Activist Kokila Annamalai on trial for alleged failure to comply with POFMA correction direction

The correction direction was issued over social media posts Kokila Annamalai made in October 2024 about a drug trafficker on death row.

ST PHOTO: KELVIN CHNG

Published Oct 07, 2026, 02:55 PM

Updated Oct 07, 2026, 02:55 PM

Activist Kokila Annamalai is on trial in Singapore for allegedly ignoring a POFMA correction direction over October 2024 social media posts about a drug trafficker on death row.

Prosecutors said she knew the law and chose “deliberately” not to comply, while her lawyers said the direction was invalid because POFMA does not cover true facts or honest opinions.

The court allowed her to travel to Chennai, with extra bail and passport rules. She also faces another pending charge over an anti-death penalty assembly.

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.

Nadine Chua is a correspondent covering crime and court at The Straits Times.

针对 Kokila Annamalai 于 2024 年 10 月在社交媒体上发布的有关一名被判死刑的毒贩的帖子，当局发布了更正指令。

《海峡时报》摄影：KELVIN CHNG

发布于 2026 年 10 月 7 日下午 2:55

更新于2026年10月7日下午2:55

活动人士 Kokila Annamalai 因涉嫌无视《防止网络虚假信息和网络操纵法案》(POFMA) 的更正指令，在新加坡受审。该指令涉及她在 2024 年 10 月发布的关于一名被判死刑的毒贩的社交媒体帖子。

检察官称她明知法律却“故意”选择不遵守，而她的律师则表示该指令无效，因为《防止网络虚假信息和网络操纵法》（POFMA）不涵盖真实事实或诚实意见。

法院允许她前往钦奈，但需遵守额外的保释条件和护照规定。她还面临另一项与反对死刑集会有关的指控。

新加坡——活动人士 Kokila Annamalai 因涉嫌未能遵守《防止网络虚假信息和操纵法》（POFMA）办公室发出的纠正指令而受审。

针对她在 2024 年 10 月在社交媒体上发布的关于一名被判死刑的毒贩的帖子，当局发出了纠正指令。

她在帖子中声称，政府随意安排和中止死刑，不顾正当的法律程序，而且国家不承担证明被告人犯有贩毒罪的法律责任。

据称，在内政部长兼时任律政部长尚穆根指示防止网络虚假信息和网络操纵法案办公室向她发出纠正指示后，她发表了一篇帖子公然违抗该指示。

38 岁的 Annamalai 于 2026 年 4 月首次被指控，罪名是未能遵守矫正指令。

10 月 7 日审判的第一天，法庭上宣读了一篇题为“我违抗：我为什么不遵守《防止网络虚假信息和网络操纵法》的纠正指令”的帖子的部分内容，法庭上挤满了支持者。

由副检察官许添福、许思敏和吴恩士领导的检控团队告诉法庭，这是一起蓄意不遵守纠正指令的简单案件。

“被告人知道该纠正指令，也知道法律要求她遵守该指令。她还知道，她可以先向部长申请变更或撤销该纠正指令，如果申请失败，可以向高等法院提出上诉。

“然而，她却故意选择无视这件事，”检察官说。

他们指出，安纳马拉伊声称她没有做出虚假事实陈述，但她选择不使用《防止网络虚假信息和网络操纵法》(POFMA) 下的上诉机制来质疑更正指令的有效性。

检方补充道：“被告试图利用这次刑事审判来博取公众关注，我们敦促法庭驳回这一企图。”

安纳马拉伊的辩护律师谭丽京和杜兴吉告诉法庭，该纠正指令表面上无效。

“《防止网络虚假信息和网络操纵法》（POFMA）不适用于真实的事实，也不适用于观点。她写的是她自己的感受。她的观点是真诚的，”谭说道。

《防止网络虚假信息和网络操纵法》(POFMA)赋予政府答辩权和澄清事实的机会。

Tham补充道：“这并不授权政府将一篇330字的文章放在个人的网络空间上。”他指的是POFMA办公室指示Annamalai在她最初的帖子上方发布的更正通知。

辩方表示，在审判过程中，他们的目标是请求法院裁定该更正指令无效。

“如果无效，那么指控就必然失败，”谭说道。

在听证会上，安娜玛莱的律师还请求允许她于 10 月 10 日至 11 月 7 日前往印度钦奈探望家人。

首席地方法官杜汉利批准了该请求，并加判5000新元保释金。作为保释条件的一部分，安娜玛莱必须提供旅行行程，保持联系畅通，并在返回新加坡后24小时内交出护照。

阿纳马拉伊目前还面临另一项指控，即涉嫌参与在哈弗洛克路1号（新加坡国家法院所在地）举行的集会，旨在宣传废除新加坡死刑的理念。该指控仍在审理中，并在本次审判期间被搁置。

审判仍在继续。

Nadine Chua是《海峡时报》负责报道犯罪和法庭新闻的记者。