Statute Details
- Title: Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) (Exemption from Prohibition against Dealing) (No. 5) Order 2007
- Act Code: TSFA2002-S231-2007
- Legislation Type: Subsidiary Legislation (SL)
- Authorising Act: Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act (Chapter 325)
- Authorising Power: Section 7(1) of the Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act
- Legislative Instrument No.: SL 231/2007
- Citation: “Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) (Exemption from Prohibition against Dealing) (No. 5) Order 2007”
- Commencement: 6 June 2007
- Status: Current version as at 27 March 2026
- Key Provisions in Extract: Section 1 (Citation and commencement); Section 2 (Exemption)
What Is This Legislation About?
The Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) (Exemption from Prohibition against Dealing) (No. 5) Order 2007 is a targeted, person-specific legal instrument made under Singapore’s terrorism financing framework. In practical terms, it creates a narrow exemption from a statutory prohibition on “dealing” with certain funds, but only for a defined withdrawal and only for a defined purpose.
Singapore’s Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act (Chapter 325) establishes controls designed to prevent terrorists and terrorist financiers from accessing financial resources. Where the Act applies, affected persons may be subject to prohibitions that restrict transactions involving their funds. This Order does not repeal those controls. Instead, it permits a limited withdrawal from a specific account for a specific medical expense, subject to conditions.
Accordingly, the Order is best understood as a compliance and humanitarian exception mechanism: it allows the Minister for Home Affairs, acting under statutory authority, to grant relief where strict application of the prohibition would be overly burdensome or would impede legitimate needs—here, medical expenses—while still maintaining the overall protective purpose of the terrorism financing regime.
What Are the Key Provisions?
Section 1: Citation and commencement provides the formal identity of the instrument and when it takes effect. The Order may be cited as the “Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) (Exemption from Prohibition against Dealing) (No. 5) Order 2007” and comes into operation on 6 June 2007. For practitioners, this matters because exemptions must be effective at the time the relevant dealing occurs; otherwise, the dealing could fall outside the exemption and potentially breach the underlying prohibition.
Section 2: Exemption is the substantive provision. It identifies two individuals by name and NRIC number and states that they are “hereby exempted” from the application of section 6 of the Act in respect of a particular transaction: the withdrawal of $472.70 from the Medisave account of Mohamad Anuar Bin Margono in the Central Provident Fund.
The exemption is not general. It is limited in at least three ways:
- Person-specific: it applies only to the named individuals (Mohamad Anuar Bin Margono and Zalinah Binti Hamid).
- Transaction-specific: it covers only the withdrawal of the specified sum ($472.70).
- Account-specific: it is limited to withdrawal from the Medisave account of Mohamad Anuar Bin Margono within the Central Provident Fund system.
Section 2(2): Condition precedent / condition attached to the exemption further constrains the exemption. The exemption is subject to the withdrawn sum being utilised for the payment of medical expenses incurred by Zalinah Binti Hamid at Tan Tock Seng Hospital on 12 December 2006.
From a legal risk perspective, this conditionality is crucial. The exemption is effectively conditional upon the purpose and use of the funds. If the withdrawn amount is not used for the specified medical expenses (or not used in the manner contemplated), the exemption may be argued not to apply, potentially exposing the individuals (or any intermediary) to liability under the underlying prohibition in section 6 of the Act. Practitioners should therefore treat such conditions as compliance checkpoints requiring documentary evidence (e.g., hospital bills, payment confirmations, and records linking the withdrawal to the stated medical event).
Finally, the Order includes the formal making clause: it was made on 5 June 2007 by Benny Lim, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs. This provides the administrative provenance and supports the validity of the instrument as an exercise of the statutory power conferred by section 7(1) of the Act.
How Is This Legislation Structured?
This Order is extremely concise and structured around two provisions only:
- Section 1 (Citation and commencement): identifies the instrument and sets the effective date.
- Section 2 (Exemption): grants a narrow exemption from the prohibition in section 6 of the Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act, specifying the persons, the exact withdrawal, the account, and the conditional use of funds.
There are no schedules, no additional parts, and no general interpretive provisions in the extract provided. The operative effect is therefore contained entirely within section 2, with section 1 serving only to establish timing and citation.
Who Does This Legislation Apply To?
The Order applies to specific named individuals—Mohamad Anuar Bin Margono (NRIC S7005368C) and Zalinah Binti Hamid (NRIC S1495123G). It is not a class-based exemption (e.g., “persons subject to freezing orders” or “persons designated under the Act”). Instead, it is a bespoke instrument tailored to a particular situation.
In addition, the exemption is limited to a particular dealing: withdrawal of $472.70 from the Medisave account of Mohamad Anuar Bin Margono. The exemption is also tied to the medical expenses of Zalinah Binti Hamid at Tan Tock Seng Hospital on 12 December 2006. As a result, the practical scope is narrow: it covers only the specified withdrawal and only when used for the specified medical purpose.
Why Is This Legislation Important?
Although the Order is short, it illustrates an important feature of Singapore’s terrorism financing regime: the law is designed to be both protective and operationally workable. Absolute prohibitions can create hardship where funds are needed for legitimate expenses. By authorising exemptions under section 7(1) of the Act, the legal framework allows the authorities to permit limited access to funds in carefully controlled circumstances.
For practitioners, the Order is significant because it demonstrates how exemptions are drafted: they are typically precise, conditional, and transaction-bound. This means that compliance advice cannot be generic. Instead, counsel should verify (i) whether the client is among the named persons, (ii) whether the dealing falls within the exact transaction described, (iii) whether the account and amount match, and (iv) whether the funds are used for the specified purpose and within the specified factual context.
From an enforcement and risk management standpoint, conditional exemptions raise evidential issues. If a withdrawal is made, the parties should ensure they can substantiate that the withdrawn sum was utilised for the stated medical expenses. In practice, this may require coordination with the relevant financial institution (here, the Central Provident Fund/Medisave system) and the hospital billing process. The conditional language (“subject to”) signals that the exemption is not merely procedural; it is substantive and may be scrutinised after the fact.
Finally, the Order’s existence underscores that the terrorism financing framework is implemented through a combination of primary legislation (the Act) and subsidiary instruments (orders granting exemptions). Lawyers advising on financial compliance should therefore monitor not only the Act itself but also the relevant subsidiary orders and their timelines, as exemptions may be time-sensitive and fact-specific.
Related Legislation
- Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act (Chapter 325) — in particular:
- Section 6 (prohibition against dealing) — the provision from which the exemption is granted
- Section 7(1) — the power under which the Minister for Home Affairs makes exemption orders
Source Documents
This article provides an overview of the Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) (Exemption from Prohibition against Dealing) (No. 5) Order 2007 for legal research and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult the official text for authoritative provisions.