\n<\/p>\n
SINGAPORE: A gag order has been imposed in the fatal Chinatown car accident \u2013and if you have been sharing videos or photos of the incident, you could be in breach, lawyers warn.<\/p>\n
On Wednesday (Apr 8), a 38-year-old female driver was charged over the viral incident that killed a six-year-old girl on Feb 6, with the court imposing a gag order during the hearing.<\/p>\n
The order was granted to protect the identity of the accused’s six-year-old son, who could be called as a witness. Because he is the accused’s child, the order extends to her as well, covering details such as her name, address, photograph and vehicle registration number, and any other information that could lead to her identification.<\/p>\n
With videos and photos of the incident already circulating online, CNA examines whether the gag order applies to such material retrospectively.<\/p>\n
Gag orders are issued by the court to protect the identities of minors involved in court proceedings, or victims of criminal offences \u2013 in particular, victims of sexual crimes.<\/p>\n
A gag order is not imposed to protect the accused. The accused is covered only if identifying them could lead to the identification of the protected person.<\/p>\n
In another recent case involving a drunk driver who fatally struck a pedestrian, a gag order was similarly imposed on the offender’s identity to protect his two young children, who were in the car at the time of the crash.<\/p>\n
Gag orders are typically issued when the accused is first charged in court and apply broadly, including to members of the public.<\/p>\n
Lawyer Joyce Khoo, a senior associate with Quahe Woo & Palmer, said gag orders are imposed under specific provisions depending on the nature of the case.<\/p>\n
In cases involving a child, for example, a court may issue a gag order under the Children and Young Persons Act (CYPA), which prohibits the publication of information relating to court proceedings that reveals the name, address, school or any particulars likely to lead to their identification.<\/p>\n
A judge could also grant a gag order under the Criminal Procedure Code to prohibit the publication of information that identifies the complainant or alleged victim of a sexual offence or child abuse. Other laws, such as the Women’s Charter, may also apply.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Criminal defence lawyer Rohit Kumar Singh from Regal Law said the protection afforded to a child is independent of their status as a witness.<\/p>\n
“So this can possibly include children who are present at the scene, affected by the incident … or connected to the proceedings in any meaningful way,<\/strong>” he said.<\/p>\n If the driver pleads guilty and her son is not expected to be called as a witness, the prosecution may apply to lift the gag order. The court will ultimately decide after considering whether it is fair and in the child’s interests, Mr Singh said.\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n Managing director of Vaswani Law Chambers Sanjiv Vaswani pointed to online comments threatening harm to the accused’s child and said “one can clearly see why the identity of the boy ought to be protected”.<\/p>\n Those who continue to share pictures and videos containing identifying details will be in breach of the gag order and must stop immediately, lawyers said.<\/p>\n “The obligation to stop is not only limited to the original source of the content, it can extend to anyone who reposts, forwards, uploads or otherwise circulates material that identifies, or is likely to identify, the protected person,” Mr Singh said. \u00a0<\/p>\n “In Singapore, the scope of liability is intentionally broad and can apply to any person involved in publishing or distributing such content, even if they were simply ‘sharing’ something that was already in circulation,” he added.<\/p>\n Gag orders can also apply to platforms that facilitate online discussions attempting to identify a protected person. Platform or forum operators could be liable if they knowingly host such content and fail to take reasonable steps to remove it when notified, Mr Singh said.<\/p>\n Mr Vaswani said that while moderating all discussions may be difficult, the law still applies to forums, as it focuses on the act of publication rather than the platform or medium used.<\/p>\n Still, lawyers said enforcement would likely focus on individuals rather than platforms, partly due to expediency.<\/p>\n Senior lecturer in the Singapore University of Social Sciences\u2019 Law Programmes Melvin Loh said it is important to intervene quickly when the gag order is breached, so as to minimise any harm. \u00a0<\/p>\n “Expediency in addressing any breaches would be key to protecting the accused’s son in this case,” said Mr Loh, who is also counsel at law firm Peter Low Chambers.\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/div>\nDoes it apply to members of the public sharing videos and photos?<\/h2>\n