DOCSLIB.ORG

Delivering Justice to the Community

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Delivering Justice to the Community DELIVERING JUSTICE TO THE COMMUNITY Annual Report 2015 SHARED VISION CONTENTS Inspiring public trust and confidence through an effective and FOREWORD BY THE HONOURABLE accessible justice system THE CHIEF JUSTICE 2 MISSION MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE STATE COURTS 6 Serving society with quality judgments, timely dispute resolution and ORGANISATION CHART 12 excellent court services CELEBRATING 40 YEARS AT HAVELOCK SQUARE 13 CORE VALUES Fairness DELIVERING JUSTICE TO THE COMMUNITY 25 Accessibility Launch of State Courts Centre for Dispute Resolution 26 Launch of Community Justice and Tribunals Division 27 Independence, Integrity, Impartiality Responsiveness SERVING SOCIETY 29 Significant Initiatives 30 INSPIRING PUBLIC TRUST AND CONFIDENCE 45 Caseload Profile 46 Significant Cases 48 Local and International Awards 57 Our International Profile 59 Visits by Distinguished Guests in 2015 63 THE PEOPLE OF STATE COURTS 65 Presiding Judge and Heads of Division 66 Leadership Team 67 State Courts Committees 2015 68 Public Service Month Activities 70 Cohesion Day 2015 71 Staff Event Highlights 72 National Day and State Courts Awards 76 State Courts, Singapore Annual Report 2015 1 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE Foreword by The State Courts published their caseload is expected to increase. THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE first annual report in 1999 and These community disputes continued to do so every year are managed by the newly- since then. These annual reports established Community Justice enable the stakeholders of the and Tribunals Division (CJTD). justice system, in particular, the members of the public, to better Another milestone for the State understand the work of the Courts in the year 2015 was Courts and the role they play in the launch of the State Courts our community. This is important Centre for Dispute Resolution. in fostering public trust and Like the CJTD, this Centre places confidence in the judiciary as an emphasis on the use of well as for accountability to the mediation to resolve disputes. people we serve. The use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) through court- The title of this annual report based mediation is not new in is “Delivering Justice to the State Courts. However, the the Community”. The State establishment of a specialised Courts’ commitment towards centre to provide ADR services the excellent delivery of across the entire range of cases justice remains steadfast and highlights the State Courts’ unwavering. This annual report emphasis on ADR as the first reflects the excellent work of the stop of the litigation process. State Courts on so many fronts, as the Presiding Judge and his colleagues continue in their quest “The ultimate goal is to to ensure justice for all. preserve peace and maintain by Foreword harmony in our community. In 2015, the State Courts dealt with approximately 326,450 At the same time, this helps The Honourable the Chief Justice Honourable The cases, an increase of more us ensure that justice can than 14,000 cases compared Annual Report 2015 be accessed through a to the previous year. With variety of dispute resolution the commencement of the Protection from Harassment methods, with a continuing Act and the Community focus on controlling costs.” Disputes Resolution Act, the State Courts, Singapore 2 3 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE Notwithstanding the heavy Being” and “Teamwork”. There Meanwhile, work on the new caseload and the daily priorities is appreciably high staff morale, State Courts Building is already of dispensing justice in the State and I congratulate the leadership underway and continues apace Courts, I am pleased that the Judges team and commend their efforts. as we turn our attention to and Court Administrators of the the future. State Courts were able to make The cover of this annual report time to organise and participate features a painting by eminent I extend my appreciation in several legal education and Singaporean watercolour artist, to all the Judges and Court community outreach activities. Mr Ong Kim Seng, of the State Administrators of the State I applaud, in particular, the Courts Building as it stood prior Courts for their hard work and programmes organised during the to 2009. As 2015 marked the 40th dedication in serving the people “Public Awareness Week” where anniversary of the State Courts of Singapore. I have the utmost the State Courts held a week- Building, it was felt that the use of confidence that the State Courts long public exhibition in the day, this painting on the cover of the will continue to deliver justice and a series of informative talks annual report would be a fitting to the community as aptly in the evenings. The talks were memorial of the iconic white encapsulated in the title of this well-received by the public, and octagon-shaped building that has annual report. I understand that there are plans become a familiar and distinctive to continue to hold such talks to landmark in our community. increase public awareness of the SUNDARESH MENON law and legal rights. Chief Justice “It reminds us of the Republic of Singapore I am also delighted that the contributions the State excellent work of the State Courts have made towards Courts in serving our external stakeholders is matched by a very developing Singapore’s well-regarded work environment justice system into what by our staff. In this regard, I it is today – a world- by Foreword congratulate the State Courts for class judiciary that has garnering extremely strong results The Honourable the Chief Justice Honourable The in the Organisational Health consistently enjoyed public Survey 2015. The staff of the State trust and confidence, helping Annual Report 2015 Courts ranked the organisation Singapore to achieve high highly in various categories international rankings for including “Organisational Foresight”, “Service”, “Well- upholding the Rule of Law.” State Courts, Singapore 4 5 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE Message from the DELIVERING JUSTICE TO We were privileged to be able PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE STATE COURTS THE COMMUNITY to convey our appreciation to all our pioneering Judges and Court 2015 was an eventful year Administrators who have helped as Singapore celebrated her bring us to where we are today. golden jubilee as a nation. As the State Courts reflected on Two New Justice Divisions our contributions to Singapore’s The justice divisions of the progress over the last 50 State Courts have traditionally years, we are mindful of the operated according to the areas need to continue delivering of law which they deal with. The fair and accessible justice to State Courts now deal exclusively the community to ensure our with civil and criminal matters. country’s continued progress in Although the Civil Justice the next 50 years and beyond. Division and Criminal Justice Division handle discrete areas 40th Anniversary of the of law, there are occasions when State Courts Building the two areas intersect and a On 15 September 2015, we holistic approach is called for to celebrated the 40th anniversary better serve our court users. With of the State Courts Building. this in mind, we established the We were joined by The Community Justice and Tribunals Honourable Attorney-General Division to provide a centralised V K Rajah SC, Judges and Judicial location for the resolution of all Commissioners of the Supreme community justice issues, such as community disputes, harassment Court, former Senior District Message from the Judges Mr Michael Khoo SC issues and small claims. We and Mr Errol Foenander, former also established the State Courts Registrars of the State Courts, Centre for Dispute Resolution, our stakeholders in the justice which consolidates our court- of the State Courts Presiding Judge system, and Mr Sonny Chan based Alternative Dispute and Mr Lee Kut Cheung who Resolution services, and serves as Annual Report 2015 were the key persons involved the focal point in providing these in the design and construction services for civil, criminal and of the State Courts Building. relational disputes. State Courts, Singapore 6 7 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE Simplifying Civil Processes for important plea negotiation were 76 cases managed under Authority, Financial Industry Lower Value Claims processes between accused the Enhanced GPS programme Disputes Resolution Centre In 2013, the State Courts began persons and the prosecution, as of December 2015. Limited, and the Personal Injury/ to look into simplifying the namely, the Criminal Case Property Damage Committee of procedural rules and processes Management System and Pre-Trial Conference Centre The Law Society of Singapore. for lower value civil cases. Criminal Case Resolution, The new Pre-Trial Conference Work is apace to update and revise This project culminated in the which were previously available (PTC) Centre, located on the protocols and procedures, introduction of Order 108 of only to accused persons who the mezzanine level, began taking into account the feedback the Rules of Court in November are represented by a lawyer. operations on 3 December 2015. from the consultations with 2014. There are encouraging With the extension of the PJP Previously located at Court our stakeholders. The revised signs from case outcomes in 2015 to criminal matters, this will 17, the new Centre enhances Practice Directions and Protocols that the main aim of Order 108 enable more accused persons to the management of criminal will come into operation in the – to resolve cases expeditiously make more informed decisions PTCs by integrating them into second quarter of 2016. and at a proportionate level of in relation to their cases. a dedicated centre comprising cost – is being achieved. A user three PTC chambers fitted with Concurrent Expert Evidence survey conducted at the end of Enhanced Guidance for a waiting area and video-link (CEE) Procedure 2015 showed that the mechanism Plea Scheme facilities to the remand area. The CEE procedure or “hot of the early case management Accused persons who are not tubbing” is a procedural conference (CMC) has been represented by counsel may Strengthening Pre-Action technique where opposing well-received.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Annual Report 2010 - 2011 Contents
    Annual Report 2010 - 2011 Contents 2 Foreword by the Attorney-General 6 Remembrance and Congratulations 10 Our Mission, Vision and Core Values 13 Our Roles 15 Our Corporate Structure A. AGC’s Management Team B. Six Legal Divisions and Two Non-Legal Divisions 29 Our Key Milestones A. As The Government’s Chief Legal Adviser and Counsel i. AGC’s Advisory Work ii. AGC’s Involvement in Litigation iii. AGC in Negotiations iv. AGC as Legislative Draftsman B. As Public Prosecutor C. In Performing Other Assigned Duties of a Legal Character D. Our Corporate Resources 61 Our Training, Development and Outreach 67 The Ties that Bind Us 71 Key Figures for 2010-2011 A. Corporate Awards B. Performance Indicators C. Financial Indicators for FY2010-FY2011 Attorney-General’s Chambers ANNUAL REPORT 2010 - 2011 1 FOREWORD BY THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL As we look back on these past years, the taxation policies and policies concerning adjust to these changes so that we can function perceptible increase in the complexity of our casino regulation. Cross-Divisional teams effectively. work is particularly striking. This growing were also engaged to deal with cases before complexity has in turn given rise to two the Singapore Courts when we were required With this in mind, I have intensified the consequences, which I elaborate on below. to address constitutional challenges and also commitment of my Chambers to the training, to defend Singapore’s judiciary in the face of development and specialisation of our officers contempt. so that we are well placed to support the THE NEED FOR Government with the highest level of legal iNTER-dIVISIONAL This is perhaps a reality that is ultimately to be services.
    [Show full text]
  • Advancing Justice: Expanding the Possibilities State Courts | Annual Report 2017 One Judiciary
    ADVANCING JUSTICE: EXPANDING THE POSSIBILITIES STATE COURTS | ANNUAL REPORT 2017 ONE JUDICIARY ANNUAL REPORT 2017 SHARED VISION Inspiring public trust and confidence through an effective and accessible justice system MISSION Serving society with quality judgments, timely dispute resolution and excellent court services CORE VALUES Fairness Accessibility Independence, Integrity, Impartiality Responsiveness CONTENTS Foreword by The Honourable the Chief Justice 6 Message from the Presiding Judge 8 Organisation Chart 10 ADVANCING JUSTICE: EXPANDING THE POSSIBILITIES 11 Workplan 2017 Initiatives 12 ICMS for Accused Persons 13 Victim Assistance Scheme 13 Guidebook for Accused-in-Person 14 Updated Publications on Personal Injury and Fatal or Motor Accident Cases 14 Employment Claims Tribunals 15 Community Justice and Tribunals System & Short Mediation and Hearing 15 On-site Psychological Services 16 Family-connect @ State Courts 16 State Courts-NUS Clerkship Programme 17 Executive Leadership Programme for Court and Tribunal Administrators 18 IFCE: State Courts of Singapore Model 18 A Day in Court 19 Public Talk on Resolving Employment Disputes 19 Sentencing Conference 2017 20 State Courts Towers Progress 21 INSPIRING PUBLIC TRUST AND CONFIDENCE 23 Dashboard 24 Caseload Profile 25 Significant Cases: Criminal Justice Division 27 Significant Cases: Civil Justice Division 28 Significant Cases: Community Justice and Tribunals Division 29 Significant Cases: State Courts Centre for Dispute Resolution 30 Organisational Excellence 31 Service Excellence 32 Results of State Courts Surveys 33 Local Awards and International Profile 34 Visits by Distinguished Guests 36 OUR PEOPLE 37 Nurturing Our People 39 Staff Engagement: State Courts Conversation 2020 40 Our People: 2017 41 OUR VOLUNTEERS 42 Working Hand-in-Hand 43 GIVING BACK TO SOCIETY 44 Giving Back to Society 45 ANNUAL REPORT 2017 6 STATE COURTS, SINGAPORE 2017 was a significant year for the Courts as we took FOREWORD steps to respond to global trends in technology and globalisation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Criminal Procedure Code 2010
    (2011) 23 SAcLJ Modernising the Criminal Justice Framework 23 MODERNISING THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE FRAMEWORK The Criminal Procedure Code 2010 The concept of “balancing” prevalent in criminal justice discourse is premised on a paradigm where “state” and “individual” interests are perpetually in conflict. This article outlines the key components of the new Criminal Procedure Code 2010 and discusses another dimension of the state- individual relationship. Rather than being inherently incompatible, synergistic common goals can, on occasion, be pursued between the State and an accused. The article will also consider areas in the Criminal Procedure Code 2010 where conflicts between “state” and “individual” interests have in fact arisen, and will outline the pragmatic approach that has been adopted towards their resolution. Melanie CHNG* LLB (Hons) (National University of Singapore), LLM (Harvard); Advocate & Solicitor (Singapore); Assistant Director, Ministry of Law. The criminal process is at the heart of the criminal justice system. It is not only a subject of great practical importance; it is also a reflection of our ideals and values as to the way in which we can accord justice to both the guilty and to the innocent.[1] I. Introduction 1 The recent legislative amendments to Singapore’s Criminal Procedure Code (“CPC”) signify a new chapter in the continuing evolution of Singapore’s criminal justice process. The new Criminal Procedure Code 2010 (“New CPC”),2 which came into force on * The opinions expressed in this article are those of its author and are not representative of the official position or policies of the Singapore government. The author is grateful to Mr Amarjeet Singh SC, Ms Jennifer Marie SC, Mr Bala Reddy, Professor Michael Hor, Mr Subhas Anandan, Ms Valerie Thean and Mr Desmond Lee for their invaluable comments on an earlier draft of this article.
    [Show full text]
  • 3668212B-95De-4Ea1-9934
    THE STATUTES OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE CORRUPTION, DRUG TRAFFICKING AND OTHER SERIOUS CRIMES (CONFISCATION OF BENEFITS) ACT (CHAPTER 65A) (Original Enactment: Act 29 of 1992) REVISED EDITION 2000 (1st July 2000) Prepared and Published by THE LAW REVISION COMMISSION UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE REVISED EDITION OF THE LAWS ACT (CHAPTER 275) Informal Consolidation – version in force from 2/1/2021 CHAPTER 65A 2000 Ed. Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY Section 1. Short title 2. Interpretation 2A. Meaning of “item subject to legal privilege” 3. Application 3A. Suspicious Transaction Reporting Office PART II CONFISCATION OF BENEFITS OF DRUG DEALING OR CRIMINAL CONDUCT 4. Confiscation orders 5. Confiscation orders for benefits derived from criminal conduct 5A. Confiscation order unaffected by confiscation order under Organised Crime Act 2015 6. Live video or live television links 7. Assessing benefits of drug dealing 8. Assessing benefits derived from criminal conduct 9. Statements relating to drug dealing or criminal conduct 10. Amount to be recovered under confiscation order 11. Interest on sums unpaid under confiscation order 12. Definition of principal terms used 13. Protection of rights of third party PART III ENFORCEMENT, ETC., OF CONFISCATION ORDERS 14. Application of procedure for enforcing fines 1 Informal Consolidation – version in force from 2/1/2021 Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes 2000 Ed. (Confiscation of Benefits) CAP. 65A 2 Section 15. Cases in which restraint orders and charging orders may be made 16. Restraint orders 17. Charging orders in respect of land, capital markets products, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • AY2020-2021 Class Timetable
    ACADEMIC YEAR 2020/2021 ‐ SEMESTER 1 Page 1: Semester 1 AY2020‐2021 Timetable (ver 23 July 2020) Version 23 July 2020 MONDAY 9:00 9:30 10:00 10:30 11:00 11:30 12:00 12:30 13:00 13:30 14:00 14:30 15:00 15:30 16:00 16:30 17:00 17:30 18:00 18:30 19:00 19:30 20:00 20:30 21:00 LC1016 LARC LECTURE LC1003 LAW OF CONTRACT LECTURE {Yale 2} CORE LC1016 LARC TUTORIAL 1 {Yale 2} LC1016 LARC TUTORIAL BURTON ONG, WAYNE COURTNEY, DORA NEO, KELRY LC1016 LARC TUTORIAL {Yale 2} ELEANOR WONG LOI, TIMOTHY LIAU, ALLEN SNG, BENJAMIN WONG Weekly YEAR LC2004 PRINCIPLES OF PROPERTY LAW CORE LECTURE {Yale 3} LC2008A,D & E COMPANY LAW [SECTIONS A, D & E] LC2008C & F COMPANY LAW [SECT C & F] {Yale 4} 2 TEO KEANG SOOD, CHEN WEITSENG, TARA DAVENPORT, KENNETH KHOO, ERNEST LIM, MICHAEL EWING‐CHOW UMAKANTH VAROTTIL, WALTER WOON Weekly HU YING, DARYL YONG, WILLIAM RICQUIER, ELAINE CHEW YEAR LC3001A EVIDENCE (A) LECTURE {Yale 5} CORE JEFFREY PINSLER, CHIN TET YUNG, HO HOCK LAI, MATTHEW SEET UPPER Weekly YR LC6378 DOCTORAL WORKSHOP LC5337 SINGAPORE COMMON LAW OF CONTRACT DAMIAN CHALMERS CORE [Week 1 ‐ 6] Non‐IBL Group 1 LC5405A LAW OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (A) Weekly HELENA WHALEN‐BRIDGE GD NG‐LOY WEE LOON LL4177V/LL5177V/LL6177V ENTERTAINMENT LAW: POP ICONOGRAPHY & CELEBRITY LL4405A/LL5405A/LC5405A/LL6405A LAW OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY A LL4033V/LL5033V/LL6033V INTERNATIONAL LEGAL PROCESS DAVID TAN NG‐LOY WEE LOON ELEANOR WONG, CHEN ZHIDA , TIONG TECK WEE LL4029BV/LL5029BV/LL6029BV INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION LL4317V/LL5317V/LL6317V INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION IN
    [Show full text]
  • Organised Crime Bill
    Organised Crime Bill Bill No. 21/2015. Read the first time on 13 July 2015. ORGANISED CRIME ACT 2015 (No. of 2015) ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART 1 PRELIMINARY Section 1. Short title and commencement 2. General interpretation 3. Meaning of “item subject to legal privilege” 4. Purpose of Act PART 2 ORGANISED CRIME OFFENCES 5. Locally-linked organised criminal group membership 6. Recruiting members for organised criminal group 7. Instructing commission of offence for organised criminal group 8. Procuring expenditure or application of property to support, aid or promote certain offences related to organised criminal group 9. Expending or applying property to support, aid or promote certain offences related to organised criminal group 10. Allowing organised criminal group to use premises 11. Receiving, retaining, etc., property of organised criminal group 12. Facilitation of commission of offence by organised criminal group 13. Commission of offence for organised criminal group 2 PART 3 ORGANISED CRIME PREVENTION ORDERS Division 1 — Preliminary Section 14. Interpretation of this Part and Parts 4 and 5 Division 2 — General 15. Organised crime prevention orders 16. Type of provision that may be made by organised crime prevention orders Division 3 — Duration and nature of OCPO 17. Duration of OCPO 18. Persons against whom OCPO may be made 19. Electronic monitoring of individual subject to OCPO 20. Compliance with orders: authorised monitors PART 4 FINANCIAL REPORTING ORDERS 21. Financial reporting order 22. Duration of FRO 23. Effect of financial reporting orders PART 5 GENERAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO OCPO AND FRO Division 1 — Enforcement 24. Powers of law enforcement officers to retain documents 25.
    [Show full text]
  • The Road to New Asia Media
    The Road to New Asia Media Having trouble viewing? Experience our Annual Report 09/10 using Augmented Reality! Just follow these simple steps: Just follow these simple steps: 1. Ensure that the black MDA marker , and not the front of the driving licence, is placed parallel 1. Remove the driving licence from the inner cover to the webcam. of this booklet (on your left). You’ll find ablack MDA marker on the back. Also ensure your PC has a 2. Do not block any part of the MDA marker’s black functioning webcam. square with your fingers. 3. Make sure the driving licence is not bent or 2. Insert the Annual Report DVD found above the folded. Markers with creases can impair detection. driving licence. Once the DVD flash menu has loaded, click on “Launch AR Application”. 4. Ensure your camera can detect the driving licence clearly. Markers that are further away are more 3. If this is the first time you are running the application, difficult to detect. you will be prompted to install the programme. 5. If you are still experiencing any issues with Follow the instructions on the screen. detection, please close and restart the application. Also, make sure your PC meets the minimum 4. The programme will then launch automatically. Your operating system requirements. LCD monitor acts as a “magic mirror”. Using the driving licence, face the MDA marker towards the webcam. Hold it within the selection circle for three seconds and watch the magic unfold! Having trouble viewing? Open the flap for more information. CONTENTS Mission and Vision 2 Chairman’s Message
    [Show full text]
  • January 2016
    January 2016 No. Topic Presenter Date Time Venue Organiser Level Category Remarks 1 A Roundtable on Equipping for Court Panellists: 5-Jan-16 5.00 - 6.00 PM The Conference SJC All JOs Court Leadership Leadership Mr Vincent Hoong, Registrar, Room, State Courts Supreme Court (Refreshments Ms Jennifer Marie, Deputy Presiding provided) Judge / Registrar, State Courts Mr Chia Wee Kiat, Deputy Presiding Judge / Registrar, Family Justice Courts 2 Judgment Writing Workshop Emeritus Professor Edward Berry 12-Jan-16 8.30 AM - 5.00 Viewing Gallery, SJC All JOs Bench Skills University of Victoria, British PM Supreme Court Columbia (Refreshments provided) 3 Forensic Document Examination: Handwriting Ms Nellie Cheng 25-Jan-16 5.00 - 6.00 PM Viewing Gallery, SJC All JOs Technology & Sciences Examination is Only the Tip of the Ice-berg Senior Forensic Scientist, Health Supreme Court • Presentation by HSA Sciences Authority (Refreshments Mr Yap Bei Sing provided) Consultant Forensic Scientist, Health Sciences Authority 4 Family Violence - Sharing by the Police Mr She Zhaozuo 26-Jan-16 Lunch-time Auditorium, State FJC All JOs Social Awareness 2 Operations Officer, Operations Courts Department / Community (Refreshments Involvement Division, Singapore provided) Police Force 5 Recent Trends in Judicial Review: New Zealand The Honourable Justice Matthew 26-Jan-16 5.00 - 6.00 PM Viewing Gallery, SJC All JOs Legal Development Experience Palmer, Wellington QC Supreme Court High Court of New Zealand (Refreshments provided) February 2016 No. Topic Presenter Date
    [Show full text]
  • The Statutes of the Republic of Singapore Corruption
    THE STATUTES OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE CORRUPTION, DRUG TRAFFICKING AND OTHER SERIOUS CRIMES (CONFISCATION OF BENEFITS) ACT (CHAPTER 65A) (Original Enactment: Act 29 of 1992) REVISED EDITION 2000 (1st July 2000) Prepared and Published by THE LAW REVISION COMMISSION UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE REVISED EDITION OF THE LAWS ACT (CHAPTER 275) Informal Consolidation – version in force from 1/9/2017 CHAPTER 65A 2000 Ed. Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY Section 1. Short title 2. Interpretation 2A. Meaning of “item subject to legal privilege” 3. Application 3A. Suspicious Transaction Reporting Office PART II CONFISCATION OF BENEFITS OF DRUG DEALING OR CRIMINAL CONDUCT 4. Confiscation orders 5. Confiscation orders for benefits derived from criminal conduct 5A. Confiscation order unaffected by confiscation order under Organised Crime Act 2015 6. Live video or live television links 7. Assessing benefits of drug dealing 8. Assessing benefits derived from criminal conduct 9. Statements relating to drug dealing or criminal conduct 10. Amount to be recovered under confiscation order 11. Interest on sums unpaid under confiscation order 12. Definition of principal terms used 13. Protection of rights of third party PART III ENFORCEMENT, ETC., OF CONFISCATION ORDERS 14. Application of procedure for enforcing fines 1 Informal Consolidation – version in force from 1/9/2017 Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes 2000 Ed. (Confiscation of Benefits) CAP. 65A 2 Section 15. Cases in which restraint orders and charging orders may be made 16. Restraint orders 17. Charging orders in respect of land, securities, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Decision-Making and Explainable Artificial Intelligence
    (2021) 33 SAcLJ 280 JUDICIAL DECISION-MAKING AND EXPLAINABLE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE A Reckoning from First Principles In light of rapid developments in legal technology, it is timely to begin considering whether, and if so how, artificial intelligence (“AI”) can replace judges. However, given that law plays a crucial role in maintaining societal order, that judges are a crucial part of ensuring the continued well-functioning of the law, and also that there are still many unknowns in the use and deployment of AI, it would be prudent to examine and understand exactly what roles judges play in the legal system, and how they do so, before we make any bold steps towards replacing judges with AI. This article examines the current and reasonably foreseeable state of AI to consider its capabilities, as well as the process by which judges make decisions and the duties they are subject to. This article will then consider whether or how AI, given its current and foreseeable state of development, may be used in judicial decision-making, and what safeguards may be required to ensure continued confidence in a well-functioning justice system. Shaun LIM1 LLB (Hons) (National University of Singapore); Advocate and Solicitor (Singapore); Research Assistant, Centre for Technology, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence & the Law, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore I. Introduction 1 Advancements in artificial intelligence (“AI”) techniques with demonstrable results have led to a boom in AI research, development and marketing, especially in fields dominated by specialist professionals whose knowledge was thought to be impossible for AI to replicate, such as in medicine and law.2 In law itself, AI solutions are being 1 This article expands upon a prior research paper for credit in the course of the author’s LLB degree.
    [Show full text]
  • Looking Back, Forging Ahead
    LOOKING BACK, FORGING AHEAD ANNUAL REPORT 2015/16 CONTENTS MISSION | VISION | CORE VALUES 2 CHAIRMAN'S MESSAGE 3 CHAPTER 1 6 CELEBRATING SG50 WITH UNIQUELY SINGAPOREAN CONTENT 1.1 Lights, Camera, Action! 7 1.2 Game On, Singapore! 10 1.3 Read On, Singapore! 12 CHAPTER 2 13 BEYOND SG50: BUILDING A FUTURE-READY MEDIA SECTOR 2.1 Gearing for Change 14 2.2 Going Global 15 2.3 Enhancing Local Capabilities 19 2.4 Supporting Talents 23 CHAPTER 3 25 CONNECTING COMMUNITIES, PROTECTING CONSUMERS 3.1 Connecting Society through Singapore Stories 26 3.2 Public Education for Digital Media Literacy 29 3.3 Upholding Standards and Consumer Rights 31 CHAPTER 4 33 STRENGTHENING TIES, DEEPENING UNDERSTANDING 4.1 Tracking Media Trends 34 4.2 Engaging the Industry 35 4.3 Engaging our Employees and Giving Back to Society 37 BOARD OF DIRECTORS 39 SENIOR MANAGEMENT 41 ADVISORY COMMITTEES 43 ANNEX 57 FINANCIAL STATEMENT 59 MISSION | VISION | CORE VALUES MISSION The Media Development Authority of Singapore (MDA), a statutory board under the Ministry of Communications and Information, promotes and regulates the media sector so as to contribute towards economic growth and help foster a cohesive and inclusive society in Singapore. To ensure a globally competitive Singapore media sector, MDA invests in: Enhancing the innovative capacity of the media sector; Developing competitive media infrastructure; Nurturing quality manpower; Supporting sustainable enterprise development; and Enabling Singapore media to go global. At the same time, MDA formulates clear and consistent regulatory policies, based on these guiding principles: To foster a pro-business environment for industry players; To ensure fair market conduct and effective competition; To safeguard consumers’ interests; To increase media choices for consumers; To uphold social values in tandem with societal expectations; and To foster a cohesive and inclusive society through quality content with wide reach and impact while promoting nation-building.
    [Show full text]
  • JUDICIAL EDUCATION and TRAINING Journal of the International Organization for Judicial Training
    and Training Issue 4 2015 JUDICIAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING Journal of the International Organization for Judicial Training MISSION The journal Judicial Education and Training publishes topical articles on the education and training of judges and justice sector professionals around the world. This journal aims to stimulate a community of learning in judicial education by showcasing selected papers presented to the biennial conferences of the International Organization for Judicial Training (IOJT). Additionally, it solicits original research, practical experience, and critical analysis on issues and trends in judicial education. It also provides a medium for informed discussion, the exchange of professional experience, and the development of knowledge in judicial education for a global readership. Contributions are invited from chief justices and senior judges, judicial educators and academic researchers with an interest in this field. Earlier issues of this online journal may be found at: http://www.iojt.org/journal/page~journal.html. JUDICIAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING Journal of the International Organization for Judicial Training 2015 JUDICIAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING Journal of the International Organization for Judicial Training Editor-in-Chief Prof. Amnon Carmi Editor Dr. Livingston Armytage Associate Editors Amy McDowell, Charles Campbell Editorial Board Judge Nikolay Angelov, Bulgaria; Dr. Livingston Armytage, Australia; Prof. Amnon Carmi, Israel; Judge (Ret.) Tony Cotter, USA; Judge Stephanie Domitrovich, USA; Judge Ives Gandra, Brazil;
    [Show full text]