askST: The fatal Chinatown accident case has a gag order. What does it cover? Can it be lifted?

SINGAPORE – A district court judge on April 8 granted a gag order to protect the identity of a child whose 38-year-old mother allegedly caused a car accident in Chinatown that killed a six-year-old girl.

The woman’s lawyer had applied for the order to be imposed under the Children and Young Persons Act as her six-year-old son was in the car she was driving at the time of the accident and is a potential witness.

The prosecutor said the gag order for his protection must be extended to his mother due to their relationship.

Both mother and son have been the target of online vitriol and threats.

The woman is accused of failing to keep a proper lookout while making a right turn as she exited the open-space carpark in Spring Street in Chinatown on Feb 6 at 11.50am.

She was handed two charges on April 8 – one for driving without due care and attention, causing the death of the girl, and the other for driving without due care and attention, causing grievous hurt to the girl’s 31-year-old mother.

What is a gag order?

A party seeking a gag order may apply to the court, said Ms Joyce Khoo, senior associate at Quahe Woo & Palmer. Only the courts can grant gag orders.

Criminal defence lawyer Cory Wong from Invictus Law said these orders cover victims, but could also be extended to an accused person if he or she is closely related to the victim. Its main intent is to protect the identity of the victim involved.

Offenders under the age of 18 can also be covered by a gag order under the Children and Young Persons Act.

Said Mr Wong: “Gag orders prohibit the publication of such a witness’ identity or any details which could lead to the identification of such a witness.

“(They) usually apply to victims of sexual crimes to prevent social embarrassment to them and to avoid re-victimising them when the case is reported by the media.”

Mr Wong said an added consideration is that the digital footprint is likely to be indefinite, and “that embarrassment would thus be cast in stone online”.

Do gag orders cover social media posts by members of the public?

When a gag order has been issued, no person, including the media and members of the public, may publish any information, such as photographs, addresses or evidence that could lead to the identification of the person whose identity is being protected.

Those who are found to have breached gag orders may be prosecuted, and may also be found in contempt of court.

Breaching a gag order can result in a fine and/or imprisonment, depending on the wording of the specific provision contravened.

For contempt of court, an offender can be fined up to $20,000, jailed for up to 12 months, or both.

In 2022, a lawyer was fined $4,000 in a district court for breaching a court order.

The lawyer had asked his associate to distribute transcripts to the press that were likely to lead to the identification of a complainant – a woman who had accused a doctor of molestation. 

Details that could lead to the identity of the accuser were not supposed to be revealed due to the gag order as the woman was at the time a potential victim of a sexual crime.

The doctor was later acquitted when charges against him were withdrawn.

Can gag orders be lifted or denied?

In May 2025, District Judge Eddy Tham lifted the gag order on former actor Ian Fang’s identity following an application by the prosecution.

A gag order was initially imposed as Fang had been in a relationship with the victim.

The judge said he lifted the gag order to respect the wishes of the victim and her family to reveal the identity of the perpetrator.

The victim’s identity remained under a gag order as she was 15 at the time of the offences.

Fang, 36, was convicted of three counts of sexually penetrating an underage girl. He was sentenced to 40 months’ jail.

A High Court judge in September 2021 lifted the gag order on Colin Chua Yi Jin, who was convicted of insulting the modesty of several women.

He had faced charges involving 11 women, all of whom wanted the gag order on his name lifted.

In 2019, a polytechnic student who took an upskirt video of a woman at an MRT station tried to get a gag order on his name, but failed.

Khai Jun Wei said his female classmates would feel “distressed, discomfort or even threatened” if they knew there was a sexual offender in their class.

He was sentenced to 21 months’ probation for insulting the modesty of women on 17 occasions. He was taking an upskirt video of a woman at Braddell MRT station when another man spotted his action and confronted him.

Mr Wong said it is possible that a gag order on an offender, which has been granted to protect the offender’s child who is a potential witness, might be lifted on the grounds that the offender’s child is no longer required as a witness.

“However, it is also foreseeable that in order to avoid future re-traumatisation of the child, or to prevent people from identifying him or her through the offender who is his or her parent, the parent’s name may likely continue to be redacted under a gag order.”