Statute Details
- Title: Films (Prohibited Film) Order 2007
- Act Code: FA1981-S153-2007
- Type: Subsidiary Legislation (SL)
- Authorising Act: Films Act (Cap. 107)
- Power Used: Section 35(1) of the Films Act
- Enacting Formula: Made by the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts
- Citation: Films (Prohibited Film) Order 2007
- Commencement: 12 April 2007
- Key Provisions: Section 1 (Citation and commencement); Section 2 (Prohibited Film)
- Current Version: Current version as at 27 Mar 2026
- Amendment Noted in Extract: Amended by S 346/2019 with effect from 29/04/2019 (as reflected in the film listing)
What Is This Legislation About?
The Films (Prohibited Film) Order 2007 is a piece of Singapore subsidiary legislation that identifies a specific film and prohibits certain activities relating to it. In plain terms, it is a legal instrument used to prevent the possession, exhibition, and distribution of a named film where the Minister forms the view that doing so would be contrary to the public interest.
Unlike a general censorship regime that sets out broad classification categories for many films, this Order is targeted. It does not create a licensing framework for film production or distribution. Instead, it operates as a prohibition order: once the film is listed, the law restricts what “any person” may do with that film.
The Order is made under the Films Act (Cap. 107), which provides the statutory basis for film-related regulatory powers. This particular Order is an example of how the Minister can exercise those powers to address concerns about a particular film’s content or impact on society.
What Are the Key Provisions?
Section 1: Citation and commencement sets out the formal name of the instrument and when it takes effect. The Order may be cited as the Films (Prohibited Film) Order 2007 and came into operation on 12 April 2007. For practitioners, this matters because the prohibition is only legally enforceable from its commencement date (subject to any later amendments).
Section 2: Prohibited Film is the core provision. It states that the Minister, being of the opinion that the possession, exhibition or distribution of the following film would be contrary to the public interest, prohibits the possession, exhibition and distribution of that film by any person. The wording is important: it covers multiple forms of conduct (possession, exhibition, distribution), and it applies to “any person”, which is broad and not limited to film distributors, exhibitors, or industry participants.
The film identified in the extract is:
- Title: “Zahari’s 17 Years”
- Director: See Tong Ming
- NRIC No.: S 6811485 C (as stated in the Order)
- Year of production: (as reflected with an amendment note)
As shown in the extract, the listing includes a bracketed note indicating that the year of production is affected by S 346/2019 with effect from 29/04/2019. While the extract does not reproduce the full amended text, this indicates that the Order can be updated to correct or refine identifying details of the prohibited film. Practically, this is significant for enforcement and evidential clarity: the more precisely the film is identified, the easier it is to establish that the prohibited subject matter is what is being targeted.
Public interest opinion: Section 2 is framed around the Minister’s opinion that the relevant conduct would be contrary to the public interest. This “opinion” language is typical of regulatory prohibitions. For lawyers, it signals that the Minister’s decision is discretionary and anchored in a statutory standard (“public interest”). In practice, challenges to such decisions (if any) would typically need to address the legal basis and procedural fairness rather than simply disputing the content in the abstract.
How Is This Legislation Structured?
The Order is concise and structured around two provisions:
(1) Section 1 provides the citation and commencement date.
(2) Section 2 sets out the prohibited film and the scope of the prohibition. It is essentially a “schedule-like” listing embedded in the operative text: the film’s title and identifying information are stated directly in the provision.
There are no additional parts, schedules, or classification categories in the extract. The instrument’s structure reflects its function: it is designed to be a clear legal notice that a particular film is prohibited and that specified conduct is unlawful for any person.
Who Does This Legislation Apply To?
Section 2 applies to any person. That breadth is a key feature for legal compliance. It means the prohibition is not limited to licensed cinema operators, broadcasters, or distributors. It can extend to individuals who possess copies, exhibit the film in private or public settings, or distribute it through physical media or other means.
In practical terms, the prohibition can affect a range of actors: members of the public, event organisers, online uploaders or sharers (depending on how “distribution” is interpreted in the relevant factual context), and intermediaries who facilitate access. While the extract does not define “possession,” “exhibition,” or “distribution,” the ordinary legal meaning of those terms would typically be used, and enforcement would focus on the conduct and the identification of the film.
Why Is This Legislation Important?
This Order is important because it demonstrates how Singapore’s film regulatory framework can operate through targeted prohibitions. Even though the Films Act provides the broader statutory architecture, subsidiary orders like this one translate the regulatory power into concrete restrictions on specific content.
For practitioners, the most significant practical impact is compliance risk. Once a film is prohibited under Section 2, the legal exposure is not confined to formal commercial distribution. The prohibition covers possession, exhibition, and distribution. That means that legal advice may be needed not only for distributors and exhibitors, but also for individuals and organisations that might inadvertently handle the film—such as by storing copies, screening it at events, or sharing it through channels that could be characterised as distribution.
Another key significance is evidential and identification clarity. The Order includes identifying details (title, director, and other information). The amendment note referencing S 346/2019 suggests that the identifying particulars can be updated. In enforcement or litigation, the ability to show that the accused material is the same as the prohibited film listed in the Order will be central. Lawyers advising clients should therefore pay attention to the exact wording and any amendments in force at the relevant time.
Finally, the “public interest” standard underscores that the prohibition is grounded in a policy judgment by the Minister. While the extract does not discuss enforcement mechanisms, the prohibition itself is the legal trigger. In practice, counsel should consider how the prohibition interacts with the Films Act’s offences, enforcement powers, and any procedural safeguards that may exist under the parent Act.
Related Legislation
- Films Act (Chapter 107) — in particular, section 35(1) (the authorising provision for making prohibition orders)
- Films (Prohibited Film) Order 2007 — as amended by S 346/2019 with effect from 29 April 2019 (as reflected in the extract)
Source Documents
This article provides an overview of the Films (Prohibited Film) Order 2007 for legal research and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult the official text for authoritative provisions.