Criteria to Distinguish Prohibited Political Advocacy from Expressions of Humanitarian Concern in Assessing Artists’ Conduct Relating to International Conflicts

Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information in assessing artists’ conduct relating to international conflicts, will the Ministry clarify (a) the criteria used to distinguish prohibited political advocacy from expressions of humanitarian concern; (b) how the artists' intent and the context of the expression are taken into account; and (c) will licensing conditions will be reviewed to exclude peaceful expressions of support for humanitarian causes.

The Senior Minister of State for Digital Development and Information (Mr Tan Kiat How) (for the Minister for Digital Development and Information): Sir, the Government recognises the humanitarian impact of international conflicts and that artists may wish to express concern for those affected. Such expressions are not, in themselves, prohibited.

While humanitarian concerns can be expressed in different ways, it should not undermine public order, national security or stability in Singapore. This condition is made clear in the Arts Entertainment Classification Code issued by the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA), which all licensees are required to comply with.

Moreover, Singapore should not be used by foreigners as a platform to further political causes, including those relating to conflicts or political issues overseas. Artists performing in Singapore, both locals and foreigners, are expected to comply with our laws and the conditions of their licence during their event. Besides the intent of their actions, IMDA will consider the likely impact of their performance to assess if the conditions are met.

Ms Hazlina.

Thank you, Speaker, and I thank the Senior Minister of State for the response. I have two supplementary questions.

I will start by outlining how much Singapore cares. Singapore cares beyond our water's edge. Singapore cares for safe spaces for expression, especially when it comes to culture, arts and causes, and Singaporeans are increasingly even more empathetic towards social causes, and even more so for our safety and security as well.

On that note, perhaps I could seek clarification from the Senior Minister of State, could he show and share an example where a performance with a social cause was actually allowed, with clarity, when it comes to a concert that was being held in Singapore by an international artist?

And second, since Massive Attack and leading up to Guns N' Roses, what upstream or downstream changes or approach have been changed, reviewed or taken place? Because as the House would know, it is hard to hold a candle in the November rain.

Sir, on rain, we certainly hope to have some rain, given the haze condition now in Singapore.

The Member asked two supplementary questions. Let me reiterate the principle first before I address the two questions. I would like to reiterate what I just said in my reply. Humanitarian concern itself is not prohibited. We should separate the cause from the content and the conduct. That is the core principle behind the licensing framework and the classification framework. The line is crossed when conduct or content undermines public order, national security or stability, or where foreigners use Singapore as a platform to further political causes.

Given that principle, I hope that Members can also understand that any assessment has to be contextual, because that is the prevailing assessment of the agencies and the regulator, at a point in time. As I shared earlier, we have provided approvals for performances. For example, on 16 May 2026, an event called "To The Unforgotten", a variety event, classified R18, some mature content. The event was meant as a celebration of humanity and solidarity with various groups around the world. It featured a song, poem and multimedia on the Israel-Gaza conflict.

And we have another example, it was a play, "6 Microlectures on Genocides". They had multiple stagings, the latest staging in May last year, also classified R18, with mature themes. The play comprised short works that explore themes of genocide, war crimes and contemporary conflicts.

And another example is a stand-up comedy tour called "Namaste", a couple of years ago in September 2024, classified Advisory 16, some mature content and coarse language, and contained a segment where the comedian spoke about the Israel-Gaza conflict.

So, having material and content on causes itself is not prohibited. The licensing framework is designed to protect young people from unwanted content but allow people to make decisions on what they can watch. But at the same time, having some boundaries on the kind of content that may stir up public disorder or national security considerations. That is the approach that we have taken and we will continue to be principled on that.

In terms of the processes, it is really a point that I had made earlier, assessments are very contextual. I encourage applicants to engage the agency, IMDA, early. And IMDA will also engage relevant agencies if their inputs are needed. The earlier that the applicants engage IMDA, the earlier conversations can start, and the earlier we can give clarity and guidance on the kind of content that may be approved and the kind of content that we may have some concerns over.

So, clarity and guidance can be provided, but I encourage applicants to reach out to IMDA early.