Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move: "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

Globalisation has produced immense benefits and rapid development to countries around the world. One side effect, however, is that serious crimes are no longer confined within national boundaries. The reduction of trade restrictions, the increasing ease with which people and goods cross national borders, the global reach of telecommunications and financial systems all present opportunities for criminals to extend their activities beyond national borders. The same forces that make possible today's rapid international trade can be exploited by criminals to extend their criminal activities and influences across countries.

Without an effective network of international cooperation in the war against transnational crimes, criminal organisations will be able to exploit the differences and dislocations caused by national borders to their advantage and defy the individual efforts of national authorities to quash them. This Bill signals Singapore's commitment to be part of the wider international network of cooperation in combating crime on a global scale.

This is not the first time provisions for international mutual assistance in criminal matters have been introduced into our law. In 1993 we enacted the Drug Trafficking (Confiscation of Benefits) Act with mechanisms for mutual assistance were built in to help in the fight against international drug money-laundering. Last year, we extended its scope to cover laundering of the proceeds of other serious crimes and renamed it the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act. With this extension, we widened the scope of the mutual assistance provisions in the Act to cover mutual assistance in the context of serious offences other than drug trafficking.

This Bill builds on these previous efforts by consolidating the existing mutual assistance provisions and providing for more forms of assistance currently not available under our laws. It follows closely on the heels of the amendments last year, as part of the Government's progressive move towards building a wider framework for international legal assistance in the fight against crime. There is an increasing international trend towards enacting comprehensive mutual legal assistance legislation. We see this in the laws of the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and Hong Kong, to name but a few. In fact, during the Plenary of the Financial Action Task Force last year, Singapore was encouraged to enact a dedicated mutual assistance law. It is in keeping with our role as a member of the Financial Action Task Force to act on this suggestion and to propose this Bill to the House.

This Bill not only facilitates the provision of legal assistance by Singapore to foreign authorities, it will also enhance the legal arsenal at the disposal of our law enforcement agencies in fighting transnational crime. For example, our law enforcement agencies have in the past faced problems in getting witnesses from other jurisdictions to come to Singapore to give evidence. This has hampered their investigations in some cases. The Bill will allow them to receive such assistance. This will help to facilitate the work of our enforcement agencies.

Sir, let me now take the House through the main provisions of the Bill. The Bill has 4 parts. Part 2 deals with requests for assistance made by Singapore to foreign countries. Part 3 deals with requests for assistance to Singapore by foreign countries. Parts 1 and 4 deal with general issues which are common to both requests by Singapore and requests to Singapore.

The Bill marks out the extent and forms of assistance which Singapore is prepared to give, the pre-conditions to be met before such assistance is given, and the conditions governing the rendering of such assistance. It also provides the legal framework for Singapore to request and receive assistance from other countries.

The Bill does not deal with extradition. All requests for extradition and assistance leading to extradition, will continue to be handled under the provisions of the Extradition Act. Clause 5 of the Bill makes this clear. The Bill will also not affect the system of informal cooperation currently existing between our law enforcement agencies and other law enforcement agencies and international organisations such as Interpol.

Assistance under the Bill may be obtained or provided for criminal investigations, criminal proceedings in court, and the seizure or confiscation of proceeds or instrumentalities of crime. The Bill imposes no restrictions on which country Singapore may request assistance from. When it comes to the provision of assistance to foreign countries, the Bill distinguishes between assistance involving coercive measures (e.g. search warrants) and those not involving coercive measures (e.g. service of documents). Assistance not involving coercive measures may be provided to any country. On the other hand, assistance involving coercive measures may only be provided to a country which has a mutual legal assistance treaty with Singapore. For these measures, the Bill merely lays down the framework for Singapore to enter into mutual legal assistance treaties with other countries for the provision of assistance. Whether assistance can be provided will depend on the existence of a treaty. Just as extradition is not automatic but is conditional on the existence of an extradition treaty, it is consistent with international practice to condition the use of a State's coercive powers on the existence of a mutual legal assistance treaty. The requirement for a treaty will allow Singapore to set conditions for giving of assistance and provide safeguards against abuses by other countries.

At this point, I should clarify that there is one exception to this distinction between coercive and non-coercive measures. This relates to the provision on taking of testimony in Singapore courts for use in foreign proceedings (Clause 21 of the Bill). This is because this form of assistance is currently available under Section 43 of the Extradition Act, without the requirement for a mutual legal assistance treaty and we do not wish to upset a practice which has been in place for many years.

The list of offences for which assistance may be obtained or provided under the Bill is the same as the list currently applicable under the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act (or CDSA in short).

The Bill provides that the Attorney-General will be the authority for requesting assistance from other countries and receiving requests for assistance from other countries.

Under the Bill, Singapore can ask for a number of different forms of assistance from a foreign country. The first form of assistance involves obtaining of evidence - that is, asking a foreign country to take evidence in that country, including obtaining the testimony of witnesses as well as seizing physical evidence, photographs and documents, and transmit them to Singapore for use in legal proceedings. The second form of assistance is in arranging for the voluntary attendance of persons in Singapore as witnesses in legal proceedings or to assist in criminal investigations. Clause 11 gives the assurance that a person who comes to Singapore under this provision will, during the period of his stay in Singapore for the purpose requested, be immune to prosecution or civil suit for anything which he has done before leaving the foreign country to come to Singapore. The third form of assistance is to request a foreign country to enforce a Singapore confiscation order. Fourthly, a request could be made to a foreign country to assist in locating or identifying a person who could be of assistance in criminal investigations or proceedings or who could be affected by such investigations or proceedings. Lastly, a request can be made to a foreign country for service of Singapore court documents in that country.

However, the existence of these provisions in our law does not mean that any foreign country will be obliged to accede to our requests. Whether the foreign country will accede to our request will depend on the provisions of its laws. Just as we require the existence of a mutual legal assistance treaty before providing some of these forms of assistance, the country which we make a request to may similarly condition the rendering of assistance upon the existence of prior arrangements or understanding with Singapore concerning mutual assistance in criminal matters. Essentially, what these provisions do is to establish that the Attorney-General has the legal authority to make such requests on behalf of Singapore.

The forms of assistance which Singapore can request under the Bill are also the forms of assistance which Singapore can provide under the Bill. As I explained earlier, some of these provisions for the giving of assistance by Singapore, like those concerning search warrants and production order, are only enabling provisions. Which assistance can be invoked in a specific case will depend on whether there is a mutual legal assistance treaty between Singapore and the requesting country.

Of the various forms of assistance which Singapore can provide, assistance concerning production orders, search warrants and enforcement of foreign confiscation orders are already provided for in the CDSA. As I mentioned just now, these mutual assistance provisions in the CDSA will be repealed and moved into the Bill. Assistance in the taking of evidence is also not new, as this is now provided for under Section 43 of the Extradition Act. Similarly, Section 43 will be repealed and moved into the Bill as Clause 21. This consolidation will provide a convenient one-stop source of reference of the provisions for mutual assistance in criminal matters in our law.

While we are willing to provide assistance to foreign authorities in appropriate circumstances, obviously there must be safeguards in place to prevent abuses of our willingness to assist and to prevent unnecessary intrusion by foreign authorities into the privacy of our businesses and individuals. Many safeguards are built into the Bill. I shall only briefly explain the main safeguards.

The first safeguard is the limited list of offences for which assistance is available. As I mentioned before, this list is tied to the list of offences under the CDSA. Limiting the list of offences for which assistance can be provided will ensure that assistance is given only for offences of a sufficiently serious nature.

The second safeguard is the requirement for a mutual legal assistance treaty for certain forms of assistance, which I have already explained. A related safeguard is that a request will be declined if it does not comply with the conditions laid down in the applicable treaty.

To ensure that requests are not made unnecessarily, it is provided that the Attorney-General will not honour a request if the thing requested is not of sufficient importance to the investigation or criminal proceedings, or could reasonably be obtained by other means.

To avoid information or evidence obtained pursuant to a request from being used subsequently for other purposes, it is provided that a request will be declined if the requesting state fails to give an undertaking that the thing requested will not be used for purposes other than those for which the request was made.

Finally, there is a general power to decline a request if the provision of assistance could prejudice a local investigation or criminal proceeding or would prejudice the safety of any person or if it is not in the public interest to provide the assistance.

Before I end, I should just mention that the Bill also seeks to insert a new Section 39A into the CDSA. This will empower Suspicious Transactions Reporting Officers in the Commercial Affairs Department to share information with foreign financial intelligence units. Safeguards have been built into Section 39A such that the sharing of information is conditional on there being an arrangement between the financial intelligence units of Singapore and the foreign country.

Sir, in conclusion, this Bill will enhance the legal arsenal at the disposal of law enforcement agencies. It will also allow Singapore to play its part in the wider international efforts to combat transnational crimes.

Sir, I beg to move.