預算辯論 · 2025-03-04 · 屆國會 14

新加坡國際爭端解決競爭力

AI 治理與監管 AI 安全與倫理 AI 經濟與產業 AI 基礎設施與研究爭議度 3 · 實質辯論

議員質詢新加坡如何保持作為國際爭端解決中心的競爭優勢，特別面對阿布扎比等新興競爭對手。政府強調新加坡憑藉法治、專業人才及創新優勢，持續吸引跨境爭端案件，並推動調解國際公約。核心爭議在於如何應對全球競爭及吸引人才，確保新加坡領先地位不被削弱。

關鍵要點

• 新加坡國際爭端中心地位
• 全球競爭加劇挑戰
• 需持續吸引人才投資

政府立場

持續強化法治與創新優勢

質詢立場

關注競爭壓力與人才流失

政策訊號

強化國際爭端解決能力

“Singapore has to: first, stay open... second, stay ahead of the competition and ahead of the curve.”

參與人員 (14)

完整譯文（中文）

Hansard 原始記錄 · 2026-05-02

主席：法律部R項負責人。朱卡奈因·阿卜杜勒·拉希姆先生。

下午1時正

新加坡作為國際爭議中心

朱卡奈因·阿卜杜勒·拉希姆先生（蔡厝港選區）：主席，我提出動議：“將預算中R項的總撥款減少100元。”

主席，我是一名國際仲裁領域的爭議律師。新加坡已堅定地確立了自己作為領先的國際爭議解決中心的地位，吸引來自世界各地的當事方，尋求一箇中立、高效且值得信賴的場所來解決爭議。我們的戰略位置、強大的法治環境和世界級的法律機構，使我們成為企業和投資者處理複雜跨境爭議時的首選。

僅在2022年，新加坡國際仲裁中心（SIAC）就處理了357起新案件，涉及65個以上司法管轄區的當事方。SIAC的案件量多年來穩步增長，反映了全球商業界的信心。同樣，新加坡國際商事法庭（SICC）涉及國際當事方的案件也有所增加，進一步鞏固了我們作為商業爭議解決可信論壇的聲譽。

除了仲裁和訴訟，新加坡在調解領域也處於領先地位。新加坡調解公約已由55個以上國家簽署，彰顯了我們推動全球友好爭議解決的承諾。憑藉健全的法律框架、一流的專業人才和對創新的承諾，新加坡將繼續作為首屈一指的爭議解決中心，在日益複雜的全球商業環境中提供確定性和公正。

多年來，新加坡成功吸引了政府間爭議解決機構。常設仲裁法院在新加坡設有辦事處。新加坡也是首個與國際海洋法法庭簽訂示範協議以承辦其程式的國家。

然而，我們不能自滿。周邊多個司法管轄區均有重大進展，人才和爭議的新競爭不斷湧現。

就在今年，新的阿布扎比國際仲裁中心（Arbitrate AD）成立，推出了強調透明度、高效性和成本效益的新仲裁規則。一個重大變化是，阿布扎比全球市場（ADGM）現為預設仲裁地，除非另有約定，取代了此前的阿布扎比內陸框架。

總理黃循財在農曆新年晚宴上提到，新加坡必須：第一，在動盪的經濟環境中保持開放，吸引合適的人才和投資；第二，保持領先競爭和走在前沿；第三，同時保持新加坡人的團結。基於此精神，請問尊敬的部長，法律部（MinLaw）在這方面還做了哪些工作以保持我們的競爭優勢？MinLaw如何支援法律專業更好地滿足現代法律實踐的需求，強化新加坡作為領先法律和爭議解決中心的地位？

[（程式文本）提案提出。（程式文本）]

加強法治與新趨勢

朱卡奈因·阿卜杜勒·拉希姆先生：主席，司法公正必須對普通人真實且有意義，確保法律保護真正惠及最需要幫助的人。新加坡已採取切實措施，尤其在影響日常生活的關鍵領域，使司法更易獲得。

對於家庭和離異母親，執行贍養令至關重要。2022年，提交了2700多起贍養相關申請。贍養執行程式（MEP）現幫助確保配偶和子女獲得其法定應得的經濟支援，減少延誤和困難。

2023年5月，家庭司法改革法案獲議會通過並獲得總統批准。該法案旨在：首先，改善家庭司法法院的訴訟程序；其次，強化贍養執行程式。通過該法案擬實施的變革現狀如何？

隨著網路危害上升，2023年報告案件超過8500起，迅速保護至關重要。《防騷擾法》（POHA）提供針對網路欺凌和騷擾的快速保護令，確保包括弱勢群體在內的受害者能迅速尋求救濟。

對此，總理宣佈將成立新機構處理網路危害，數字發展與信息部（MDDI）與法律部正合作制定相關立法。MinLaw針對網路危害擬採取哪些措施？

對於經濟困難者，個人破產製度已改革。2022年雖有1600多起破產令，但許多人受益於債務償還計劃，該計劃提供結構化還債方式，避免破產的嚴重後果。近年來破產申請也有所增加。MinLaw是否認為有必要改革新加坡破產法以應對不斷變化的金融環境？

先生，司法必須公平、可及且有效，不僅惠及特權階層，更惠及普通大眾。新加坡致力確保法律保護真正服務於最需要幫助的人。

網路危害

維克拉姆·奈爾先生（實龍崗選區）：主席，網際網路進入我們生活不過三十年左右。許多議員可能還記得沒有網際網路的生活和童年。對今天的孩子來說，這幾乎難以想象。隨著網際網路普及，網路危害的潛力也在增長。剛才內政部（MHA）供應委員會辯論中已討論了許多發生線上的詐騙問題。

其他網路危害包括接觸有害內容或行為，如露骨或暴力材料、網路欺凌和騷擾。螢幕成癮也是問題，尤其是兒童和青少年；澳大利亞等國已立法限制兒童訪問社交媒體。

總理去年10月宣佈將成立新機構處理網路危害，為受害者提供一站式服務。他提到MinLaw和MDDI正合作推進該專案。MinLaw和MDDI也曾舉行公眾諮詢以收集反饋。MinLaw能否介紹該計劃的最新進展、可能的立法框架及新機構的具體規劃？

網路欺凌與網路危害

林標泉先生（馬登選區）：先生，2024年7月，有報道稱馬來西亞一名網路紅人因網路欺凌自殺。去年同月，MDDI調查發現74%的網際網路使用者遭遇過網路欺凌或性內容等有害資訊，但僅四分之一舉報。

許多使用社交媒體的人都曾遭遇各種網路欺凌。有時欺凌者造謠，有時故意用詞羞辱傷人；網路噴子經常暗示你的品格，使用惡毒言辭。欺凌者常藏身匿名之下。這不可接受，尤其對年輕社交媒體使用者。為何任何社交媒體使用者都應遭受此類欺凌？

2024年10月，張玉娟部長在答覆國會質詢時表示，政府計劃推出新立法和措施，為網路危害受害者提供更強支援和保障。請問法律部能否更新新立法進展？建議禁止任何社交媒體使用者使用虛假賬戶註冊。即若有人利用虛假身份進行欺凌或惡言攻擊，必須追究其責任。期待有一天社交媒體使用者能免受此類欺凌。

應對網路危害

納迪婭·艾哈邁德·薩姆丁女士（宏茂橋選區）：先生，近年來，網路危害如網路欺凌和未經同意分享親密影像的嚴重性和普遍性上升。新加坡通過多項立法建立了應對和減輕網路危害的框架。法律部計劃成立專門機構，制定法定侵權行為，揭開匿名面紗，將增強問責並強化相關工作。

請問能否詳細說明將為網路危害受害者提供的及時援助性質？例如，該機構是否有權強制刪除有害內容？如何加強對弱勢受害者如兒童和女性的支援？

該機構還將獲授權在特定情況下向受害者披露施害者身份資訊。鑑於許多網路平臺註冊僅需電子郵件地址，實際操作如何實施？若賬戶使用者在海外又如何處理？

最後，應對網路危害必須從源頭做起。該機構如何與社群團體合作，教育公眾建設性和安全的網路行為？

審前釋放

施麗雅·林女士（亞歷山大選區）：先生，面臨調查或刑事指控的人可能需等待數月甚至數年案件結案。我見過一些低收入新加坡人因此掙扎。比如簡單的停車違規通常可繳納庭外罰款，但若未繳，最終需出庭並需保釋人。找不到保釋人將導致審前羈押，常引發失業或教育中斷，使整個家庭陷入更危險境地。

我曾於2020年11月司法系統動議中提出此問題。去年刑事訴訟法（CPC）修訂，明確要求執法機構或法官考慮對較輕罪行被告以個人保證釋放，無需保釋人，我對此表示鼓勵。

先生，CPC第93(1A)和93(1C)條新規定於2024年8月1日生效，已逾六個月，現適合瞭解是否已有顯著成效。執法機構是否有跡象顯示更多符合條件者獲個人保證釋放？法院方面，對被告的釋放情況是否也有類似跡象？

主席：請Patrick Tay先生。您可以合併兩次發言。

防騷擾法最新情況

鄭德源先生（先驅選區）：先生，防騷擾法（POHA）已實施十年，POHA法庭也已設立。請問法律部能否提供POHA案件的提起和調解數量更新？在所有案件中，涉及社群鄰里、網路騷擾、性騷擾和職場騷擾的案件分別有多少？法律部如何確保該法庭更高效有效地解決騷擾投訴？

改善民事執行

鄭德源先生：先生，我曾協助工會會員和工人在職場糾紛中，案件可能進入民事法院或僱傭申索法庭。問題是他們可能贏得判決，但快樂和寬慰往往短暫。

因為僱主可能無力或不願支付，受害工人通常是外行，需自行應對複雜的執行程式並承擔費用。多數情況下，他們仍需聘請律師，有時還面臨漫長的執行過程。

因此，有必要簡化、加快和改善民事執行流程和機制，方便受害者追回款項。請問法律部是否計劃審視此事，使執行更便捷、經濟、高效且減輕工人和外行負擔？

執行仲裁裁決

施金麗女士（提名議員）：去年10月，我曾詢問法律部是否考慮簡化小額索賠和僱傭申索法庭裁決的執行。部長回覆稱法律部正推進改革，“使民事判決執行更有效、高效和簡便。”

執行裁決的挑戰最近也在《海峽時報》論壇中被提及。部長能否提供有關解決法院命令不遵守問題的改革最新情況？

下午1時15分

司法可及性

維克拉姆·奈爾先生：主席，近年來司法可及性有顯著改善。多虧法律部、律師協會、社群組織以及許多無償奉獻時間和資金的律師的努力。

法律部設立了公設辯護人辦公室，這是重大舉措，為貧困被告提供刑事辯護服務。

律師協會成立了名為Pro Bono SG的公益機構，通過該機構為需要民事援助者提供法律援助。例如，在海事部門，本地慈善組織“寧靜領域”與Pro Bono SG合作，在其場所開設社群法律診所，將法律援助帶入基層。這些都是值得稱讚的舉措，我想了解法律部是否有進一步計劃促進司法可及性？

司法的一個重要方面是判決的易於執行。2024年供應委員會中，法律部提到正在研究改善民事執行框架的方法。對此我將感激任何更新。

最後，多年來法律部簡化了破產製度，使個人更易重組債務，也更易解除破產。或許部分原因是這些措施，破產申請數量似乎有所上升。法律部對此有何看法？是否計劃對破產製度採取進一步行動？

主席：拉茲瓦娜·貝古姆副教授，您可以合併兩次發言。

拉茲瓦娜·貝古姆·阿卜杜勒·拉希姆副教授（提名議員）：先生，司法可及性是公平公正社會的基石，確保個人能通過法律體系保護權利和尋求救濟。確保法律服務對所有公民可及且負擔得起，不僅增強司法系統信任，也支援國家對正義和平等的承諾，無論背景或境遇如何。

在此背景下，法律部如何應對弱勢群體在司法可及性上的障礙？有哪些策略確保他們的聲音被聽見和保護？有哪些舉措使法律資訊和資源更易線上獲取？如何利用科技簡化法律程式，減少司法可及的時間和成本？

調解與恢復性司法

恢復性司法和社群調解在解決社群衝突和處理傷害方面效果顯著。與傳統懲罰體系不同，恢復性司法側重於通過讓所有利益相關者參與，包括受害者、犯罪者和社群，實現療愈和重建。調解作為協作工具，促進開放對話和相互理解，達成友好解決方案。這些做法不僅有助於減少再犯，還加強社群紐帶，促進更支援和團結的環境。

在此背景下，法律部實施了哪些舉措促進社群調解和爭議解決？如何應對公眾認知和接受度等挑戰，鼓勵更廣泛參與？法律部如何確保法律專業人員獲得社群調解和恢復性司法原則的充分培訓？法律部與社群組織之間形成了哪些合作伙伴關係，以促進調解和恢復性專案的成功實施？

主席：下一位議員未到。司徒義斌先生。

社群糾紛

司徒義斌先生（波東巴西選區）：主席，我去年供應委員會時曾談及社群糾紛。正如許多議員所經歷的，管理和解決鄰里間的糾紛，尤其是住得很近的鄰居，是我們社群工作中最具挑戰性的方面之一。

此後，我很高興看到2024年11月《社群糾紛解決（修訂）法案》通過。特別是我期待觀察新成立的社群關係單位（CRU）效果如何，該單位官員獲賦予調查和執法權力，介入鄰里糾紛。

在涉及噪音或其他糾紛的爭執中，鄰里之間往往會互相收集“證據”。這可能包括在深夜錄製對方的所謂噪音或活動，甚至在極端情況下，偷偷安裝攝像頭對準對方的住所。可以預見，這種行為只會使糾紛升級，迅速加劇矛盾，往往會對鄰里關係造成無法修復的損害。

有一個客觀的仲裁機構，比如社群調解單位（CRU），可以減少居民自行採取極端措施的需要，做出各方都能接受的決定和結果。另一個方面，社群糾紛解決法庭（CDRT）權力的增強，也有望加快有效解決社群糾紛的程序。在此背景下，先生，我想請部長就《社群糾紛解決（修訂）法案》通過後，社群調解領域的增強措施實施情況作一更新。

社群司法——避免數字鴻溝

陳武明博士（裕廊）：線上社群司法與法庭系統為能夠上網的人帶來了便利。那麼，對於那些數字技能較弱、文化程度較低或不熟悉英語的長者來說怎麼辦？如果這些長者想要使用小額索償法庭、反騷擾法庭或社群司法與法庭系統（CJTS）下的其他服務，該怎麼辦？這是否意味著數字劣勢者在使用這些新數字平臺獲取社群司法服務時，必然會面臨不公平的競爭環境？

先生，數字化不能成為數字鴻溝。數字司法不能成為非資訊科技（IT）熟練者的難以獲得的司法。我們必須避免數字脫落，即因長者覺得數字流程太難而放棄有理有據的案件。

主席：下一位議員未到。林秀儀女士。

保護創作者的智慧財產權

林秀儀女士：主席，在新加坡，追求創意職業可能很困難，因為難以獲得穩定收入。然而，新加坡的藝術家、作家、電影製作人及其他創意人員能夠過上有意義的生活，並支援新加坡藝術文化的發展，這是至關重要的。

為此，我遇到許多創意工作者，如電影製片人和攝影師，他們對自己的權利瞭解不足，尤其是在智慧財產權（IP）方面。許多人不知道，根據2021年《版權法》，即使他們的作品是有償創作，其智慧財產權仍自動歸他們所有。這是一個關鍵的知識缺口，必須加以解決。隨著生成式人工智慧（Gen AI）的興起，未經授權使用受版權保護材料以盈利的情況增多，這一問題變得更加緊迫和重要。

新加坡文學界最近向國家圖書館局發表公開宣告，至少有88位本地創意人員簽署，反映出對版權作品缺乏尊重及其對藝術職業活力和可持續性的潛在影響的日益關注。

除了推動教育和意識提升外，政府還可以考慮對人工智慧模型引入監管，以更好地平衡人工智慧開發者與創意人員之間的競爭環境。一些司法管轄區已開始採取行動。例如，歐盟（EU）的《人工智慧法》要求生成式人工智慧模型證明其符合歐盟版權法，並提供用於訓練模型內容的詳細摘要。這些義務使版權持有人能夠通過選擇退出其作品被用於文本和資料探勘來行使權利。

在這方面，瞭解是否有針對創意人員的基層推廣活動以促進他們對智慧財產權的理解，將是有益的。此外，法律部和新加坡智慧財產權局（IPOS）如何應對人工智慧帶來的版權挑戰？

在人工智慧時代保護創作者的智慧財產權

施金麗女士：智慧財產權局（IPOS）與全國職工總會（NTUC）旗下的視覺、音訊及創意內容專業人士協會（新加坡）合作，提高創作者的智慧財產權意識和能力。同樣，對於採用人工智慧的公司，法律部將如何指導它們遵守智慧財產權的倫理和尊重使用？例如，未經許可或補償，不得使用受版權保護的作品來訓練生成式人工智慧應用。法律部將如何在促進創新與保護創作者智慧財產權之間取得平衡？

主席：蔡偉傑先生，請將您的兩段發言合併。

智慧財產權局對中小企業的支援

蔡偉傑先生（提名議員）：主席，我們的中小企業（SMEs）有許多渠道在本地和國際上發展，也有許多有用的資助和不同領域的融資支援。然而，許多中小企業可能不瞭解如何發掘其無形資產和智慧財產權的價值。成功的企業應確保保護其品牌價值，這也可能為融資開闢途徑。

智慧財產權局如何在這方面支援中小企業？智慧財產權局是否與行業協會和商會（TACs）合作，更好地接觸新加坡中小企業？

新加坡作為仲裁中心

主席，新加坡已確立自己作為國際仲裁領先地之一。最新報告顯示，新加坡已成為領先的仲裁中心。

這帶來了從專業到經濟的諸多附帶利益。然而，其他城市的競爭也很激烈。請問部長，我們採取了哪些措施，未來還可以採取哪些措施，以深化新加坡作為仲裁中心的吸引力？鑑於近期全球和技術的諸多變化，包括更具保護性和不確定性的世界，這將如何影響我們的努力？

企業內部律師和法律助理

鄭德源先生：先生，我宣告本人為全國職工總會法律總監及新加坡企業法律顧問協會名譽會員。

新加坡的企業內部律師是法律界一個重要且不斷增長的群體。企業內部律師人數已超過執業律師人數。這為新加坡企業內部律師在技能和幫助企業自信地在新加坡及全球開展業務方面提供了巨大機遇，同時也有助於為我們的私營執業律師及相關領域帶回關鍵工作。因此，我請求法律部提供當前支援情況及長期計劃，進一步提升新加坡企業內部律師的職業健康和發展。

在法律界和生態系統中，我們還有一批法律助理，也稱為法律專業人員或律師事務所及企業的法律執行人員。他們許多畢業於淡馬錫理工學院及其他教育機構的法律課程。他們也希望提升專業水平、能力和標準，繼續教育及職業發展機會。因此，我想了解法律部如何進一步幫助提升法律助理和法律專業人員的職業健康和發展。

支援我們的年輕律師

納迪亞·艾哈邁德·桑丁女士：主席，我繼續在本議院為法學院學生和年輕律師發聲。法律行業對初級律師的要求不易。為了跟上行業快速變化的需求，照顧年輕律師並保持強大的人才儲備，確保我們的法律培訓框架保持穩健和前瞻性至關重要。

根據新的實習培訓框架，實習律師必須滿足雙崗位要求，輪換擔任律師崗位和訴訟崗位。對於作為細分業務運營的小型律所，必須安排實習律師輪換到其他律所，以獲得第二崗位的經驗。

鑑於必須將實習律師輪換出本所，法律部是否瞭解小型律所承擔年輕律師培訓和招聘未來人才的能力？是否考慮採取措施支援這些律所應對相關需求？

隨著我們作為領先國際仲裁中心的角色日益增長，越來越多來自大陸法系鄰國的糾紛可能在新加坡審理。法律部是否考慮進一步深化和拓寬法學院學生和執業者的大陸法系專業知識，以確保我們在國際爭端解決領域保持領先？

下午1時30分

國際公約最新情況

烏莎·錢德拉達斯女士（提名議員）：先生，我想了解法律部關於新加坡在三項國際公約上的立場，即2019年7月2日《海牙公約》關於承認和執行民商事外國判決（海牙判決公約）、關於國際遺囑形式統一法的公約（國際遺囑公約）以及《海牙公約》關於國際成年人保護。

成為這些公約的簽署國可加強新加坡作為全球財富管理和家族辦公室中心的地位，提升跨境糾紛的法律確定性，簡化國際聯絡家庭的遺產和繼承規劃，併為在新加坡但在多個司法管轄區擁有法律或財務利益的弱勢群體提供更大保障。希望法律部能就新加坡加入這些公約的正在考慮事項、潛在挑戰及時間表提供見解。

最佳化國家資產

納迪亞·艾哈邁德·桑丁女士：主席，隨著城市生活日益密集，規劃良好的社群區域對於打造充滿活力和可持續的鄰里至關重要。法律部表示已發現最佳化國家資產以更好滿足社群需求並創造更大社會影響的機會。評估哪些國家資產應重新開發時使用了哪些標準？鑑於我們多元的人口結構，考慮了哪些具體社群需求？

法律部是否計劃試點社群概念，吸引更廣泛的新加坡人群，打造促進有意義互動的動態空間？是否考慮在這些資產中試點共居概念，或為新加坡人創造更多關懷和休閒空間？

新加坡土地管理局（SLA）“將空間重塑為充滿活力的場所”計劃

蔡偉傑先生：主席，自新加坡土地管理局（SLA）啟動“將空間重塑為充滿活力的場所”（RSVP）計劃以來，部長能否告知是否已有資產成功授予？如果有，數量是多少？

成功租戶是否已開始使用這些資產？未來一年是否有資產計劃推出？如果有，具體時間是什麼？該計劃下新增資產的決定是否完全由SLA和城市重建局（URA）決定？

根據迄今為止該計劃引發的興趣，法律部能否說明國家土地的興趣是否仍傾向於更傳統的方式，因為似乎有更多地塊以傳統方式招標？鑑於藝術、文化和遺產興趣的增加，SLA是否會對非營利團體和組織的提案給予有利考慮？

一些社群服務組織可能會考慮使用國家資產作為更好連線社群的選項。SLA是否對這類提案持開放態度？例如，創意使用某資產可能使其成為歡迎點，幫助人們瞭解心理健康或焦慮、抑鬱等其他狀況等難題。適當地點的使用也可能吸引長者，尤其是如果該資產有有趣的歷史，可能有助於喚起美好回憶。

通過技術最佳化國家資產

朱卡爾南·阿卜杜勒·拉希姆先生：主席，國家土地資產對新加坡的城市規劃和經濟發展至關重要。新加坡必須最大化土地使用效率。SLA如何成功最佳化國家資產以滿足社群和經濟需求？自2023年財政預算案更新以來，數字產權轉讓門戶的發展進展如何？該專案是否仍預計於2026年完成？

主席：法律部長湯英偉先生。

法律部第二部長（湯英偉先生）：主席，今年我們慶祝新加坡建國60週年，回顧我們在逆境中發展、繁榮和興盛的國家建設努力。

許多因素促成了我們從第三世界到第一世界的轉變，其中之一是我們致力於建設強大的法律體系和推進法治。法律部將繼續維護這些基本原則，確保經濟活力，同時維護社會信任和凝聚力。

感謝各位議員通過發言提出的各種建議，我將在本次發言中回應，內容分為兩個大主題：第一，加強新加坡作為國際法律和智慧財產權中心的地位，以支援經濟增長；第二，改善法律程式，增加司法可及性，以維護社群的信任和凝聚力。我的同事，法律部國務部長穆拉利·皮萊，將就最佳化國家資產使用和防範網路危害發表講話。

先生，首相已談及新加坡在當前動盪外部環境中面臨的挑戰。無疑存在強勁逆風，我們必須謹慎。但同樣，在此環境中，如果我們保持對外資的吸引力，維持開放、繁榮的商業環境，也存在機遇。新加坡能夠吸引外資的一個原因是對我們法律體系的信心。我的部門致力於通過三個法律支柱維護和增強這種信任，我將簡要說明。

首先，不斷加強我們所依託的法律框架。我們的策略是發展新領域，以支援新興產業和不斷演變的商業模式，同時繼續鞏固我們的優勢領域。讓我簡要提及三個方面。

首先是智慧財產權領域，正如蔡偉傑先生所提。企業的價值越來越體現在智慧財產權和無形資產上。但要實現這一價值，企業必須能夠將無形資產和智慧財產權貨幣化。只有這樣，它們才願意進一步投資創新，從而進一步提升企業價值。

新加坡的知識產權制度和創新環境在國際上享有盛譽。2024年，新加坡在世界智慧財產權組織（WIPO）全球創新指數中排名上升一位，位列全球第四，亞洲第一。根據《新加坡智慧財產權戰略2030》（SIPS 2030），我們專注於激發創新，幫助企業，包括中小企業，發掘無形資產和智慧財產權的價值。我們支援企業在智慧財產權旅程的各個階段。對於有海外擴充套件計劃的企業，智慧財產權局將於2025年3月與WIPO合作推出“新加坡智慧財產權管理診所”計劃，提供全面的無形資產和智慧財產權戰略支援，包括為期四個月的專家指導。

針對林秀儀女士的提問，對於創意行業中的小型企業和自由職業者，智慧財產權局提供簡明的資訊包和易懂的影片，解釋版權並分享使用和保護智慧財產權的最佳實踐。事實上，林女士，我記得當我介紹您提及的法案時，我們也推出了學習輔助材料和這些影片。

此外，智慧財產權局還與國家藝術理事會（NAC）、國家圖書館局（NLB）以及行業合作伙伴，如新加坡版權許可與管理協會（CLASS）和視覺、音訊及創意內容專業人士協會（VICPA）合作，提供額外支援。

就在去年2024年8月，智慧財產權局與VICPA簽署了為期三年的諒解備忘錄，支援創意產業在智慧財產權教育、管理和能力建設方面的發展。智慧財產權局還與NAC和NLB合作製作音樂行業創意人員參與的影片播客，計劃於今年4月26日世界智慧財產權日推出。

智慧財產權局還積極支援合作伙伴舉辦的活動，如國際複製權組織聯合會（IFRRO）世界大會，討論版權相關問題和發展，該活動將於今年10月舉行。

換言之，從基礎產業層面到提升我們在全球思想領導力的層面，這些都是提升該領域意識和教育的努力組成部分。我們確實會尋找更多機會接觸創作者，提高他們在這一快速發展的環境中的意識。

對於希望商業化其無形資產和智慧財產權的企業，智慧財產權局正與本地及國際合作夥伴共同制定可國際互操作的無形資產估值指南。我們計劃於2025年上半年就無形資產估值指南草案徵求公眾意見。國務部長穆拉利·皮萊將就技術發展及其對智慧財產權的影響發表講話。

我想談的第二個支柱是爭議解決。我們都知道，企業在經營過程中時不時會遇到與他人的爭議。這實際上是做生意的一部分。但這些爭議必須以公開、透明且高效的方式解決。

多年來，我們不斷更新制度，提升服務。簡而言之，我們採取以企業為中心的方法。我們使制度與國際標準接軌。我們開發了完整的選項，無論是仲裁、調解、訴訟，還是它們的組合，使當事方能夠根據其需求的性質及交易的具體情況自主選擇。我們也尊重當事方的自主權，無論是法律選擇、審理地點、機構、解決方式，還是律師選擇。

總體而言，新加坡表現良好。以新加坡國際商事法院（SICC）為例，今年慶祝成立十週年。其案件量穩步增長，包括新案件的提交。新加坡國際仲裁中心（SIAC）和新加坡國際調解中心（SIMC）在仲裁和調解領域的案件量也呈現總體上升趨勢。事實上，許多案件與新加坡的聯絡甚少。

針對蔡凱思先生的提問，我們將繼續加強我們的機構。

首先，通過擁抱科技，為使用者提供增值服務。據我們所知，SIAC是唯一獲得資訊安全管理體系ISO 27001認證的仲裁中心。SIMC擁有調解人工智慧助手，麥克斯韋爾法院配備了先進的無人機攝像和全息顯示技術，輔助證據展示及聽證會中的爭議解決。

其次，提供平臺，展示新加坡在該領域的思想領導力。各位議員應知，我們在新加坡舉辦了許多國際會議，如自2019年起舉辦的新加坡調解公約周，始於新加坡調解公約啟動之初並持續至今。我們還有新加坡-中國國際商事爭議解決會議，每年舉辦一次，一年在中國，一年在新加坡。今年晚些時候將在新加坡舉辦。這些活動不僅為頂尖專家討論最新發展提供平臺，也為新加坡律師與全球社群建立聯絡提供機會。

第三，在債務重組和破產領域。這是一個運作良好且發展完善的經濟體的重要組成部分。它為陷入財務困境的公司、小型企業和創業者提供切實可行的商業選項，賦予靈活性和現實的重組方案。成功的重組不僅使債務人能夠繼續經營，還通常為員工、債權人和投資者帶來更好的結果。

我的部委在過去十年中完善了這一框架，下面我談談該框架的三個部分。

首先是企業破產。我們借鑑了領先且經過驗證的模式的特點，例如大約六七年前引入的美國破產法第11章。我們採納了聯合國國際貿易法委員會（UNCITRAL）跨境破產示範法；並明確了SICC對涉及多司法管轄區案件的管轄權，這在大型跨境重組中尤為突出。我們引入了簡化破產程式，為實體提供更簡單、更快捷、更經濟的流程。各位議員應知，我們最初在新冠疫情期間作為臨時措施引入，且今年早些時候已將其永久化，以惠及更多公司。

最後是個人破產。我們設立了差異化的破產解除框架。這是一種康復性制度，旨在鼓勵財務謹慎，同時不扼殺創業精神。

我們建立了一個平衡債務人和債權人利益的制度，維護健康的貸款環境以支援持續經濟增長，同時支援從個體創業者到大型企業的各類債務人，無論本地還是外國。

這導致新加坡框架的使用日益增長。例如，航運公司太平洋國際航運和越南開發商諾瓦地產的案件均在SICC審理。

針對朱卡奈因先生和維克拉姆·奈爾先生的提問，我們不會自滿。我們正基於這些案件和從業者的經驗，認真研究下一輪改進，考慮反饋，並將考慮引入進一步的提升措施。

下午1時45分

我們正在考慮的改進措施包括以下內容。

首先是個人債務償還計劃（DRS）。法務部正著手防止債務人在商業機構建議下不負責任借貸後自行申請破產，濫用DRS。

其次是在企業救助工具領域，特別是司法管理。我們還將審查現行的第11章制度，評估是否需要調整。2023年，即兩年前，我們成立了加強新加坡企業重組與破產（R&I）制度委員會。該委員會進行了激烈討論，諮詢了利益相關者，討論了我提及的近期案件，並就建議進行了諮詢，預計將很快釋出報告。

接下來，我談第二個支柱：擴充套件和提升我們的法律能力和素質。

先生，世界日益複雜，法律工作顯然不再受地理界限限制。正如朱卡奈因先生所說，為了使我們的律師事務所和法律專業人士有效競爭，他們必須跟上新興趨勢，提供獨特優勢，我們對此表示認同。

為提升培訓質量和一致性，我們於2024年7月根據律師專業培訓委員會的建議實施了多項變革。律師資格考試B部分課程大綱擴大，涵蓋更廣泛主題。實習培訓期延長至一年，讓實習律師有更多時間接觸不同執業領域，建立堅實的全面基礎，開啟執業生涯。

針對納迪婭·薩姆丁女士的觀點，我們認識到小型律所有時需要支援以應對這些變化，非常感謝薩姆丁女士持續為年輕律師發聲。

新加坡法律教育學院和律師公會發布了指南，幫助實習律師和指導律師適應這些變化。正如薩姆丁女士所知，我們走上這條路還不到一年，因此我們將吸納小型律所年輕律師的經驗。目前指南涵蓋酬金和休假等方面。律師公會還在其網站公佈了可用的實習崗位，方便實習律師尋找不同執業領域的實習機會。律師公會還提供職業諮詢、導師指導和實習合同指導，並將在必要時實施其他措施。

除了提升專業標準，我們還致力於轉變思維和提升技能，尤其是在技術領域。法律行業中，人工智慧有潛力以遠低於時間和成本的方式完成初級律師的任務。例如，湯森路透報告估計，到2029年，人工智慧可為專業人士每週節省多達12小時。但我們不應將其視為威脅，而應視為律師向價值鏈上游邁進的機會，專注於更高價值的前臺和客戶工作。

全球範圍內，美國和英國等領先法域的律所正積極採用和利用法律科技支援工作。為與之競爭，我們的律師也必須保持開放心態，擁抱法律科技。

2022年，我們推出了法律科技平臺（LTP），為有需求的律所提供現成的事項管理和協作工具。2024年，生成式人工智慧（Gen AI）作為Copilot功能加入，為新加坡律所服務。

我們還通過補貼降低新加坡律所使用法律科技的成本。我們理解初期投入或使用成本可能很高。例如，2022年我們推出了法律行業生產力解決方案補助（PSG-Legal），提供70%的支援，最長兩年。自2025年4月1日起，支援水平調整為50%，為期一年，以與其他行業保持一致。截至目前，新加坡律所已成功申請超過70個PSG-Legal專案，涵蓋400多個法律科技賬戶。

今年下半年，我們將試點變革管理計劃。我們聽到一些律所反饋，他們需要更多支援以改善技術流程，同時兼顧現有優先事項。因此，我們將派遣法律科技顧問到有意參與試點的律所，診斷其技術需求，並根據其執業領域推薦合適工具。

我還想談談民法領域。新加坡是普通法轄區，但我們的主要貿易伙伴多來自民法轄區，如中國和印度尼西亞。這些是擁有巨大機遇的大市場。

因此，為了更好地定位我們的律師，我們將深化法學院課程中的民法內容。我們還將繼續開展“準備中國”專案和新加坡-上海律師交流專案，幫助律師深入瞭解中國的商業和法律環境。如果其他市場和法域有類似需求，我們也樂於考慮。

先生，律師持續終身學習的文化非常重要。執業環境在演變，執業領域快速變化，法律研究及其在產業中的實踐和應用的思想領導力也在迅速發展。為鼓勵這一點，我們更新了持續專業發展（CPD）體系，並將分階段提高CPD要求。律師可利用技能未來基金資助許多課程。

除了律師，輔助法律專業人士和企業內部律師也是法律行業的重要組成部分，正如泰瑞克·泰先生剛才提到的。新加坡法律學院正與律師公會、新加坡企業內部律師協會及淡馬錫理工學院合作，制定法律服務技能框架和培訓路線圖。未來幾年將分階段先為律師推出，隨後為企業內部律師和輔助法律專業人士推出。淡馬錫理工學院還將為輔助法律專業人士開設法律科技和法律專案管理新課程。根據反饋，這些是參與者和學生感興趣的領域，因此將開發相關模組。

先生，第三個支柱是保持對世界的開放。作為一個小型城邦，我們需要融入全球經濟。為此，我們必須加強網路建設，與他人合作。這對我們來說是雙贏局面：幫助合作伙伴從新加坡實現目標，同時將原本可能不在新加坡的工作帶入新加坡司法管轄區。

多年來，我們加強了與關鍵及新興市場的法律合作。舉例來說，去年我們簽署了四份諒解備忘錄（MOU）——兩份與沙烏地阿拉伯，一份與印度，一份與哈薩克——進一步拓展了全球影響力，進入新市場。我去年也多次出訪，建立聯絡，幫助我們的律所和律師開拓這些市場。

正如朱卡奈因先生指出的，我們還加大力度將多邊爭議解決機構落戶新加坡，這些機構處理涉及主權利益的爭議。這有助於國際法治，也提升了新加坡作為頂級爭議解決中心的吸引力。

讓我給朱卡奈因先生舉幾個例子。

首先，常設仲裁法院（PCA）是一個為國家提供仲裁及其他爭議解決服務的政府間組織，正在新加坡擴大其影響力，獲得我們的支援。新加坡是其在亞洲的首個實體辦公室，自2018年成立以來，過去五年內至2023年，新加坡辦公室已管理超過135起案件。

其次，我們已與國際投資爭端解決中心（ICSID）簽署諒解備忘錄，正推動ICSID在新加坡設立其總部華盛頓特區外的首個實體辦公室。我們也持續歡迎國際律所和外國律師在新加坡設立據點。

自1990年代以來，新加坡逐步放寬法律行業限制，惠及新加坡及新加坡人。多年來，我們推出多種計劃，允許外國律所與本地律所合作，合作程度根據外國律師與本地同行的需求調整。這些計劃取得成功，但我們將繼續審視，必要時完善框架，並考慮如何合理化和簡化，目標之一是減輕律所遵守這些計劃的監管負擔。

我們於2023年成立的審查新加坡律所及合作監管框架委員會預計將很快完成工作。

我還要補充，我們不會改變開放姿態。我們仍歡迎外國律所和律師，同時致力於維護新加坡法律職業的核心。

主席先生，我們的工作總體上促進了經濟發展，便利企業，吸引投資，使新加坡繁榮發展。總體來看，我們在這方面取得了成功。2024年，新加坡在世界競爭力排名中位列第一，商業效率排名第一。2023年，世界銀行資料顯示，新加坡在外國直接投資淨流入方面排名第二，僅次於美國。因此，我所述的措施總體上成功提升了新加坡的商業環境。

主席先生，我演講的第二部分將聚焦國內背景。近年來，許多國家社會結構承受壓力，出現分裂，部分群體感到被排斥，對機構的信任減弱。

在新加坡，我們幸運地保持團結；但我們絕不能對此掉以輕心。我們的社會凝聚力基於法治和司法可及性，這些是社會的核心支柱。因此，我們必須繼續強化這些基本要素，以維護社會信任和凝聚力，並提升民眾生活。我們的法律構成社會的基石——決定社會如何有序、如何運作、成員如何行為和互動。

在我們的社群中，當個人或企業之間發生摩擦時，他們有多種方式解決爭議和分歧。這包括向公正的裁判者申訴或與可信賴的調解員合作，通過此過程，當事方陳述觀點，尋求衝突解決。執行是這一過程的關鍵部分，正如部分議員所提——“最後一公里”，當事方實現權利，獲得救濟，然後繼續前行。這一直是我部關注的重點。當一方獲得判決時，必須有效執行，否則判決僅是紙上談兵。

因此，我們一直致力於加強兩個關鍵領域的執行：第一是家庭司法；第二是民事判決。

讓我向各位議員彙報這兩個領域的最新進展。

先生，家庭是我們社群的基石。關係破裂時，我們希望幫助減少敵意，使當事方得以療愈並繼續前行。一個重要改進是設立了贍養費執行程式（MEP），正如朱卡奈因先生所強調的。

遺憾的是，贍養令不履行的情況仍然較高，且存在大量重複執行申請。

因此，在MEP下，贍養費執行官（MEO）有權獲取當事方的財務狀況資訊，這些資訊將幫助法院作出更有效的贍養費執行命令。他們還可以促成雙方和解，鼓勵更可持續的結果和判決。MEP已於今年一月投入執行。法務部新成立的MEO團隊已開始受理案件，並將分階段逐步擴大業務。

針對鄭國輝先生和施淑恩女士的提問，法律部也將推出改革措施，使民事判決的執行更加有效、簡便和高效。

我們收到反饋，執行判決所需的時間、精力和費用——正如鄭先生所說——有時與判決金額不成比例。我們正著手解決這些問題，賦予法院更大的權力，以識別判決債務人的資產和收入來源，並引入新的執行方式，以威懾和懲罰不遵守法院命令的行為。我們還將設立新的民事判決執行官，專門協助希望執行其民事判決的訴訟當事人。

這些改革將適用於我們的民事法院，包括以下法庭：泰先生提到的僱傭申索法庭；社群糾紛解決法庭；以及小額索償法庭。

先生，正如各位議員所知，這些擬議的變更是新穎的。它們偏離了現有的執法框架。我們目前正在研究、評估這些變更，並與相關方進行磋商，包括律師公會成員和司法機構。隨著研究的完成，更多細節將在適當時候公佈。

先生，我們不斷努力改善司法的可及性，特別是針對最弱勢群體。這確保他們能夠獲得幫助，沒有人被落下。

對於Vikram Nair先生和Razwana副教授的提問，法律部（MinLaw）有著悠久的歷史，一直處於在民事和刑事領域提供援助和幫助的前沿，包括通過法律援助局（Legal Aid Bureau，LAB）等專案；以及最近成立的公共辯護辦公室（Public Defender's Office，PDO）。

下午2點

自1958年以來，法律援助局（LAB）為弱勢群體提供民事法律援助，包括婚姻、金錢索賠以及遺囑認證等事務。除了處理法律案件外，法律援助局還加強了與社群的聯絡，例如組織家庭律師與社會服務專業人員之間的交流會。

法律部一直支援由Pro Bono SG管理的刑事法律援助計劃（CLAS），並自2015年起直接為其提供資金。從2022年12月起，辯護律師辦公室（PDO）開始運作，以促進更多被告人獲得司法公正。

先生，公共辯護辦公室（PDO）多年來不斷發展壯大。如今，PDO擁有一支由22名公共辯護律師組成的團隊。2024年，PDO共收到近1900份申請，其中約有1000份被評估為符合資格。這些符合資格的申請中有一部分被轉介給法律援助與諮詢服務（CLAS），CLAS和PDO共同服務於社會中最脆弱的群體。這種合作關係體現了法律界的公益精神——這是政府與公益新加坡（Pro Bono SG）之間的合作，公益新加坡是真正的草根組織，得到了許多私營部門律師的支援。

這有助於我們確保法律援助不僅在刑事領域內保持可及性（由CLAS和PDO負責），而且在民事領域也同樣如此。去年，我們更新了人均家庭收入（PCHI）和年值（AV）的資格標準，以確保鑑於近年來家庭收入和房產價值的增長，我們能夠繼續服務於目標群體和需要幫助的個人。我們會持續審查這些門檻，確保其保持合理。

先生，在我結束之前，請允許我簡要談一下社群糾紛——這是司徒一斌先生提出的一個話題，我幾個月前在介紹該法案時也曾廣泛討論過。

針對薛奕彬先生的詢問，這些改進措施將很快實施。社群關係組（CRU）試點專案，包括針對嚴重噪音和囤積案件的定向調解，將於今年第二季度在淡濱尼啟動。試點結束後，我們將考慮如何在全島範圍內可持續地推廣這一流程。

關於調解，正如拉茲瓦娜副教授所提到的，社群調解中心（CMC）繼續通過社交媒體以及日常廣告渠道（例如我們在公交車站看到的廣告）來推廣調解的好處，以便接觸那些可能需要了解這些計劃的人。為了應對預期的案件量增加，已確定約30名值班調解員負責處理指定的調解案件。CMC還將衛星調解點的數量從2023年的10個增加到2025年的18個。這將帶來更多便利並提高可及性。

先生，請允許我在結束時說幾句話。我已經談到了我們在促進經濟增長以及維護社會信任和凝聚力方面的方法。這是我們法律部工作的兩個非常重要的成果。新加坡的成功基於我們強大的法律體系，這一體系以法治為基礎。這對於我們法律部所做的所有工作來說，都是絕對不可談判的原則。

在此，我想通知各位議員，我們將在明年紀念新加坡現代法律體系通過第二份司法憲章建立的200週年。那是在1826年——明年將是200週年。將舉辦一系列活動以紀念這一時刻。更多細節將在適當時候公佈。希望各位議員明年能夠參與並支援這些專案和活動。

主席：國務部長穆拉利·皮萊。

法律國務部長（穆拉利·皮萊先生）：先生，我想首先表達我對各位議員在本次辯論中提出的意見和發言的感謝。我將涵蓋三個廣泛領域：第一，審慎且富有創意地利用國家資產；第二，防範新興技術帶來的社會問題；第三，保障司法公正。

新加坡土地管理局（SLA）確保土地資源的有效和富有創意的利用。針對朱卡奈因先生和娜迪婭·薩姆丁女士的提問，這一工作是通過積極主動的參與，培養對社會和社群需求的良好理解來實現的。例如，SLA與國家志願者與慈善中心以及社群實體如新希望合作，瞭解他們在尋找合適空間時面臨的挑戰。通過這些交流，SLA識別出新興需求，如銀髮共居和社群空間的需求。

首先，為了應對新加坡老年人對獨立生活日益增長的需求，土地管理局（SLA）啟用了國有物業，如Hindoo路79至95號、Evans路26號和Henderson路98號。在此基礎上，土地管理局計劃於今年第一季度啟動招標，涉及位於Admiralty Road East的20處歷史遺產物業，用於多代同堂共居。那些提出全面規劃並強調促進獨立老年生活的代際共居方案將獲得優先考慮。

第二，新加坡土地管理局（SLA）正在啟用具有潛力促進社群融合的國家物業。一個例子是將麥克斯韋爾路30號改造為健康與健身中心，這是與城市重建局（URA）聯合發起的“將空間重塑為充滿活力的場所”計劃的一部分，正如蔡偉傑先生所提到的。另一個例子是將位於普林塞普街11號的前選舉部辦公室改造為名為“The Foundry”的社會影響力中心，該中心於去年開始運營。

此外，新加坡土地管理局（SLA）將修復並重新利用東海岸路1號樓（1ECR），用於社群和社會用途。翻新的空間將提供支援青年的專案和培訓，以及適合各年齡層的休閒活動。SLA於2024年9月招標，聘請一個多學科顧問團隊，提供增建和改造工程的諮詢服務，預計於2028年完成。

新加坡土地管理局（SLA）將繼續與各機構合作，引入更多國家財產用於經濟和社會用途。通過推出更多價格-質量招標，SLA將能夠更好地策劃場所營造工作，以惠及社群。

除了最佳化國家資產的使用外，我們還利用技術實現交易的數字化。新加坡目前的產權轉讓系統依賴於實體檔案和流程，且需要大量人力。因此，土地管理局（SLA）一直在開發數字產權轉讓門戶（DCP）。該門戶是一個完全整合的數字化端到端產權轉讓流程，適用於所有型別的物業，從購房意向書（OTP）階段到法律完成階段。它還將支援電子支付和數字檔案。

當數字契約平臺（DCP）投入執行時，將為所有相關方提供更大的便利，包括買家和賣家、律師事務所、房地產專業人士、金融機構和開發商。我們正在對該系統進行嚴格測試，並徵求行業反饋意見，包括關於DCP各階段的優先順序以及相關技術的持續發展。

DCP的第一階段重點是私人住宅轉售交易，這類交易佔私人房地產交易的一半以上。OTP流程的測試版於2024年11月與選定的利益相關者開始。私人住宅轉售市場的OTP正式交易計劃於2025年初作為試點啟動。DCP的功能和交易型別將在後續階段逐步擴充套件。

即使技術變得不可或缺，我們也意識到它帶來了問題，尤其是版權問題。我們的知識產權制度通過賦予創作者對其作品使用的一系列權利來激勵新作品的創作，同時允許第三方，包括其他創作者和創新者，合理訪問這些作品，以便他們在此基礎上進行創作。通過這種方式，我們通過平衡的方法最大化創造性和創新性的產出。

林秀霞女士和施淑儀女士詢問了人工智慧背景下的平衡問題。雖然知識產權制度允許使用受版權保護的材料進行數字創新，但我們已設定條件以保護權利持有人的合法權益。特別是，如果使用版權材料來訓練人工智慧模型，這些材料必須是合法獲取的。例如，對於付費牆後的材料，必須通過付費訪問。此外，權利持有人可以利用版權保護制度，對生成或使用與其作品實質相似的內容採取行動。

我們認識到，諸如生成式人工智慧等技術對許多利益相關者產生了重大影響。政府仍然致力於與創意社群合作，解決他們的關切。政府正在與包括作家、出版商、唱片公司和創意機構在內的創意領域利益相關者進行持續的溝通。

收到的一些建議包括提高版權材料用於人工智慧訓練的透明度，以及讓權利持有人對其材料的使用擁有更多控制權。我們正在研究這些建議。例如，我們正在與醫療器械發展局（MDDI）和信息通信媒體發展局（IMDA）探討，在我們的人工智慧治理政策和工具中支援透明度措施和尊重版權，例如IMDA即將釋出的針對生成式人工智慧模型開發者和應用部署者的安全指南。

法律部和新加坡智慧財產權局（IPOS）將繼續與利益相關者合作，保持支援創造力和創新的適當平衡。

我們還關注技術對法律行業的影響。法律專業人士應安全且負責任地使用生成式人工智慧工具，同時我們也鼓勵其採用。

設立護欄的必要性顯而易見，原因有三：第一，生成式人工智慧可能會給出不準確的回答或產生幻覺；第二，安全和隱私問題——一些生成式人工智慧模型可能會儲存使用者資訊和搜尋歷史以訓練模型，而這些資訊隨後可能會在對其他使用者的回答中被再現；第三，隨著不同程式設計師快速開發生成式人工智慧，倫理問題日益突出，因此必須在原則、倫理和規則指導的框架內開發生成式人工智慧工具。

鑑於此背景，法律部正在制定指導方針，指導法律專業人士成為生成式人工智慧工具的聰明買家和使用者。我們已諮詢了新加坡法院、律師協會和信息通信媒體發展局等利益相關方，並將在適當時候諮詢業界。

數字化的另一個方面是對使用者和我們社群的新興威脅。林標泉先生、維克拉姆·奈爾先生、朱卡奈因先生和娜迪婭·薩姆丁女士詢問了政府打擊網路危害的努力。

政府已採取重大措施應對網路危害的普遍存在。其中包括2014年頒佈《防止騷擾法》（POHA），並於2019年加強該法，為受害者提供針對騷擾（包括網路騷擾）的法律救濟；以及頒佈《網路安全及其他（修訂）法案》和《網路刑事危害法》，以便政府對有害內容採取行動。

然而，網路危害仍然是許多人關注的領域——各位議員在他們的發言中也提到了這一點。

MDDI在2024年的一項調查發現，三分之二的受訪者在社交媒體上遇到過有害內容。網路傷害對年輕人，尤其是年輕女性來說，是一個特別嚴重的問題。在SG Her Empowerment（SHE）2023年的一項研究中，超過半數年齡在15至24歲之間的受訪者報告曾親身經歷過網路虐待。這一比例高於其他任何年齡組。在該年齡組中，年輕女性成為性騷擾受害者的可能性幾乎是男性的兩倍。40%的網路騷擾受害者報告經歷了嚴重的情緒和心理困擾，包括抑鬱和自殘。

法律部和多元文化發展局一直在研究仍然存在的差距。我們廣泛諮詢了社群團體，如與青少年、婦女和女孩合作的團體；專家；科技公司；以及司法機構。

下午2時15分

確定的主要缺口是需要一個簡單快捷的程式來尋求線上傷害的救濟。法院程式可能令人生畏且難以應對。對於現有法律是否能用來應對新出現的傷害存在不確定性，而且由於肇事者往往匿名，缺乏問責機制。

為了解決這些不足，法律部和MDDI正在合作制定新的立法，涵蓋三個大方面。首先，將設立一個新的機構，能夠迅速處理有關網路傷害的投訴。MDDI將分享更多關於該機構的細節，以及其應對網路傷害的一些更廣泛的努力。

第二，它將規定法定侵權行為，以明確法律涵蓋的線上傷害型別，以及線上生態系統中各方的權利和義務。這些法定侵權行為將為受害者提供明確的法律依據，以追究對其所受傷害負責的人的責任。我們打算讓這些法定侵權行為適用於一系列嚴重的線上傷害，包括網路騷擾、親密影像濫用和兒童虐待材料。

第三，它將引入新的機制，以應對網路傷害行為者濫用匿名性的情況。正如Nadia Samdin女士和其他人正確指出的那樣——如果目的是增強問責制，首先必須有足夠的資訊。受害者可以申請查明行為者的使用者資訊。受害者可能需要知道這些資訊，以便考慮法律訴訟，更好地保護自己免受行為者的侵害。

提供此類資訊將受到保障措施的約束，以防止濫用。該資訊不應用於進行“反擊”。利益相關者，如科技公司，也表達了一些保留意見——主要是關於此類措施將如何影響他們的業務。我們將與他們密切合作，以緩解他們的擔憂。我們將在適當時候公佈更多細節。政府致力於確保受害者在遭受網路傷害時能夠獲得便捷且有效的救濟。

在細分方面，自2021年6月1日公共衛生中心（PHC）開始運營至2024年12月31日，共提交了2,023份保護令（PO）申請，涉及以下型別的騷擾投訴：（a）760起涉及網路欺凌；（b）719起涉及人肉搜尋；（c）485起涉及職場騷擾；（d）253起涉及性騷擾；（e）122起涉及債務催收員、放貸人或債權人的騷擾。總數為2,339起，儘管申請數量為2,023份，因為一份申請中可能包含多種型別的騷擾投訴。

我現在轉向林淑儀女士關於刑事案件中個人保證金的查詢——這是《刑事訴訟程序（雜項修正）法案2024》中的一項修正。該修正允許被控非保釋罪行且最高刑期可達七年的被告人以個人保證金獲釋，作為保釋的替代方案。此前，被控此類罪行的人只能在等待調查或審判期間通過保釋獲釋。如果他們無法找到保釋人，即使被提供保釋，也會被還押。

通過這項修正，他們在適當情況下可以自行提供保證金獲釋。正如尊敬的議員所提，這減少了對他們生活和賺錢能力的干擾。自2024年8月實施該修正以來，已有超過100名被告因非保釋罪行而獲准以個人保證金獲釋。個人保證金制度是新的，尚處於初期階段。我們將繼續審視有關拘留和保釋的政策。

最後，我談談我們在確保司法可及性方面的工作。第二法律部長Edwin提到了公共辯護人辦公室和法律援助局的良好工作。法律部也正與各合作伙伴合作，通過技術手段增加司法可及性。

值得注意的是，我們與Pro Bono SG合作開發了LawGoWhere。該平臺於去年三月推出，是一個一站式門戶，整合了法律資訊、法律服務和法律意識資源的獲取。

今年，將整合法律幫助查詢功能，使使用者更容易尋求法律資訊。使用者可以輸入郵政編碼和法律問題等資訊，獲得法律援助選項，例如最近的法律診所。

儘管技術使用日益增加，我們也關注數字鴻溝，正如Tan Wu Meng博士所指出的。針對他的提問，已採取措施確保司法對所有人都可及，無論其對技術的熟悉程度如何。例如，遇到法院電子服務（如社群司法與法庭系統）困難的個人，可以撥打州法院熱線聯絡他們，也可以前往州法院業務中心使用數字終端，或如需幫助，可到州法院服務中心尋求協助。

主席先生，臨近結束，我感謝各位議員的發言。Usha Chandradas女士談到了可能的法律改革領域。鑑於已列出的繁重工作，一些審查需要更多時間仔細考慮。我從社會及家庭發展部瞭解到，2000年《保護成年人公約》亦是如此。Razwana教授也談到了累犯問題，內政部在其部長辦公會中已有涵蓋。

主席先生，最後，第二法律部長Edwin Tong談到了法律及法律程式對實現新加坡良好成果的重要性，這一切以法治為基礎。他還談及我們在動盪的外部環境中，推動經濟增長的努力和方法。我們將加強法律框架，使其對商業友好且具有前瞻性，特別是在智慧財產權、爭議解決以及債務重組和破產領域。

此外，第二法律部長Tong闡述了我們提升律師事務所和法律專業人士能力的舉措——通過採用法律科技、促進進入海外市場以及提升整個行業各領域以培養新能力。

隨後，他談到了家庭司法和民事執行的執法機制；以及幫助社會中最弱勢群體獲得法律系統的途徑。他還提供了社群糾紛管理框架的最新情況。

最後，他宣佈慶祝新加坡現代法律體系建立200週年。

我已介紹了新加坡土地管理局最佳化國家資產使用以滿足不斷變化需求的努力，以及數字產權轉讓門戶的進展；我們維護支援創造力和創新的穩健平衡知識產權制度的努力；確保法律專業安全、負責任地使用生成式人工智慧；加強保護弱勢群體的網路新立法；騷擾保護法庭的最新情況；個人保證金改革的實施；以及利用技術促進司法可及性同時防止數字鴻溝。

這些共同構成了我們共享公共生活的基礎。法律是在本議院共同制定並獲得合法性的，但只有在這些規則的生活化和實踐中，我們國家才能賦予其生命。

主席：我們有時間進行澄清。Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim先生。

Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim先生：謝謝主席。我有兩組問題：一組給Edwin Tong部長，另一組給Murali Pillai國務部長。

關於部長，關於債務償還計劃。我非常歡迎法律部正在完善債務償還計劃的做法，目前該計劃容易被濫用。我知道有債務人會聘請第三方諮詢公司，這些公司收費極高。實際上，債務人自己還被要求再貸款來支付這些服務費用。所以，我想請問部長，從監管角度看，法律部如何計劃加強對第三方債務諮詢公司的監管，以防止誤導和剝削債務人？

在公眾方面，法律部是否考慮與其他部委或社會服務機構合作，為債務人提供準確可靠的財務指導，保護他們免受此類公司的剝削？我認為公眾意識非常關鍵。

關於Murali國務部長，關於數字辦公室在安全和網路危害方面與MDDI的潛在合作。我們注意到數字辦公室可能面臨的挑戰，如跟不上新技術、高量有害內容以及匿名濫用。我的問題是技術性問題，關於法定侵權行為的管轄權。我瞭解到法律部將推出一整套法定侵權行為，但這些是否也將遵循衝突法中的雙重可訴性規則？例如，該侵權行為是否需要在新加坡和侵權發生地國家均可訴——即侵權地法（lex loci delicti）和審理地法（lex fori）的問題。

Edwin Tong Chun Fai先生：主席，感謝Zhulkarnain先生對擬議計劃的支援。確實如此，諷刺的是，有些債務人諮詢這些公司，結果反而陷入更深的債務泥潭，因為他們試圖解決債務問題。我們對此非常關注，將採取措施尋找手段打擊這些公司的不當行為。

正如Zhulkarnain先生所指出，公眾意識確實關鍵。我們將大幅加強提高公眾意識的措施，方法包括：首先，在法律部網站上釋出資訊，增強其資訊量和使用者友好性。

其次，我們計劃釋出指南，幫助債務人瞭解破產申請流程，指導他們採取步驟，儘量避免依賴債務諮詢公司協助文書工作。我們將盡可能簡化流程，併發布逐步指南，幫助他們避免求助這些公司。

最後，我們還將考慮主動接觸債務人，例如將強制信用諮詢作為提交破產申請的前提條件，先行教育他們，提高對流程的認識，儘量勸阻他們轉向債務諮詢公司。

Murali Pillai先生：主席，關於Zhulkarnain先生關於管轄權的問題，正如我在發言中提到的，設立法定侵權行為主要是為受害者提供民事訴訟理由。管轄權基於現有法院的民事管轄權，範圍相當廣泛。至於雙重可訴性規則，涉及海外侵權行為是否可在本地追訴，是否適用取決於現行規則。

主席：Sylvia Lim女士。

Sylvia Lim女士：謝謝主席。我有兩個澄清問題，關於Murali國務部長提到的刑事訴訟法修訂，涉及審前釋放。早前他提到，自8月1日新規定生效以來，約有100人被以個人保證金釋放，而非保釋。我想請他確認這是否是執法部門和法院的合計數字，這是第一個問題。

第二個問題是，如果是這樣，六個月100人，平均每月約16人，我認為數字相當低。對此，他能否確認是否有持續培訓，特別是對執法部門，關於如何使用這項新規定？

Murali Pillai先生：主席，關於Lim女士的問題，我理解這是法院案件相關資料，但我可以核實並另行澄清。[請參閱《法律國務部長澄清》，官方報告，2025年3月4日，第95卷，第157期，澄清部分。]

主席：還有其他澄清嗎？Lim女士。

Sylvia Lim女士：謝謝主席。跟進一下，我想知道是否有持續培訓我們的執法人員，教他們如何在適用案件中使用這項新規定。

Murali Pillai先生：主席，這屬於內政部職責範圍。當然，我們可以轉達這方面的反饋。

下午2點30分

主席：還有其他議員要澄清嗎？如果沒有，我請Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim先生撤回你的修正案。

Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim先生：主席，感謝Edwin Tong部長和Murali Pillai國務部長的清晰澄清和對法律部及新加坡同胞的規劃。法律是工具，司法是理想。感謝法律部工作人員為新加坡人實現司法可及性理想所做的努力。現請求撤回我的修正案。

[（程式文本）修正案，經許可，撤回。（程式文本）]

[（程式文本）R項下3億5644萬1800元列入主要預算。（程式文本）]

[（程式文本）R項下1億3897萬3500元列入發展預算。（程式文本）]

英文原文

SPRS Hansard · Fetched: 2026-05-02

The Chairman : Head R, Ministry of Law. Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim.

1.00 pm

Singapore as an International Dispute Hub

Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim (Chua Chu Kang) : Chairman, I move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head R of the Estimates be reduced by $100."

Chairman, I am a disputes lawyer in an international arbitration practice. Singapore has firmly established itself as a leading international dispute resolution hub, attracting parties from all over the world seeking a neutral, efficient and trusted venue for resolving their disputes. Our strategic location, strong rule of law and world-class legal institutions make us the preferred choice for businesses and investors navigating complex cross-border disputes.

In 2022 alone, the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) handled 357 new cases, with parties from over 65 jurisdictions. SIAC's caseload has grown steadily over the years, reflecting the confidence of the global business community. Similarly, the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC) has seen an increase in cases involving international parties, reinforcing our reputation as a trusted forum for commercial dispute resolution.

Beyond arbitration and litigation, Singapore is also a leader in mediation. The Singapore Convention on Mediation, signed by more than 55 countries, highlights our commitment to promoting amicable dispute resolution worldwide. With a robust legal framework, top-tier professionals and a commitment to innovation, Singapore will continue to serve as a premier dispute resolution hub, offering certainty and fairness in an increasingly complex global business environment.

Singapore has, over the years, succeeded in attracting inter-governmental dispute resolution institutions. The Permanent Court of Arbitration has an office here in Singapore. Singapore is also the first country to have a model agreement with the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea to host its proceedings.

However, we cannot rest on our laurels. All around us, various jurisdictions have made significant developments and there is new competition for talent and disputes.

Just this year, the new Abu Dhabi International Arbitration Centre (Arbitrate AD) was launched with new arbitration rules that emphasise transparency, efficiency and cost effectiveness. A significant change is that the Abu Dhabi Global Market (ADGM), is now the default seat of arbitration, unless otherwise agreed, shifting from the previous onshore Abu Dhabi framework.

Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, in his Chinese New Year dinner, mentioned Singapore has to: first, stay open in this tumultuous economic climate to attract the right talent and investments to Singapore; second, stay ahead of the competition and ahead of the curve; but at the same time, third, stay united as Singaporeans. Now, in this spirit, may I ask the hon Minister what more is the Ministry of Law (MinLaw) doing to maintain our competitive edge on this front? What is MinLaw doing to support the legal profession to better meet the demands of modern legal practice to strengthen Singapore as a leading legal and dispute resolution hub?

[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]

Strengthening Rule of Law and New Trends

Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim : Chairman, access to justice must be real and meaningful for the common person, ensuring that legal protections work for those who need them the most. Singapore has taken concrete steps to make justice accessible, especially in key areas affecting everyday lives.

For families and divorced mothers, enforcing maintenance orders is critical. In 2022, over 2,700 maintenance-related applications were filed. The Maintenance Enforcement Process (MEP) now helps ensure that spouses and children receive the financial support that they are legally entitled to, reducing delays and hardship.

In May 2023, the Family Justice Reform Bill was passed by Parliament and received Presidential assent. The Family Justice Reform Act seeks to, among others: firstly, make improvements to Court proceedings and procedure in the Family Justice Courts; and secondly, enhance MEP. What is the status of the changes to be implemented through this Act?

With rising online harms, over 8,500 reported cases in 2023, swift protection is essential. The Protection from Harassment Act (POHA) provides Expedited Protection Orders against cyberbullying and harassment, ensuring that victims, including the vulnerable, can seek redress quickly.

In this regard, the Prime Minister has announced that a new agency will be set up to deal with online harms and that the Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI) and MinLaw are working together on this piece of legislation. What measures does MinLaw have in mind for addressing online harms?

For those in financial distress, the personal bankruptcy regime has been reformed. While over 1,600 bankruptcy orders were made in 2022, many benefited from the Debt Repayment Scheme, which offers a structured way to repay debts without the severe consequences of bankruptcy. Bankruptcy applications have increased in recent years as well. Does MinLaw consider that reforms to Singapore's bankruptcy law are necessary to address the evolving financial landscape?

Sir, justice must be fair, accessible and effective for all, not just the privileged but the everyday person. Singapore remains committed to ensuring that legal protections truly serve those who need them the most.

Online Harms

Mr Vikram Nair (Sembawang) : Chairman, it has been barely three decades since the Internet was first introduced into most of our lives. Many of us in this House may remember life and childhoods without the Internet. For the children of today, this is almost unthinkable. As Internet use has become a ubiquitous part of life, the potential for online harms has also grown. The issue of scams, many of which take place online, has just been discussed in the Ministry of Home Affairs' (MHA's) Committee of Supply (COS) debate.

Other types of online harms include exposure to harmful online content or conduct, including explicit or violent materials, cyberbullying and harassment. Addiction to screens is also a problem, especially with children and youths; and countries, such as Australia, have passed legislation to limit access to social media for children.

The Prime Minister announced in October last year that a new agency will be set up to deal with online harms and provide a one-stop centre for victims. He mentioned that MinLaw and MDDI are working together on this project. In conjunction with this, I also note that a public consultation was held by MinLaw and MDDI to get feedback from the public. Does MinLaw have any updates on this initiative, the likely legislative framework and details on the plans for this new agency?

Cyberbullying and Online Harm

Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten) : Sir, in July 2024, there was a report about an online influencer in Malaysia who took her life due to cyberbullying. In the same month last year, a survey done by MDDI found that 74% of Internet users face harmful content, like cyberbullying or sexual content online, but only a quarter report it.

Many of us who are on social media have faced all sorts of cyberbullying at one point or another. Sometimes, the bully makes false allegations; sometimes, they deliberately use words intended to humiliate and hurt your feelings; the trolls frequently make insinuations about your character, they use mean and vicious words against you. Frequently, the bully hides behind the cloak of anonymity. This is not acceptable, especially for those younger social media users. Why should anyone using social media be subject to such bullying behaviour?

Sir, in an answer to a Parliamentary Question in October 2024, Minister Josephine Teo said that the Government plans to introduce new legislation and measures to provide stronger support and assurance to victims of online harms, such as bullying. Can the Ministry provide an update as to the new legislation? Make it illegal for any social media user to use a false account to register that account. This means that if any user wishes to, say, bully others by making false allegations or using mean or harsh words, they must be held to account for the things they say. I look forward to the day when social media users can be protected from such bullying behaviour.

Tackling Online Harms

Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin (Ang Mo Kio) : Sir, in recent years, we have seen a rise in the seriousness and prevalence of online harms, such as cyberbullying and non-consensual sharing of intimate images. Singapore has developed a framework to address and mitigate these online harms through various legislation. The Ministry's plans to establish a dedicated agency, codify statutory torts and lift the veil of anonymity, will serve to enhance accountability and fortify our efforts in this regard.

I would like to ask for an elaboration of the nature of timely assistance which will be provided to victims of online harms. Will the agency, for example, have the power to compel the removal of harmful content? How will the assistance be augmented to support vulnerable victims, for example, children as well as women?

The agency will also be empowered to disclose the identity information of perpetrators to victims under specified circumstances. How will this be implemented in practice, given that many online platforms only require an email address for registration? What if the user of the account is overseas, for example?

Finally, tackling online harms must be done upstream. How else can the agency work with community groups to educate the public on constructive and safe online behaviour?

Pre-trial Release

Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied) : Sir, a person facing investigations or criminal charges may need to wait several months or even years before his case is concluded. I have seen how some lower-income Singaporeans struggle with this. A simple parking violation that usually attracts an out-of-Court composition fine is not paid, eventually leading to a Court hearing that requires a bailor. Failure to find a bailor will lead to pre-trial custody, which often leads to job loss or disruption of education, plunging the whole family into a much more precarious situation.

I had previously raised this issue during the Justice System Motion in November 2020. To that end, I was very encouraged when the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) was amended last year to expressly require the law enforcement agency or judge to consider releasing a person charged with a less serious offence on his personal bond without the need for a bailor.

Sir, the new provisions of section 93(1A) and section 93(1C) of the CPC, which came into force on 1 August 2024, after more than six months, it will be opportune to find out if there are significant outcomes to date. Are there indications from the law enforcement agencies that more eligible persons are being released on personal bond? Similarly, for those charged in Court, are there similar indications from the Courts that more accused persons are now being released on personal bond?

The Chairman : Mr Patrick Tay. You can take your two cuts together.

Protection from Harassment Act Updates

Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (Pioneer) : Sir, POHA has been around for a decade and the POHA Court set up. Can MinLaw provide an update on the number of cases filed and mediated by the POHA Court; and among all the POHA cases filed, what is the breakdown of the types, that is, how many involve community neighbours; how many are online harassment; how many are sexual harassment; and how many are workplace harassment? I also ask MinLaw how this Court has and can better ensure the efficient and effective resolution of harassment complaints.

Bettering Civil Enforcement

Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan : Sir, I have assisted and advised union members and workers in workplace disputes which may end up in the civil Courts or the Employment Claims Tribunal. The problem is that they may win the case and get a judgment either from the Courts or the Employment Claims Tribunal but their happiness and relief are often short-lived.

This is because the employer may not be able or want to pay up. This would mean the aggrieved worker, often a layman, having to navigate and be subjected to the entire rigmarole to enforce the judgment and also incur monies to do so. In most instances, they would still need to engage a lawyer and may sometimes still be subject to a protracted enforcement process.

There is thus a need to simplify, expedite and better the civil enforcement process and mechanism to facilitate the victim's recovery of monies. Can I ask MinLaw if it intends to review this and make enforcement more accessible, economical, expeditious and less painful for workers and the layman?

Enforcing Awards by Tribunals

Ms See Jinli Jean (Nominated Member) : Last October, I asked if MinLaw would consider simplifying enforcement of small claims and employment claims tribunals' awards. I noted the Minister's reply that MinLaw was working on reforms, "To make the enforcement of civil judgments more effective, efficient and simpler."

The challenge of enforcing awards was also recently raised in the Straits Times forum. Could the Minister provide an update on reforms to address challenges of non-compliance with Court orders?

1.15 pm

Access to Justice

Mr Vikram Nair : Chairman, the last few years have seen significant changes to improve access to justice. Thanks to initiatives from MinLaw, the Law Society, community organisations and, of course, the many lawyers that contribute their time and money to pro bono work.

On the Ministry's part, it set up the Public Defender's Office, a major initiative that now provides criminal defence services for impecunious defendants.

The Law Society has set up an Institution of Public Character called Pro Bono SG and through this, provided legal aid for those who need assistance in civil matters. In the Admiralty division, for example, the Realm of Tranquility, a local charitable organisation, collaborated with Pro Bono SG to open a community legal clinic at their premises which brings legal aid to the heartlands. These are commendable initiatives and I would like to know if the Ministry has any further plans to facilitate access to justice?

An important aspect of justice is also the ability to enforce judgements easily. In the Committee of Supply 2024, the Ministry mentioned it was studying ways to improve the civil enforcement framework. I will be grateful for any updates on this.

Finally, over the years, the Ministry has simplified the bankruptcy regime, making it easier for individuals to restructure debts and also made it easier for bankrupts to get discharged from bankruptcy. Perhaps, in part, because of these measures, the number of bankruptcy applications seems to have gone up. Does the Ministry have any views on this matter and is it planning any further actions in relation to the bankruptcy regime?

The Chairman : Assoc Prof Razwana Begum, you can take your two cuts together.

Assoc Prof Razwana Begum Abdul Rahim (Nominated Member) : Sir, access to justice is a fundamental pillar of a fair and equitable society, ensuring that individuals can protect their rights and seek redress through the legal system. Ensuring that legal services are accessible and affordable to all citizens, not only foster trust in the judicial system, but also supports the country's commitment to justice and equality for everyone, regardless of their background or circumstances.

In this context, how is the Ministry addressing the barriers faced by vulnerable populations in accessing justice and what strategies are in place to ensure their voices are both heard and protected? What initiatives are being introduced to make legal information and resources more available online? How is technology being leveraged to streamline legal processes, reducing the time and costs associated with accessing justice?

Mediation and Restorative Justice

Restorative justice and community mediation are effective at resolving conflicts and addressing harm within communities. Unlike traditional punitive systems, restorative justice focuses on healing and reconsolidation by involving all stakeholders in the process, including victims, offenders and the community. Mediation serves as a collaborative tool, facilitating open dialogue and mutual understanding to reach amicable resolutions. Together, these practices not only help reduce recidivism but also strengthen community bonds, promoting a more supportive and cohesive environment.

In this context, what initiative is the Ministry implementing to promote community mediation and resolution and how is this addressing challenges, such as public awareness and acceptance, to encourage broader participation? In what ways is the Ministry ensuring that legal professionals receive adequate training in community mediation and restorative justice principles and what partnerships are being formed between the Ministry and community organisations to facilitate the successful implementation of mediation and restorative programmes?

The Chairman : The next Member is not present. Mr Sitoh Yih Pin.

Community Disputes

Mr Sitoh Yih Pin (Potong Pasir) : Mr Chairman, I spoke on community disputes at last year's COS. As many of us in this House have experienced, managing and resolving disputes among neighbours, often living side by side, is one of the most challenging aspects of the work we do in the Community.

Since then, I was heartened to see the passing of the Community Disputes Resolution (Amendment) Bill in November 2024. In particular, I was looking forward to observe how effective the new Community Relations Unit (CRU) will be, with officers given investigatory and enforcement powers to intervene in neighbourly disputes.

Oftentimes, in disputes involving noise or other disagreements, it is a contest of one neighbour gathering "evidence" against the other. This can include recording each other's alleged noise or movements at odd hours or, in extreme cases, surreptitiously installing cameras directed at each other's homes. As one can expect, such behaviour is likely only to escalate and rapidly increase the temperature of the dispute, often damaging neighbourly relations beyond repair.

Having an objective arbiter, like CRU, could reduce the need for extreme measures taken by the residents themselves, with decisions and outcomes acceptable to affected parties. Separately, the enhanced powers of the Community Disputes Resolution Tribunal (CDRT) will also hopefully quicken the pace of resolving community disputes effectively. In this context, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister to give an update on the implementation of the enhancements in the space of community mediation after the passing of the Community Disputes Resolution (Amendment) Bill.

Community Justice – Avoid Digital Divides

Dr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong) : The online Community Justice and Tribunals System brings convenience to those who can go online. What happens to seniors who are less digitally-savvy, less literate or who may not be so familiar with the English language? What happens if these seniors want to access the Small Claims Tribunal or Protection from Harassment Court or other services under the CJTS? Does this mean the digitally disadvantaged may inevitably face an uneven playing field when it comes to accessing community justice with all these new digital platforms?

Sir, digitalisation must not become a digital divide. Digital justice must not become difficult justice for the non-information technology (IT) savvy. We must avoid digital dropout where a case with merits is abandoned, because a senior found it too hard to access digital processes.

The Chairman : Next Member is not present. Ms Sylvia Lim.

Safeguarding IP Rights of Creatives

Ms Sylvia Lim : Chairman, in Singapore, pursuing a creative career can be difficult due to the challenge of earning a stable living. However, it is vital that Singaporean artists, writers, filmmakers and other creatives can lead meaningful livelihoods and help support the growth of Singapore's artistic and cultural landscape.

To that end, I have come across many creatives, such as film producers and photographers, who do not fully understand their rights, especially when it comes to the intellectual property (IP). Many are unaware that under the Copyright Act 2021, the IP rights in their creations automatically belong to them even if they were paid for that work. This is a crucial gap in knowledge that must be addressed. This becomes more urgent and important with the rise of generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI), which has led to the unauthorised use of copyrighted materials for profit-driven purposes.

The recent open statement from Singapore's literary community to the National Library Board, signed by at least 88 local creatives, reflects growing concern over the lack of regard for copyrighted works and its potential impact on the vitality and viability of pursuing an artistic career.

Besides promoting education and awareness, the Government can also consider introducing regulations on AI models to better level the playing field between AI developers and creatives. Some jurisdictions have started on this. For example, the European Union's (EU's) AI Act compels Gen AI models to demonstrate compliance with the EU's copyright law and provide a sufficiently detailed summary of the content used for training their models. Such obligations empower copyright-holders to exercise their rights by opting out of having their works used in text and data mining.

In this regard, it would be good to understand whether there are ground outreach efforts to creatives to promote understanding of their IP rights. In addition, how are MinLaw and the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) tackling the copyright challenges posed by AI.

Protecting Creators' IP in Age of AI

Ms See Jinli Jean : IPOS and the National Trades Union Congress' (NTUC's) Visual, Audio, Creative Content Professionals Association (Singapore) is partnering to raise IP awareness and proficiency among creators. Likewise, for companies that adopt AI, how will MinLaw guide them to adhere to ethical and respectful use of IP? For instance, copyrighted works should not be used to train Gen AI applications without permission or compensation. How will MinLaw balance between fostering innovation and protecting creators' IP?

The Chairman : Mr Keith Chua, please take your two cuts together.

IPOS' Support for SMEs

Mr Keith Chua (Nominated Member) : Mr Chairman, there are many avenues for our small and medium enterprises (SMEs) to grow both locally and internationally. There are also many helpful grants and different areas of financing support available. However, many of our SMEs may not be aware of the opportunity to unlock value of their intangible assets and IP rights. Successful businesses should ensure that they protect their brand value. This may also open up avenues for access to finance.

How can IPOS support SMEs in this area? Has IPOS worked with trade associations and chambers (TACs) to better reach Singapore SMEs?

Singapore as Arbitration Hub

Mr Chairman, Singapore has established herself as one of the leading places for international arbitration. Recent reports suggest that Singapore has become the leading arbitration hub.

There are many accompanying benefits ranging from professional to economic. However, there is also keen competition from other cities. May I ask the Minister what steps are we taking and what steps can we be taking to deepen the attraction of Singapore as an arbitration hub? With the many global and technological changes more recently, including a more protective and uncertain world, how might this affect our efforts?

In-house Counsels and Para-legals

Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan : Sir, I declare my interest as Director of Legal for NTUC and honorary member of the Singapore Corporate Counsel Association.

In-house counsels in Singapore form a significant and growing part of our legal fraternity. The number of in-house counsels has outstripped the number of lawyers in practice to-date. This presents a great opportunity for our Singapore in-house legal counsels to differentiate themselves in their skills as well as how they help businesses move confidently in Singapore and around the globe, while also helping to bring back crucial work to our private practice lawyers and others in related fields. I therefore ask MinLaw to provide an update of their current support and longer-term plans to further uplift the career health and progression of in-house counsels in Singapore.

In the legal fraternity and ecosystem, we have a group of para-legals, also known as paraprofessionals or legal executives in law firms and corporate entities. Many of them graduated from the law programmes offered by Temasek Polytechnic as well as other educational institutions. They also hope to build and boost their professionalism, competencies and standards, continuing education and career progression opportunities. I therefore ask how can MinLaw further help to uplift and enhance the career health and progression of para-legals and paraprofessionals.

Supporting Our Young Lawyers

Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin : Chairman, I continue to speak up for law students and young lawyers in this Chamber. The demands of the legal industry on our juniors are not easy. To keep pace with the fast-evolving demands of the profession and to take care of our young lawyers while maintaining a strong pipeline, it is essential to ensure that our legal training frameworks remain robust and forward-looking.

Under the new practice training framework, trainee lawyers must satisfy the dual seat requirement by rotating through a solicitor's seat and a litigation seat. For smaller firms operating as niche practices, arrangements must be made to rotate trainees to a covering law practice for them to gain exposure to a secondary seat.

Does the Ministry have any indication as to the capacity of smaller firms to undertake the training of young lawyers and recruit future talent, given the necessity of rotating trainees out of their firm? Are measures being considered to support these firms in navigating such demands?

With our growing role as a leading international arbitration hub, a rising number of disputes from our civil law neighbours may be heard on our shores. Is the Ministry considering furthering educational reforms to deepen and broaden civil law expertise among our law students and practitioners to ensure that we can remain at the forefront of international dispute resolution?

1.30 pm

Update on International Conventions

Ms Usha Chandradas (Nominated Member) : Sir, I would like to seek an update from the Ministry on Singapore's position with regard to three international conventions, namely the Hague Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters (Hague Judgments Convention), the Convention providing a Uniform Law on the Form of an International Will, (International Wills Convention) and the Hague Convention on the International Protection of Adults.

Becoming a signatory to these conventions could strengthen Singapore's position as a global wealth management and family office hub. It could enhance legal certainty in cross-border disputes, simplify estate and succession planning for internationally connected families, and provide greater safeguards for vulnerable individuals who are based in Singapore but who have legal or financial interests across multiple jurisdictions. I would appreciate insights from the Ministry on any ongoing considerations, potential challenges or timelines for Singapore to join these conventions.

Optimising State Properties

Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin : Chairman, as our urban living grows increasingly dense, well-planned community areas are essential in creating dynamic and sustainable neighbourhoods. The Ministry has stated that it had identified opportunities to optimise state properties to better meet community needs and create greater social impact. What criteria is used to evaluate which state properties should be redeveloped? What are the specific community needs that are taken into consideration, given our diverse demographic?

Does the Ministry have plans to pilot community concepts that engage a broader spectrum of Singaporeans so as to create dynamic spaces that foster meaningful interactions? Could the Ministry consider piloting co-living concepts in these properties, for example, or create more care and recreational spaces for Singaporeans?

SLA's Reinventing Spaces into Vibrant Places Programme

Mr Keith Chua : Mr Chairman, since launching the Singapore Land Authority's (SLAs') Reinventing Spaces into Vibrant Places ( RSVP) programme, could the Minister kindly advise whether properties have been successfully awarded and, if so, how many?

Are any of the properties currently in use by the successful tenants? Are there any properties scheduled for launch in the coming year and, if so, when will be the timing of this launch? Will the decision for additional properties under this programme be solely determined by SLA and the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA)?

In evaluating the interest generated in the programme thus far, can the Ministry advise whether the interest for state land is still leaning towards the more conventional method as there seems to be many more sites listed for tender under this method? Would there be favourable consideration by SLA for proposals from non-profit groups and organisations, given the increase in interest for arts, culture and heritage?

Some community service organisations may find use of state properties as an option to better connect with the community. Is SLA open to such proposals? As an example, creative use of a property may enable it to be a welcoming touchpoint for persons to find out more about difficult topics, such as mental health or other conditions like anxiety or depression. Use of appropriate sites may also appeal to the seniors, especially if the property has an interesting history. It may be helpful for happy memories.

Optimising State Assets via Technology

Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim : Chairman, state land assets are crucial to Singapore's urban planning and economic development. Singapore must maximise land use efficiency. How has SLA successfully optimised state assets to meet community and economic needs? How has the development of the Digital Conveyancing Portal been progressing since the last update at COS 2023? Is the project still expected to be completed by 2026?

The Chairman : Minister Edwin Tong.

The Second Minister for Law (Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai) : Mr Chairman, this year, we celebrate SG60 and our nation-building efforts that have allowed Singapore to develop, prosper and thrive against the odds.

Many factors have contributed to our transformation from Third World to First, and one of them is our commitment to building a strong legal system and advancing the rule of law. MinLaw will continue to uphold these fundamentals, to ensure the vibrancy of our economy, as well as to maintain trust and cohesion in our society.

I thank the Members for their various suggestions through their cuts, and I will address Members' cuts in this speech, organised into two broad topics: first, strengthening Singapore's position as an international legal and IP hub to support our economic growth; second, improving legal processes and increasing access to justice to maintain trust and cohesion in our community. My colleague, Minister of State Murali Pillai, will speak about optimising the use of state assets and safeguarding our society from online harms.

Sir, the Prime Minister has spoken about the challenges that Singapore is facing in this turbulent external environment. There are undoubtedly strong headwinds and we have to be cautious. But equally, in this environment, there are also opportunities if we remain attractive to foreign investments and maintain an open, thriving business environment. One reason Singapore has been able to attract foreign investments is the confidence in our legal system. My Ministry is committed to preserving and enhancing this trust in Singapore through three legal pillars which I will outline.

First, continually strengthening our legal framework in which we operate. Our approach is to grow new areas to support emerging industries and evolving business models as well as to continue to build on our areas of strength. Let me briefly mention three areas.

First, in the area of IP, which Mr Keith Chua spoke about. The value of an enterprise is increasingly in IP as well as in intangible assets (IA). But to realise this value, enterprises must be able to monetise both the IA and the IP. Only then will they be willing to invest in further innovation, which then further enhances and increases the value of their enterprise.

Singapore's IP regime and innovation environment are recognised internationally. In 2024, Singapore climbed a spot to rank fourth globally in the World Intellectual Property Organisation's (WIPO's) Global Innovation Index and remained top in Asia. Under the Singapore IP Strategy 2030, or SIPS 2030, we are focused on spurring innovation and helping enterprises, including the smaller enterprises, unlock the value in their IA and IP. We support enterprises at various stages of their IP journey. For businesses with overseas expansion plans, IPOS will launch the IP Management Clinics Singapore programme, in collaboration with WIPO, in March 2025. This will provide enterprises with comprehensive IA and IP strategy support, including connecting with experts for a four-month mentorship.

To Ms Sylvia Lim's query, for smaller enterprises and freelancers in the creative sectors, IPOS has simple info-packs as well as easy-to-understand videos that explain copyright and share best practices on using and protecting IP. In fact, Ms Lim, I remember that when I introduced the Bill that you spoke about, we had introduced as well the learner aids as well as these videos.

In addition, IPOS also works with agencies like the National Arts Council (NAC) and the National Library Board (NLB), as well as industry partners, like Copyright Licensing and Administration Society of Singapore (CLASS) and the Visual, Audio, Creative Content Professionals Association (VICPA), to provide additional support.

Just last year, in August 2024, IPOS signed a three-year MOU with VICPA, to support the creative industry in IP education and management, and capacity building. IPOS is also working on a video podcast with NAC and NLB to engage creatives in the music industry. This will be launched during World IP Day on 26 April later this year.

IPOS also actively supports partner events, such as the International Federation of Reproduction Rights Organisations (IFRRO) World Congress to discuss copyright-related issues and developments. This will happen in October this year.

In other words, going down to the basic industry, at that level, as well as elevating ourselves to world global thought leadership in these areas are all part of the efforts to enhance awareness and education in this space. And we will, indeed, look out for more opportunities to reach our creators to raise their awareness in this very quickly evolving environment.

For enterprises looking to commercialise their IA and IP, IPOS is working with local and international partners to develop IA valuation guidelines that are interoperable internationally. We will seek public feedback on the draft IA valuation guidelines in the first half of 2025. Minister of State Murali Pillai will speak about the development of technology and its impact on IP rights.

The second pillar I want to speak about is dispute resolution. From time to time, we all know businesses may run into disputes with others. It is really part and parcel of doing business. But they have to be resolved in an open, transparent manner, as well as efficiently.

Over the years, we have updated our regime and enhanced our services. In short, we take a business-centric approach. We align our regime to international standards. We develop a full suite of options, whether it is in arbitration, mediation or litigation, or a combination of them, so that parties can choose, have the autonomy, depending on the nature of their needs as well as the particular circumstances of the transaction in question. We also give effect to party autonomy, be it choice of law or choice of forum, institution, modality of resolution, or the choice of counsel.

Overall, Singapore has done well. If you take SICC, it is celebrating its 10th anniversary this year. It has seen a steadily increasing caseload, including fresh filings. The caseload of SIAC, as well as SIMC, in both the arbitration and mediation spaces, have also seen a general upward trend. Many of these cases, in fact, have minimal connection to Singapore.

To Mr Keith Chua's query, we will continue to strengthen our institutions.

First, by embracing technology to provide value-added services to users. SIAC, as far as we know, is the only arbitration centre with ISO 27001 Certification for its Information Security Management system. SIMC has a Mediation AI Assistant, and Maxwell Chambers offers cutting-edge drone camera and holographic displays which aid in the presentation of evidence, as well as in the course of resolving disputes at hearings.

Second, by providing platforms to profile Singapore as a thought leader in this space. Members will know that we have many international conferences in Singapore, such as the Singapore Convention Week that started since 2019 in the starting days of the Singapore Convention on Mediation which we have continued since. We have the Singapore-China International Commercial Dispute Resolution Conference. This takes place once a year – one year in China, and one year we hosted in Singapore. We will host it in Singapore later this year. These events, among others, not only provide a platform for leading experts to discuss latest developments, but they are also an opportunity for lawyers in Singapore to connect with the global community.

Third, in debt restructuring and insolvency. This is an integral part of a well-functioning and well-developed economy. It provides practical and commercial options for companies as well as smaller businesses and entrepreneurs in financial distress, giving flexibility and realistic options to restructure. Successful restructurings not only allow the debtor to carry on as a going concern, but generally result in better outcomes for employees, creditors and investors.

My Ministry has enhanced this framework over the last decade and let me speak about three parts of this framework.

First, in corporate insolvency. We have grafted in features from leading, as well as tried-and-tested models, like, for example, chapter 11 of the US Bankruptcy Code, which we brought in about six to seven years ago. We have adopted the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-border Insolvency; and we have also clarified the SICC's jurisdiction for cases with multi-jurisdiction elements, which are particularly a feature of large cross-border restructurings. We have introduced simplified insolvency, providing entities with simpler, faster and cheaper processes. Members will know we first introduced this as a temporary measure during COVID-19, and this was made permanent earlier this year to benefit more companies.

Finally, in personal bankruptcy. We have a differentiated discharge framework for bankrupts. This is a rehabilitative regime that seeks to encourage financial prudence without, at the same time, stifling entrepreneurship.

We have arrived at a regime, which we believe, balances the interests of debtors and creditors, maintaining a healthy lending environment for sustained economic growth whilst, at the same time, supporting debtors across the spectrum: from individual entrepreneurs to larger corporates, both locally as well as foreign.

This has resulted in the growing use of Singapore's framework. For instance, the shipping firm, Pacific International Lines, and Vietnamese developer, No Va Land – a case heard in the SICC.

To Mr Zhulkarnain's and Mr Vikram Nair's queries, we are not resting on our laurels. We are building on the experiences of these cases, as well as the experience of practitioners. We are carefully looking at the next set of refinements, considering feedback and we will look at introducing further enhancements.

1.45 pm

These enhancements that we are thinking about will include the following.

First, the Debt Repayment Scheme (DRS) for individuals. MinLaw is looking to, among other matters, prevent misuse of the DRS by debtors who are advised by businesses to borrow irresponsibly and then self-petition for bankruptcy.

Second, in the area of corporate rescue tools, in particular, in judicial management. We will also review our current Chapter 11 regime, to assess the need for changes. In 2023, some two years ago, we convened the Committee to Enhance Singapore's Corporate Restructuring and Insolvency (R&I) Regime. The Committee has been engaged in robust debates, consulted with stakeholders, discussed the recent cases that I mentioned, as well as taken consultations on its recommendations and it will be able to release a report shortly.

Next, I move to the second pillar: expanding and growing our legal competency as well as capabilities.

Sir, the world is increasingly complex and certainly, legal work is no longer limited by geographical boundaries. As Mr Zhulkarnain said, for our law firms and our legal professionals to compete effectively, they must keep up with emerging trends and offer unique advantages and we agree with that.

To raise the quality and consistency of training, we implemented several changes in July 2024, pursuant to the Committee for the Professional Training of Lawyers. The syllabus for the course leading up to Part B of the Bar Examinations was expanded to cover a wider range of topics. The practice training period was lengthened to one year, to allow trainees more time to gain exposure to contrasting practice areas and develop a strong all-rounded foundation as they start their practice career.

To Ms Nadia Samdin’s point, we recognise that small firms may occasionally need support to cope with these changes and we appreciate very much Ms Samdin's continual advocacy for young lawyers in this space.

The Singapore Institute of Legal Education and the Law Society have released guides to help trainees and supervising solicitors navigate these changes. As Ms Samdin knows, it has been less than a year since we have commenced on this path, so we will take on board the experiences of young lawyers at smaller firms in the space but for the moment, the guidelines cover areas such as honorarium and leave. And the Law Society also published available training positions on their website, so that they become easier for trainees to find a training position in contrasting practice areas. The Law Society also offers career counselling, mentorship and guidance on practice training contracts. And the Law Society will implement other measures if necessary.

Besides raising professional standards, we are also looking to shift mindsets and raise skillsets in our law firms and in our lawyers. One area in which we seek to do this is in that of technology. In the legal sector, AI can potentially perform tasks at the level of junior associates, but at a fraction of the time and cost. For example, a Thomson Reuters report estimated that AI can save professionals up to 12 hours per week by 2029. But instead of seeing this as a threat, let us also look at this as an opportunity for lawyers to go up the value chain, to focus on higher-value tasks looking at front-facing work, client-facing work.

Globally, law firms in other jurisdictions, like the United States (US) and United Kingdom (UK), leading jurisdictions, for example: they are embracing and harnessing legaltech in support of their work. To compete with them, our lawyers must also keep that open mindset and embrace legaltech.

In 2022, we made available the Legal Technology Platform (LTP), a matter management and collaboration tool, to law firms that desired a ready product. Generative AI (Gen AI) was also added in 2024 as a feature through Copilot for SG law firms.

We also made legaltech accessible to Singapore law practices, by providing subsidies to defray the cost. We understand that sometimes the startup costs or the cost of entry into such a product could be very high. And so, in 2022, for example, we offered the Productivity Solutions Grant for the Legal Sector (PSG-Legal) which provided 70% support for up to two years. From 1 April 2025, the support level will be 50% for one year – to align with other sectors. To date, there are over 70 successful PSG-Legal applications from Singapore law practices, for over 400 legaltech accounts.

We will also be piloting a change management initiative in the second half of this year. We have heard some feedback from law firms that they require more support to improve their tech processes, whilst at the same time managing and juggling their existing priorities. We will therefore deploy legaltech consultants to the firms keen to join the pilot to diagnose their technology needs and recommend the appropriate tools for them in the context of their practice areas.

Another area which I wish to speak about is civil law. Singapore is a common law jurisdiction, but many of our top trading partners come from civil law jurisdictions, such as China and Indonesia. These are large markets with immense opportunities.

Therefore, to position our lawyers better, we will be deepening civil law content in law school curriculum. We will also continue to run the China Ready Programme as well as the Singapore-Shanghai Lawyers Exchange Programme, which help to provide lawyers with a deeper and more embedded understanding of China’s business and legal environment. And if there is demand for similar programmes in other markets and other jurisdictions, we will be happy to consider.

Sir, it is important for our lawyers to continue to have a lifelong learning culture. Practice is evolving. The areas of practice are quickly moving and the thought leadership around the study of law and more importantly, the practice and application of law to the industry is quickly evolving. To encourage this, we refreshed the Continuing Professional Development (CPD) system and will be increasing the CPD requirements in phases. Lawyers can use and tap into the SkillsFuture funding for many of the courses.

Besides lawyers, allied legal professionals and in-house counsel are also a vital part of our legal sector, as Mr Patrick Tay spoke about it a short while ago. The Singapore Academy of Law is working with the Law Society as well as the Singapore Corporate Counsel Association and Temasek Polytechnic on a Skills Framework for Legal Services and training roadmap. These will be first introduced for lawyers, followed by in-house counsel and then allied legal professionals over the next few years in phases. Temasek Polytechnic will also be introducing new courses in legal technology and legal project management for allied legal professionals. They have got feedback that these are areas that participants and students are keen on and so they will develop modules along these lines.

Sir, moving to the third pillar – keeping ourselves open to the world. As a small city-state, we need to be plugged into the global economy. But to do so, we must enhance our networks and collaborate with others. This really is a win-win situation for us if we can manage it. We help partners meet their goals from Singapore and in doing so, bring work here into the Singapore jurisdiction, which might otherwise not be present in Singapore.

Over the years, we have strengthened our legal cooperation with key and emerging markets. To give Members some examples, last year, we signed four Memorandum of Understanding (MOUs) – two with Saudi Arabia, one with India and one with Kazakhstan – further expanding our global outreach into new markets. I have also made several trips in the course of last year to develop connections and help our law firms and lawyers build inroads into these markets.

As Mr Zhulkarnain noted, we also increased our efforts to anchor in Singapore multilateral dispute resolution institutions, which administer disputes involving and including sovereign interests. This contributes to the international rule of law, as well as burnishes Singapore’s attractiveness as a premier dispute resolution hub.

Let me give Mr Zhulkarnain some examples.

First, the Permanent Court of Arbitration, which is an intergovernmental organisation providing arbitration and other dispute resolution services, for states, is expanding its presence in Singapore, with our support. Singapore was its first physical office in Asia and since its establishment in 2018, over the last five years, the Singapore office has until 2023 administered over 135 cases from Singapore.

Second, we have also signed an MOU with the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) and are working towards ICSID setting up its first physical office outside its headquarters in Washington DC here in Singapore. We also continue to welcome international law firms and foreign lawyers to anchor their presence here in Singapore.

Singapore has gradually liberalised the legal sector since the 1990s and this has benefited Singapore and Singaporeans. Over the years, we have introduced various schemes, to allow foreign law firms to collaborate with our local law firms and the schemes are attenuated to fit the level of collaboration that the foreign lawyers want with the local counterparts. These schemes have been successful, but we will continue to review them – to refine the framework where necessary, and also how we can rationalise and streamline them, with one aim being to reduce the regulatory burden on the law firms complying with these schemes.

The Committee to Review the Regulatory Framework for Law Practices and Collaborations in Singapore, which we set up in 2023, is expected to complete its work soon.

I should add that we will not change our posture of being open. We remain open to foreign law firms and lawyers, while remaining committed to preserving the Singapore core in the legal profession.

Mr Chairman, the sum of our work contributes to the economy by facilitating businesses and attracting investments, allowing Singapore to thrive. Overall, we have been successful in playing this role. In 2024, Singapore was first in the World Competitiveness Ranking and rated top for business efficiency. And in 2023, Singapore was ranked second by the World Bank for net inflows of foreign direct investments (FDIs), behind only the US. So, by and large, these measures that I have spoken about, they have been successful in uplifting the Singapore business environment.

Mr Chairman, in the second part of my speech, I will focus on the domestic context. In recent times, many countries have seen their social fabric under stress and divisions forming, as parts of society feel left out and trust in institutions diminishes.

In Singapore, we are fortunate that we remain united; but we cannot for once take this for granted. Our cohesive social fabric is underpinned by the rule of law and access to justice, and these are core pillars of our society. Therefore, we must continue to reinforce these fundamentals to maintain social trust and cohesion as well as uplift people’s lives. Our laws form the bedrock of society – how it is ordered; how it functions; and how its members behave and interact in this society.

In our community, when individuals or businesses face friction with each other, they have a range of options to resolve their disputes and differences. This involves going before an impartial adjudicator or working with a trusted mediator and through this process, parties present their perspectives and find resolution in their conflict. A key part of this process is enforcement that some Members spoke about – that "last mile", where parties realise their rights, obtain redress and then move on. This has been a matter of focus for my Ministry. When a party receives a judgment, this must be enforced effectively. Otherwise, it is only really a paper judgment.

We have therefore been working to strengthen enforcement in two key areas: first in family justice; and second in civil judgments.

Let me give Members an update on these two areas.

Sir, families form the building blocks of our community. Where relations break down, we want to help to reduce the acrimony and allow parties to heal and to move on. A key improvement was the creation of the Maintenance Enforcement Process (MEP), as highlighted by Mr Zhulkarnain.

Unfortunately, the reality is that there remains a fairly high incidence of non-compliance with maintenance orders. There is also a significant number of repeat applications for enforcement.

Therefore, under the MEP, Maintenance Enforcement Officers (MEOs) are empowered to obtain information about the parties’ financial circumstances and these findings will help the Courts make more effective maintenance enforcement orders. They can also facilitate settlements between the parties, which encourages more sustainable outcomes and judgments. The MEP was operationalised in January. A new unit of MEOs in MinLaw have started taking cases. They will progressively expand their operations in phases.

To Mr Patrick Tay and Ms Jean See’s queries, MinLaw will also introduce reforms to make the enforcement of civil judgments more effective, simple and streamlined.

We received feedback that the time, effort and costs – Mr Tay spoke about that – of enforcing judgments can sometimes be disproportionate to the judgment sum. We are looking to address these areas by providing the Court with greater powers to identify the assets and income streams of the judgment debtor as well as introducing new modes of enforcement to deter and punish non-compliance with Court orders. We will also create new Civil Judgment Enforcement Officers, who will effectively assist litigants who wish to enforce their civil judgments.

These reforms will be made available to our civil courts, which includes tribunals such as: the Employment Claims Tribunal, which Mr Tay spoke about; the Community Disputes Resolution Tribunals; as well as the Small Claims Tribunal.

Sir, as Members will know, these proposed changes are novel. They depart from the existing framework for enforcement. We are currently studying them, evaluating them and consulting with interested parties, including Members of the Bar and the Judiciary. More details will be released in due course as we complete this study.

Sir, we continually work to improve access to justice, particularly for the most vulnerable. This ensures they receive help and no one is left behind.

To Mr Vikram Nair and Assoc Prof Razwana's queries, MinLaw has had a long history, being at the forefront of providing aid and assistance in the civil and criminal spheres including through programmes, such as the Legal Aid Bureau (LAB), for instance; and more recently, the Public Defender's Office (PDO).

2.00 pm

Since 1958, LAB has provided the vulnerable with civil legal aid, including in matrimonial, monetary claims as well as probate matters. Beyond taking on legal cases, LAB has strengthened connections in the community, for example, by organising networking sessions between family lawyers and social service professionals.

MinLaw has been supporting the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme (CLAS) as well, which is administered by Pro Bono SG, and progressed to directly fund them since 2015. And from December 2022, PDO was operationalised to facilitate access to justice for more accused persons.

Sir, PDO has grown over the years. Today, it has a team of 22 public defenders. In 2024, PDO received almost 1,900 applications and about 1,000 were assessed as eligible. A part of these eligible applications is referred to CLAS, and between CLAS and PDO, they serve the section of the community who are most vulnerable. This partnership exemplifies the pro bono spirit among the legal fraternity – a partnership between the Government as well as Pro Bono SG, which is really ground-up, supported by many lawyers in the private sector.

This helps us to ensure that legal aid remains accessible not just across the criminal spectrum, which CLAS and PDO looks after, but also across the civil sector. Last year, we updated the quantum of the per capita household income (PCHI) as well as the Annual Value (AV) for eligibility criteria to ensure that, in the light of increase in household income and property value in recent years, we will continue to serve the target audience and target persons who need assistance. We continually review these thresholds to ensure that they are kept in line.

Sir, before I conclude, let me quickly touch on community disputes – a topic that Mr Sitoh Yih Pin raised and which I also spoke extensively a few months ago when I introduced the Bill.

To Mr Sitoh Yih Pin's queries, the enhancements will be implemented shortly. The Community Relations Unit (CRU) pilot, including directed mediation, for severe noise and hoarding cases will start in Tampines from the second quarter of this year. Following the pilot, we will consider how to sustainably scale-up the process island-wide.

On mediation, as touched on by Assoc Prof Razwana, the Community Mediation Centre (CMC) continues to promote the benefits of mediation through channels like social media as well as everyday advertisements, such as those we see at the bus stops, for instance, to reach out to those who might need awareness brought to them about these schemes. To manage the anticipated increase in caseload, around 30 duty mediators have been identified to manage directed mediation cases. CMC has also increased the number of satellite mediation locations from 10 in 2023 to 18 in 2025. This will allow more convenience as well as improve accessibility.

Sir, let me just say a few words in closing. I have spoken about our approach in growing the economy and maintaining trust and cohesion in society. These are two very important outcomes of the work that we do at MinLaw. Singapore's success is underpinned by our strong legal system, based on the rule of law. That is something that is really non-negotiable for us in all the work that we do at MinLaw.

On this note, I would like to inform Members that we will be commemorating next year, the 200th anniversary of the establishment of Singapore's modern legal system via the Second Charter of Justice. It was in 1826 – next year will be 200 years. A series of events will take place to commemorate the occasion. More details will be announced in due course. And I hope that Members will come and support these programmes and events next year.

The Chairman : Minister of State Murali Pillai.

The Minister of State for Law (Mr Murali Pillai) : Sir, I would like to start off by adding my appreciation to hon Members for their cuts as well as their speeches in this debate. I would cover three broad areas: first, the prudent and imaginative use of state assets; second, safeguarding our society from concerns posed by emerging technologies; and third, access to justice.

The Singapore Land Authority (SLA) ensures effective and imaginative use of land resources. To address Mr Zhulkarnain and Ms Nadia Samdin's queries, this is done by cultivating a good understanding of social and community needs through proactive engagement. For example, SLA engages the National Volunteer and Philanthropy Centre and community entities, such as New Hope, to understand their challenges in finding suitable spaces. Through such engagements, SLA identified emerging demands, such as silver co-living and the need for community spaces.

First, to address rising demand for independent living for older Singaporeans, SLA activated state properties, such as 79 to 95 Hindoo Road, 26 Evans Road and 98 Henderson Road. Building on the response, SLA plans to launch a tender in the first quarter of this year for 20 heritage properties at Admiralty Road East for multi-generational co-living. Proposals with holistic programming and emphasis on inter-generational co-living that encourages independent senior living will be favourably considered.

Second, SLA is activating state properties with potential to bring communities together. One example is the transformation of 30 Maxwell Road into a wellness and fitness hub through the joint initiative with URA, Reinventing Spaces into Vibrant Places, as noted by Mr Keith Chua. Another example is the transformation of the former Elections Department office at 11 Prinsep Street into a social impact hub named The Foundry, which started operations last year.

Further, SLA will restore and repurpose Block 1 East Coast Road (1ECR) for community and social uses. The renovated space will provide programmes and training to support youths as well as recreational activities for all ages. SLA called a tender for a multidisciplinary team of consultants in September 2024 to provide consultancy services for Additions and Alteration works, with estimated completion in 2028.

SLA will continue collaborating with agencies to introduce more state properties for economic and social uses. By launching more Price-Quality tenders, SLA will be able to better curate placemaking efforts to benefit the community.

Besides optimising the use of state assets, we are harnessing technology to digitalise transactions. Singapore's current conveyancing system is reliant on physical documents and processes, and requires significant manpower. SLA has therefore been developing the Digital Conveyancing Portal (DCP). It is a fully integrated digital end-to-end conveyancing process for all types of property, from the stage of Option to Purchase (OTP) to legal completion. It will also enable e-payments and digital documents.

When operationalised, the DCP will provide greater convenience to all parties, including buyers and sellers, law firms, real estate professionals, financial institutions and developers. We are testing the system rigorously and seeking industry feedback, including on how the phases of the DCP should be prioritised and the continuing evolution of associated technology.

The first phase of the DCP focuses on private residential resale transactions, which make up more than half of private real estate transactions. Beta testing of the OTP process started in November 2024 with selected stakeholders. Live OTP transactions for the private residential resale market is targeted to commence as a pilot initially in 2025. The DCP functions and types of transactions will be progressively expanded in subsequent phases.

Even as technology becomes integral, we are aware that it also presents issues, particularly with copyright. Our IP regime incentivises the creation of new works by rewarding creators with a set of rights over the use of their works, at the same time, allows reasonable access to these works by third parties, including other creators and innovators, who may build on them. In this way, we maximise creative and innovative output through a balanced approach.

Ms Sylvia Lim and Ms Jean See asked about the balance in the context of AI. While the IP regime enables the use of copyright materials for digital innovation, we have built in conditions to protect legitimate interests of rights-holders. In particular, if copyright materials are used to train AI models, the materials must be lawfully accessed. For example, for materials behind pay walls, through paid access. Furthermore, rights-holders can use the copyright protection regime to take action against the generation or use of content substantially similar to their own.

We recognise technologies, such as Gen AI, significantly impact many stakeholders. The Government remains committed to working with the creative community to address their concerns. There is ongoing engagement with stakeholders, including those in the creative sector, such as writers, publishers, record labels and creative agencies.

Some of the suggestions received include greater transparency in how copyright material is used for AI training and for rights-holders to have more control over use of their material. We are studying these suggestions. For example, we are exploring with MDDI and the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA), support for transparency measures and respect for copyright in our AI governance policies and tools, such as IMDA's upcoming safety guidelines for Gen AI model developers and app deployers.

MinLaw and the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) will continue to work with stakeholders to maintain the right balance that will support creativity and innovation.

We also focus on the impact of technology in the legal sector. Legal professionals should use Gen AI tools safely and responsibly, even as we encourage its adoption.

The need for guardrails is clear because: one, Gen AI may give inaccurate responses or hallucinate; two, security and privacy concerns – some Gen AI models may store user information and search history to train the model and this may then be reproduced for responses to other users; and three, ethical concerns with the rapid development of Gen AI by different programmers, it is critical that Gen AI tools are developed within a framework guided by principles, ethics and rules.

Considering this context, MinLaw is working on guidelines to guide legal professionals to be smart buyers and users of Gen AI tools. We have consulted stakeholders, such as the Singapore Courts, Law Society and IMDA, and will consult the industry in due course.

Another facet of digitalisation is the emerging threats to users and our community. Mr Lim Biow Chuan, Mr Vikram Nair, Mr Zhulkarnain and Ms Nadia Samdin asked about the Government's efforts to combat online harms.

The Government has taken significant steps to address the prevalence of online harms. This includes, among others, enacting the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA) in 2014 and strengthening it in 2019, to provide victims with legal recourse for harassment, including online harassment; and enacting the Online Safety, Miscellaneous (Amendments) Act and the Online Criminal Harms Act to allow the Government to act against harmful content.

However, online harms continue to be an area of concern for many – and hon Members said that in their speeches too.

A 2024 survey by MDDI found that two-thirds of respondents encountered harmful content on social media. Online harms are an especially serious problem for the young and young women in particular. In a 2023 study by SG Her Empowerment (SHE), more than half of the respondents between 15 and 24 years old reported having personally experienced online abuse. This was more than in any other age group. Within this age group, young women were nearly twice as likely as men to be victims of sexual harassment. And 40% of victims of online harassment reported suffering severe emotional and psychological distress, including depression and self-harm.

MinLaw and MDDI have been studying the gaps that remain. We have consulted extensively with community groups, such as those working with youths, and women and girls; experts; technology companies; and the Judiciary.

2.15 pm

The key gaps identified are the need for a simple and fast process to seek relief from online harms. The Court process can be daunting and difficult to navigate. Uncertainty over whether existing laws can be used to address new emerging harms and the lack of accountability as perpetrators are often anonymous.

To address these gaps, MinLaw and MDDI are working together on new legislation that will cover three broad buckets. First, it will establish a new agency that will act quickly on complaints of online harms. MDDI will share more details about the agency as well as some of its broader efforts to deal with online harms.

Second, it will set out Statutory Torts to clarify the types of online harms covered under the law, and the rights and duties of the various parties in the online ecosystem. These Statutory Torts will provide a clear legal basis for victims to hold to account those responsible for the harm they suffer. We intend for the Statutory Torts to apply to a range of serious online harms, including online harassment, intimate image abuse and child abuse material.

Third, it will introduce new mechanisms to address the misuse of anonymity by perpetrators of online harms. As Ms Nadia Samdin and others have rightly observed – there must be adequate information in the first place, if the intent is to enhance accountability. Victims may apply to find out a perpetrator's user information. The victim may need to know, so as to consider legal proceedings, better protect himself or herself from the perpetrator.

The provision of such information will be subject to safeguards, to prevent abuse. The information should not be used to carry out "counter-attacks". Stakeholders, such as the tech companies, have also expressed some reservations – mainly about how such measures will impact their business. We will work closely with them to mitigate their concerns. We will announce more details in due course. The Government is committed to ensuring that victims have accessible and effective remedies when they suffer online harms.

Mr Patrick Tay asked for figures relating to the Protection from Harassment Court (PHC). The number of applications for protection orders to the PHC since it started operations on 1 June 2021 are as follows: (a) 346 PO applications were filed in 2021; (b) 520 in 2022, (c) 526 in 2023; and (d) 631 in 2024.

In terms of breakdown, out of the 2,023 PO applications filed from 1 June 2021, which is when the PHC commenced operations, to 31 December 2024, there were complaints about the following kinds of harassments: (a) 760 cases involved cyberbullying; (b) 719 cases involved doxing; (c) 485 cases involved workplace harassment; (d) 253 cases involved sexual harassment; and (e) 122 cases involved harassment by debt collectors, moneylenders or creditors. The total number is 2,339, though there were 2,023 applications, because a single application can contain complaints for about more than one type of harassment.

I now turn to Ms Sylvia Lim's query on the personal bond in criminal cases – an amendment in the Criminal Procedure (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2024. This allows persons accused of non-bailable offences punishable with up to seven years' imprisonment to be released on personal bond, as an alternative to bail. Previously, persons accused of such offences could only be released on bail while awaiting investigations or trial. They will be remanded if they are unable to find a bailor, even if they are offered bail.

With this amendment, they may be released by putting up a bond by themselves in appropriate cases. This reduces the disruptions to their lives and earning capacity, as mentioned by the hon Member. Since the amendment was implemented in August 2024, more than 100 accused persons have been released on personal bond for non-bailable offences. The personal bond regime is new and in its infancy. We will continue to keep our policies on remand and bail under review.

Lastly, I turn to our work on ensuring access to justice. Second Minister Edwin mentioned about the good work of the Public Defender's Office and the Legal Aid Bureau. MinLaw is also working with various partners to increase access to justice, including through technology.

Notably, we have collaborated with Pro Bono SG to develop LawGoWhere. Launched in March last year, this is a first-stop portal that consolidates access to legal information, legal services and law awareness resources.

This year, a legal help finder will be integrated, to make it easier for users to seek legal information. Users may key in information such as their postal code and legal issue, and receive legal assistance options, such as their nearest legal clinics.

Even as the use of technology increases, we are mindful of the digital divide, a point that Dr Tan Wu Meng made. On his query, measures have been taken to ensure that justice remains accessible to everyone, regardless of their level of familiarity with technology. For example, individuals who have difficulties with Court e-services, like the Community Justice and Tribunals System, can contact the State Courts by calling their hotline. They may also visit the State Courts Business Centre to access digital terminals or approach the State Courts Service Hub if they require assistance.

Before I conclude, Mr Chairman, I would like to thank hon Members for their comments. Ms Usha Chandradas spoke about possible areas for law reform. Given the full slate of work outlined, some of these reviews will require more time for careful consideration. I understand from the Ministry of Social and Family Development that the same also applies to the 2000 Protection of Adults Convention. Prof Razwana also spoke about recidivism. This was covered by the Ministry of Home Affairs in their COS.

Mr Chairman, Sir, in conclusion, Second Minister Edwin Tong spoke about the importance of the law and legal processes on achieving good outcomes for Singapore, underpinned by the rule of law. He also spoke about our efforts and approach to growing the economy, even as Singapore faces challenges in this turbulent external environment. We will strengthen our legal framework to be business-friendly and forward-looking, especially in the areas of IP, dispute resolution and debt restructuring and insolvency.

Furthermore, Second Minister Tong outlined our moves to grow the capabilities of law firms and legal professionals – through adoption of LegalTech, facilitating access to overseas markets and uplifting all areas of the profession to grow new competencies.

Then, he spoke on Enforcement Mechanisms in Family Justice and Civil Enforcement; as well as helping the most vulnerable in our society access the legal system. He also provided an update on the Community Disputes Management Framework.

Lastly, he announced our celebrations of the 200th anniversary of the establishment of Singapore's modern legal system.

I have covered SLA's efforts to optimise the use of state assets to meet changing needs and developments on the Digital Conveyancing Portal; our efforts to maintain a robust and balanced IP regime that supports creativity and innovation, as well as ensuring that the legal profession uses Gen AI safely and responsibly; new legislation to enhance protection for the vulnerable online; updates on the Protection from Harassment Court; implementation of reforms on personal bond; and leveraging technology for access to justice while preventing a digital divide.

Together, these form the foundations of our shared public life. Laws are made together, and made legitimate, in this House, but it is only in the living and the working out of these rules, that we as a country, give them life.

The Chairman: We have time for clarifications. Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim.

Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim : Thank you, Chairman. I have two sets of questions: one for Minister Edwin Tong, the other for Minister of State Murali Pillai.

For Minister, on the debt repayment scheme. I truly welcome MinLaw's approach whereby they are looking to refining the debt repayment scheme, which is currently susceptible to abuse. I know of debtors who engage third-party consulting firms and they are charged exorbitantly for such services. And indeed, the debtors themselves are being asked to take up further loans to pay for such services. So, may I ask the Minister on the regulatory standpoint, how does MinLaw plan to enhance oversight of third-party debt consultancy firms to prevent misinformation and exploitation of debtors.

And on the public front, whether the Ministry can consider collaborating with other Ministries or social service agencies to provide debtors with the accurate or reliable financial guidance and protect them from being exploited by such firms. I think public awareness is key.

For Minister of State Murali, on the digital office on the safety and online harms, the potential collaboration with MDDI. We note the challenges such that digital office may face to keep up with new technologies, high volume of harmful content and the misuse of anonymity. My question is a technical one. It is on jurisdiction for Statutory Torts. I understand that the Statutory Torts will be a whole suite that will be introduced by MinLaw, but would they also be pursuant to the double actionability rule for conflict of laws? For instance, does the Tort need to be actionable in Singapore and the country where that Tort occurred – the lex loci delicti and lex fori issues.

Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai : Sir, I thank Mr Zhulkarnain for his support for the proposed scheme. And indeed, it is true. The irony is that some debtors consult with these firms only to find that they end up in a bigger hole, a larger debt, as a consequence of trying to find a solution to their debt. So, we are very mindful of this and we will take steps to look at how we can have levers to clamp down on such practices by these firms.

Indeed, it is also true, Sir, as Mr Zhulkarnain points out, that public awareness is key, to paraphrase him. We will step up significantly on steps to raise awareness and we will do this in a few ways. First, we will put information on MinLaw's website. We will enhance it, to make it informative and user friendly.

Second, we intend to also publish a guide to help debtors along the journey of submitting bankruptcy applications, and teach them and guide them on what steps to take, to try to turn them away from having to rely on such debt consultancy firms to get assistance for the paperwork. So, we will simplify as much as we can, as well as publish step-by-step guidelines, so that they can avoid going to these firms.

Finally, we will also look at measures to proactively reach out to debtors, for example, imposing mandatory credit counselling as a prerequisite for filing bankruptcy application, so that we get to them first, try and educate them, raise awareness on the process, so that we can deter them as much as we can from turning to the debt consultancy firms.

Mr Murali Pillai : Sir, with respect to the hon Member, Mr Zhulkarnain's question on jurisdiction, as was mentioned in my speech, this creation of Statutory Torts is really providing civil causes of action for victims. And the jurisdiction is based on the civil jurisdiction of the Courts as it stands now, it is quite expansive. And in situations where the double actionability rule, which deals with the commission of Torts overseas, and whether or not there is a basis to pursue it here, whether it applies depends on the current rules.

The Chairman : Ms Sylvia Lim.

Ms Sylvia Lim : Thank you, Chair. I have two clarifications for Minister of State Murali on the Criminal Procedure Code amendments on pre-trial release. Earlier, he mentioned that under the new provisions that were effective on 1 August, about 100 persons had been released on personal bond instead of on bail. I would like him to confirm that this is actually the combined number from law enforcement, as well as the Courts. That is the first question.

And the second question is if that is the case, this means that if it is 100 persons over six months, it is only about 16 persons per month, which to me is quite a low figure. And to this end, can he confirm that there are ongoing efforts to train, especially our law enforcement agencies, on the use of this new provision?

Mr Murali Pillai : Sir, with respect to the hon Member Ms Lim's question, my understanding is this is in relation to Court cases, but I can double check and perhaps, clarify this separately. [ Please refer to "Clarification by the Minister of State for Law", Official Report, 4 March 2025, Vol 95, Issue 157, Clarification section. ]

The Chairman : Any other clarifications? Ms Lim.

Ms Sylvia Lim : Thank you, Sir. So, just to follow up, I would just like to know whether there are ongoing efforts to train our officers involved on the new provision and how to apply it in applicable cases.

Mr Murali Pillai : Sir, that would be something that is within the province of the MHA. Certainly, we can convey the feedback as well.

2.30 pm

The Chairman : Any other clarifications from Members? If not, could I invite Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim to withdraw your amendment.

Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim : Sir, I thank Minister Edwin Tong and Minister of State Murali Pillai for their clear clarifications and plans for MinLaw and for our fellow Singaporeans. Sir, the law is the tool, but justice is the ideal. I thank the staff and officers of MinLaw for making access to justice the ideal for our Singaporeans. With that, I seek leave to withdraw my amendment.

[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]

[(proc text) The sum of $356,441,800 for Head R ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]

[(proc text) The sum of $138,973,500 for Head R ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]

Hansard 原始記錄