SINGAPORE — A wide-ranging law that will give victims of harassment civil remedies and issue offenders with various criminal sanctions will be tabled in Parliament on Monday — three months after it was mooted and views from the public were sought.

The move was first flagged by Law Minister K Shanmugam during a conference on harassment organised by the Institute of Policy Studies in November last year, when he cited a worldwide study by Microsoft in 2012 that showed Singapore to be one of six countries where bullying among youth aged eight to 17 was particularly pervasive.

He also cited a poll of Singaporeans aged above 15, where eight in 10 felt that online harassment was a serious issue, with almost 90 per cent calling for offenders to be punished under the law.

Under the range of remedies proposed in the Protection From Harassment Act, a victim can get expedited Protection Orders to force his harasser to desist from further acts that harm him, or a third party to remove offending materials causing harassment. A court can also order anyone who publishes false facts about another person to publish alerts about the falsehoods. Those who commit harassment can also be sued for damages.

A spectrum of offensive or anti-social behaviours are also classified as offences, including sexual harassment both in and outside workplaces, verbal harassment, cyber-bullying, as well as the bullying of children.

Stalking will be against the law too, if the perpetrator causes harassment, alarm or distress, the Ministry of Law (MinLaw) said yesterday.

Protection for public servants will also be extended to those who deliver essential services to the general public, such as those working in public healthcare and public transport, it added.

Under the proposed Bill, those who harass from outside Singapore will also get into trouble, so long as the victim is in Singapore and the perpetrator knew or ought to have known that when he committed these acts.

Meanwhile, existing penalties for harassment offences will be enhanced to reflect their seriousness, with repeat offenders facing heavier punishments. The court will also be empowered to make community orders in appropriate cases.

The decision to enact a standalone omnibus legislation was taken after public feedback, although the authorities had initially intended to tweak existing laws such as the Miscellaneous Offences Act to cover the various offending behaviours, the ministry added.

Currently, the legal remedies for harassment are specific and do not cover general conduct. For instance, the Moneylenders Act covers harassment in the context of moneylending, while the Women’s Charter covers harassment in the context of family violence.

The proposed Bill was drawn up after consultations with stakeholders, said MinLaw. These included the Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE), the Singapore Children’s Society and the Coalition Against Bullying for Children and Youth (CABCY). Lawyers who have represented victims of harassment, victims and academics were also consulted.

Despite the range of behaviours covered under the proposed law, lawyers did not feel it was too broad.

Mr Choo Zheng Xi, one of the lawyers consulted, said it provides a much-needed remedy for individuals who are being cyber-harassed as well as stalked. He added that the way harassment cases are dealt with in court under the proposed statute should not be too different, given the existing case law on the definition of harassment under the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act.

Asked if there would be a surge in the applications for Protection Orders with the proposed new law, lawyer Abraham Vergis said it is hard to tell how the public will take up the new remedies.

Lawyers also did not feel the new statute promoted censorship, for example, as a way to curb critical speech against public figures when the writer did not go as far as to commit defamation. Mr Choo said, of his consultation with MinLaw: “I emphasised the need to strike a balance between an effective and accessible set of remedies for ordinary persons to seek the protection of, while at the same time making clear that the object of this Bill is not to curb critical speech of public figures. In my view, that objective has been met.”

Media analyst Ang Peng Hwa, who has also seen a draft of the Bill, added: “As long as you don’t abuse people, don’t insult or threaten, I don’t see how you will be caught by the law.”

When contacted, CABCY, which proposed the prompt removal of harassing content, said it welcomed the Bill. “Victims need to have the assurance that the content would be removed and they could close the chapter and move on without worrying or fear that the contents posted by the perpetrator would resurface,” it said.

CABCY added that it also suggested “a mandatory anti-bullying policy across all schools”, instead of punitive sanctions by law. “Clear direction and guidelines on how a reported case of bullying will be managed ... will give all children, youth, their family, school administrators, teachers, counsellors and staff a crystal clear idea on what to expect and what they can do about bullying behaviours.”

Separately, AWARE said it welcomed the strengthening of civil legal remedies for harassment victims but called for the proposed Bill to be expanded, or the Employment Act to be amended, to require employers to address workplace sexual harassment.

The women’s rights group also urged the Manpower Ministry to “mandate and enforce a detailed code of conduct specifically setting out best practices for employers on preventing workplace sexual harassment and processing harassment complaints”.