Statute Details
- Title: Revised Edition of the Laws (Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act 1992) (Rectification) Order 2023
- Act Code: RELA1983-S784-2023
- Type: Subsidiary Legislation (SL)
- Authorising Act: Revised Edition of the Laws Act 1983 (specifically section 23(1)(a))
- Legislative Instrument No.: S 784/2023
- Date Made: 1 December 2023
- Status: Current version as at 27 Mar 2026
- Core Function: Rectification (correction) of an error in the 2020 Revised Edition of the principal Act
- Key Amendment Location: Section 18(5) of the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act 1992 (2020 Revised Edition)
What Is This Legislation About?
The Revised Edition of the Laws (Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act 1992) (Rectification) Order 2023 is a short but legally significant instrument. Its purpose is not to introduce new substantive law. Instead, it corrects a drafting error in the text of the principal statute as it appears in the 2020 Revised Edition.
In plain language, the Order fixes a wording problem in section 18(5) of the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act 1992 (“the principal Act”). The correction changes the meaning of a sentence about discharge—an area that can affect how legal consequences operate in confiscation proceedings.
Rectification orders like this are part of Singapore’s law revision and consolidation framework. They ensure that the published revised text accurately reflects the intended legal effect. For practitioners, the practical impact is that the corrected wording should be used when interpreting and applying the principal Act, including in litigation, advisory work, and compliance.
What Are the Key Provisions?
Section 1 (Citation) identifies the instrument. This is a standard provision that confirms the name of the Order: the “Revised Edition of the Laws (Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act 1992) (Rectification) Order 2023.” While seemingly administrative, citation provisions matter for legal referencing and for ensuring that the correct instrument is relied upon in submissions and legal research.
Section 2 (Rectification of error) is the substantive operative provision. It directs a specific textual change in the principal Act’s revised edition. The Order states that, in the principal Act (2020 Revised Edition), in section 18(5), the phrase “is not to discharge” is replaced with “is to discharge”.
This replacement is not merely grammatical. The difference between “is not to discharge” and “is to discharge” is a complete reversal in direction. In legal terms, it changes whether a particular legal outcome is prohibited or mandated. Depending on the surrounding context of section 18(5), this could affect whether an authority or court is required to discharge a person (or an order) in the relevant procedural or substantive stage.
Because the extract provided includes only the rectification instruction and not the full text of section 18(5), practitioners should treat this as a “meaning-changing” correction and verify the full surrounding provisions in the principal Act. When advising clients or preparing submissions, counsel should cite the corrected wording and ensure that any reliance on earlier versions or older citations accounts for the rectification.
Enacting formula and procedural context also matter. The Order is made in exercise of powers conferred by section 23(1)(a) of the Revised Edition of the Laws Act 1983. This indicates that the Law Revision Commissioners have authority to correct errors in revised editions. The Order also notes that it is “to be presented to Parliament under section 23(2)” of the Revised Edition of the Laws Act 1983. That parliamentary presentation requirement underscores that rectification orders are part of a controlled governance process, rather than ad hoc amendments.
How Is This Legislation Structured?
This Order is extremely concise and contains only two numbered provisions:
(1) Section 1 (Citation) — provides the short title/citation of the Order.
(2) Section 2 (Rectification of error) — specifies the exact location in the principal Act (section 18(5) of the 2020 Revised Edition) and the exact textual replacement to be made.
There are no schedules, no definitions, and no additional procedural or substantive rules. The structure reflects the nature of the instrument: a targeted correction rather than a legislative overhaul.
Who Does This Legislation Apply To?
Although the Order itself is directed at the text of the principal Act, its effect is felt by the parties and actors involved in the principal Act’s operation. The Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act 1992 governs confiscation-related processes connected to serious crimes, including corruption and drug trafficking. Accordingly, the corrected wording in section 18(5) can affect how courts, enforcement agencies, and respondents understand and apply the procedural consequences described in that provision.
In practical terms, the Order applies to anyone who must interpret or apply section 18(5) of the principal Act—this includes prosecutors, investigators, legal advisers, defendants/respondents, and their counsel. It also affects compliance and risk assessments for entities or individuals who may be subject to confiscation-related proceedings.
Why Is This Legislation Important?
Even though the rectification Order is brief, it is important because it corrects a wording error that changes the legal direction of a sentence. In confiscation law, procedural and substantive triggers can be decisive. A change from “is not to discharge” to “is to discharge” can alter whether a discharge is required or prohibited, which in turn can affect outcomes in applications, hearings, and the final disposition of matters.
For practitioners, the key significance is accuracy in legal research and citation. Courts and counsel rely on the authoritative revised text. If a practitioner cites the uncorrected wording from the 2020 Revised Edition without accounting for the rectification, there is a risk of misstatement of the law. This can undermine credibility and, more importantly, can lead to incorrect legal advice.
Second, the Order illustrates how Singapore’s law revision system maintains the integrity of the statute book. Rectification orders help ensure that the “published law” matches the intended legal effect. While they do not create new policy, they can still have real-world consequences because they correct meaning. In litigation, small textual differences can be outcome-determinative—particularly where the law uses mandatory language (“is to”) versus prohibitive language (“is not to”).
Third, the Order serves as a reminder that legal practitioners should always check the latest version status and relevant amendments. The instrument is shown as “current version as at 27 Mar 2026,” and it is linked to a specific timeline entry (06 Dec 2023, SL 784/2023). Practitioners should therefore treat it as part of the living statutory record, not as a historical footnote.
Related Legislation
- Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act 1992 (including the 2020 Revised Edition and the corrected wording in section 18(5))
- Revised Edition of the Laws Act 1983 (authorising powers for rectification orders, including section 23(1)(a) and section 23(2))
- Revised Edition of the Laws Act 1983 (general framework for law revision and publication)
Source Documents
This article provides an overview of the Revised Edition of the Laws (Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act 1992) (Rectification) Order 2023 for legal research and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult the official text for authoritative provisions.