Statute Details
- Title: Criminal Justice Reform (Saving and Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2025
- Act/Instrument Code: S760-2025
- Legislative Type: Subsidiary legislation (SL)
- Enacting Act: Criminal Justice Reform Act 2018 (section 128(7))
- Commencement: 31 December 2025
- Key Provisions (as extracted): Regulation 1 (Citation and commencement); Regulation 2 (Opinion of psychiatrist)
- Current Version Status: Current version as at 27 Mar 2026 (per provided extract)
- Made Date: 25 November 2025
- Maker: Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Law (Luke Goh)
What Is This Legislation About?
The Criminal Justice Reform (Saving and Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2025 (“the Regulations”) are designed to manage the legal transition around 31 December 2025. In practical terms, they ensure that certain evidential rules—particularly those involving psychiatric expert evidence—do not operate harshly or unpredictably during the changeover period.
Although the Regulations are subsidiary legislation, they play an important “bridge” role. They sit alongside the Criminal Justice Reform Act 2018 (“the Act”), and they use a targeted transitional mechanism to preserve admissibility of psychiatric opinions in criminal proceedings. The central issue addressed in the extract is the relationship between a specific provision in the Criminal Procedure Code 2010 (“CPC”)—section 270(1)—and the admissibility of psychiatric expert opinions after the reform timeline.
In plain language, the Regulations clarify that the CPC’s restriction (or procedural limitation) on psychiatric opinions does not prevent admissibility in certain circumstances. Those circumstances are time-bound (within two months after 31 December 2025), tied to the appointment process for psychiatrists, or linked to when the psychiatrist’s treatment or assessment began. This approach reduces the risk that otherwise relevant psychiatric evidence becomes inadmissible solely because it was obtained or processed around the transition date.
What Are the Key Provisions?
Regulation 1: Citation and commencement is straightforward. It provides the formal name of the instrument and states that the Regulations come into operation on 31 December 2025. For practitioners, this commencement date is critical because Regulation 2’s transitional windows are calculated from that date.
Regulation 2: Opinion of psychiatrist is the operative provision in the extract. It addresses section 270(1) of the CPC, which (as reflected in the wording) would otherwise prevent an opinion of a psychiatrist from being admissible as evidence in a criminal proceeding. The Regulations carve out exceptions so that psychiatric expert opinions can still be admitted where specified conditions are met.
The Regulation begins by stating the baseline: section 270(1) of the CPC does not prevent any opinion of a psychiatrist (given as an expert) from being admissible as evidence in a criminal proceeding, if one of the enumerated conditions applies. This is a classic transitional “saving” clause: it preserves admissibility notwithstanding the general rule in the CPC.
There are three main categories of admissibility triggers:
(a) Adduced within 2 months after 31 December 2025
Under Regulation 2(a), the psychiatrist’s opinion must be adduced in evidence within 2 months after 31 December 2025. This creates a short, clear grace period. For defence and prosecution counsel, the practical takeaway is that if the psychiatric expert opinion is presented in court within that window, the CPC’s restriction will not bar admissibility.
(b) Adduced in cases linked to the psychiatrist’s appointment process for the Panel
Regulation 2(b) is more complex and is designed to protect cases where the psychiatrist is in the pipeline for appointment to the relevant expert panel. The Regulation refers to the Panel of psychiatrists established for the purposes of section 270 of the Code, and it defines this Panel as “the Panel”.
To fall within Regulation 2(b), two layers must be satisfied:
- First: the psychiatrist’s application for appointment as a member of the Panel must have been submitted within 2 months after 31 December 2025.
- Second: at least one of the specified circumstances must apply regarding the application and any subsequent appeals.
The specified circumstances (Regulation 2(b)(ii)(A)–(E)) cover procedural timing and ongoing disputes, including:
- (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 extension of time to file an appeal is pending;
- (E) an extension of time has been granted and has not lapsed.
For practitioners, this provision is particularly useful because it prevents a technical admissibility problem where a psychiatrist is not yet formally appointed, but the appointment process is active or under challenge. It also recognises that administrative timelines and appeals can extend beyond the initial two-month period.
(c) Treatment or assessment started before 31 December 2025
Regulation 2(c) provides a further transitional safeguard: the psychiatrist’s treatment or assessment of the person whose psychiatric condition is to be assessed must have started before 31 December 2025. If that factual condition is met, the CPC’s restriction will not prevent admissibility of the psychiatrist’s expert opinion.
This is a fairness-oriented rule. It acknowledges that psychiatric assessment is often time-consuming and cannot always be completed neatly around legislative dates. If the clinical work began before the transition date, the Regulations allow the resulting expert opinion to be used in court even if the opinion is ultimately adduced later.
Interplay with the CPC and the Panel concept
Although the extract does not reproduce section 270(1) of the CPC, Regulation 2 makes clear that the CPC contains a rule about admissibility of psychiatric opinions. The Regulations do not abolish that rule; instead, they specify when it will not operate to exclude expert evidence. The Panel mechanism is central: it is the institutional method for determining which psychiatrists are eligible for certain expert roles. The transitional provisions effectively ensure that eligibility formalities do not derail ongoing cases or ongoing appointment processes.
How Is This Legislation Structured?
The Regulations are short and structured as follows:
- Regulation 1 (Citation and commencement): sets the name of the Regulations and provides that they come into operation on 31 December 2025.
- Regulation 2 (Opinion of psychiatrist): provides the transitional admissibility rules. It states that section 270(1) of the CPC does not prevent admissibility of psychiatric expert opinions if the opinion is adduced within the specified time window, or in cases tied to the Panel appointment/appeal process, or where the psychiatrist’s treatment/assessment began before the commencement date.
Notably, the extract indicates only these two regulations. For practitioners, this means the legal analysis is concentrated: the entire transitional scheme in the provided text turns on Regulation 2’s conditions.
Who Does This Legislation Apply To?
The Regulations apply to criminal proceedings in which an opinion of a psychiatrist is sought to be admitted as expert evidence. The operative effect is on admissibility—i.e., whether section 270(1) of the CPC will bar the opinion.
In terms of persons affected, the practical beneficiaries include:
- Accused persons and their counsel, who may rely on psychiatric expert evidence for issues such as mental condition, fitness, or other psychiatry-relevant matters (depending on how the CPC and the Criminal Justice Reform framework operate);
- Prosecution counsel, who may also seek to adduce psychiatric opinions; and
- Psychiatrists whose appointment status with the Panel is pending, under appeal, or whose assessment began before the transition date.
The scope is not limited to a particular court or stage of proceedings in the extract; rather, it is triggered by the act of adducing the opinion in evidence and by the timing/administrative circumstances described in Regulation 2.
Why Is This Legislation Important?
Transitional provisions are often overlooked, but they can be decisive in litigation. Here, the Regulations address a potential evidential cliff-edge around 31 December 2025. Without such a provision, parties might face arguments that psychiatric expert opinions are inadmissible because the psychiatrist is not yet appointed to the Panel or because the opinion is presented after the relevant procedural threshold.
By creating clear exceptions, Regulation 2 reduces procedural uncertainty and supports continuity in criminal cases. It allows courts to admit psychiatric expert opinions where the evidence is timely (within two months), where the expert appointment process is actively progressing or under appeal, or where the underlying clinical assessment began before the commencement date.
From a practitioner’s perspective, the Regulations have immediate case-management implications:
- Timing of adduction: counsel should track the two-month window after 31 December 2025 and ensure that the opinion is adduced within that period where possible.
- Documentation of Panel-related status: if relying on the Panel appointment/appeal pathway, counsel should gather evidence of when the psychiatrist’s application was submitted and the current status of any pending appeal or extension of time.
- Clinical timeline evidence: if relying on Regulation 2(c), counsel should be prepared to prove that treatment or assessment started before 31 December 2025 (e.g., through records, appointment logs, or expert affidavits).
Overall, the Regulations reflect a policy choice: transitional fairness and evidential practicality. They ensure that the criminal justice system can continue to function effectively during legislative change, without excluding relevant psychiatric expert evidence due to administrative timing.
Related Legislation
- Criminal Justice Reform Act 2018
- Criminal Procedure Code 2010 (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.