Statute Details
- Title: Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Kingdom of Cambodia) Order 2010
- Act Code: MACMA2000-S246-2010
- Legislation Type: Subsidiary legislation (Order)
- Authorising Act: Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act (Chapter 190A)
- Enacting Provision: Made under section 17 of the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act
- Order Number / Citation: S 246/2010
- Commencement: Deemed to have come into operation on 8 April 2010
- Key Provisions (from extract): Section 1 (Citation and commencement); Section 2 (Declaration of Cambodia as a prescribed foreign country)
- Status: Current version as at 27 March 2026 (per provided extract)
- Made Date: 26 April 2010
- Maker: Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Law (Chan Lai Fung)
What Is This Legislation About?
The Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Kingdom of Cambodia) Order 2010 is a Singapore legal instrument that designates Cambodia as a “prescribed foreign country” for the purposes of Singapore’s mutual assistance framework in criminal matters. In practical terms, it enables Singapore authorities to provide certain forms of legal assistance to Cambodia in criminal investigations and proceedings, and—depending on the operation of the underlying Act and the relevant requests—also supports Singapore’s ability to seek assistance from Cambodia.
This Order is not a standalone procedural code. Instead, it functions as a “gateway” measure. The substantive mechanics of mutual assistance—such as how requests are made, how evidence may be obtained, and how Singapore courts and authorities handle incoming or outgoing requests—are governed by the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act (Chapter 190A) (“MACMA”). The Order’s role is to identify which foreign states are treated as eligible partners under the Act’s Part III.
Accordingly, the legal significance of the Order lies in its designation effect. Once a country is declared “prescribed,” the Act’s Part III regime can be applied to that country. For practitioners, this means the Order is often the document that answers a threshold question: is Cambodia within the scope of Singapore’s statutory mutual assistance machinery?
What Are the Key Provisions?
Section 1: Citation and commencement provides the formal identity and timing of the instrument. It states that the Order may be cited as the “Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Kingdom of Cambodia) Order 2010” and that it is deemed to have come into operation on 8 April 2010. This “deemed” commencement is important for legal certainty: it clarifies that the designation effect is treated as having started earlier than the date the Order was made (26 April 2010).
From a practitioner’s perspective, commencement timing can matter in at least two ways. First, it may affect whether a request received or acted upon around that period falls within the operative legal framework. Second, it can influence arguments about whether particular procedural steps were taken under the correct statutory basis. Even though the Order is brief, the commencement clause can be relevant when tracing the chronology of assistance requests and the actions taken by authorities or courts.
Section 2: Declaration of Kingdom of Cambodia as prescribed foreign country is the substantive provision in the extract. It declares that the Kingdom of Cambodia is “hereby declared as a prescribed foreign country for the purposes of Part III of the Act.” This is the core legal effect: it brings Cambodia within the scope of MACMA’s Part III mutual assistance regime.
While the extract does not reproduce the full text of Part III, the designation language indicates that Part III contains the operative rules for mutual assistance with prescribed foreign countries. In practice, once Cambodia is prescribed, Singapore can process requests from Cambodia (and potentially make requests to Cambodia) under the statutory framework applicable to that category of foreign state. The designation also signals that Singapore has determined Cambodia to be an eligible jurisdiction for the purposes of criminal mutual assistance under MACMA.
It is also worth noting the enabling authority. The Order is made “in exercise of the powers conferred by section 17 of the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act.” This matters for legal interpretation. It indicates that the Minister (or the relevant authority) has been empowered by MACMA to prescribe foreign countries for Part III purposes. Therefore, the Order is a legislative act implementing the Act’s policy choice—rather than an ad hoc administrative decision.
For lawyers, the key takeaway is that the Order does not itself set out the procedures for evidence, warrants, or court processes. Instead, it activates the Part III machinery by satisfying the statutory precondition: Cambodia is declared prescribed. When advising clients or preparing submissions, counsel will typically treat the Order as establishing the jurisdictional eligibility required to invoke Part III.
How Is This Legislation Structured?
This Order is structured in a simple, two-section format.
Section 1 deals with citation and commencement. Section 2 performs the substantive designation by declaring Cambodia a prescribed foreign country for Part III of MACMA. The brevity of the instrument is typical of subsidiary legislation that performs a “designation” function rather than a full procedural regulation.
Although the extract does not list additional parts or sections, the document’s structure should be understood in relation to the parent Act. The Order is best read together with MACMA—particularly Part III—because the Order’s effect is to determine eligibility, while Part III contains the operative legal processes.
Who Does This Legislation Apply To?
The Order primarily applies to Singapore authorities and the foreign state designated by it—here, the Kingdom of Cambodia. It is not drafted as a rights-conferring instrument directed at private individuals in the way that, for example, a criminal offence statute would be. Instead, it forms part of the legal infrastructure enabling mutual assistance in criminal matters.
That said, the practical consequences of the Order can affect individuals and entities indirectly. For example, if Cambodia makes a request that is processed under MACMA’s Part III regime, persons in Singapore may be subject to procedural steps connected to the request (such as production of documents, provision of information, or other forms of assistance, depending on what Part III authorises and what the request seeks). Conversely, if Singapore seeks assistance from Cambodia, the Order supports the legal basis for such outward requests under the same framework.
In advising clients, practitioners should therefore treat the Order as relevant to any matter where the question is whether Singapore can lawfully engage in mutual assistance with Cambodia under Part III of MACMA.
Why Is This Legislation Important?
Although the Order is short, it is legally significant because mutual assistance in criminal matters depends heavily on statutory eligibility. Without a “prescribed foreign country” designation, the Part III pathway may not be available, or a different statutory route may apply. The Order therefore reduces uncertainty and enables predictable processing of cross-border criminal cooperation with Cambodia.
From an enforcement and compliance perspective, the designation supports international cooperation in areas such as investigation, evidence gathering, and prosecution. For prosecutors, investigators, and legal counsel, the ability to rely on a clear statutory basis strengthens the legitimacy of requests and the defensibility of procedural steps taken in Singapore.
For defence counsel and affected parties, the Order’s importance lies in its downstream effects. Once Cambodia is prescribed, requests from Cambodia can be considered under MACMA’s Part III framework. This can trigger legal safeguards and procedural protections embedded in the parent Act (for example, requirements for formal requests, judicial oversight where applicable, and limitations designed to protect fundamental rights and ensure proportionality and legality). Even though those safeguards are not contained in the Order itself, the Order is the document that allows them to come into play.
Finally, the commencement clause (deemed operation from 8 April 2010) can be crucial in disputes about timing—such as whether a request was processed under the correct legal regime, or whether certain actions were taken after the designation became effective. In cross-border matters, where timelines can be complex, such details can matter.
Related Legislation
- Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act (Chapter 190A) — the parent statute governing mutual assistance in criminal matters, including Part III and the power to prescribe foreign countries (section 17).
- Legislation Timeline / Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Kingdom of Cambodia) Order 2010 — to confirm the correct version and any amendments (as indicated by the provided extract’s “current version as at 27 Mar 2026” and timeline references).
Source Documents
This article provides an overview of the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Kingdom of Cambodia) Order 2010 for legal research and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult the official text for authoritative provisions.