In Singapore, the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA) helps protect people from harassment, bullying, and threats, both offline and online. While most of us are familiar with general harassment laws, Section 6 of the POHA focuses specifically on offences against public servants or public service workers.
Who is a Public Servant or Public Service Worker?
Public servants and public service workers are individuals who work for the government and perform official duties. They can include, but are not limited to police officers, LTA officers NEA officers, Healthcare workers (including private healthcare workers), bus drivers and taxi drivers.
What does Section 6 of the POHA Protects?
Section 6 of the POHA safeguards public servants or public service workers when they experience harassment in connection with their official duties. Harassment under this section is not limited to physical threats. It can include repeated offensive messages, vulgarities, threatening behaviour, or any actions that cause alarm, distress, or fear.
The important factor is that the harassment must be related to the individual’s role as a public servant and not based on personal reasons. Examples of such harassment include threatening a police officer during an investigation, sending abusive messages to a government officer performing inspections, or intimidating a civil servant while carrying out official work.
These actions can interfere with public duties and pose risks not only to the public servant but also to the wider community.
Case scenario
John, a 25-year-old university student, sustained a foot injury while out drinking with friends and decided to go to the Accident & Emergency Department at the National University Hospital to seek treatment Upon arrival, medical staff assessed him and determined that his condition did not constitute an emergency. He was informed that he would need to wait to be attended to by a nurse, as other patients with more urgent medical needs were being prioritised.
After waiting for approximately 30 minutes, John grew increasingly frustrated at the perceived delay in his care. Feeling upset and impatient, he approached the nurses’ station to inquire about when he would be seen. When the nurse explained that he would have to wait his turn in accordance with hospital procedures, John reacted angrily. He began shouting vulgarities, including statements such as, “f*** you, who are you to treat me like this? You are not even a doctor, just an overpaid servant.”
His frustration escalated into aggressive behaviour as he continued shouting at the nurse, raising his voice and using increasingly offensive language. John told the staff that they would pay for treating him in this manner and insisted that he was a very important person, implying that he deserved immediate attention regardless of hospital procedures.
John was charged with Section 6 of the POHA.
Punishment under Section 6 of the POHA
Under Section 6 of the POHA, a person found guilty of an offence is liable, upon conviction, to a fine not exceeding $5,000, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months, or to both.
Based on past cases, the typical sentence for an offence, particularly where abusive language is directed at a victim, is a fine. Courts have generally imposed fines ranging from $2,000 to $5,000, reflecting the seriousness of using offensive or threatening language towards public servants while performing their official duties.
There are also cases where the offender was sentenced to an imprisonment term of between 1 week to 15 weeks. The sentence depends on several factors of the case, such as if the accused is a recalcitrant offender.
| Case | Brief Facts | Fine amount ($) |
| PP v Navinthiren Moses s/o Krishna [2021] SGDC 110 |
The Accused and a group of 15 to 20 people were gathered at a barbeque pit to celebrate the Accused’s birthday. The victim and her colleagues, all from the Singapore Police Force, asked the group to lower their volume. The Accused and a friend approached two of the police officers and challenged them about the law. The victim joined the other two police officers and tried to calm the Accused down. The Accused shouted “f*** you lah” to her in English. | 2,000 |
| PP v Leong Yin Teng Coretta and ors [2020] SGDC 154 | The victim and his colleagues, all from the Singapore Police Force, conducted a routine raid at various clubs in St James Power Station. The Accused spoke to the victim in an aggressive tone and uttered “f*** you, ch** bye” at the victim. | 2,500 |
| PP v Gavin Liang Shaohui and another [2022] SGDC 84 | The Accused booked a private-hire car and had a dispute with the driver. He then spotted the victim’s patrol car and wanted to seek Police assistance. During the course of the engagement, the Accused was confrontational towards the victim, and did not cooperate with police requests to provide his particulars. He also repeatedly stepped close towards the victim and spoke to him in a challenging manner. The Accused, in anger, used the abusive words “f*** you” and “who the f*** do you think you are” and “idiot” to the victim. | 3,000 |
| PP v Chua Kok Thye [2019] SGDC 125 | The Accused was restrained and escorted out of the Club and towards the police vehicle. Whilst being escorted out, the Accused uttered expletives in the Hokkien language, directed at ASP Diong’s mother. The Accused did this repeatedly, despite ASP Diong warning him to stop. | 5,000 |
| Case | Brief Facts | Imprisonment term |
| PP v Ng Eong Chien [2019] SGDC 16 | The police officers found the Accused sleeping at the side of the road and tried to wake him up. One of the officers asked for the Accused’s particulars.
The Accused shouted at him to “shut the f*** up”. When the officer warned the Accused to keep the peace, the Accused shouted again at the officer to “shut the f*** up”. The Accused started to walk away, and when the officer tried to stop the Accused from leaving, the Accused called him “Si Pui Eh” (i.e. dead fatty) and shouted “Kan Ni Na Bu Chao Ch** Bye” (i.e. F*** your mother’s smelly vagina). After the Accused was arrested, he was escorted back to the Police Cantonment Complex in a police car. One of the officers asked the Accused what he did which led to his arrest. The Accused verbally abused Sgt Joel “shut the f*** up, police dog”. |
1 week |
| PP v Rasaruddin Bin Abdul Rahaman [2017] SGDC 205 | The Accused was scheduled to be released from prison. When preparing for the Accused‘s release, the victim, a public servant, found several unofficial documents on the Accused. The victim explained to the Accused that he was not allowed to bring these documents out. The Assistant Superintendent of the prison stepped in and informed the Accused that he could not bring these documents out and took the documents away. The victim continued to escort the Accused out of the prison. Feeling unhappy, the Accused said “Puki Mak” in Malay language to the victim, which is translated to mean “Mother’s c**t” in English. | 1 week |
| Public Prosecutor v Chong Sem Fook [2021] SGDC 37 | The Accused used abusive words towards an operations manager of Selarang Halfway House, in relation to his execution of his duty as a public sevice worker, to wit, by uttering the words “Pubor” in Teochew dialect and “Ka Ni Na” in Hokkien dialect, which means “Mother f***er” and “F*** your mother” respectively in the English language | 2 weeks |
| Public Prosecutor v Kajayendran Krishnan [2024] SGMC 52 | At 12.15am, Mr Kajayendran called the police emergency hotline using his mobile number and used abusive words against the police call-taker; He did the same again at 12.20am; and At 2.44am, he also used abusive words against a Singapore Civil Defence Force (“SCDF”) paramedic.
He was last sentenced to ten weeks’ imprisonment in 2023 after being undeterred by the previous sentences of five- and nine-weeks’ imprisonment in 2021. |
15 weeks |
How Gloria James-Civetta & Co can help you
If you are facing a charge under Section 6 of the POHA, it is important to act quickly and get proper legal advice. At Gloria James-Civetta & Co, our team has extensive experience in defending clients against criminal allegations and will work with you to protect your rights and minimise the impact of these proceedings. Reach out to us today for clear guidance and strong representation.
