Part of a comprehensive analysis of the Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act 2002
All Parts in This Series
Duty to Disclose Property and Information Relating to Terrorism Financing
The Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act 2002 imposes a critical obligation on individuals and entities in Singapore to disclose any property or information connected to terrorists or terrorist entities. Section 8(1) mandates that:
"Every person in Singapore and every citizen of Singapore outside Singapore who ... has possession, custody or control of any property belonging to any terrorist or terrorist entity; or ... has information about any transaction or proposed transaction in respect of any property belonging to any terrorist or terrorist entity, must immediately inform the Commissioner of Police of that fact or information." — Section 8(1), Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act 2002
Verify Section 8 in source document →
This provision exists to ensure early detection and disruption of terrorist financing activities by compelling prompt reporting. The law recognises that property linked to terrorism financing can be held by a wide range of persons, including those outside Singapore, and thus extends the duty extraterritorially to Singapore citizens abroad. Immediate disclosure to the Commissioner of Police facilitates timely investigation and intervention.
Failure to comply attracts severe penalties reflecting the gravity of terrorism financing. Section 8(3) specifies:
"(a) Individual in course of trade, profession, business or employment: fine not exceeding $250,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or to both; (b) Individual otherwise: fine not exceeding $50,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or to both; (c) Non-individual: fine not exceeding ... $1 million; or twice the value of the property ... or $1 million." — Section 8(3), Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act 2002
Verify Section 8 in source document →
The tiered penalty structure recognises the differing levels of responsibility and potential impact, with harsher penalties for those acting in a professional or business capacity and for corporate entities.
Ministerial Power to Require Audits for Terrorism-Linked Property
Section 9(1) empowers the Minister to mandate ongoing audits by any person or class of persons to determine whether they possess or control property owned or controlled by terrorists or terrorist entities:
"The Minister may, by order in the Gazette, require any person or class of persons to determine on a continuing basis whether they are in possession or control of property owned or controlled by or on behalf of any terrorist or terrorist entity." — Section 9(1), Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act 2002
Verify Section 9 in source document →
This provision enables proactive surveillance and compliance monitoring, particularly for sectors vulnerable to misuse for terrorism financing. The continuing basis requirement ensures sustained vigilance rather than one-off checks.
Non-compliance with audit orders is a serious offence, punishable by:
"fine not exceeding $50,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or to both." — Section 9(4), Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act 2002
Verify Section 9 in source document →
This penalty underscores the importance of compliance in preventing the flow of funds to terrorist activities.
Obligation to Disclose Information About Terrorism Financing Offences
Section 10(1) imposes a duty on every person in Singapore who has information that may materially assist in preventing terrorism financing offences or in securing the apprehension, prosecution, or conviction of offenders:
"Every person in Singapore who has information which the person knows or believes may be of material assistance ... in preventing the commission by another person of a terrorism financing offence; or ... in securing the apprehension, prosecution or conviction of another person ... who fails to disclose the information immediately to a police officer shall be guilty of an offence." — Section 10(1), Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act 2002
Verify Section 10 in source document →
This provision is designed to encourage the public to actively participate in combating terrorism financing by sharing relevant intelligence with law enforcement. It recognises that timely information can be crucial in thwarting terrorist acts.
Penalties for failure to disclose mirror those under Section 8(3), with fines and imprisonment scaled according to the offender’s status:
"(a) Individual in course of trade, profession, business or employment: fine not exceeding $250,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or to both; (b) Individual otherwise: fine not exceeding $50,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or to both; (c) Non-individual: fine not exceeding ... $1 million; or twice the value of the property ... or $1 million." — Section 10(2), Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act 2002
Verify Section 10 in source document →
Protection of Informers and Confidentiality of Disclosures
To encourage disclosures without fear of reprisal, Section 10A(1) provides strong protections for informers:
"No information disclosed by an informer pursuant to section 8, 9 or 10 is to be admitted in evidence in any criminal or civil proceedings; and no witness ... is obliged to disclose the name and address of any informer." — Section 10A(1), Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act 2002
Verify Section 10A in source document →
This confidentiality provision exists to safeguard the identity of informers, thereby promoting a secure environment for reporting suspicious activities. It prevents the use of informer disclosures as evidence, which could deter potential whistleblowers.
Section 10A(4) defines an informer as:
"a person who makes a disclosure or report pursuant to section 8, 9 or 10." — Section 10A(4), Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act 2002
Verify Section 10A in source document →
Prohibition of Tipping-Off and Related Offences
Section 10B(1) criminalises the act of "tipping-off," which involves disclosing information likely to prejudice an investigation into terrorism financing:
"Any person ... who knows or has reasonable grounds to suspect that a police officer is acting ... in connection with an investigation ... and who discloses to any other person information or any other matter which is likely to prejudice that investigation ... shall be guilty of an offence." — Section 10B(1), Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act 2002
Verify Section 10B in source document →
This provision exists to protect the integrity of investigations by preventing suspects or third parties from being alerted prematurely, which could lead to the destruction of evidence or flight of suspects.
Penalties for tipping-off are stringent:
"fine not exceeding $250,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or to both." — Section 10B(1) and (2), Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act 2002
Verify Section 10B in source document →
Section 10B(10) cross-references definitions from the Evidence Act 1893, clarifying terms such as "legal counsel" and "public agency" to ensure consistency in interpretation:
"'legal counsel' has the meaning given by section 3(7) of the Evidence Act 1893; 'public agency' has the meaning given by section 128A(6) of the Evidence Act 1893." — Section 10B(10), Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act 2002
Verify Section 10B in source document →
Additionally, subsection (5) of Section 10B refers to Section 6 of the Companies Act 1967, integrating corporate governance considerations into the framework.
Definitions and Their Importance
Clear definitions are essential for the effective application of the Act. Section 8(6) defines the "Commissioner of Police" broadly to include:
"any police officer; and any other person authorised by the Commissioner of Police to act for the Commissioner for the purposes of this section." — Section 8(6), Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act 2002
Verify Section 8 in source document →
This ensures that disclosures can be made to authorised representatives, facilitating operational flexibility.
Similarly, the definition of "informer" in Section 10A(4) and the cross-referenced definitions in Section 10B(10) provide clarity on who is protected and the scope of the Act’s application.
Conclusion
The Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act 2002 establishes a comprehensive legal framework to combat terrorism financing through mandatory disclosure duties, audit requirements, protection for informers, and prohibitions on tipping-off. The provisions are designed to promote transparency, encourage public cooperation, and safeguard the integrity of investigations, all while imposing significant penalties to deter non-compliance. Cross-references to other legislation ensure consistency and clarity in interpretation, reinforcing Singapore’s robust stance against terrorism financing.
Sections Covered in This Analysis
- Section 8(1), (3), (6) – Duty to disclose property and information; definition of Commissioner of Police; penalties
- Section 9(1), (4) – Ministerial power to require audits; penalties for non-compliance
- Section 10(1), (2) – Duty to disclose information about terrorism financing offences; penalties
- Section 10A(1), (4) – Protection of informers; definition of informer
- Section 10B(1), (2), (5), (10) – Tipping-off offences; penalties; cross-references to Evidence Act and Companies Act
Source Documents
For the authoritative text, consult SSO.