Statute Details
- Title: List of Touts
- Act Code: SCJA1969-N3
- Type: Singapore legislation (SL)
- Status: Current version as at 27 Mar 2026
- Authorising Act: Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Chapter 322), section 73
- Commencement: 20 March 1970 (as indicated in the extract)
- Key Provision (from extract): Exclusion from the precincts of the Supreme Court for persons named in the published list of “touts”
- Legislative Instrument Reference: [G.N. No. 920/1970]
- Legislative History (as shown): 25 Mar 1992 (1990 RevEd); 26 Sep 1997 (1997 RevEd)
What Is This Legislation About?
The “List of Touts” is not a standalone statute creating a new offence or a comprehensive regulatory scheme. Instead, it is a published legal instrument that gives effect to a specific exclusionary consequence under the Supreme Court of Judicature Act. In plain terms, it identifies individuals who are treated as “touts” for the purposes of court precinct control, and it imposes a restriction on their presence at the Supreme Court.
Under the authorising framework in section 73 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act, a list is published naming persons whose conduct has been characterised as touting—typically understood in practice as improper solicitation or interference connected with legal proceedings. The “List of Touts” then operates as a practical enforcement tool: once a person’s name appears in the list, that person is barred from entering or remaining in the “precincts of the Supreme Court”, subject to limited exceptions.
For practitioners, the key point is that this instrument is a targeted, person-specific restriction. It does not merely provide guidance; it creates a legal status for named individuals, with immediate consequences for access to the Supreme Court environment. The restriction is designed to protect the integrity of court processes, reduce improper influence around proceedings, and deter behaviour that undermines public confidence in the administration of justice.
What Are the Key Provisions?
1. Exclusion from the Supreme Court precincts
The operative rule in the extract is straightforward: “Any person whose name appears in the list of touts published pursuant to section 73 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act is excluded from the precincts of the Supreme Court”. This means that the legal consequence attaches automatically to the fact of being listed. There is no need for a further court order in the text provided; the list itself functions as the trigger for exclusion.
2. Scope of the restriction: “precincts of the Supreme Court”
While the extract does not define “precincts”, the phrase is typically understood in legal-administrative contexts to include the court building and its controlled surrounding areas used for court access and security. Practitioners should treat the restriction as applying to the controlled areas where court proceedings are managed and where security and access controls operate. In practical terms, the exclusion is likely to be enforced through security screening, access passes, and refusal of entry by authorised officers.
3. Exception for participation in proceedings
The instrument contains an important carve-out: the excluded person may be present in the precincts “except when that person is a party to or a witness in any proceedings in the Supreme Court.” This exception is legally significant because it balances the exclusionary purpose with procedural fairness. If the listed person has a legitimate role in a case—either as a litigant (party) or as someone who gives evidence (witness)—the law permits their presence despite their touting designation.
4. Procedural and evidential implications
Although the extract does not set out procedure for how a person is added to the list, the existence of an exception implies that, in practice, the person’s status in a particular case must be established. For example, security personnel and court administration may require confirmation that the person is indeed a party or witness in the relevant proceedings. Lawyers should therefore ensure that the person’s role is clearly documented (e.g., through case filings, witness summonses, or court orders) to avoid access disputes. If a listed person is expected to attend, counsel should coordinate with the relevant court registry and security arrangements in advance.
How Is This Legislation Structured?
The “List of Touts” is structured as a short legal instrument rather than a multi-part Act. The extract indicates it is presented as a single operative statement under the heading “List of Touts”, supported by an enacting formula and legislative history/versioning information.
In terms of legal architecture, the instrument is best understood as a publication made pursuant to an authorising provision—namely, section 73 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act. The authorising Act provides the legal basis for creating and publishing the list, while the “List of Touts” document itself provides the consequence: exclusion from the Supreme Court precincts for those named.
For practitioners using the platform, the “Timeline” and “Versions” features are important. The extract shows revisions (1990 RevEd and 1997 RevEd) and a current status as at 27 Mar 2026. While the extract does not show the full list of names, the versioning controls matter because the identity of listed persons may change over time. A lawyer should always verify that they are consulting the correct current version when advising clients or assessing risk of access restrictions.
Who Does This Legislation Apply To?
The restriction applies to any person whose name appears in the published list of touts. This is a personal, status-based application rather than a general prohibition directed at a class defined by conduct alone. Accordingly, the legal question for any given individual is not merely whether they have engaged in conduct that could be characterised as touting, but whether they are named in the list published under section 73.
However, the instrument also applies in a contextual way to court access. Even if a person is listed, the law permits entry into the Supreme Court precincts when the person is a party or witness in proceedings in the Supreme Court. This means the same person may be excluded in general but allowed in a specific case, depending on their procedural role. Lawyers should therefore treat the exclusion as conditional on the person’s role in the relevant proceedings.
Why Is This Legislation Important?
This instrument is important because it supports the integrity and orderly administration of justice. Court precincts are sensitive environments where improper solicitation, interference, or influence can distort the fairness of proceedings and undermine public confidence. By excluding named touts, the legal system reduces opportunities for misconduct around court processes.
From an enforcement perspective, the instrument provides a clear and administrable rule. Security and court administration can rely on the published list to determine access eligibility. This reduces discretion and helps ensure consistent application. For practitioners, this clarity means that access issues can become a real operational risk if a client, witness, or other participant is inadvertently a listed person.
For legal practice, the exception for parties and witnesses is the practical safeguard. It ensures that the exclusion does not prevent legitimate participation in litigation or the giving of evidence. Nevertheless, the exception places a premium on advance coordination. Counsel should confirm whether any person expected to attend is listed, and if so, ensure that their participation as a party or witness is properly documented and communicated to court administration. Where necessary, lawyers may need to liaise with the registry to facilitate entry consistent with the exception.
Finally, the instrument’s versioning and timeline features are not merely technical. If the list is updated, the legal status of individuals can change. A lawyer advising on court access should therefore check the current version as at the relevant date, rather than relying on outdated references.
Related Legislation
- Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Chapter 322), section 73 (authorising provision for the publication of the list of touts)
- Judicature Act (as referenced in the metadata)
- Timeline (platform feature for legislative version control; relevant for confirming the correct version)
Source Documents
This article provides an overview of the List of Touts for legal research and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult the official text for authoritative provisions.