Military Law in Singapore is unique due to its separate legal system and jurisdiction.
To most, “Military Justice” (or “Military Law”) is simply a body of law and system of rules which only applies to military personnel. Being a nation known for its mandatory conscription (National Service), many of us have probably heard the military-related terms, viz, “AWOL”, “court-martial”, “honourable/dishonourable discharge”, “insubordination”, etc.
But what are some of the differences between Military Law and Civilian Law? In a two part series, the four main differences between military law and civilian law are noted and discussed.
1st Difference: Who is subject to Military Law?
The backbone of Military Law is the Singapore Armed Forces Act (Cap 295) (the “SAF Act”) [1], which applies to:-
1) Regular servicemen and full-time national servicemen.
2) Operationally ready national servicemen from the time that they are ordered to report for enlistment or service, whether they have complied with such order or not, and while in uniform or performing service in the Singapore Armed Forces or the People’s Defence Force pursuant to section 14 of the Enlistment Act (Cap. 93), and while called out for mobilised service pursuant to sections 16 and 17 of that Act or when called out to duty in aid of the civil power;
3) Civilians who are in the service of the Singapore Armed Forces when engaged on active service.
4) Civilians who are not otherwise subject to military law but who follow or accompany the Singapore Armed Forces when engaged on active service.
5) Officers and soldiers belonging to a Commonwealth or foreign force when attached to or seconded for service with or otherwise acting as part of or with any portion of the Singapore Armed Forces
6) Volunteers during the period that they are ordered to report for service, whether they have complied with such order or not.
For the purposes of this article, persons who are subject to Military Law under Section 3 of the SAF Act will hereafter be referred to as “servicemen/women”.
Being subject to Military Law is a “bonus” – it has no bearing on a serviceman/woman’s liability to be tried in the civil courts (i.e. a court of ordinary criminal jurisdiction) for a civil offence (i.e. an offence punishable under any written law in force other than a military offence). This is made clear by Section 6 of the SAF Act. Thus, servicemen/women can be charged and punished in the civilian criminal courts, even if their acts were committed during their duty with the SAF.
In 2012, an SAF vehicle overturned during an exercise, causing the death of a soldier. The Conducting Officer of the exercise, who had allowed a serviceman whom he knew did not have a valid driving licence to drive the military vehicle was convicted in the criminal courts and sentenced to 6 months’ imprisonment.
2nd Difference: Types of Offences and Punishments under Military Law
Military Offences
A military offence is defined as an offence listed under Part III of the SAF Act. A “civil offence” is defined as an offence punishable under any other written law, other than those prescribed under Part III of the SAF Act. These include, inter alia, the Penal Code (Cap 224, Rev 2008), the Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, Rev 2008) (“MDA”) or the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act (Cap 67, Rev 2000).
There are overlaps between military offences and civil offences i.e. a single act can at one and the same time be an offence under both jurisdictions, and render the offender liable to punishment under either.
One such example pertains to the possession and/or consumption of drugs.
Section 34. – Possession, etc., of drugs[1]
Possession and/or consumption of drugs is a military offence under the SAF Act and it carries a term of imprisonment not exceeding 5 years.
Similarly, possession and/or consumption of drugs is also a civil offence under Section 8 of the MDA, punishable under Section 33 / 33A of the MDA.[2]
Whether an offender would be charged for an offence under Military Law or Civilian Law is entirely left to the prosecutorial discretion of the Chief Military Prosecutor or the Attorney-General.
Some of the offences that are unique to Military Law include: i) AWOL (Absent without Official Leave), ii) desertion, iii) insubordinate behaviour, iii) malingering and iv) conduct to prejudice of good order or discipline.
Section 22 – Absence without leave
Most commonly referred to as “AWOL” (Absent Without Official Leave), any serviceman / woman who is absent without leave from service in the Singapore Armed Forces or from the place where he/she is lawfully required for the time being to be shall be liable for a term of imprisonment not exceeding 2 years.[3]
This is a common offence with the most prominent case examples. They can be people who left before their service is finished. For example [6], Wang Yinchu, left Singapore on Oct 8, 2008 and returned only almost six years later. He was one month away from completing his national service when he left Singapore without permission to pursue his medical studies at the University of Cambridge in Britain.
Section 23 – Desertion
An offence of Desertion differs from an offence of AWOL in its severity.
While both offences involve the serviceman/woman’s failure to attend at his/her place of duty (without a valid reason), an offence of Desertion is viewed as a more serious offence and is typically distinguished from AWOL by the intention and permanency of a serviceman/woman’s absence.
Consequently, an offence of Desertion carries a much more severe punishment of a maximum term of imprisonment of 10 years.[4]
Section 19 – Insubordinate Behaviour
As the term suggests, an offence of Insubordinate Behaviour involves the wilful disobedience or open disrespect for the authority, rules and/or orders of a person superior in rank or appointment.
Such an offence carries a term of imprisonment not exceeding 2 years, and if the offence is committed during active service, for a term not exceeding 5 years.[5]
Section 25 – Conduct to prejudice of good order or discipline
An offence under Section 25 of the SAF is phrased extremely broadly and it is used to enforce the disciple and professionalism of servicemen/women at all times.
Section 25 of the SAF Act provides that any person subject to military law who is guilty of an act, conduct or neglect to the prejudice of good order or discipline shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to an imprisonment term not exceeding 12 months.[6]
Section 32 – Malingering
Unlike in a civilian setting, a medical certificate (“MC”) does not automatically excuse a serviceman/woman for his/her period of absence. The MC would have to be endorsed by the Unit Commanding Officer (“Unit CO”) first, otherwise, the serviceman/woman would be considered as having gone AWOL.[7]
More seriously, a serviceman/woman found to be: i) falsely pretending to be suffering from any sickness; ii) injuring him/herself or any other person subject to military law with intent thereby to render him/herself or that other person unfit for service, or causes him/herself to be injured by any person with that intent; or iii) does any act or fails to do anything to produce, prolong or aggravate any sickness with intent to render or keep him/herself unfit for duty or service, shall be guilty of an offence of Malingering and shall be liable to a term of imprisonment not exceeding 12 months.[8]
Punishment
Military Law in Singapore is unique in that offenders who are convicted and sentenced to a term of imprisonment under the SAF Act serve their sentences at a military prison (i.e. the SAF Detention Barracks)[9], rather than with the Singapore Prison Service.
The SAF Act also provides for certain punishments which are unique to Military Law, including, inter alia, discharge with ignominy, dismissal, reduction in rank, forfeiture of seniority of rank, forfeiture of services for purposes of promotion and the deduction of pay. The imposition of such punishments are highly dependent on whether the offence is being dealt with by way of a summary trial or a trial by a subordinate military court.[10]
Criminal Record[11]
Unlike in the civilian criminal courts, military offences are generally non-registrable and any time spent in the SAF Detention Barracks does not necessitate a criminal record. Only offences which fall within Section 112 of the SAF Act may be registrable. For example, Section 33(5) of the MDA provides that any conviction under Section 8(b) by a court including a subordinate military court or the Military Court of Appeal after October 1992 shall be deemed as a previous conviction for the purposes of determining whether an individual is liable for enhanced punishment under Section 33A of the MDA.
As such, whilst employers may inquire about a potential employee’s criminal history, other military offences (i.e. AWOL, Conduct to the Prejudice of Good Order and Insubordination) are not recorded in a serviceman/woman’s criminal record.
Stay tuned for our second part of this military law series coming up!
[1] See Section 34 of the SAF Act
[2] See Section 8, 33 and 33A of the MDA
[3] See Section 22 of the SAF Act
[4] See Section 23 of the SAF Act
[5] See Section 19 of the SAF Act
[6] See Section 25 of the SAF Act
[7] Tan Sze Yao, January 2008, ‘Debunking Myths About Military Justice in Singapore Armed Forces’, The MINDEF Legal Counsel
[8] See Section 32 of the SAF Act
[9] For more information about the SAF Detention Barracks, please visit: https://www.mjp.sg/single-post/2017/10/19/Life-in-the-Detention-Barracks-What-You-can-Expect
[10] See Part IV and V of the SAF Act
[11] Tan Sze Yao, January 2008, ‘Debunking Myths About Military Justice in Singapore Armed Forces’, The MINDEF Legal Counsel
Have a question about the law?
If you have any questions about military law, you can request a quote with with Chooi Jing Yen or have a quick consult with other lawyers. With Quick Consult, from a transparent, flat fee of S$49, a lawyer will call you on the phone within 1-2 days to give you legal advice.
This article is written by Chooi Jing Yen from Eugene Thuraisingam LLP and edited by Tan Jian Rong from Asia Law Network.
This article does not constitute legal advice or a legal opinion on any matter discussed and, accordingly, it should not be relied upon. It should not be regarded as a comprehensive statement of the law and practice in this area. If you require any advice or information, please speak to practicing lawyer in your jurisdiction. No individual who is a member, partner, shareholder or consultant of, in or to any constituent part of Interstellar Group Pte. Ltd. accepts or assumes responsibility, or has any liability, to any person in respect of this article.