Statute Details
- Title: Criminal Justice Reform (Saving and Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2025
- Act Code: S760-2025
- Type: Subsidiary Legislation (SL)
- Enacting Authority: Made by the Minister for Law in exercise of powers under section 128(7) of the Criminal Justice Reform Act 2018
- Commencement: 31 December 2025
- Date Made: 25 November 2025
- Key Provisions: Regulation 1 (Citation and commencement); Regulation 2 (Opinion of psychiatrist)
- Legislative Purpose (as reflected in text): Transitional/saving provision ensuring admissibility of certain expert psychiatric opinions during the post-commencement period
- Status: Current version as at 27 March 2026
What Is This Legislation About?
The Criminal Justice Reform (Saving and Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2025 (“the Regulations”) are a short, targeted set of subsidiary legislative provisions designed to manage legal continuity as Singapore’s criminal justice reforms take effect. In practical terms, the Regulations address a specific procedural and evidential issue that could otherwise disrupt ongoing or newly initiated psychiatric expert processes around the reform commencement date.
At the heart of the Regulations is Regulation 2, which provides a transitional pathway for the admissibility of psychiatric expert opinions in criminal proceedings. The Regulations operate by carving out a limited exception to a general rule in the Criminal Procedure Code 2010 (specifically section 270(1)). That general rule typically restricts the circumstances in which psychiatric opinions—when given as expert evidence—can be admitted.
In plain language, the Regulations ensure that, even though the law may change on 31 December 2025, psychiatric expert opinions will not be excluded merely because they fall within a transitional window. This is especially important for cases where (i) the psychiatrist’s appointment process is underway, (ii) appeals are pending, or (iii) the psychiatrist’s assessment or treatment of the person began before the reform date.
What Are the Key Provisions?
Regulation 1: Citation and commencement is straightforward. It confirms that the Regulations are cited as the Criminal Justice Reform (Saving and Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2025 and that they come into operation on 31 December 2025. For practitioners, this commencement date is critical because Regulation 2’s transitional conditions are expressly tied to that date.
Regulation 2: Opinion of psychiatrist is the substantive provision. It states that section 270(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010 does not prevent any opinion of a psychiatrist on matters concerning psychiatry—when given as the opinion of an expert—from being admissible as evidence in a criminal proceeding, provided the opinion is adduced under specified transitional circumstances.
The structure of Regulation 2 is best understood as a set of eligibility conditions that must be satisfied. The Regulations do not create a general permission for any psychiatric evidence; rather, they create a controlled exception to the admissibility restriction in section 270(1). The exception applies only if the opinion is adduced within the timeframes and/or in the procedural contexts described below.
Condition (a): Adduced within 2 months after 31 December 2025
Under Regulation 2(a), the admissibility exception applies if the psychiatric opinion is adduced in evidence within 2 months after 31 December 2025. This is a clear, bright-line temporal rule. For cases where psychiatric expert evidence is needed quickly around the transition, this provision reduces the risk of exclusion due to technical admissibility constraints.
Condition (b): Adduced in cases tied to the psychiatrist’s panel appointment process
Regulation 2(b) is more complex and is designed to protect expert evidence where the psychiatrist is in the pipeline for appointment to the relevant expert panel. It applies where:
- the psychiatrist’s application for appointment as a member of the panel of psychiatrists established for the purposes of section 270 of the Code (“the Panel”) was submitted within 2 months after 31 December 2025; and
- one of several procedural circumstances applies regarding the application and any appeals.
The listed circumstances (i.e., sub-paragraphs (b)(ii)(A) to (E)) cover the full range of transitional procedural states:
- (A) the application is pending;
- (B) the period for filing an appeal against the Selection Committee’s decision not to appoint the psychiatrist has not expired;
- (C) an appeal is pending;
- (D) an application for an extension of time to file an appeal is pending; and
- (E) an extension of time has been granted and has not lapsed.
For practitioners, this is significant because it recognises that expert admissibility should not depend on whether administrative and appellate timelines have fully run their course by the time evidence is needed. The provision effectively “holds the line” for admissibility while appointment and review processes are still ongoing.
Condition (c): Assessment or treatment started before 31 December 2025
Regulation 2(c) provides a further transitional protection. It applies where the psychiatrist’s treatment or assessment of the person whose psychiatric condition is to be assessed by the expert had started before 31 December 2025. This condition is important for continuity of clinical work. It prevents exclusion of expert evidence where the psychiatrist’s involvement began under the prior regime and the assessment process naturally continues into the post-commencement period.
Practical effect of Regulation 2
Taken together, Regulation 2 ensures that psychiatric expert opinions remain admissible in criminal proceedings despite the operation of section 270(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010, but only within carefully defined transitional scenarios. The Regulations therefore balance two competing interests: (i) maintaining the integrity of the expert panel system, and (ii) avoiding unfairness and procedural disruption during the transition to the reformed framework.
How Is This Legislation Structured?
The Regulations are extremely concise and consist of an enacting formula followed by two regulations:
- Regulation 1 sets out the citation and commencement.
- Regulation 2 provides the saving/transitional rule for the admissibility of psychiatric expert opinions notwithstanding section 270(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010.
There are no additional parts, schedules, or detailed procedural mechanics in the extract provided. The legislative design is therefore “surgical”: it targets one evidential issue and provides a limited exception for transitional fairness.
Who Does This Legislation Apply To?
Regulation 2 applies in the context of criminal proceedings where an expert opinion is sought from a psychiatrist on matters concerning psychiatry. It is not limited to a particular offence type, court level, or stage of proceedings; rather, it is triggered by the adduction of the opinion as evidence and the satisfaction of the transitional conditions tied to 31 December 2025.
In addition, the Regulations indirectly affect the administrative appointment process for psychiatrists to the Panel established for section 270 of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010. Where a psychiatrist’s application is submitted within the specified post-commencement window and the application/appeal status falls within the enumerated categories, the psychiatrist’s expert opinion may be admitted even if the Panel appointment is not yet final.
Why Is This Legislation Important?
For criminal practitioners, the admissibility of expert evidence can be outcome-determinative. Psychiatric expert opinions may be central to issues such as mental state, fitness, culpability, or other matters where expert assessment is required. Without transitional provisions, a reform that changes admissibility rules could lead to evidence being excluded simply because the expert’s status or the timing of adduction falls on the “wrong” side of the reform date.
This is precisely what the Regulations prevent. By ensuring that section 270(1) does not bar admissibility in specified transitional scenarios, the Regulations reduce the risk of:
- unnecessary adjournments to re-qualify experts;
- procedural challenges to the admissibility of psychiatric evidence; and
- unfairness to accused persons and the prosecution where clinical assessment commenced before the reform date or where administrative appointment processes are still pending.
From an enforcement and case management perspective, Regulation 2 also supports judicial efficiency. Courts can admit psychiatric expert opinions without requiring parties to re-run expert appointment processes solely due to the timing of the reform. This is particularly relevant where psychiatric assessments are time-consuming and depend on continuity of treatment or evaluation.
Finally, the Regulations reflect a broader legislative approach: reforms are implemented with saving and transitional provisions to protect legitimate expectations and ongoing processes. Practitioners should therefore treat these Regulations as a practical guide for how to plan expert evidence around the 31 December 2025 transition.
Related Legislation
- Criminal Justice Reform Act 2018
- Criminal Procedure Code 2010 (in particular section 270(1))
Source Documents
This article provides an overview of the Criminal Justice Reform (Saving and Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2025 for legal research and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult the official text for authoritative provisions.