Participation in OECD (list year):
No.
This guide offers information on the current regulations related anticorruption policies in various jurisdictions around the world. Please contact the listed contributors for specific questions.
How to Use: You can use the tools below to create bespoke reports for the jurisdiction(s) and topic(s) covered. Click into single jurisdiction for one location or use the compare tool to compare multiple jurisdictions. Select the jurisdictions and topics of interest to create your unique report. You also have the option to print or download using the ellipsis button in the top right corner.
No.
Prevention of Corruption Act 2020 (“PCA”), Penal Code 1871 (“Penal Code”), Corruption, Drug Trafficking and other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act 1992 (“CDSA”).
Generally, the PCA and Penal Code prohibits active and passive bribery by individuals and companies in the public and private sectors. The CDSA on the other hand targets the laundering of bribe money, allowing the state to confiscate corrupt benefits.
Yes, as long as it is committed by a Singapore citizen.
Yes.
No.
Yes.
Yes, in relation to Singapore citizens.
The director of a company incorporated in Singapore can be found li able. However, a director will generally not be found personally liable for an offence committed by the company insofar as they were not personally responsible or involved in the said offence.
For offences under the PCA and Penal Code: Fines up to S$100,000 and/or imprisonment up to 5 years (or 7 years in certain circumstances)
For offences under the CDSA: Fines up to S$500,000 and/or imprisonment up to 10 years. Where the offence is committed by a company/corporation, the fine imposed may be up to S$1 million or twice the illegal benefits received, whichever is higher.
Yes. Sections 5 and 6 of the PCA apply to all “persons”. Under the Interpretation Act 1965, the term “person” includes “any company or association of body of persons, corporate or unincorporated.”
No express obligation.
Yes. While the implementation of a compliance program does not serve as a defence against the offence, generally, being able to demonstrate that adequate measures and/or a compliance program have been implemented to prevent corruption may serve as a mitigating factor.
Yes. Deferred Prosecution Agreements (“DPA”) were introduced in Singapore in 2018. DPA is a settlement under which the Prosecution agrees to defer criminal charges against a corporate offender in exchange for the corporation’s agreement to comply with certain conditions, such as admission of wrongdoing, payment of financial penalties, and implementation of corporate reform.
All DPAs in Singapore must be approved by the General Division of the High Court. However, to date, there has been no reported DPAs entered into since its introduction.
Disclaimer: This guide contains summaries of general principles of law. It is not a substitute for specific legal advice and should not be relied upon in relation to the application of the law or subject matter covered.