The Definition of ‘False Statement of Fact’ in the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act

<p>In 2019, the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) was enacted in Singapore. POFMA is a law regulating so-called ‘fake news’ and ‘disinformation,’ but it does not use these terms. Instead, it refers to ‘false statements of fact.’ This paper examines the criticisms regarding the Singapore government’s definition of a ‘false statement of fact,’ which has been considered ambiguous, and the counter-arguments against such criticisms. Specifically, this paper examines whether the definition of ‘false statement of fact’ is unique compared to existing definitions of fake news and disinformation in light of the key issues in defining them. In doing so, this research finds that the definition of ‘false statement fact’ employs jurisprudential logic rarely seen in previous studies defining fake news and disinformation. The logic has led to discrepancies and frictions in the legislative and implementation process between politicians and ministers of the ruling People's Action Party and critics of POFMA. In particular, the distinction between fact and opinion, the examination of communicators' intent, and how to determine falsity became significant issues in developing POFMA. Still, determining these distinctions and examinations became possible only after the implementation of POFMA and the accumulation of precedents.</p>