Legislation

Registration of Criminals (Amendment) Bill 2005 (B10/2005)

Pursuant to the Registration of Criminals Act (Cap 268) (‘RCA’), a register of criminals is maintained containing particulars of persons convicted of registrable crimes as specified in the First and Second Schedules of the RCA.

The Registration of Criminals (Amendment) Bill 2005 (B10/2005) (‘Bill’) was passed in Parliament on 16 May 2005 to provide for spent criminal records. The changes will come into force on a date to be appointed. The Registration of Criminals (Amendment) Act 2005 is expected to come into operation towards the end of 2005.

It is stated in the Parliamentary Speech delivered at the Second Reading of the Bill that the object of the Bill is ‘to provide a second chance for ex-offenders who have paid their dues to society and have shown the resolve and ability to stay away from crime’. The majority of those eligible to have their records spent will be those who have committed minor offences such as theft and shoplifting.

Criminal record of Singapore crime may become spent

The new s 7B provides that all records in the register of convictions within Singapore (whether before, on or after the date of commencement of the Registration of Criminals (Amendment) Act 2005) are capable of becoming spent. The record of a person’s conviction within Singapore for a crime becomes spent upon the expiration of a crime-free period in relation to the person. The crime-free period is a consecutive period of at least five years starting from the relevant date defined n the section.

Subject to the proposed s 7C, all records in the register of any person convicted within Singapore of any crime shall be capable of becoming spent whether the conviction is before, on or after the appointed day.

The record in the register of a person’s conviction within Singapore for a crime will become spent on the expiration of the crime-free period applicable to the person, unless he is disqualified under the proposed s 7C.

‘Crime-free period’ means a period of not less than five consecutive years starting from the relevant date applicable to a person, during which the person —

(a)   has not been convicted of a crime;

(b)   has not been unlawfully at large in relation to any crime;

(c)   has not been detained or subject to police supervision under s 30 of the Criminal Law

      (Temporary Provisions) Act (Cap 67); and

(d)   has not been subject to a supervision order or admitted to an approved institution under the Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185) or admitted to an approved centre under the Intoxicating Substances Act (Cap 146A);

‘Relevant date’, in relation to a person, means —

(a)   where the sentence of the person does not include a term of imprisonment and is no longer subject to appeal, the date on which the sentence was  

      passed;

(b)   where the sentence of the person includes a term of imprisonment and is no longer subject to appeal, the date of his release from legal custody; or

(c)   where a sentence of imprisonment has been wholly remitted or commuted to or substituted with a sentence other than a term of imprisonment, the date of that remission, commutation or substituted sentence, as the case may be.

Person disqualified from having criminal record become spent

Pursuant to the proposed s 7C, a person is disqualified from having the record in the register of his conviction becoming spent if:

(a)    that conviction was for any offence specified in the Third Schedule, examples of which include trafficking in controlled drugs, culpable homicide and sexual offences;

(b)    the sentence imposed on him for that conviction included —

(i)     a term of imprisonment exceeding three months; or

(ii)    a fine exceeding S$2,000;

(c)    that conviction was for a crime committed within five years after he had been released from —

(i)     approved institution under the Misuse of Drugs Act; or

(ii)    an approved centre under the Intoxicating Substances Act;

(d)    he has been detained or subject to police supervision under s 30 of the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act at any time before that conviction;

(e)    for the time being, he has a warrant of arrest for any offence issued against him which remains unexecuted;

(f)     he has records in the register of more than one conviction, whether or not those convictions arise from the same particular occasion; or

(g)    he has had any previous record in the register of any of his convictions become spent. In effect,    

        an ex-offender is given only one second chance.

Application by disqualified person to have criminal record spent

The new s 7D enables a person who is disqualified under the new s 7C to apply to the Commissioner of Police to treat his record of a conviction in Singapore as spent.

Consequences of criminal record becoming or treated as spent

Pursuant to proposed s 7E, if the record of a person’s conviction in the register is spent or is treated as spent:

(a)    the person will be deemed to have no record of that conviction, and it will be lawful for him to answer a question asked of him on or after the appointed day about his criminal record, or to disclose information about his criminal record, in the manner as if he had no record of that conviction;

(b)    the Registrar of Criminals will, without delay, make an entry in the register to show that the record of that conviction is spent; and

(c)    any reference in any agreement or other document made on or after the appointed day to the person’s criminal record shall be taken not to refer to the conviction the record of which is so spent, but to refer only to any of the person’s convictions the records of which are not so spent.

It is explained in the Parliamentary Speech that, pursuant to the proposed s 7E, if a person is asked ‘whether he has a ‘criminal record’, the person can lawfully answer ‘no’. He does not have to disclose its existence in most circumstances, especially when applying for a job. The ex-offender can treat such questions as not relating to his spent criminal record.

However, the proposed amendments do not expunge a person’s criminal record. A record that becomes spent does not remove the fact of the conviction. So, an ex-offender whose record is marked as spent must still disclose his conviction if specifically asked about a ‘previous conviction’, for example, if the question asked is if he has ever been convicted by a court of law.

Records of offences not kept in the Register of Criminals

At present, only those offences listed in the First and Second Schedules of the RCA will result in a criminal record in the Register of Criminals.

There are many offences that are not registrable. These tend to be minor or regulatory in nature, such as parking or littering offences. It was disclosed in the Parliamentary Speech that, for these non-registrable offences, the department concerned that enforces them would keep its own records. Hence, there is no court record of the conviction.

With the object of avoiding stigmatising persons who commit minor, technical or regulatory offences as ‘criminals’ with ‘criminal records’, a new s 7F is proposed so that records of these non-registrable offences are not regarded as ‘criminal records’ under the RCA.

The effect of s 7F is that when a person is asked about his criminal record, that question will be taken to refer only to a criminal record as defined in the RCA, that is, the record of convictions for registrable offences. A person who has committed only non-registrable offences can say he has no criminal record.

Role of employers

In the Parliamentary Speech, employers are encouraged to consider phrasing the question in their employment application forms as ‘Do you have a criminal record?’ instead of ‘Have you ever been convicted by a court of law?’ Rephrasing the question as suggested would allow a job applicant with a spent record to answer ‘no’. The MHA is of the view that, as a result of the safeguards in the Bill, employers can rest assured that only one-time offenders who were convicted of minor crimes can have records rendered spent.

Companies (Amendment) Bill 2005 (B11/2005)

The Companies (Amendment) Bill 2005 (‘Bill’) was passed in Parliament on 16 May 2005. The Bill has not been gazetted and has not come into force.

The key features of the amendments proposed in the Bill include:

·         abolishing the concepts of ‘par value’ and ‘authorised capital’;

·         introducing an alternative capital reduction process which does not require court sanction;

·         liberalising the financial assistance restrictions to allow financial assistance to be provided in additional circumstances, eg where less than 10% of the company’s paid-up capital and reserves is involved, or where it is approved by a unanimous resolution of shareholders;

·         allowing share-buyback to be funded out of profits as well as capital so long as the company is solvent;

·         allowing repurchased shares to be held as treasury shares; and

·         introducing a more effective and efficient statutory form of merger and amalgamation process.

Elizabeth Wong

Allen & Gledhill