SINGAPORE: Last week, it emerged that deepfake nude photos by students of the Singapore Sports School had been created and shared by schoolmates.

This came on the backs of politicians – including Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan – receiving extortion letters with manipulated, obscene photos earlier in 2024.

Experts indicated a “explosion” of deepfakes – created using artificial intelligence (AI) techniques to alter visual and audio content – as a recent and intensifying scourge.

What are the legal options?

Acts involving such falsified photos could constitute offenses under the Penal Code, according to lawyers.

“As these are all serious arrestable offences, the police would investigate and if the perpetrator can be found, the matter would likely lead to prosecution,” said Mr Cory Wong, director of Invictus Law.

He pointed to certain sections of the Penal Code that could apply to the victims at the Singapore Sports School, who are said to be between the ages of 13 and 18.

Someone producing deepfake AI pornography featuring the face of a person under the age of 16 could be charged with willfully producing child abuse material under Section 377BH of the Penal Code, Mr Wong said.

This carries a prison sentence of up to 10 years, with the possibility of a fine or caning.

For distributing child abuse material, a person can be jailed for up to seven years and can also be fined or caned.

If the victims are aged 16 or over, the offenses could fall under Section 377BE on distribution of intimate images, Mr Wong said.

This section carries a jail term of up to five years along with a possible fine and caning.

Under the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA), those who intentionally cause harassment, alarm or distress could also be charged. And this could apply to the creators and distributors of deepfake pornography, said Ms Tania Chin, Director of Litigation at TSMP Law.

Victims could also file a POHA application to obtain a protection order against a perpetrator.

A protective order could include conditions for a perpetrator to remove the content and not publish or circulate the content, Mr Wong said.

However, he acknowledged that the victim would not be able to sue every social media user who continues to circulate the content, essentially making a protective order “pointless” in this scenario.

Under Singapore’s Films Act, owning or creating an obscene deepfake video could also be an offence.