Bryan Lim Boon Heng, Vice-Chairman of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), voiced concerns over new election advertising laws in a Facebook post on 19 October 2024, following a briefing on election advertising requirements by the Elections Department and the Ministry of Digital Development and Information, which he attended with a few of his SDP colleagues.
Lim shared his apprehension regarding the Elections (Integrity of Online Advertising) (Amendment) Act (ELIONA), questioning its fairness in being applied equally to candidates from both the ruling party and the opposition.
The legislation, passed earlier this month, aims to prevent the spread of manipulated online content, such as deepfakes, during election periods.
Lim acknowledged the positive intentions behind ELIONA, which was introduced to curb misleading content generated by AI and other digital tools.
However, he emphasised that its actual implementation would be a test of the government’s commitment to a level playing field in Singapore’s political landscape.
With general elections expected by November 2025, Lim called on the public to help monitor potential misrepresentations of opposition candidates, stressing the importance of quickly reporting issues to the Returning Officer.
Lim also raised concerns over recent amendments to the Parliamentary Elections Act 1954, particularly those regarding Traditional Election Advertising (TEA), such as the display of flags, banners, and posters.
These amendments limit the permissible time period for displaying campaign materials to between the Issuance of the Writ of Election and the close of Nomination Proceedings.
Lim implied that this exemption would benefit the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP), as it would allow logos at PAP Community Foundation (PCF) childcare centres and the PAP headquarters to remain visible during the restricted period, without being counted towards the permissible TEA limits.
“No prizes for guessing which party stands to gain from these exceptions,” wrote Lim.
Lim further expressed strong criticism regarding the structural disadvantages faced by opposition parties in Singapore.
He argued that elections in the country “will never be free and fair” as long as the Elections Department operates under the Prime Minister’s Office.
Lim highlighted the significant challenges the opposition faces, stating that they are often forced to campaign with their “hands and legs bound” while competing against a ruling party that enjoys substantial resources and the backing of mainstream media.
ELIONA Bill and the new legal framework
The ELIONA Bill, passed by Singapore’s Parliament on 15 October 2024, updates existing election laws to address the rise of digitally altered or generated media, such as deepfakes, during campaign periods.
This legislation applies to both parliamentary and presidential elections, banning content that depicts manipulated and untrue representations of candidates, which could mislead the public.
According to Josephine Teo, Minister for Digital Development and Information, the law focuses on combatting the “most harmful types” of misinformation, especially in light of recent technological advances in AI.
The move was spurred by widespread concerns, with a study by Verian Research revealing that 60% of Singaporeans fear the potential impact of deepfakes on the upcoming elections.
Teo cited other countries, including South Korea and Brazil, as having similar legal frameworks to control deepfake proliferation.
Content restrictions and exceptions
To qualify as prohibited content under ELIONA, the material must meet four key conditions: it must be part of election advertising, digitally manipulated, depict an untrue representation of the candidate, and be realistic enough for public belief.
This encompasses AI-generated content and traditional techniques such as Photoshop or video editing.
However, certain exceptions apply. Content that is clearly unrealistic, such as memes, satire, or minor cosmetic edits, is exempt from the law’s purview. Nevertheless, merely labelling content as altered does not exempt it from regulation, as these labels can be easily ignored or removed when the content is redistributed.
The law covers not just original posts but also the sharing and reposting of manipulated content on public platforms, including large chat groups on apps like WhatsApp and Telegram. Private communications between individuals or within small groups are not subject to these restrictions.
Enforcement and penalties
ELIONA gives the returning officer the authority to issue directives to remove or restrict access to manipulated content during the election period.
The law will apply from the issuance of the Writ of Election to the close of polling, focusing only on officially declared candidates.
Violators may face penalties, with individuals potentially subject to a fine of up to S$1,000, 12 months in prison, or both, for distributing prohibited content. Social media platforms that fail to comply with removal requests could face fines of up to S$1 million.
To strengthen compliance, the government is also developing a Code of Practice, which will require social media platforms to implement safeguards against manipulated content before elections. This code is expected to be finalised by 2025.
Opposition concerns and AI in political campaigns
During parliamentary debates, Workers’ Party MP Gerald Giam expressed concerns about how the law might limit the use of AI in political campaigns, particularly for opposition parties that often have fewer resources than the ruling PAP.
Giam questioned whether AI-generated content, even if it conveys an accurate and pre-approved message from a candidate, would be restricted under ELIONA.
Minister Teo responded by clarifying that even AI-generated content, despite being truthful, would be prohibited under the law.
She emphasised that while the script might be accurate, the fact that a candidate did not personally appear in front of a camera to deliver the message makes the content problematic, thereby subject to restrictions under the new legislation.
This clarification raises questions about how opposition parties, which often rely on digital tools to bridge the resource gap with the PAP, will navigate the upcoming election campaigns while adhering to the new law.
