The Debate on the Speed and Timing of COP Hearing Video Publication: What’s Gained or Lost?
In recent weeks, Singapore’s Parliament has made significant strides in ensuring transparency by publishing five special reports and over 34 hours of video footage from the ongoing Committee of Privileges (COP) hearings. Typically, Parliament sessions, often lasting up to 10 hours or more, are recorded and made accessible to the public for greater transparency. However, the COP hearings have raised questions regarding the timing of the release of their videos, sparking debate over whether these recordings should be made available sooner or later.
Since January 2021, all Parliament sessions have been live-streamed, fostering a sense of openness and accountability. However, the COP hearings differ from typical sessions, leading to a unique approach in their publication. Instead of offering live-streams, Parliament published the full video recordings of the COP hearings, albeit with a delay of a couple of days. In contrast, transcriptions of other parliamentary debates are usually made available via the Hansard, but transcripts of the COP hearings have not been released.
This decision has raised questions about the balance between transparency and the need for thoughtful reflection. Immediate publication may foster quick access to information, allowing the public to stay informed in real-time, but it could also risk disrupting the nuanced understanding of the hearings, which might benefit from delayed consideration. On the other hand, publishing the videos later could provide more time for reflection, but may miss the opportunity for immediate engagement with the public on critical matters.
