Written Answer · 2026-10-07 · Parliament 15
Regulations for Use of Smart Glasses with AI Capabilities by Public Service Officers
Ms Hany Soh asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether the Government considers it necessary to ban or restrict public service officers' use of AI-enabled smart glasses at work, to prevent breaches of the Official Secrets Act 1935. Mr Chan Chun Sing (for the Prime Minister) replied that existing laws and safeguards, including rules on photography and recording, already apply to AI-enabled smart glasses, and that officers must comply with the Public Service Code of Conduct and the Official Secrets Act. He added that officers must exercise due care regardless of the device used, that violators face legal action or disciplinary proceedings, and that safeguards will continue to be reviewed as technology evolves.
Why it matters
Chan Chun Sing did not establish separate specific rules, instead directly placing AI smart glasses under the jurisdiction of the 1935 Official Secrets Act, indicating that regulation of new AI hardware still relies on existing legacy laws.
Key Points
- • The Ministry of Digital Development and Information has explained in Parliamentary Q&As this year that existing laws and safeguards, including rules on photography and audio/video recording, apply to AI-enabled smart glasses.
- • The Public Service Code of Conduct requires officers to safeguard the confidentiality of official information.
- • Officers must comply with the Official Secrets Act 1935 and Government security requirements.
- • Officers must exercise due care and must not improperly record, retain or disclose classified information, whether using smart glasses, mobile phones or other electronic devices.
- • Officers who fail to comply will face legal action or internal disciplinary proceedings, and the Government will continue to review safeguards as technologies and risks evolve.
The Government considers that existing laws, security requirements and the Public Service Code of Conduct already address the risks posed by AI-enabled smart glasses, and it did not announce a specific ban or restriction, instead stressing officer compliance with existing rules.
The questioner was concerned that public service officers' use of AI-enabled smart glasses at work could raise the risk of breaches of the Official Secrets Act and leaks of classified information.
This signals that Singapore's approach is to manage new devices like AI-enabled smart glasses under existing laws and conduct frameworks rather than issuing device-specific rules, while leaving room to adjust safeguards as technology evolves.
"Public officers are expected to exercise due care and must not improperly record, retain or disclose classified information."
Participants (2)
Original Text (English)
SPRS Hansard · Fetched: 2026-10-21
41 Ms Hany Soh asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether the Government considers it necessary to ban or restrict the usage of smart glasses with AI capabilities by public service officers during work in order to prevent or minimise the risk of breaches of the Official Secrets Act 1935.
Mr Chan Chun Sing (for the Prime Minister) : The Government takes the protection of official information seriously.
As the Ministry of Digital Development and Information has explained in response to Parliamentary Questions this year, existing laws and safeguards apply to the use of AI-enabled smart glasses, including rules governing photography and audio or video recording. In addition, for public officers, the Public Service Code of Conduct requires officers to safeguard the confidentiality of official information. Officers must comply with the Official Secrets Act and Government security requirements.
Public officers are expected to exercise due care and must not improperly record, retain or disclose classified information. This applies irrespective of whether they are using smart glasses, mobile phones or any other electronic devices.
Officers who fail to comply with the rules will be taken to task under the law or internal disciplinary proceedings. We will continue to review our safeguards as technologies and the associated risks evolve.