Statute Details
- Title: Revised Edition of the Laws (Evidence Act) (Rectification) Order 2016
- Act Code: RELA1983-S210-2016
- Legislation Type: Subsidiary Legislation (SL)
- Authorising Act: Revised Edition of the Laws Act (section 23(1))
- Commencement Date: Not stated in the extract (order made on 4 May 2016; presented to Parliament under section 23(2))
- SL Number: S 210/2016
- Made Date: 4 May 2016
- Status: Current version as at 27 Mar 2026
- Key Provisions: Section 1 (Citation); Section 2 (Rectification of error)
- Primary Amendment Target: Section 94 of the Evidence Act (Cap. 97) across specified revised editions (1985 Ed., 1990 Ed., 1997 Ed.)
- Nature of Change: Corrects wording in an Illustration (e) by substituting “performed” with “reformed”
What Is This Legislation About?
The Revised Edition of the Laws (Evidence Act) (Rectification) Order 2016 is a narrowly focused legal instrument. Its purpose is not to rewrite the Evidence Act or to introduce new evidential rules. Instead, it performs a “rectification of error” in the text of the Evidence Act as it appears in certain revised editions.
In practical terms, the Order corrects a specific word in a specific place: within section 94 of the Evidence Act, in an Illustration labelled (e). The rectification changes the term “performed” to “reformed”. This kind of correction is typical of law revision and consolidation processes, where minor textual inaccuracies may be discovered after publication of revised editions.
For lawyers, the significance lies in ensuring that the operative meaning of the Evidence Act is preserved. Even a single word can affect how an illustration is understood, and illustrations can guide interpretation of statutory provisions. This Order therefore serves the integrity of the statutory text and reduces the risk of misapplication in court proceedings.
What Are the Key Provisions?
Section 1 (Citation) provides the short title of the instrument: it is the “Revised Edition of the Laws (Evidence Act) (Rectification) Order 2016”. This is standard drafting: it helps practitioners cite the Order when relying on it for the correction.
Section 2 (Rectification of error) is the substantive provision. It identifies the exact location and the exact correction. The Order directs that in section 94 of the Evidence Act, the Evidence Act in three specified revised editions—(i) Cap. 97, 1985 Ed., (ii) Cap. 97, 1990 Ed., and (iii) Cap. 97, 1997 Ed.—the word “performed” should be deleted wherever it appears in Illustration (e), and replaced with “reformed”.
Although the extract does not reproduce the full text of section 94 or Illustration (e), the drafting makes clear that the correction is limited to a particular illustration within that section. The phrase “delete ‘performed’ wherever it appears in Illustration (e) and substitute … ‘reformed’” indicates that the incorrect word may have been repeated or used in more than one spot within the illustration. The rectification therefore ensures that the illustration reads correctly in its entirety.
Practical interpretive effect: illustrations in evidence legislation often function as explanatory examples of how a rule operates. If Illustration (e) was intended to describe a concept involving “reformation” (for example, a change in conduct or character), then “performed” would be semantically mismatched. By substituting “reformed”, the Order aligns the illustration with the intended legal concept, thereby supporting correct judicial understanding and consistent application by counsel.
Procedural and legislative context: the Order is made under section 23(1) of the Revised Edition of the Laws Act. The extract also notes that it is “to be presented to Parliament under section 23(2)”. This matters to practitioners because it signals that rectification orders are part of a formal legislative process, not merely administrative correction. The Law Revision Commissioners are empowered to make such orders to correct errors in revised editions, subject to parliamentary presentation requirements.
How Is This Legislation Structured?
This Order is extremely short and consists of two operative provisions.
First, it contains a citation provision (Section 1). This is a standard structural element in subsidiary legislation.
Second, it contains the rectification clause (Section 2). Section 2 is structured to (a) specify the target provision (section 94 of the Evidence Act), (b) specify the editions affected (1985 Ed., 1990 Ed., 1997 Ed.), and (c) specify the exact textual change (in Illustration (e), replace “performed” with “reformed”).
There are no schedules, no additional amendments, and no new definitions. The entire instrument is designed to correct a discrete textual mistake, leaving the rest of the Evidence Act untouched.
Who Does This Legislation Apply To?
The rectification applies to the Evidence Act as it appears in the specified revised editions. In other words, the Order affects how the Evidence Act is read and cited in those editions, and it ensures that the corrected wording is reflected in the authoritative legal text.
While the Order itself does not impose duties on particular categories of persons (such as witnesses, accused persons, or prosecutors), its effect is felt by everyone who uses the Evidence Act in practice—judges, lawyers, and litigants. In court, the corrected illustration may influence how counsel frames arguments and how the court interprets the evidential rule in section 94.
Why Is This Legislation Important?
At first glance, rectification orders may appear minor because they do not change the substance of the law. However, this Order is important for legal certainty and for accurate statutory interpretation. Evidence law is highly technical, and the meaning of statutory provisions must be precise. A single incorrect word in an illustration can create ambiguity, particularly where illustrations are used to clarify the application of a rule.
From a practitioner’s perspective, the key value of this Order is that it helps prevent reliance on an erroneous text. If a lawyer were to cite Illustration (e) using the incorrect word “performed”, it could undermine the persuasiveness of submissions or, worse, lead to an argument based on a misread example. The rectification ensures that the illustration communicates the intended concept—here, corrected to “reformed”.
Additionally, the Order demonstrates how Singapore’s law revision framework maintains the integrity of consolidated and revised statutes. The Revised Edition of the Laws Act empowers the Law Revision Commissioners to correct errors in revised editions. This supports a stable legal environment where practitioners can trust that the published text is accurate, subject to the formal rectification process.
Finally, because the Order is “current version as at 27 Mar 2026”, practitioners should be aware that the corrected wording is part of the living legal record. When preparing submissions, drafting pleadings, or conducting legal research, it is best practice to consult the latest consolidated version and to note rectification instruments that may have corrected earlier textual anomalies.
Related Legislation
- Evidence Act (Cap. 97)
- Revised Edition of the Laws Act (authorising powers under section 23)
Source Documents
This article provides an overview of the Revised Edition of the Laws (Evidence Act) (Rectification) Order 2016 for legal research and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult the official text for authoritative provisions.