[ad_1]
SINGAPORE: The ongoing simplification of the language of Singapore's laws is on track, with the next target within three years, as well as the number of visitors to the Singapore Statutes.
The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) began in 2014, in response to the Plain Laws Understandable By Singaporeans (PLUS) survey of about 1,000 people by its Legislation Division.
The division, Singapore's central law drafting office, has been implementing the changes progressively with the AGC told Channel NewsAsia.
In particular, attention is paid to the local use of English and the trend "that average Singaporeans get information through digital platforms more than print".
According to the AGC, there were 1.73 million unique visitors in 2015 to its Singapore Statutes Online website, which lays out the country's laws in detail.
This increased to 1.87 million in 2016 and 2 million in 2017. On average, about a fifth of these users are from outside Singapore.
The number of visits is even higher – growing from 4.3 million in 2015 to 4.8 million in 2016 and 5.1 million last year.
Some of the ways new laws are drafted in this digital audience. For example, legislative sentences in new Acts or subsidiary legislation are shorter than before.
Specifically, internal guidelines recommend that each sentence be kept within 45 words, which would fit on the screen of most mobile devices.
SHORTER SENTENCES, ARCHAIC WORDS DISCONTINUED
Long supply and complex concepts are broken down into separate paragraphs, while simpler text is adopted in new laws where possible.
For example, archaic words like "hereby" and "heretobefore" have been discontinued from use, and the phrase "for the avoidance of doubt" has been replaced with "to avoid doubt". Roman numerals have been replaced with Arabic numerals.
The lengthy section of the 1958 Public Order (Preservation) Act on carrying offensive weapons states: "Any person who is in possession of any explosive, corrosive or flammable property. substance shall, unless it has been in the possession of the person, or in the possession or under the control of the offender, 5 years and shall be binding to caning. "
The simplified revision of this section, under the 2018 Public Order and Safety Act (Special Powers), reads: "41 (1) A person commits an offense if the person –
at. is carrying or is in the possession of a person under the law of and
b. is within the target area of a special authorization.
(2) A person who is guilty of an offense under subsection (1) shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years and shall be liable to caning. "
Ease Test (FRET) to determine how to read new laws are compared with older versions.
The AGC has been used by the Public Order and Safety (Special Powers) Act 2018 against its predecessor, the Public Order (Preservation) Act, and found that the new act has six times more readability.
All Bills tabled in Parliament since 2015 with Explanatory Statement, with illustrations or descriptions provided.
The Legislation Division has also produced a guide to about 600 pages to help the law in English, in Singapore's context, to replace legal, commercial and complex sentences used in older laws.
To keep the drafts and editors abreast of the developments, drafting guidelines are being issued under the PLUS project.
The AGC is currently working on revising the current Acts of Parliament, more than 500 of them, and aims to complete this within the next three years.
"This timeline is, however, subject to the demands of law drafting services for government's legislative programs or proposals during this period," said the AGC spokesman.
After this is completed, it will be more than 6,000 pieces of subsidiary legislation.
REACTION TO THE SIMPLIFICATION PROCESS
In general, the public "accepts that improving the readability of Singapore's written laws is an ongoing process," the AGC said. It has not received any negative feedback on the new laws since embarking on the simplification endeavor.
National University of Singapore (NUS) Law Professor David Tan said the AGC "is doing a good job in the field of plain English when drafting some recent legislation," such as the Protection from Harassment Act 2015.
"In particular, the use of illustrative examples within the legislation is a helpful guide for both the public and the courts in certain sections," said Prof Tan.
NUS law faculty dean Simon Chesterman said Singapore's laws are, "for the most part, well-drafted and clear – though in some cases that is most obvious to lawyers and academics with legal training".
"Since it is helpful, it is useful if it is helpful," he said. "As an American judge once observed, the language of the law should not be foreign to the ears of those expected to obey it."
He pointed out that the full move to plain English dates back to the 1970s, and has gained traction in many common law jurisdictions including the United States and Australia.
In the United Kingdom, a year ago began in 1996, and was reported to be estimated at £ 70 million (S $ 126 million) annually, said Prof Chesterman.
Singapore Management University (SMU) Law by Eugene Tan echoed his counterparts' views that Singapore's laws are "generally drafted well-clear, concise and easy to understand".
However, there is room to be even better, he said.
"The audience is not so much the lawyer but the average person who has the right to know the law," said Associate Professor Tan.
"Poorly drafted or hard to understand laws create uncertainty, confusion, misunderstanding – in sum, generating inefficiencies through increasing transaction costs of doing business," he said.
Even so, Assoc Prof Tan pointed out that there are limits to the plain language drafting of legislation in practice.
"Overall, the plain language method of drafting is to be welcomed even if it is not sufficient to remove every doubt as to a particular law," he said.
Laws are not good if people find it hard to understand them, Assoc Prof Tan said.
"The law must work for the people," he added. "Laws which are necessary to reduce the need for litigation"
Source link
