Clause 9

A person must not operate an unmanned aircraft to fly, at any height, over any part of any protected area declared under section 7. (2) Every operator of an unmanned aircraft who contravenes subsection (1) shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $20,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both.(3) In proceedings for an offence under subsection (2) —

it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove that an accused knew or had reason to believe that the area flown over is a protected area; but(b)it is a defence to the charge for the accused to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that —

the accused did not intentionally cause the unmanned aircraft to fly over the protected area, and the overflight was not due to any want of reasonable care on the part of the accused; or

the overflight was authorised by and in accordance with a permit from a competent security officer.(4) Every offence under this section is an arrestable offence within the meaning of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap. 68).Absolute prohibition of carriage of dangerous materials on unmanned aircraft7B.—

If —

a person operates an unmanned aircraft to fly indoors or at any height over any area in Singapore; and

the unmanned aircraft carries a prohibited item when so flying,the person shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $100,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or to both. (2) In proceedings for an offence under subsection (1) —

it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove that an accused knew that the unmanned aircraft carried a prohibited item when flying; but(b)it is a defence to the charge for the accused to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that he did not know, and could not reasonably have been expected to know, that the unmanned aircraft carried a prohibited item when flying. (3) Every offence under this section is an arrestable offence within the meaning of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap. 68).(4) In this section, “prohibited item” means —

any weapon, substance or other thing the possession of which (for any purpose) would constitute an offence under any of the following written laws:

the Arms and Explosives Act (Cap. 13);

the Corrosive and Explosive Substances and Offensive Weapons Act (Cap. 65); (iii)the Dangerous Fireworks Act (Cap. 72);

any biological agent, biological agent waste or toxin within the meaning of the Biological Agents and Toxins Act (Cap. 24A);

any radioactive material, radioactive substance or radioactive waste within the meaning of the Radiation Protection Act (Cap. 262); or

any other hazardous material (whether gaseous, liquid or solid) that is prescribed, in a notification published in the Gazette, by the Minister charged with the responsibility for homefront security to be a prohibited item for the purposes of this section.Discharge from unmanned aircraft 7C.—

If —

a person operates an unmanned aircraft to fly indoors or at any height over any area in Singapore; and

the unmanned aircraft when so flying discharges anything (whether gaseous, liquid or solid),the person shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $20,000. (2) In proceedings for an offence under subsection (1), it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove that an accused knew or had reason to believe that the unmanned aircraft discharged anything while in flight, but it is a defence to the charge if the accused proves, on a balance of probabilities, that —

the accused —

did not intentionally cause the thing to discharge from the unmanned aircraft and the discharge was not due to any want of reasonable care; and

took all reasonably practicable steps to stop or reduce further discharge of that thing from the unmanned aircraft as soon as practicable after discovering the discharge; (b)the thing escaped from the unmanned aircraft operated by the accused in consequence of damage, other than intentional damage, to the unmanned aircraft and all reasonable precautions were taken by the accused after the occurrence of the damage or the discovery of the discharge for the purpose of preventing or minimising further discharge from the unmanned aircraft; or

the accused has in force a discharge permit from the Authority and had caused the thing to be discharged from the unmanned aircraft in accordance with that discharge permit.(3) However, it is not a defence to a charge for an offence under subsection (1) if —

no individual dies or is hurt; (b)no property is destroyed or damaged; or

no hazard is caused to another aircraft, to anyone or any property,as a result of anything discharged from an unmanned aircraft in flight. (4) For the purposes of subsection (2)(b), damage to an unmanned aircraft or to its equipment is intentional damage if the damage arose in circumstances in which the operator of the unmanned aircraft —

acted with intent to cause the damage; or

acted recklessly and with knowledge that damage would probably result.(5) A person who is refused a discharge permit, or whose discharge permit is cancelled by the Authority, may appeal to the Minister against the Authority’s refusal or cancellation, as the case may be, in the manner prescribed under section 3 or 3A; and the Minister’s decision on appeal is final.(6) In this section, “discharge”, from an unmanned aircraft, includes dropping from an unmanned aircraft but does not include the discharge of exhaust from an unmanned aircraft during flight.(7) To avoid doubt, this section does not affect the operation of the Military Manoeuvres Act (Cap. 182).”.