Statute Details
- Title: Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) (Exemption from Prohibition against Dealing) (No. 6) Order 2010
- Act Code: TSFA2002-S374-2010
- Legislation Type: Subsidiary Legislation (Order)
- Authorising Act: Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act (Chapter 325)
- Enacting Authority: Minister for Home Affairs (exercising powers under section 7(1) of the Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act)
- Statutory Citation: SL 374/2010
- Date Made: 8 July 2010
- Commencement: 9 July 2010
- Status: Current version as at 27 Mar 2026
- Key Provision(s): Section 2 (Exemption)
What Is This Legislation About?
The Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) (Exemption from Prohibition against Dealing) (No. 6) Order 2010 (“the Order”) is a targeted exemption instrument made under Singapore’s terrorism financing framework. In plain terms, it temporarily or conditionally lifts (for specified persons and specified funds) a prohibition that would otherwise apply under section 6 of the Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act (the “TSFA”).
Singapore’s TSFA is designed to prevent and disrupt the financing of terrorism. A central compliance mechanism is the prohibition against “dealing” with funds that are subject to restrictions under the Act. However, real-world situations—such as inheritance, estate administration, and the handling of funds held in institutional accounts—may require carefully controlled exceptions. This Order is an example of such an exception: it concerns funds in the Central Provident Fund (“CPF”) account of a deceased member and the subsequent inheritance and use of those funds by identified individuals.
Importantly, the Order is not a general policy change. It is a specific exemption tied to named individuals, a specified CPF amount, and a specified bank account designated in an exemption letter dated 8 July 2010. The structure reflects a compliance approach: exemptions are permitted, but only under conditions that preserve the overall objective of preventing terrorism financing risks.
What Are the Key Provisions?
1. Citation and commencement (Section 1)
Section 1 provides the formal citation of the Order and states that it comes into operation on 9 July 2010. For practitioners, this matters for determining the effective date of any legal relief from the TSFA prohibition and for assessing whether actions taken before commencement fall within or outside the exemption.
2. The exemption from the prohibition against dealing (Section 2)
The core operative provision is Section 2. It creates exemptions from the application of section 6 of the TSFA in relation to specific funds and specific persons. The exemption is two-tiered: first, it exempts the Central Provident Fund Board in relation to payment of certain inherited CPF funds; second, it exempts the recipient (the inheriting individual) in relation to withdrawals and use of those sums.
3. Exemption granted to the Central Provident Fund Board (Section 2(1))
Under Section 2(1), the CPF Board is exempted from the application of section 6 of the TSFA in respect of the payment of funds in the CPF account of a deceased member, Jaafar Bin Suraji (NRIC No. S0043712C). The funds are specified as amounting to $4,167.81 plus interests thereon (if any), and they are described as having been inherited by Hamim Bin Jaafar (NRIC No. S1792911I) to Hasmah Binte Omar (NRIC No. S1699952J).
Two practical points follow from the drafting. First, the exemption is limited to the payment of the specified CPF funds and interest. Second, the exemption is conditional: the moneys must be deposited in the bank account of Hasmah Binte Omar that is designated in the letter of exemption dated 8 July 2010. This means the exemption is not merely about who may receive funds; it also governs where the funds must go, thereby supporting traceability and risk management.
4. Exemption granted to the inheriting individual: withdrawals and use (Section 2(2) and (3))
Section 2(2) extends the exemption to Hasmah Binte Omar. She is exempted from the application of section 6 of the TSFA in respect of:
- (a) any withdrawal from the bank account referred to in Section 2(1); and
- (b) the use of the sums withdrawn therefrom.
This is significant because it clarifies that the exemption is not confined to the act of receiving the funds. It also covers subsequent transactions—withdrawals and use—so long as they relate to the designated account and the sums withdrawn from it.
However, Section 2(3) introduces an important compliance constraint: the exemption for the activity in Section 2(2)(b) (i.e., use of withdrawn sums) is subject to the conditions stated in the letter of exemption referred to in Section 2(1). In other words, the Order itself does not enumerate all “use” conditions; instead, it incorporates them by reference to an external letter. For legal practitioners, this is a key diligence point: the letter of exemption may contain restrictions on how the funds may be applied (for example, limitations on transfers, spending categories, or reporting requirements). Without reviewing that letter, counsel may not be able to advise confidently on permissible “use”.
5. The conditional nature of the exemption
Although the Order is short, its conditional design is central. The exemption is:
- limited to specified funds (CPF amount and interest);
- limited to specified persons (named NRIC holders);
- limited to specified banking arrangements (deposit into a designated account); and
- for “use”, limited by conditions in a separate exemption letter.
This approach aligns with the broader TSFA objective: exemptions exist to allow legitimate handling of funds, but only within controlled parameters that reduce the risk of prohibited dealing.
How Is This Legislation Structured?
The Order is structured in a minimal, two-section format:
- Section 1 (Citation and commencement): sets out the name of the Order and the date it comes into operation (9 July 2010).
- Section 2 (Exemption): provides the substantive legal relief, including the exemption for the CPF Board (payment of specified inherited funds) and the exemption for the recipient (withdrawal and use), with “use” subject to conditions in an exemption letter.
There are no additional Parts or detailed schedules in the extract provided. The operative content is therefore concentrated entirely in Section 2, with the external “letter of exemption” functioning as an important interpretive and compliance instrument.
Who Does This Legislation Apply To?
The Order applies to two categories of persons/entities:
- The Central Provident Fund Board, in relation to its handling and payment of CPF funds from the account of the deceased member, Jaafar Bin Suraji.
- Hasmah Binte Omar, in relation to withdrawals from, and use of, sums deposited into her designated bank account.
Although Hamim Bin Jaafar is mentioned as the inheritor who inherited the funds to be passed to Hasmah Binte Omar, the exemption’s operative beneficiaries are the CPF Board (for payment) and Hasmah Binte Omar (for withdrawal and use). Practitioners should therefore map the exemption’s effect carefully to the roles each named person plays in the transaction chain.
In terms of scope, the exemption is not open-ended. It is tied to the specific CPF amount ($4,167.81) and interest (if any), and to the designated bank account identified in the exemption letter dated 8 July 2010. Accordingly, the Order should be treated as a narrow permission for a particular set of facts rather than a general authorisation to deal with other funds or accounts.
Why Is This Legislation Important?
For lawyers advising on terrorism financing compliance, this Order illustrates how Singapore’s TSFA regime balances strict prohibitions with practical exceptions. The prohibition against dealing under section 6 is a powerful tool; however, the legal system recognises that funds may be held in institutional accounts and may legitimately pass to heirs. The Order provides a lawful pathway for such transfers and subsequent use, reducing the risk that otherwise legitimate estate-related transactions could breach the TSFA.
From an enforcement and compliance perspective, the conditional drafting is crucial. The exemption is effective only if the funds are deposited into the designated bank account and, for “use” of withdrawn sums, only if the conditions in the referenced exemption letter are satisfied. This means that compliance is not merely about obtaining the exemption order; it is also about operationalising the conditions—ensuring correct account routing, maintaining records, and adhering to any restrictions on how funds may be used.
Practically, the Order is also a reminder that subsidiary legislation may incorporate external documents by reference. Counsel should therefore obtain and review the “letter of exemption dated 8 July 2010” to determine the full set of conditions governing permissible use. Failure to do so could lead to inadvertent non-compliance with section 6 of the TSFA, potentially exposing parties to legal consequences.
Related Legislation
- Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) Act (Chapter 325) — particularly section 6 (prohibition against dealing) and section 7(1) (power to make exemption orders)
- Timeline / Legislation instruments referenced in the legislation database for SL 374/2010 (Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) (Exemption from Prohibition Against Dealing) (No. 6) Order 2010)
Source Documents
This article provides an overview of the Terrorism (Suppression of Financing) (Exemption from Prohibition against Dealing) (No. 6) Order 2010 for legal research and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult the official text for authoritative provisions.