Submission to the Universal Periodic Review of Singapore

Introduction

Human Rights Watch submits the following information regarding Singapore’s human rights record since its last Universal Periodic Review (UPR) in 2021. It is not a complete review of the recommendations that Singapore supported during the last UPR cycle, nor is it a comprehensive assessment of Singapore’s human rights record.

Since gaining independence in 1965, Singapore’s parliamentary system has been dominated by the People’s Action Party, led first by Lee Kuan Yew and later by his son Lee Hsien Loong. Lawrence Wong was sworn in as prime minister in 2023, succeeding Lee Hsien Loong, and has largely upheld his predecessor’s policies. Singapore’s political environment remains overwhelmingly repressive, with serious restrictions on the rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly through overly broad criminal laws and regulations. The government has continued to use the death penalty, bucking global trends.[1]

In January 2023, Singapore abolished section 377A of the criminal code – a colonial-era provision criminalizing same-sex relations between men – which a number of states had called for in the last UPR cycle. [2] However, in the same year, the government approved a constitutional amendment to bar legal challenges to the current definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman.

Singapore has yet to ratify several core human rights and labor rights conventions, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Labour Organization Violence and Harassment Convention (C190), the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, and the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families. Refugees and asylum seekers have no legal rights or status in the city-state, including in respect of the principle of non-refoulement.

Death Penalty

Singapore’s criminal justice system provides for the use of the death penalty for a range of crimes, including trafficking, importing, or exporting quantities of drugs above a certain threshold.[3] Since the last UPR cycle in 2021, the Singaporean government has shown no indications of curbing the use of the death penalty, despite widespread criticism from United Nations experts, concerned governments, and civil society organizations.[4] Singapore received 20 recommendations at the last UPR cycle addressing its use of the death penalty, including calls to repeal the death penalty for drug-related crimes. Singapore did not support 16 of the 20 recommendations.[5]

In February and October 2025, UN experts urged Singapore to halt the execution of Malaysian national Pannir Selvam Pranthaman for drug trafficking and called on the government to halt all executions for death row inmates convicted for drug-related crimes, which are unlawful under international human rights law.[6] Despite these calls and those from foreign governments, Pannir Selvam was executed on October 8, 2025. [7] In July 2023, Singapore executed Saridewi Djamani, the first woman to be put to death in Singapore in nearly two decades, for a drug trafficking offense.

In June 2024, Singapore enacted the Post-Appeal Applications in Capital Cases Act (PACC)—a law that further curtails fair trial and due process rights of prisoners in capital cases. The PACC severely limits prisoners’ ability to appeal their convictions and contravenes the 1984 UN Safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty.[8]  

Lawyers defending death row inmates in Singapore have faced harassment and punitive cost orders, obstructing inmates’ access to legal counsel and right to a fair trial. On May 31, 2024, the Singaporean High Court removed human rights defender and lawyer Ravi Madasamy from the roll of advocates and solicitors on charges of “making false allegations” against one of the country’s former leaders. Madasamy has long been targeted by the government, the courts, and the legal establishment, who have accused him of undermining the judiciary.

On November 17, 2022, Mary Lawlor, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, expressed deep concern about the Singaporean government’s suppression and intimidation of human rights defenders Kirsten Han and Rocky Howe for their advocacy opposing the death penalty in Singapore.[9]

Recommendations

• Impose a moratorium on implementation of the death penalty, with a view to its complete abolition.
• Commute all existing death sentences to terms of imprisonment.
• Abolish the death penalty for drug-related offenses by removing drug trafficking from the list of capital offenses.
• Abolish the use of all forms of corporal punishment as a legal penalty.
• End the practice of harassing and intimidating human rights defenders and anti-death penalty advocates for their activism and drop all politically motivated charges against those peacefully exercising their rights.

Freedom of Expression and Peaceful Assembly

During its previous UPR cycle, Singapore supported several recommendations on free expression, including to ‘’ensure that laws and policies on the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association comply with the relevant international human rights standards.’’[10]

However, the Singaporean authorities continued to frequently use overly broad and restrictive laws to silence criticism of the government and restrict individuals’ rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. Such laws include the Public Order Act (POA), the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA), and the Foreign Interference (Counter-Measures) Act (FICA).

The government tightly restricts the right to peaceful assembly through the POA, which requires a police permit for any “cause-related” assembly—even for an individual acting alone—if it is held in a public place or in a private venue if members of the public are invited. It also gives the police commissioner authority to reject applications for an assembly “directed towards a political end” if any foreigner is involved. The government has frequently used the POA against activists and human rights defenders in the period since Singapore’s last UPR cycle, despite accepting recommendation 59.171 from Italy to “ensure that freedom of opinion and expression, as well as peaceful assembly, are protected.”

On February 3, 2025, human rights defender Jolovan Wham was charged under the POA for allegedly attending five candlelight vigils for death row prisoners without first obtaining a permit between March 2022 and April 2023. [11]

On February 2, 2024, about 70 people marched towards the Istana—Singapore’s Presidential Office—carrying watermelon umbrellas in solidarity with the Palestinian cause. The group had letters to deliver to the then-prime minister urging him to cut ties with Israel.[12] The authorities later investigated the organizers of the march, activists Annamalai Kokila Parvathi, Siti Amirah Mohamed Asrori, and Mossammad Sobikun Nahar, and charged them on June 27 under the POA for organizing a public gathering without a permit.  

Singapore partly supported recommendation 59.166 from Uruguay and 59.168 from Czechia to “ensure full respect for the rights to freedom of expression and freedom of association by taking measures to enhance the security of civil society, journalists and human rights defenders,” and “ensure the full enjoyment of the right to freedom of expression, eliminate media censorship and allow peaceful demonstrations without undue restrictions,” respectively.[13] Singapore also fully supported recommendation 59.173 from New Zealand to “Ensure that the right to freedom of opinion and expression is protected, including via online public platforms.”[14] Nevertheless, since the last UPR cycle, Singapore has continued to use the POFMA law to silence and intimidate activists, human rights defenders, and independent media who criticize the government.

The POFMA gives the government broad and discretionary powers to target critics, including by censoring online content and requiring individuals or entities to issue government-determined “corrections” notices on online content. The POFMA also allows the designation of websites or webpages as “Declared Online Locations” (DOL), which blocks the site owner from receiving any financial benefits and requires them to display a DOL notice on their website.[15] Despite multiple recommendations from states at the last UPR cycle to amend the POFMA, the government has continued to aggressively enforce the law against civil society organizations, human rights defenders, and independent media outlets.

On December 20, 2024, Singapore designated Transformative Justice Collective’s (TJC) website and social media as “Declared Online Locations” under section 32 of the POFMA.[16] The order requires TJC to display a notice on all its platforms alerting that it “had communicated multiple falsehoods.” Rights groups, including Human Rights Watch, criticized the action and urged the government to end its harassment and intimidation of TJC.[17]

The government frequently uses the POFMA to silence critical media in Singapore. Independent outlets including Asia Sentinel, The Online Citizen, and The Edge Singapore, as well as international media including Bloomberg and the East Asia Forum, have all been issued POFMA notices for their reporting since the last UPR cycle.[18]

The Hostile Information Campaigns provisions of the overbroad and vague FICA went into effect on July 7, 2022. The FICA grants the home minister broad powers to require the removal or disabling of online content, publication of mandatory messages drafted by the government, banning of apps from being downloaded in Singapore, and disclosure of information by internet and social media companies.[19]

It also allows the government to designate individuals or groups as “politically significant persons” (PSP) who can be required to follow strict limits on receiving funding and to disclose all links with foreigners. The law’s broad language encompasses a wide range of ordinary activities by civil society activists, academics, and journalists who engage with non-Singaporeans. The home minister’s authority under the law is reinforced by severe criminal penalties, and judicial review is limited to procedural matters.

On February 26, 2024, the authorities invoked the FICA against Singaporean citizen Chan Man Ping Philip, designating him as a PSP for showing “susceptibility” to foreign influence.[20] The authorities have previously designated two civil society groups as PSPs, as well as the National Trades Union Congress.[21]

Recommendations

• Sign and ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other core international human rights treaties.
• Drop all prosecutions and close all investigations into the cases of individuals targeted solely for exercising their rights to freedom of expression or peaceful assembly.
• Amend the Public Order Act to specifically recognize the government’s obligation to facilitate peaceful assemblies, and repeal sections of the law that require a permit for an assembly or procession, and advance notice to the authorities ahead of an assembly irrespective of the number of participants.
• Repeal sections 15 and 16 of the Public Order Act to eliminate criminal penalties for organizing or participating in a peaceful assembly or procession without a permit, holding an assembly or procession at a date and time that differs from that stated in the notice, or failing to comply with conditions imposed on the gathering. No criminal penalties should be assessed for organizing or participating in a peaceful assembly.
• Repeal the Protection from Online Falsehood and Manipulation Act (POFMA).
• Repeal the Public Order Act or amend to remove overly broad powers to restrict peaceful assemblies.
• Drop politically motivated charges against human rights defenders. 

Migrant Workers

According to the Ministry of Manpower, Singapore hosts over 1.5 million foreign workers, most of whom are employed as domestic workers, engineers, or as construction laborers.[22] Despite supporting several recommendations to protect migrant workers and considering adhering to the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families during its 2021 UPR cycle, Singapore has still not implemented them.[23]

Migrant workers in Singapore face serious labor rights abuses, including exploitation through exorbitant debts owed to recruitment agents, non-payment of wages, restrictions on movement, confiscation of passports, and sometimes physical and sexual violence. Foreign women employed as domestic workers are particularly vulnerable to violence.

Migrant workers remain excluded from the country’s Employment Act and many key labor rights protections, including limits on daily work hours and restrictions on participating in union activities or protests without explicit government permission.[24] Instead, they are covered by the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act (EFMA), which ties workers’ visas to their employers, who retain the unilateral power to cancel workers employment contracts and repatriate them at will, including to unsafe countries.[25]

In June, the Ministry of Manpower declined to renew the work permit of Zakir Hossain Khokan, who had been working in Singapore for 19 years, claiming that his Facebook post from October 2021 about the treatment of migrant workers was “false” and that he had “overstayed his welcome.”[26]

Recommendations

• Amend the Employment Act to include domestic workers to ensure that they have adequate legal protection.
• Ratify ILO Convention No. 190: Eliminating Violence and Harassment in the World of Work.
• Ratify the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families.
• Abolish tied visa system.
• Amend Singaporean law to enshrine the principle of non-refoulement, forbidding the return of individuals to a country where they face a risk of persecution.