以色列驻新加坡大使馆删除社交媒体帖子事件的最新情况

1 周凯年先生（蔡厝港集选区议员）就以色列驻新加坡大使馆于 2024 年 3 月 24 日在社交媒体上删除帖子一事询问内政部长：

(a) 是否将采取进一步措施？

(b) 在外国驻新加坡大使馆拥有或管理的社交媒体账户上发布此类帖子的责任人是否享有外交豁免，不受我国法律的管辖和起诉？

尚穆根先生（内政部长）：议长先生，外部事态发展，尤其是像中东冲突这样情绪激动的事态发展，往往会跨越国界。它们会导致对问题有不同感受和不同认同的人之间关系紧张。

我们新加坡也受到了这些力量的影响。我们尤其看到马来/穆斯林社区与犹太教和基督教社区之间的分歧。马来/穆斯林社区的许多人认为在加沙发生的事情是不公正的。与此同时，犹太社区对哈马斯 2023年10月7日的恐怖行动所造成的痛苦深有感触。基督教社区的一些人认为，对以色列的任何攻击都是对基督教的攻击—虽然并非所有基督徒都有这种感觉，但有些人有这种感觉并表达了这种观点。其他社区也可能更同情冲突的一方。

深厚的感情也可能导致冒犯其他群体的言行。2023年10月7日至2024年3月 31 日期间，警方共收到43起针对新加坡犹太人或穆斯林社群成员的冒犯性言行的报告。

政府将对影响社会和谐的行为进行干预。各位议员知道，我们有《维持宗教和谐法》等法律，《刑法》也有相关规定，还有《防止骚扰法》—它们都规定了可接受行为的界限。

在这方面，让我也谈谈抗议活动。我们看到，许多国家的紧张局势已经沸沸扬扬。在柏林，支持巴勒斯坦的抗议者与警察发生冲突，数百人被捕；在美国的大学里，支持以色列和支持巴勒斯坦的学生抗议者之间的冲突变得越来越激烈。双方学生都面临骚扰和攻击。

具有讽刺意味的是，一些美国一流大学开始表示，言论自由并不意味着可以想说什么就说什么，想做什么就做什么。

我们在海外许多地方看到的情况是，抗议活动往往变得暴力化。人们占领建筑物，阻止他人从事日常工作，对公众造成严重的破坏和干扰。这往往导致破坏和伤害。他们一开始可能是出于好意，由诚实、理想主义的人领导。我的意思是，人们常说，"抗议、表达观点有什么错？" 我能理解这种说法。很多时候，人们真的觉得有必要，而且他们也不是暴力分子。他们不想制造麻烦。但是，正如我们在其他地方看到的那样，当有这些抗议活动时，往往会被其他怀有自己目的的人渗透。这些渗入抗议活动的人经常试图制造暴力。

《纽约时报》和其他媒体都报道了美国目前正在发生的事情。据报道，纽约市长批评外部煽动者在校园内训练并参与抗议活动。我引用他的话，他担心“年轻人……受到那些激进化儿童的专业人士的影响”。《纽约时报》发表了一篇文章，引用一名学生的话说，抗议活动的很大一部分是来自洛杉矶地区的人，他们举行的示威活动造成了广泛的混乱。这些都在加州大学洛杉矶分校（UCLA）的校园里。

另一方面，也有报道否认外界有重大参与。我认为很难知道真实的事实，但纵观抗议活动——我们一直在研究香港、斯里兰卡和其他地方的抗议活动，——我认为可以公平地说，通常有一个团体有合法的目标，希望和平，但往往经常有其他人利用这些活动，在人们聚集的地方策划暴力，让警察处于守势，并试图怂恿警察，试图强行阻止暴力行为，然后暴力行为升级。

同样，我们自己的观点是：如果我们允许在这个问题上进行抗议，最初可能是和平的，但随着时间的推移，随着抗议活动的结束，可能会发生一些暴力事件，破坏和平与法律，占领新加坡的建筑；我们和其他地方没有什么不同。

然而，我们应该承认，从事攻击性或暴力行为的人在我们的社会中是极少数，我怀疑在许多其他地方也是如此。我们新加坡没有发生过多起使一个种族或宗教团体与另一个群体对立的严重事件。大多数新加坡人都明白维护社会凝聚力的重要性，以及相互尊重和宽容的价值。即使对冲突的看法有所不同，新加坡人在处理问题的方式上也相对谨慎和理性。

除了法律之外，我们还必须积极努力，而且我们也确实如此，通过在我们的种族和宗教社区建立相互信任和理解来加强我们的社会契约。在领导层面，内政部（MHA）和文化、社区及青年部（MCCY）为高级宗教和社群领袖频繁互动提供平台。这些平台包括全国种族与宗教和谐常务委员会，以及每个选区的族群与宗教和谐圈。

在人与人之间，MCCY为将不同社区聚集在一起的信仰间和种族间倡议提供支持，包括鼓励不同社区相互理解和相互尊重的对话。

现在让我谈谈周凯年先生提出的以色列大使馆在社交媒体上发布的帖子问题。外国驻新加坡大使馆和外交人员根据法律享有外交豁免权，除非他们放弃。除其他外，这意味着他们享有我们刑事管辖的豁免。

尽管如此，MHA在该贴文发布时向外交部 (MFA)表达了我们的担忧。我们立即表达了我们的关切。外交部同意该贴文越界，应当立即删除。外交部随后与以色列大使馆接洽，要求将其撤下。大家都知道，大使馆立即撤销了这一职务。

各位议员会记得我在公开场合所说的话--该贴子是完全不能接受的。以色列大使要求见我。我上周见过他。他为发布的帖子道歉。他说发布这个帖子是错误的。贴子未经他的授权，负责贴子的官员将被遣返回国，离开新加坡。他还说这种情况再也不会发生了。

我向他指出，大使馆有权发表自己的观点。但是，如果所发表的言论影响到新加坡，影响到新加坡国内和谐与安全，特别是影响到我们少数族群社区的安全，我们就必须介入。像大使馆发布的这类贴文有可能在我们的犹太社区和穆斯林社区之间制造紧张局势，特别是有可能将我们的犹太社区置于危险之中。

警方收到了关于该贴文的报告。经与总检察长办公室协商，警方认为无须采取进一步行动。各位议员都明白，以色列大使馆的行为受主权豁免原则的保护。

UPDATE ON INCIDENT WHERE SOCIAL MEDIA POST WAS TAKEN DOWN BY ISRAELI EMBASSY IN SINGAPORE(1)

1 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Home Affairs with regard to the social media posting that was taken down by the Israeli embassy in Singapore on 24 March 2024 (a) whether there are further steps to be taken; and (b) whether a person responsible for such posting on a social media account that is owned or managed by a foreign embassy in Singapore will enjoy diplomatic immunity from jurisdiction and prosecution under our laws.

The Minister for Home Affairs (Mr K Shanmugam): Sir, external developments, especially those as emotionally charged as the conflict in the Middle East, often spill across borders. They can cause tensions between people who feel differently about and who identify with different sides of the issue.

And we in Singapore have been affected by these forces as well. We see in particular a divide in the reactions between the Malay/Muslim community on the one side and the Jewish and Christian communities on the other side. Many in the Malay/Muslim community see the injustice in what is happening in Gaza. The Jewish community meanwhile feels deeply the pain inflicted by Hamas’ act of terror on 7 October 2023. There are sections of the Christian community who feel that any attack on Israel is an attack on Christianity – while not all Christians feel that way, there are some who feel that way and have expressed those views. Other communities may also empathise with one side of the conflict more than the other.

Deeply held feelings can also result in words or actions that offend other communities. Between 7 October 2023 and 31 March 2024, the Police received 43 reports regarding alleged offensive remarks or actions targeted at members of the Jewish or Muslim communities in Singapore. 

The Government will intervene against acts which can affect our social harmony. Members know we have laws such as the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act, the Penal Code has provisions, the Protection from Harassment Act – they all set out the boundaries on what is acceptable conduct.

In this context, let me also say something about protests. We have seen how tensions have boiled over in many countries. In Berlin, pro-Palestinian protestors have clashed with the police, with hundreds of people arrested. At United States (US) universities, exchanges between different groups of pro-Israel and pro-Palestine student protestors have become increasingly acrimonious. Students on both sides have faced harassment and assault.

Ironically, some of the leading US universities are beginning to say that freedom of expression does not mean that one can say or do anything one wants.

What we see happening in many places overseas is that the protests have often become violent. People occupy buildings, prevent others from going about their daily businesses, cause significant disamenities and disruption to the public. And often, that leads to damage and harm. They may start off well-intentioned, led by honest, idealistic people. I mean, people often say, "What's wrong with protests, expression of views?" And I can understand that. Often, people genuinely feel the need and they are not violent people. They do not want to create trouble. But what happens is that when there are these protests, they often get infiltrated, as we can see from elsewhere, by others with their own agendas. These others who infiltrate these protests often try and engineer violence.

The New York Times and other media outlets have run stories on what is happening in the US right now. The Mayor of New York has reportedly criticised outside agitators for being on campus grounds training and co-opting the protests. He was concerned with, and I quote, “young people…being influenced by those who are professionals at radicalising children”. The New York Times ran an article, quoting a student saying that a big part of the protests was people coming in from the general Los Angeles area and putting on a demonstration that caused widespread disruption. These are on the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) campuses.

There are also reports which, on the other hand, deny that outsiders have been significantly involved. I think it is difficult to know the true facts, but looking at protests – and we have been studying them, Hong Kong, Sri Lanka, other places – I think it is fair to say, often, there is a group which has legitimate aims, wants to be peaceful, but there are often others who use these events where people gather, to then engineer violence and put the police on the defensive, and try and egg the police on, to try and engage in forcibly preventing acts of violence, and then, it escalates.

Likewise, our own view is that: if we allow protests on this issue, initially, it may be peaceful, but over time, as the protests take a life of their own, there could be some violence, breach of the peace and law, occupying of buildings in Singapore; we are no different from other places.

We should accept that individuals who engage in offensive or violent conduct, however, are a very small minority in our society and I suspect in many other places too. We in Singapore have not had many serious incidents pitting one racial or religious group against another. Most Singaporeans understand the importance of safeguarding our social cohesion, and the value of mutual respect and tolerance. Even where views on the conflict have differed, people in Singapore have been relatively measured and rational in the way we have approached the issues.

Beyond the law, we have to work actively, and we do work actively, on strengthening our social compact by building mutual trust and understanding across our ethnic and religious communities. At the leadership level, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) facilitate platforms where senior religious and community leaders engage with one another frequently. The platforms include the National Steering Committee on Racial and Religious Harmony, as well as the Racial and Religious Harmony Circles in every constituency.

At the people-to-people level, MCCY provides support for inter-faith and inter-ethnic initiatives that bring different communities together, including dialogues which encourage mutual understanding and respectful interactions across different communities.

Let me now turn to the social media post by the Israeli Embassy that was raised by Mr Zhulkarnain. Foreign embassies and diplomatic staff in Singapore enjoy diplomatic immunity under the law, unless they waive it. Amongst other things, this means that they enjoy immunity from our criminal jurisdiction.

Nevertheless, MHA shared our concerns with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) when the post was put up. We shared our concerns immediately. MFA agreed that the post was offside and should be taken down. MFA then engaged the Israeli Embassy on the post and asked that it be taken down. As Members would know, the Embassy took down the post immediately.

Members will remember what I said in public – that the post was completely unacceptable. The Israeli Ambassador asked to see me. I met him last week. He apologised for the post having been put up. He said it was wrong for the post to have been put up. The post was not authorised by him and the officer responsible for the post will be sent back, away from Singapore. And he said that this would never happen again. 

I pointed out to him that embassies are entitled to have their point of view. But where what has been said affects Singapore, in this case the harmony and safety within Singapore, especially the security as well of our minority communities, we have to step in. Posts like what the Embassy put up have the potential to create tension between our Jewish and Muslim communities, and may also put our Jewish community, in particular, at risk.

The Police received a report on the post. The Police, in consultation with the Attorney-General’s Chambers, have assessed that no further action was to be taken. Members would understand the Israeli Embassy’s actions are covered by the principle of sovereign immunity.