With the IoT, at least the victim can voice out the feeling of injustice. Although the victim's post on social media could be viewed as 'doxxing', it is still a victim's voice. Where else could the victim voice out the frustration.
Netizens have various views and comments even politicians chipped in. The following are comments on some of it.
1. The police. The police have decided not to prosecute the accused based on their reasoning that the offender is just a first offender with no traits of such offensive behavior. They therefore give the accused a 12 month conditional warning. If they prosecute the offender then there will be a permanent record which will ruing a person's life even before he get started in life.
2. NUS. NUS is like any educational institution, which is supposed to uphold individual's privacy and integrity. The initial punishment is suspense from a semester, banned from entering campus residence and write a letter of apology to victim. I am not here to judge the punishment but it does looks like a slap on the hand. Of course I can't say how much punishment is enough but it is not even near the police's punishment level. There are already 20 NUS previous cases in last 3 years and there is no review on how to stop it. They finally apologize and get to hold a review on this.
3. The accused. Beside being given punishment by Police, NUS, Great Eastern, he only express "no excuse" in a ST interview. No public apology was given as far as I can see.
4. The victim. As said before, her post could be viewed as 'doxxing'. There are better ways to express frustration than to identify the person with pictures in social media.
5. 'Trial by social media'. Those against voicing out saying it is TBSM. However, if this wasn't brought up, nobody knows about it and the vicious cycle continues unabated and unknown. At least now we know that Police have their reason and NUS no longer wants to keep it quiet.
6. Great Eastern. As a company, it cannot be seen to be doing nothing. Firing the accused is the only way out.
7. Agrarian. The company cuts ties with NUS on condition that NUS expel the accused. I don't think this is the right way. It becomes issuing a threat to NUS. Others simply says that the company join in to the media rush to be heard and seen, a typical business tactic.
8. A blogger seems to be biased against the victim in her lengthy blog on the issue. She question about the rights of the accused future. One other post that talks about the blog question how she feels if she or her family member is the victim.
9. Tan Kin Lian is giving support to the accused. He portrayed them as victims. If he is referring to 'doxxing' then it may be true. It depends on who is viewing the incident at what instance? I will be grossly unjust if the focus is only on the consequence of the victim's action than the voyeur's action. It reminds me of the "Singapore Kindness movement" which sides with the perpetrator rather than the wronged.
9. Right to be forgotten. Singapore has this Personal Data Protection Act in place. This should give the accused back his life.
No comments:
Post a Comment