Singapore’s Coordinating Minister for Public Services Chan Chun Sing affirmed Thursday that ministerial discretion in the application of laws like the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) must remain within legal boundaries.
The statement came during a parliamentary debate on the Public Service Division’s spending plans, responding to questions posed by Workers’ Party Member of Parliament He Ting Ru (Sengkang GRC). Ms. He had inquired about the mechanisms in place to guide and monitor the exercise of executive discretion, particularly concerning legislation granting broad powers to ministers and statutory bodies to address online falsehoods, foreign interference and harmful content. These laws include POFMA, the Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Act (FICA), and the Online Safety (Relief and Accountability) Act.
Ms. He also raised concerns about the limited avenues for public challenge to the exercise of such discretion, noting that judicial review is “rare” in Singapore. She asked, “How does Singapore guide and monitor the use of executive discretion and what are the safeguards in place to ensure that these are done judiciously?”
Mr. Chan explained that the Prime Minister assigns responsibilities to ministers, encompassing statutory functions derived from legislation. “All statutory functions must be exercised in accordance with the law,” he stated. He further clarified that the intention behind granting discretionary powers is to allow ministers and officials to apply judgment to individual cases based on specific facts, rather than adhering to a “mechanically applied rigid rule.”
According to Mr. Chan, the rationale, scope, limits, and safeguards associated with these discretionary powers were thoroughly debated during the legislative process when the relevant acts were passed. He added that ministers are individually accountable for exercising their assigned statutory functions, and that significant issues are typically discussed by the Cabinet before a final decision is reached. “Cabinet, in turn, is collectively responsible to parliament,” he said.
Minister-in-Charge of the Public Service Chan Chun Sing also noted that decisions made by ministers are carefully recorded, along with their reasoning, building a body of knowledge akin to the development of case law, according to a statement released Thursday. This practice, he said, is intended to provide a record of how ministerial discretion is applied over time.
