SINGAPORE – Activist Kokila Annamalai is standing trial on a charge of allegedly failing to comply with a correction direction issued by the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) Office.
The correction direction was issued over social media posts she made in October 2024 about a drug trafficker on death row.
She had alleged in the posts that the Government schedules and stays executions arbitrarily without regard for due legal process, and that the state does not bear the legal burden of proving a drug trafficking charge against the accused person.
After she was issued the correction direction by the POFMA Office on the instruction of Minister for Home Affairs and then Law Minister K. Shanmugam, she allegedly published a post defying it.
Annamalai, 38, was first charged in April 2026 with allegedly failing to comply with the correction direction.
On the first day of the trial on Oct 7, part of a post titled “I defy: Why I am not complying with my POFMA correction direction” was read out in court, which was filled with supporters.
The prosecution team, led by Deputy Public Prosecutors Timotheus Koh, Stephanie Koh and Ernest Goh, told the court that it was a straightforward case of deliberate non-compliance with a correction direction.
“The accused knew about the correction direction and knew that she was required by law to comply with it. She also knew that she could challenge the correction direction by first applying to the Minister to vary or cancel it and if unsuccessful, appeal to the High Court.
“However, she instead deliberately chose to ignore it,” said the prosecutors.
They noted that Annamalai claimed she did not make false statements of fact, but chose not to use the appeal mechanism under POFMA to challenge the validity of the correction direction.
The prosecutors added: “The accused is trying to use this criminal trial for her own publicity, and we urge this court to reject this.”
Annamalai’s defence lawyers, Tham Lijing and Too Xing Ji, told the court that the correction direction is invalid on its face.
“POFMA does not apply to facts that are true, nor does it apply to opinions. She wrote what she felt. Her opinions are honest,” said Tham.
“POFMA grants the Government the right of reply and the opportunity to set the record straight.
“It does not authorise the Government to put a 330-word essay on a person’s own online space,” added Tham, referring to the correction notice that the POFMA Office instructed Annamalai to place above her original post.
The defence said that over the course of the trial, its aim will be to ask the court to find the correction direction invalid.
“And if it is invalid, then the charge must fail,” said Tham.
During the hearing, Annamalai’s lawyers also sought permission for her to travel to Chennai in India to visit family from Oct 10 to Nov 7.
Principal District Judge Toh Han Li granted the request and an additional $5,000 bail was imposed. As part of her bail conditions, Annamalai must provide her travel itinerary, remain contactable and surrender her passport within 24 hours of her return to Singapore.
Annamalai currently faces another charge of allegedly taking part in an assembly at 1 Havelock Road, where the State Courts is located, to publicise the cause of abolishing capital punishment in Singapore. This charge is still pending in court and was stood down during this trial.
The trial continues.