnerable when race and religion are used as an issue of protest potential.

Outlining examples where Singapore had been subjected to cyber attacks and manipulation in recent times, the minister said one case involved a large spike in anonymous online comments critical of Singapore during a period of bilateral tension with an unnamed country in 2018.

On that point, Sengkang GRC MP Jamus Lim of the WP said that Facebook had publicly stated that it has uncovered no cases of coordinated inauthentic behaviour by foreigners targeting Singapore since 2017.

In response, Mr Shanmugam said: "We do not know how Facebook makes its assessments and whether it depends only on Facebook. We look at the wide variety of communication tools based on the information we have available to us. We reached a different conclusion."

He added: "Matters of our national security should not be outsourced to private companies and they should not be made to decide what our fate ought to be."

Noting that the threat of foreign interference and its seriousness is not disputed by most people, Mr Shanmugam said most people also agree that something needs to be done, which is why he moved the Bill.

Several MPs, including from the PAP, raised concerns about the law's potentially far-reaching powers on curtailing normal interactions with foreigners and whether it could have a chilling effect on the freedom of speech,

Mr Shanmugam assured the House that the answer was no.

"Fica will not stop individuals, businesses and organisations in Singapore from building overseas partnerships, soliciting overseas businesses, networking with foreigners, sourcing for donations, discussing government policies or political matters that affect their businesses with foreign colleagues or business partners or supporting charities," he said.

This is as long as these activities are done in an open and transparent manner and are not part of an attempt to manipulate Singapore's political discourse or undermine public interest such as security, he said.

"Singapore depends for its success and vitality on being open, and a government that seeks to close down that will lead Singapore to ruin," he said.

"The difficulty we face at MHA (Ministry of Home Affairs), and which many other countries face in dealing with this foreign interference issue, is that out of 10,000 interactions, one might be the sort that you are interested in, where there is an attempt to interfere, and foreign agencies and even (non-government) agencies, NGOs, others will try and present a legitimate front," he said.

"So the language has got to be broad enough to cover that - that what is apparently normal but is actually not normal."

Addressing concerns on potential abuse on the part of the government, Mr Shanmugam said: "It's a degree of risk. There are also risks in not giving the power. The real issue is what power should you give, what are the risks in not giving the power."

The risk is if the government abuses its power so that perfectly normal collaboration is interfered with, he added.

"You have to weigh the risks of a rogue government doing that versus a rogue foreign interference. The latter is a far greater risk," he said.