Law of Singapore

It has been suggested that prior to British acquisition of the island, the Malay chief in charge of Singapore was the Temenggung of Johor.

Regulation III of 20 January 1823 established a magistracy which had jurisdiction over "all descriptions of persons resorting under the British flag".

The magistrates were enjoined to "follow the course of the British magistracy, as far as local circumstances permit, avoiding technicalities and unnecessary forms as much as possible, and executing the duties of their office with temper and discretion, according to the best of their judgement and conscience and the principles of substantial justice".

In this respect, he had treated Singapore as if the entire island had been ceded to the British when the Treaty with the Sultan and the Temenggung had only permitted the establishment of a trading factory.

Crawfurd doubted the legitimacy of the judicial system set up by Raffles, and annulled proceedings in which magistrates had ordered the flogging of gamblers and the seizure of their properties.

The Indian Salaries and Pensions Act 1825[6] authorised the East India Company to place Singapore and Malacca under the administration of Prince of Wales' Island (now Penang).

4 c. 85 empowered the British Crown to issue letters patent providing for the administration of justice in the Straits Settlements.

The East India Company petitioned the Crown for the grant of such letters patent establishing "such Courts and Judicatures for the due administration of Justice and the security of the persons rights and property of the Inhabitants and the Public Revenue of and the Trial and Punishment of Capital and other Offences committed and the repression of vice within the said Settlement of Prince of Wales’ Island Singapore and Malacca…" Granting the petition, the Crown issued the Second Charter of Justice on 27 November 1826.

[8] The Charter established the Court of Judicature of Prince of Wales' Island, Singapore and Malacca, which was conferred "full Power and Authority… to give and pass Judgement and Sentence according to Justice and Right".

Thus, on 22 May 1828 the Governor Robert Fullerton, together with the Resident Councillor Kenneth Murchison, were obliged to hold the first assizes in Singapore by themselves.

[10] The Charter conferred no legislative power on the Governor and Council of Prince of Wales' Island or, indeed, on any other individual or institution.

[13] However, on 20 June 1830 the East India Company reduced the status of Prince of Wales' Island from a Presidency to a Residency.

This led Governor Fullerton to conclude that neither he nor the Resident Councillors were empowered any longer to administer justice under the Second Charter.

Members of the mercantile community were in an uproar as they felt the ensuing confusion and inconvenience of having no local courts would disrupt commercial activity.

It decided to restore the titles of Governor and Resident Councillor so that these officers could continue to administer justice pursuant to the Charter.

There was no change to the structure of the legal system – the Governor General of India continued to legislate for the Straits Settlements.

[20] Unfortunately, many Acts passed by the Governor General during this period were not relevant to the Straits Settlements, and it was difficult to determine which were applicable.

), which appointed commissioners to inquire into the matter and empowered them to publish a volume containing the text of any Indian Acts considered in force.

It was felt the provision was needed because the Straits Settlements Supreme Court had a tendency to follow English case law premised on the existence of statutes that were not in force in the Colony.

Numerous regulations, laws and notices were issued by all these bodies through the Tokubetu-si without adhering to the normal chain of command.

1 (1945), the Supreme Allied Commander South East Asia established the British Military Administration which assumed full judicial, legislative, executive and administrative powers and responsibilities and conclusive jurisdiction over all persons and property throughout such areas of Malaya as were at any given time under the control of forces under his command.

Otherwise, all proclamations and legislative enactments of whatever kind issued by or under the authority of the Japanese Military Administration ceased to have effect.

3 of 1946), which had the effect of permitting post-Occupation courts to review the decrees of Japanese tribunals and to confirm, modify or reverse them.

[51] The 1963 Order in Council provided that all laws in force in Singapore continued to apply subject to modifications, adaptations, qualifications and exceptions that might be necessary to bring them into conformity with its new Constitution and the Malaysia Act.

Again, all laws were expressed to continue in force with such modifications, adaptations, qualifications and exceptions as might be necessary to bring them into conformity with the independent status of Singapore upon separation from Malaysia.

These changes came shortly after the Privy Council restored a prominent opposition Member of Parliament, Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam, to the roll of advocates and solicitors of the Supreme Court of Singapore after he had been struck off for a criminal conviction for making false statements in a statutory declaration; the court described the conviction as "a grievous injustice".

It added that this power would be exercised sparingly, bearing in mind the danger of retrospectively disturbing contractual, proprietary and other legal rights.

Judgements may interpret statutes or subsidiary legislation, or develop principles of common law and equity which have been laid down, not by the legislature, but by previous generations of judges.

[89] In addition, Singapore society is highly regulated through the criminalisation of many activities which are considered as fairly harmless in other countries.

These include failing to flush toilets after use,[90] littering,[91] jaywalking,[92] the possession of pornography,[93] the sale of chewing gum,[94] and, prior to December 2022, sexual activity such as oral and anal sex between men.