These three women were sure they would be jailed for organising a march for Palestine. Then something extraordinary happened

Three Singapore women awaiting the judge’s decision in court earlier this month, accused of organizing an illegal pro-Palestinian protest, were primed for outrage.

Living in a country where the conviction rate of cases reaching court is so high 97 percentSiti Amirah Mohamed Asrori, Kokila Annamalai and Mossammad Sobikun Nahar awaited the guilty verdict with a very low tolerance for public protests and activism and faced up to six months in prison and a fine of S$10,000 (about £5,800).

They were charged under SingaporeDespite holding an ‘illegal parade’ in contravention of the ‘s strict Public Order Act, he was sensationally acquitted by judge John Ng on 21 October. To talk IndependentThe women describe the decision as a surreal victory and one that could be quietly transformative for the country’s civic landscape.

In February 2024, activists led about 70 people on a peaceful march on public roads to deliver letters to the president’s office demanding Singapore cut ties with Israel over the war in Gaza, where health officials say more than 69,000 Palestinians have been killed. The war in Palestine has become a sensitive issue in the country, which has both a large ethnic Malay-Muslim population and close ties to Israel.

“I was most certain we would be convicted,” recalls Annamalai, 37. “So I had prepared a statement to read in court after I was convicted, about how the system was terrible or something like that.” Independent.

The prosecution argued that the march was illegal because although they were walking on pavements that appeared to be open to the public, their route passed through a restricted area along the outer perimeter of the Istana, Singapore’s presidential palace.

However, Ng stated in his decision that there were no signs indicating that the road was a prohibited area and that the prosecution could not prove that the women knew what they were doing was illegal, which was a very important technical point that changed the balance of his decision. The tension in the courtroom gave way to a wave of relief and quiet joy.

“It was a very strange reality that we were arguing about technicalities and legal arguments in court, when the essence of what we were doing was to stand in solidarity with the Palestinians,” Annamalai says.

Women say they were forced to organize the protest because of Singapore’s continued friendship with Israel committing what a UN investigation described as genocide in Gaza. Singaporean women said they found it “sickening and angering”.

For Nahar, 26, the youngest of the three, the impulse was moral as well as political. “There is an innate sense of responsibility towards the world and the people around,” he says, especially towards the people who are suffering greatly in Gaza. “What needs to be done needs to be done.”

he says Independent that their actions were not planned for publicity purposes; He didn’t expect them to become a big deal in the news. Nahar says he is motivated by the belief that more needs to be done in Singapore, where many people are unsure how to act politically or demand accountability from the government.

Beyond the courtroom, the acquittal also fueled debates about resistance and courage in a society known for strict limits on dissent. What really caught the watching public’s attention, Annamalai says, was not just the decision itself, but also the stance the three women maintained throughout the trial.

They never directly discussed Singapore’s relations with Israel during court hearings, but preferred to wear the colors of the Palestinian flag and keffiyeh The shawls in court made an indirect reference to this, turning their clothing into an act of protest.

“The only explanation you can give is what you wear in court,” says Nahar. “Mainstream media will take a photo and use it in the article. So that’s the only message you can send. We would wear it.” keffiyehs and Palestinian flag colors. “This is the only voice we have to show our defiance.”

“I think what touched a lot of people about this case is the defiance we showed,” Annamalai says. “This is a very important energy that we will bring to our movement. Singapore’s civil society … has a habit of appealing to those in power rather than challenging them.”

Activists say their case has helped normalize dissent in Singapore. “We are trying to build a culture where the masses can take action,” says Annamalai.

For Nahar, Annamalai and Asrori, the case became more than a legal battle. It was about staying true to their beliefs and showing that peaceful resistance still has meaning in Singapore.

Their acquittal, however narrow, is seen by young Singaporeans as a symbolic crack in a rigid system.

Supporters praised the three women on social media as proof that dissent doesn’t always have to result in punishment, and that even small acts of defiance can spark change.

Looking back, they hope the acquittal will inspire others to resist fear and embrace collective courage. “The biggest change in our case over the last year and a half is that the masses in Singapore are actually cheering for the challenge,” says Annamalai. “This is new. This is a validation of defiance as a strategy. Because it is long past time for us to continue appealing to those in power.”

“This win means a lot. It’s about continuing to fight even if the system is against you,” says Annamalai.