Chapter 1 – Report of the Policy, Law and Complaints Group including politicians, academicians, and media representatives who had uttered remarks critical of the Government and its policies. With regard to the Sedition (Amendment) Act 2015, (Amendment Act), the Commission makes the following observations: (i) Deletion of the word “Government” in Section 3(a)(i) The Commission is pleased to note that the Amendment Act has excluded from the definition of “seditious tendency” “hatred and contempt or exciting disaffection against the Government” (Section 3(a)(i)), thus decriminalising criticism of the Government. The Commission believes that this will encourage more transparency in the Government and will enable better public scrutiny and constructive discourse on the Government’s policies and practices. (ii) Inclusion of “Religion” The Commission notes that, in addition to existing provisions on racial incitement, the Amendment Act has also made it an offence to incite religious hatred. While it is of the view that hate crime provisions are necessary,27 the Commission calls on the authorities to ensure that the scope of any such law is confined strictly to the punishment of hate crimes and not the expression of any opinions or views. Controversial ideas and opinions expressed in the context of academic debates, political engagements, or similar activity, and without any intention to incite hatred, contempt, violence, or discrimination, should be regarded as legitimate exercises of the right to freedom of expression.28 (iii) Removal of Discretionary Powers of the Court in Sentencing With reference to the amendment to Section 4 of the Act, the Commission regrets that the Amendment Act has removed the discretionary powers of the Court, as provided in the original Act, to impose a fine instead of a custodial sentence upon conviction. As a general rule, a Judge has discretion in the sentencing process, taking into account the facts and other mitigating factors. The amendment has taken away the important discretionary 27 Article 4 of the International Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination (ICERD) requires State parties to penalise the following four categories of misconduct, including hate crimes – a. Dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred; b. Incitement to racial hatred; c. Acts of violence against any race or group or persons of another colour or ethnic origin; and d. Incitement to acts under (c) above. Also, Article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights obliges States to criminalise the advocacy of “national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.” 28 Para 25, General Recommendation No 35 – Combating racist hate speech by Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. 65 BOOK-ANR2016-01-latest.indb 65 08/04/2016 3:32 PM