Statute Details
- Title: Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) (Exemption from Prohibition against Dealing) (No. 3) Order 2012
- Act Code: TSFA2002-S403-2012
- Legislation Type: Subsidiary legislation (SL)
- Authorising Act: Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act (Cap. 325)
- Enacting Authority: Minister for Home Affairs
- Commencement: 24 August 2012
- Enactment Date: 23 August 2012
- Legislative Citation: SL 403/2012
- Key Provisions: Sections 1–4 (Citation and commencement; definition of “specified person”; exemptions for Media Development Authority of Singapore; exemptions for nominee of a specified person)
- Related Legislation: Internal Security Act (Cap. 143); United Nations Act (Cap. 339); Timeline (legislation versioning)
What Is This Legislation About?
The Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) (Exemption from Prohibition against Dealing) (No. 3) Order 2012 (“the Order”) is a targeted exemption instrument made under the Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act (the “TSFA”). In plain terms, it addresses a narrow practical problem: how certain funds connected to a “specified person” may be refunded and used without breaching the TSFA’s prohibition on “dealing” with terrorist-related assets.
The TSFA is Singapore’s core framework for suppressing the financing of terrorism. Among other things, it restricts dealings with property that is connected to persons designated as terrorists or subject to terrorist-related controls. However, real-world administration sometimes requires that funds be returned to a person’s nominee—particularly where the funds are refunds of licence fees or similar entitlements—while still maintaining safeguards to prevent diversion to prohibited uses.
This Order therefore creates a limited carve-out from the TSFA’s prohibition against dealing. It does so in two steps: first, it exempts the Media Development Authority of Singapore (“MDA”) from the TSFA prohibition in relation to a specific refund of 2011 Radio and Television Licence Fees; second, it extends an exemption to the nominee who receives the refund, but only for tightly controlled, basic domestic needs and subject to restrictions on transfers.
What Are the Key Provisions?
Section 1 (Citation and commencement) confirms the legal identity and timing of the instrument. The Order may be cited as the “Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) (Exemption from Prohibition against Dealing) (No. 3) Order 2012” and comes into operation on 24 August 2012. For practitioners, commencement is critical when assessing whether an exemption could apply to a transaction, refund, or withdrawal occurring before or after the effective date.
Section 2 (Definition of “specified person”) is the gateway provision. It defines “specified person” as any person in Singapore who is defined in regulations made under the United Nations Act (Cap. 339) to be a terrorist and who falls within one of three categories under the Internal Security Act (Cap. 143). Specifically, a “specified person” is a terrorist-designated person who:
- (a) is detained under an order made under section 8(1)(a) or (2) of the Internal Security Act;
- (b) is or was placed under a restriction order made under section 8(1)(b) of the Internal Security Act; or
- (c) is the subject of an order made under section 8(1)(a) of the Internal Security Act that has been suspended by the Minister under section 10 of that Act.
This definition matters because it ties the exemption to persons who are both (i) terrorist-designated under the UN framework and (ii) subject to particular detention/restriction/suspension regimes under Singapore’s internal security law. The Order is thus not a general exemption for all terrorist-designated persons; it is limited to those meeting the specified detention or restriction criteria.
Section 3 (Exemption of MDA) provides the first exemption. It states that MDA is exempted from the application of section 6 of the TSFA in respect of the refund by the Authority, in cash to a nominee of a specified person of an amount of the 2011 Radio and Television Licence Fees that the specified person is entitled to receive.
The exemption is conditional. The cash refund must be deposited in the bank account of the nominee as designated in a letter of exemption issued by the Minister to the specified person and his or her nominee. Practically, this means that the refund is not “free-floating”; it must be routed through a designated account and supported by an official exemption letter. For compliance and documentation, this is a key control point: the exemption is triggered only when the refund is made in the manner and to the account specified by the Minister.
Section 4 (Exemption of nominee of specified person) extends the exemption to the nominee, but only for specific activities and uses. The nominee is exempted from the application of section 6 of the TSFA in respect of:
- (a) any withdrawal by the nominee from the designated bank account; and
- (b) the use by the nominee of the sums withdrawn.
However, the exemption is subject to two important conditions:
- Condition (i): Except with prior approval of an officer authorised by the Minister, the withdrawn sums may only be used to pay for food, clothing, medicines, medical treatment, insurance premiums and such other provisions as are necessary for satisfying the basic domestic needs of the nominee and his or her family.
- Condition (ii): No withdrawn sum may be transferred to any other bank account of the nominee or specified person or any other person.
These conditions are the heart of the Order’s risk-management approach. The law permits limited access to funds for essential living and health-related expenses, but it prevents broader financial mobility (especially transfers) that could facilitate prohibited dealings or re-routing of funds to other parties.
How Is This Legislation Structured?
The Order is structured as a short, four-section instrument. It follows a typical subsidiary-legislation pattern: (1) identify the instrument and commencement; (2) define key terms; (3) grant an exemption to a specific institutional actor (MDA) for a particular transaction type (cash refund of 2011 licence fees); and (4) grant a corresponding exemption to the nominee, limited to withdrawal and narrowly defined permitted uses, with explicit safeguards.
Notably, the Order does not attempt to restate the TSFA’s general prohibition. Instead, it operates by reference: it exempts the relevant parties from the application of section 6 of the TSFA in defined circumstances. This drafting technique is common in Singapore’s legislative practice for targeted exemptions—ensuring that the underlying prohibition remains intact except where the Order expressly carves out permitted conduct.
Who Does This Legislation Apply To?
The Order applies to two categories of persons/entities in relation to a specific refund transaction: (1) the Media Development Authority of Singapore and (2) the nominee of a “specified person”. The “specified person” is a defined subset of terrorist-designated individuals under the UN framework who are also subject to particular detention/restriction/suspension orders under the Internal Security Act.
In practical terms, the exemption is activated only where there is (i) a specified person entitled to a refund of 2011 Radio and Television Licence Fees, (ii) a nominee designated in a Ministerial letter of exemption, and (iii) the refund and subsequent withdrawals are carried out in the manner and for the purposes permitted by the Order. The nominee’s permitted conduct is therefore not open-ended; it is tethered to the designated account, the permitted expense categories, and the prohibition on transfers.
Why Is This Legislation Important?
Although the Order is narrow in scope, it is legally significant because it demonstrates how Singapore balances counter-terrorism financing controls with humanitarian and practical considerations. The TSFA’s prohibitions are designed to prevent terrorist financing and to restrict access to controlled funds. Yet, a blanket prohibition could create severe hardship where a person’s entitlement to refunds exists and where a nominee needs funds for basic living and medical needs.
This Order provides a controlled mechanism to allow such refunds while maintaining safeguards. The requirement for a Ministerial letter of exemption and a designated bank account ensures traceability and administrative oversight. The limitation on permitted uses to basic domestic needs and medical/insurance-related expenses reduces the risk that funds could be used for prohibited purposes. The explicit ban on transferring sums to other accounts further constrains the potential for diversion.
For practitioners—particularly those advising compliance officers, financial institutions, or nominees—this Order is a reminder that exemptions under the TSFA are typically transaction-specific and condition-driven. A lawyer should therefore focus not only on the existence of an exemption, but also on whether the factual circumstances align with the statutory conditions: the correct refund amount, the correct year of licence fees (2011), the correct designated nominee account, the absence of unauthorised transfers, and the use of funds within the permitted categories unless prior approval is obtained.
Related Legislation
- Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act (Cap. 325) — authorising framework; section 6 referenced by the Order
- Internal Security Act (Cap. 143) — detention/restriction/suspension regimes referenced in the definition of “specified person”
- United Nations Act (Cap. 339) — basis for terrorist designation regulations referenced in the definition of “specified person”
Source Documents
This article provides an overview of the Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) (Exemption from Prohibition against Dealing) (No. 3) Order 2012 for legal research and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult the official text for authoritative provisions.