Singapore International Commercial Court (International Committee) Bill

Order for Second Reading read.

Mr Speaker: Minister for Law.

12.32 pm

The Minister of State for Law (Mr Murali Pillai) (for the Minister for Law): Mr Speaker, Sir, on behalf of the Minister for Law, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

The Singapore International Commercial Court (International Committee) Bill establishes an International Committee of the Singapore International Commercial Court, or International Committee. This body will hear prescribed appeals of international commercial disputes from prescribed foreign jurisdictions.

Before I delve into the specifics of the Bill, allow me to provide some context on how the proposals within this Bill are to be positioned within the present dispute resolution framework.

Singapore has established itself as a leading international dispute resolution hub with a comprehensive suite of international offerings. In addition to our domestic Courts, we have an ecosystem built on three pillars.

First, international arbitration. In addition to the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC), there are also other leading international arbitration centres that have established a presence here, including the Permanent Court of Arbitration, the ICC International Court of Arbitration, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Arbitration and Mediation Center, and the American Arbitration Association’s International Centre for Dispute Resolution.

Second, international litigation, through the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC).

Third, international mediation, facilitated by our mediation centres like the Singapore International Mediation Centre (SIMC).

These three pillars work in harmony to offer a holistic, three-part approach to dispute resolution for commercial disputes. Depending on the nature and stage of the dispute, commercial parties can adopt the most suitable dispute resolution modality for their needs. This includes moving between the different modalities where necessary.

The SICC was established in 2015 and is specifically designed to handle transnational and cross-border commercial disputes that may have little connection to the actual physical jurisdictions they may arise from. It offers a bespoke procedural regime for international commercial disputes, drawing upon international best practices and is attuned to the needs and realities of international commerce.

First, the SICC panels comprise eminent international jurists from civil and common law traditions with deep expertise and experience in hearing commercial cases.

Second, the SICC allows foreign lawyers and law experts a right of audience before the Court, upon successful registration.

Third, there is procedural flexibility in how parties may conduct their cases before the SICC.

Since its introduction, the SICC’s caseload increased by about 30% in 2023, with a substantial increase in fresh filings in the SICC over the past two years. Furthermore, the SICC was voted the most used international commercial court globally in 2024 in the Singapore International Dispute Resolution Academy International Dispute Resolution Survey 2024. Users who voted include users of dispute resolution mechanisms, including businesses, in-house and external counsel, from 26 countries.

Through the establishment of the International Committee and the availability of a transnational appeal mechanism as set out in this Bill, we will start a new chapter in facilitating cross-border legal cooperation, enhance our offerings as a leading international centre for dispute resolution that is responsive and attuned to evolving commercial needs and strengthen opportunities for the development of jurisprudence beyond our shores. This innovative initiative will, in time, create opportunities for more cross-border legal work in Singapore, boosting our legal sector.

I will take hon Members through key features of the Bill in turn: the structure and constitution of the International Committee; the jurisdiction of the International Committee and the transnational appeal mechanism; legal representation in the International Committee; enforcement and finality of International Committee judgments or orders; and the International Committee’s procedural rules.

First, the International Committee will be a standalone body hearing prescribed civil appeals of an international and commercial nature from prescribed foreign courts. While there will be strong linkages between the International Committee and Singapore’s judiciary, the International Committee will not be a court of Singapore, nor will it exercise the judicial power of Singapore. The International Committee will leverage the close relationship with the SICC. For example, proceedings before the International Committee will take place in Singapore and the International Committee will tap existing Supreme Court resources, such as the SICC registry and its state-of-the-art courtrooms, building on our efficient and reliable Court infrastructure.

The International Committee’s bench will consist of permanent members drawn from the Judges of the Supreme Court and International Judges in the SICC, and ad hoc members drawn from the foreign court of appeal origin. This ensures a deep bench of highly qualified and experienced local and foreign jurists.

As it was with the establishment of the SICC, the International Committee highlights the strong commercial law experience and expertise of Singapore Judges. Singapore Judges have sat on foreign judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, for example, in Brunei, Fiji, China and Dubai. This positions our local Judges to broaden their expertise and knowledge of the commercial realities and practices in other regions of the world. Such international exposure enhances the expertise of our Judges that they bring to the International Committee. It also demonstrates the high regard in which Singapore’s judiciary is held internationally.

Particulars unique to each collaboration agreement with a foreign jurisdiction will be set out in regulations made under the framework of the Bill. The Minister for Law will be empowered to make such regulations concerning the types of cases that can be appealed to the International Committee from a prescribed foreign jurisdiction, the powers of the International Committee and ancillary matters, such as the appointment of ad hoc members and the composition of the International Committee panel. The particulars set out in the regulations will be subject to inter-governmental negotiations.

To ensure quality legal representation and parity with the SICC, the Bill makes related amendments to the Legal Profession Act 1966. Singapore advocates and solicitors can appear before the International Committee, and the SICC registration model for foreign lawyers and law experts will be extended to apply to the International Committee. Those who have registered to appear before the SICC are allowed to also appear before the International Committee.

For enforcement purposes by the Courts of Singapore, a judgment or order of the International Committee will be treated as a judgment or order of a court of that foreign jurisdiction from which the appeal arose. This means the Committee’s judgments will be enforceable in accordance with the mechanisms applicable to that jurisdiction. For example, if that jurisdiction is party to the Convention on Choice of Court Agreements, enforcement in accordance with the Choice of Court Agreements Act 2016 is available.

To ensure finality, a decision of the International Committee may not be appealed to or reviewed by any Court in Singapore.

The International Committee framework represents a significant step forward in international commercial dispute resolution, featuring a dedicated body to hear appeals from foreign courts, flexible arrangements with different jurisdictions and the development of judicial expertise across borders in a structured, collaborative manner.

Please allow me to share Singapore’s first collaboration arrangement under the Bill’s framework.

On 20 March 2024, Singapore and Bahrain signed a Treaty for Bahrain to establish the Bahrain International Commercial Court (BICC) and for Singapore to designate a body to hear appeals from the BICC. The International Committee will be the body to hear these appeals. As mentioned earlier, details of the collaboration, like the types of cases that would be heard on appeal by the International Committee, will be set out in the relevant regulations made by the Minister for Law.

This collaboration has three main features. First, Bahrain will establish the BICC to hear international commercial matters in the Kingdom of Bahrain. Second, the International Committee will be able to hear appeals from the BICC within the categories stated in the Treaty. Broadly, depending on the nature of the BICC’s jurisdiction over the matter, parties may agree to "opt in" or "opt out" of appeals to the International Committee. And the International Committee panel will consist of at least three members who include one International Judge and one ad hoc member. Ad hoc members will be Bahraini judges nominated by the Bahrain Supreme Judicial Council.

Our collaboration with Bahrain on the International Committee was entered into because of our shared commitment to advance the framework of law supporting commerce in an important region. This collaboration can serve as a model for future partnerships with other international partners.

The features of the Bill are designed to allow for adaptability of the mechanism of the International Committee to accommodate future collaborations with such partners.

There are also opportunities for users who will benefit from having their cases heard before leading jurists in the International Committee, thus contributing to the development of jurisprudence in areas unique to the Middle East and North Africa region.

We are creating a virtuous cycle as these collaborations further enhance our judiciary’s strong international standing and open doors to even more innovative partnerships. We hope that in time, this will attract more sophisticated offshore legal activity, create new and challenging work for our legal sector, foster the development of specialised expertise in transnational commercial law and position Singapore as a major contributor to shaping the future of global commercial justice. Sir, with that, on behalf of the Minister for Law, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Mr Speaker: Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim.

12.46 pm

Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim (Chua Chu Kang): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill. The Bill represents an important milestone in our journey to position Singapore as a pre-eminent international dispute resolution hub. It seeks to establish a new body, the International Committee of the SICC, which will be empowered to hear prescribed civil appeals and related proceedings from foreign jurisdictions. By creating this International Committee, we not only strengthen Singapore’s reputation as a leader in international legal standards, but we also open new doors for Singapore-trained lawyers to appear before a court with a truly global mandate.

As an international disputes lawyer, I appeared before dispute resolution fora such as the London Court of International Arbitration in London and the International Chamber of Commerce in Paris. I experienced the first-hand value of exposure to complex and cross-border legal issues. I have also had the privilege of appearing before the SICC, where I was able to experience the legal cut and thrust amongst foreign counsel and international judges. Such experiences are invaluable and I look forward to the establishment of the International Committee, which will offer more Singaporean lawyers with these opportunities and develop Singapore’s legal talent and exposure to international work.

However, there are five key areas where I seek clarifications.

Firstly, I would like to understand more about the types of cases that can be brought before the International Committee. Under this Bill, the Minister for Law will have the power to prescribe the types of cases that may be appealed from a foreign jurisdiction to the International Committee. Can the hon Minister of State provide more information on this? Will these cases primarily be commercial in nature? Will cases need to have any specific nexus or connection to Singapore, or would they involve purely foreign entities and issues?

Additionally, will the International Committee be empowered to hear cases involving non-monetary relief, such as declarations or specific performance, or will it be restricted to monetary judgments? Understanding the scope of appeals will be critical for those considering the International Committee as a venue for resolving disputes.

Secondly, I seek clarity on the jurisprudential implications of the International Committee’s decisions. Specifically, will the decisions of the International Committee be binding on lower courts in the foreign jurisdiction from which the appeal originated? Moreover, will these decisions carry any binding effect on Singapore’s domestic Courts? Establishing binding authority would strengthen Singapore’s influence in international jurisprudence, signalling that our Courts are trusted and authoritative on complex international legal issues.

Additionally, given that the International Committee will impact the development of jurisprudence in foreign jurisdictions, how will it handle issues of public policy or interest that are specific to that foreign jurisdiction? For instance, if a case before the Committee raises matters of public interest in that foreign country, will the Committee evaluate these issues from Singapore’s perspective or will it consider the public policies of that foreign jurisdiction? This is an important question as the Committee’s decisions will be final and non-appealable, meaning that such judgments will have lasting impacts on the legal landscape of the jurisdiction concerned.

Next, in terms of operational support, I would appreciate clarification on how the International Committee will be resourced. While users pay filing fees and court fees, these may not fully cover the costs of running the Committee. For cases arising from jurisdictions with whom we have, or will have, bilateral agreements, will there be any agreement on the sharing of costs or funding? This could help to ensure that the Committee is well-resourced to handle a high volume of complex cases.

Thirdly, I would like to inquire about the composition of the International Committee. The Bill proposes that this body will be an independent committee hearing appeals from designated foreign jurisdictions. To uphold the credibility and global appeal of the International Committee, will the judges on the Committee be drawn from both the civil law and common law traditions? Given that many jurisdictions with which Singapore engages are civil law systems, ensuring a balanced representation of both legal traditions would enhance the Committee’s legitimacy and broaden its appeal.

Furthermore, I hope the Singapore judiciary will feature prominently in the International Committee. This will help develop our judiciary’s experience and ensure that Singapore’s interests are well-represented. By allowing more Singaporean judges to preside over cases with significant international dimensions, we also strengthen their expertise and contribute to the growth of our judiciary’s global standing.

Fourth, I commend the Bill’s provisions on enforcement, which treat a judgment or order of the International Committee as equivalent to a judgment or order of the court of the foreign jurisdiction from which the appeal originated. This structure significantly simplifies the enforcement process and removes the need for a separate enforcement or reciprocal enforcement mechanism.

Singapore’s legal framework for enforcing foreign judgments was recently streamlined with the repeal of the Reciprocal Enforcement of Commonwealth Judgments Act, or RECJA, in March 2023. Judgments that were once registrable under the RECJA are now registrable under the Reciprocal Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act, or REFJA, which covers not only money judgments but also non-monetary judgments. This is a progressive development that aligns with Singapore’s goal to make cross-border dispute resolution more efficient.

I would also like to commend Singapore’s recent Memorandum of Understanding with Bahrain’s judiciary in May 2023, which established an appeal mechanism between the Bahrain International Commercial Court and the SICC. However, I suggest that for countries entering into such agreements with Singapore, we should also consider extending the benefits of REFJA to include lower court decisions as well. This would allow for mutual, reciprocal enforcement of judgments from both lower courts and the International Committee, streamlining enforcement for judgments across jurisdictions.

Finally, I would like to discuss the future potential for international collaboration, particularly with China and India. Singapore’s recent partnership with China is an exciting example. On 1 April 2023, Singapore’s Supreme Court signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Supreme People’s Court of China, focusing on cooperation in managing international commercial disputes, particularly in relation to the Belt and Road Initiative. This partnership also was discussed at the sixth Singapore-China Legal and Judicial Roundtable in February 2023, co-chaired by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon and His Excellency Zhou Qiang. The Strategic Roadmap for Judicial Cooperation that emerged from these talks provides a framework for Singapore-China collaboration in this arena.

Similarly, Singapore has been building stronger legal ties with India, including hosting a successful SICC roadshow in New Delhi in December last year. This engagement with two of the world’s largest economies demonstrates Singapore’s commitment to expanding its role as a global dispute resolution hub. If we can encourage more disputes and more cases from China and India to be heard on appeal by the International Committee and the SICC, it would significantly enhance Singapore’s standing in the international legal community. I would appreciate any updates from the Minister on ongoing efforts to establish similar collaborative frameworks with China and India, as well as any challenges that may have been encountered.

In closing, Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe this Bill is a landmark step forward for Singapore. The establishment of the International Committee represents a remarkable opportunity to solidify Singapore’s role as a key player in international disputes resolution. But we must not limit ourselves to just Bahrain and a few other jurisdictions. To truly succeed, we need to attract more appeals and cases from ASEAN, China, India and the Gulf Cooperation Council, creating a robust and diverse docket for the International Committee.

Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill is testament as to how far Singapore has come since its early days as part of the Straits Settlements. After World War II, the Straits Settlements were disbanded and Singapore was established as a separate Crown Colony in 1946, with a Supreme Court consisting of a High Court and a Court of Appeal. Over the years, we developed our own judicial system, eventually achieving full autonomy from the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in 1994. The Privy Council in England, until that point in time, was the highest Appellate Court. Our own Court of Appeal is the highest Court of our land. This independence marked the end of our colonial ties and set us on a path to becoming one of the most respected judicial systems in the world.

Today, 30 years after breaking free from the last remnants of colonial judicial control, Singapore has emerged as a beacon of legal excellence. Our Courts are recognised for their efficiency, integrity and adherence to the rule of law. The world is now looking to Singapore not only for judicial guidance but also as a model of an effective dispute resolution system. With the establishment of the International Committee, we are taking yet another step forward in ensuring that Singapore remains at the forefront of global legal innovation.

I believe Singapore, as we celebrate SG60 next year, will continue to develop our legal talent and cultivate judicial luminaries who will lead the way in upholding the rule of law in an increasingly complex world. Mr Speaker, Sir, I stand in full support of this Bill.

Mr Speaker: Minister of State Murali Pillai.

12.56 pm

Mr Murali Pillai: Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the hon Member, Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim, for his support of the Bill and delivering a very thoughtful speech as well.

Before I deal with these points, may I just say that I am heartened to note his positive experience appearing in the SICC, which he said as a result of which he felt that his experience was deepened and his skills were honed as well. I suspect this would be the experience of all Singapore counsel appearing before the SICC. This is truly one of the ideas behind the SICC and I hope that the setting up of the International Committee will give further opportunities to members of the Singapore Bar.

Mr Zhulkarnain asked about the types of cases that can be appealed to the International Committee and whether this would include cases which involve non-monetary relief.

As mentioned in my speech, the International Committee will hear prescribed appeals of an international and commercial nature. These cases do not have to be related to or connected to Singapore. The powers of the Committee, which include whether it has powers to hear and decide on cases which involve non-monetary relief, will be conferred by regulations. There will be specific regulations unique to the arrangements between a foreign jurisdiction and the International Committee.

Broadly, the regulations may provide for powers that include: the powers of the Committee in disposing of an appeal or any related proceedings, provided for in clause 6(2)(c)) of the Bill; and the Committee to hear those appeals and any related proceedings, including proceedings for incidental directions and interim orders, as provided for in clauses 6(1)(a) and 6(2)(j)) of the Bill.

Mr Zhulkarnain also asked whether the decisions of the International Committee are binding on the lower courts in the foreign jurisdiction which the appeal arose from and on Singapore courts.

As judgments and orders of the International Committee are judgments and orders from the foreign jurisdiction which the relevant appeal arises from, their precedential value and effect in that particular jurisdiction, is subject to the law of that jurisdiction. In the same vein, as an International Committee judgment is not a Singapore judgment, it will not be binding under Singapore law. But as the International Committee includes our most senior judges, its judgments and the reasoning therein are likely to be taken into account when similar issues arise in our own Courts.

Mr Zhulkarnain also asked how the International Committee will handle issues of public policy or interest, given that a decision of the International Committee would impact the jurisprudence of the foreign jurisdiction from which the appeal arises.

As pertinently observed by Mr Zhulkarnain, an International Committee judgment will be a judgment of the foreign court from which the appeal arose. It is intended that the International Committee approach public policy considerations from the perspective of that foreign jurisdiction. To facilitate this, the International Committee panel hearing an appeal will consist of one or more ad hoc members drawn from the court of the foreign jurisdiction referring the appeal. The particulars of the panel’s composition will be set out in regulations.

Additionally, should enforcement of an International Committee judgment be sought in Singapore, the Singapore courts can, at that stage, refuse enforcement on the ground that it contradicts Singapore public policy.

On Mr Zhulkarnain's question about resourcing for the International Committee, the creation of the International Committee will provide various benefits for Singapore as mentioned in my speech, including members of the Singapore Bar. Resourcing will be provided for the International Committee under the existing framework for the Singapore courts. The International Committee will also tap existing Supreme Court infrastructure and facilities.

Mr Zhulkarnain asked if the International Committee would comprise judges from both civil and common law jurisdictions and whether Singapore members of the judiciary will feature prominently on the Committee. The answer is yes. Members of the Committee will include the Chief Justice, Supreme Court Judges, Senior Judges, Judicial Commissioners and International Judges in the SICC, with ad hoc members drawn from the court of the foreign jurisdiction that will be referring an appeal to the International Committee.

Like the panels of the SICC, the International Committee panels will comprise eminent international jurists from civil and common law traditions. This diversity is crucial to the International Committee's ability to handle a wide range of international commercial disputes.

With regard to Mr Zhulkarnain's suggestion regarding the expansion of the Reciprocal Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act 1959, or REFJA, to countries signing agreements with Singapore, we will continue to consider both bilateral and multilateral options for increasing the mutual enforcement of judgments with such countries. For example, if that jurisdiction is also a Party to the Convention on Choice of Court Agreements, its judgments, including from its lower courts, will be eligible for enforcement in Singapore in accordance with the Choice of Court Agreements Act 2016. Such enforcement mechanisms are relevant to judgments of the International Committee, as they are not Singapore judgments.

Finally, Mr Zhulkarnain asked about potential collaborations with other jurisdictions, in a similar vein to Singapore's collaboration with Bahrain. Our collaboration with Bahrain on the International Committee was entered into because of our shared commitment to advance the framework of law and to support commerce in an important region. This collaboration can serve as a model for future partnerships with other foreign jurisdictions seeking appeals to the International Committee. That said, the shape of each collaboration must be unique to the needs and interests of each collaboration arrangement. Singapore is prepared to explore similar collaborations with other states. Each request would have to be negotiated and assessed individually.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I appreciate the historical context provided by the hon Member Mr Zhulkarnain. It is a powerful reminder of how far we have come. While Singapore has made remarkable progress in facilitating cross-border legal cooperation and shaping the future of global commercial justice, we must continue to innovate to continue on this path. This Bill represents the next step in that journey.

Sir, I thank Mr Zhulkarnain for his comments and suggestions; and with that, I beg to move.

1.05 pm

Mr Speaker: Any clarifications for the Minister of State? No? Okay.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr Murali Pillai].

Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.