49
(c) the internet intermediary has control over access by
end-users in any place to that online location; and
(d) the Minister is satisfied that one or more end-users in
Singapore have used or are using the services of an internet
access service provider to access that online location.
5
(2) The Minister may direct the IMDA to order the internet access
service provider to take reasonable steps to disable access by
end-users in Singapore to the online location (called in this section an
access blocking order), and the IMDA must give the internet access
service provider an access blocking order.
10
(3) An internet access service provider that does not comply with an
access blocking order under subsection (2) shall be guilty of an
offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding
$20,000 for each day during any part of which that order is not fully
complied with, up to a total of $500,000 for each offence.
15
(4) No civil or criminal liability is incurred by an internet access
service provider or an officer, employee or agent of such provider, for
anything done or omitted to be done with reasonable care and in good
faith in complying with an access blocking order.
Appeals to High Court
20
44.—(1) The following persons may appeal to the High Court
against an Account Restriction Direction:
(a) the prescribed internet intermediary to whom the Direction
is issued;
(b) the holder of the specified online account or any other
person with control over the specified online account.
(2) No appeal may be made to the High Court by any person unless
the person has first applied to the Minister mentioned in section 46 to
vary or cancel the Account Restriction Direction under that section,
and the Minister refused the application whether in whole or in part.
(3) An appeal may only be made to the High Court within such
period as may be prescribed by Rules of Court.
25
30
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents