Criminal Procedure (Expert Opinion) Rules 2025

be signed by the expert;

state that the expert’s report was prepared by and sets out the opinion of the expert and that the expert accepts full responsibility for the report;

give details of the expert’s qualifications and any relevant experience;

give details of any literature or other material that the expert relied on in making the expert’s report;

set out the issues that the expert has been asked to consider and the facts that the expert relied on in making the expert’s report;

if applicable, state the name and qualifications of the person who carried out any test or experiment that the expert has used for the expert’s report, and whether such test or experiment has been carried out under the expert’s supervision;

where there is a range of opinion on the matters dealt with in the expert’s report, contain a summary of the range of opinion that is known to the expert;

state the conclusion reached on the issues set out in sub‑paragraph (e) and the reasons supporting the conclusion;

contain a statement of belief of correctness of the expert’s opinion;

contain a statement that the expert understands the expert’s duty in rule 3, and that in giving the expert’s report, the expert has complied, and will continue to comply, with the expert’s duty in that rule; and

disclose any personal relationship between the expert and any person connected to the proceedings in which the expert’s report is provided, which may cause a conflict between the expert’s interests and the expert’s duty to the court.

state whether a person whose psychiatric condition is assessed by the expert (called in this paragraph the subject) was interviewed by the expert, and if the subject was interviewed by the expert, state —

the number of interviews and the date of each interview; and

the language in which each interview was conducted (and whether the interview was conducted through an interpreter);

state whether any person apart from the subject was interviewed by the expert, and if any such person was interviewed by the expert, state —

the person’s identity and relationship to the subject;

the number of interviews and the date of each interview; and

the language in which each interview with the person was conducted (and whether the interview was conducted through an interpreter);

state whether the expert diagnosed the subject as suffering from a psychiatric disorder, and if so, state —

what the psychiatric disorder is;

when the subject suffered from the psychiatric disorder (such as at the time of the alleged offence, the time of diagnosis or any other time, whichever is relevant);

the basis for the diagnosis, including the diagnostic criteria or test applied or relied on (if any), and the result and report (if any) obtained after the application of the criteria or test to the subject; and

the nature and severity of the psychiatric disorder, including the basis for this assessment;

where the expert diagnosed the subject as not suffering from a psychiatric disorder, state the basis for this diagnosis;

state whether the expert was given a copy of another psychiatrist’s expert report on the subject, and if so, for each report on the subject by another psychiatrist, state each part of that report that the expert agrees with and each part of that report that the expert disagrees with, and provide reasons for each agreement and each disagreement;

state whether the expert was a member of the Panel when the expert’s report was made; and

state the source of each material fact that the expert relied on in making the expert’s report.

if at least one of the experts is a psychiatrist — comply with the requirements in paragraph (3);

if 2 or more of the experts are psychiatrists — state, in relation to each interview mentioned in paragraph (3)(a) and (b), which psychiatrist conducted which interview; and

be signed by all the experts who prepared the report.

in the circumstances described in item (i) or (ii) of the following table — by the Code Date, but subject to section 166(3)(a) or 218(3)(a) of the Code, as the case may be;

in the circumstances described in item (iii) or (iv) of the following table and if the Code Date is later than the Service Date — by the Code Date; and

in any other case — by the Service Date.Manner by which engaging party gives notice of intention to admit expert’s report at trial Type of trial at which expert report is sought to be admitted(i)By including the expert’s report in the list of exhibits in the Case for the Prosecution or the Case for the Defence, as the case may be A trial at which only CCD offences are to be tried(ii)By including the expert’s report in the list of exhibits in the Case for the Prosecution or the Case for the Defence, as the case may be A joint trial involving both CCD offences and other offences, and the expert’s report relates to at least one CCD offence(iii)By giving notice under section 231 of the Code after the Case for the Prosecution or the Case for the Defence (as the case may be) is served A trial at which only CCD offences are to be tried(iv)By giving notice under section 231 of the Code after the Case for the Prosecution or the Case for the Defence (as the case may be) is served A joint trial involving both CCD offences and other offences, and the expert’s report relates to at least one CCD offence

by the court on its own motion or upon an application made by the engaging party or that other party, as the case may be; or

with the consent of all parties to the trial or proceeding and the approval of the court.

understands that the evidence of the accused’s expert witness can be considered by the court to determine if the accused has a case to answer at the close of the prosecution’s case; and

understands the manner in which the evidence of the experts will be given as a panel as provided in rule 7.

the accused is not deemed to have waived the accused’s right to submit that there is no case for the accused to answer at the close of the prosecution’s case; and

any evidence from the accused’s expert witness can be considered by the court in determining if the accused has a case to answer at the close of the prosecution’s case.

be in the form and manner that the Selection Committee requires;

include all of the following particulars of the applicant:

name and contact details;

current job title and employer;

basic medical degree;

training and qualifications relating to psychiatry;

every jurisdiction in which the applicant is registered, and authorised to practise, as a psychiatrist at the time of the application;

whether any disciplinary action has been taken, or any disciplinary proceeding is pending, against the applicant as a medical practitioner or a psychiatrist (whether in Singapore or elsewhere), and if so, the relevant details of each disciplinary action (including the decision on any appeal against the disciplinary action) and each disciplinary proceeding;

whether the applicant has been convicted, or has been accused in any pending court proceedings, of any offence involving dishonesty, fraud or obstruction of justice (whether in Singapore or elsewhere), and if so, the relevant details of each conviction (including the decision on any appeal against the conviction) and each court proceeding;

any other information that the applicant wishes to present to the Selection Committee; and

if the applicant is not registered as a psychiatrist in the Register of Specialists, contain a declaration by the applicant —

that the applicant is a psychiatry resident; or

that the applicant has arranged, or will arrange, for the certificates mentioned in paragraph (3) to be sent to the Selection Committee.

by the Medical Council or licensing authority of each jurisdiction in which the applicant is registered, and authorised to practise, as a psychiatrist at the time of the application; and

in the 3 months immediately preceding or following the application.

a person had previously made an application to be appointed as a member of the Panel; and

the Selection Committee had refused to appoint the person,the person must not make another application to be appointed as a member of the Panel until at least one year after the date of the refusal.

to be accredited as a psychiatrist by the Specialists Accreditation Board; or

to be registered as a psychiatrist in the Register of Specialists,inform the Selection Committee in writing of the outcome.

must not apply to be appointed as a member of the Panel until at least 3 years after the date on which the latest revocation takes effect; and

must, in addition to complying with the requirements mentioned in paragraph (2), also include the following information in the application:

each date on which the applicant’s appointment was previously revoked;

the Selection Committee’s reasons for the revocation on that date;

the applicant’s justification to be appointed as a member of the Panel.

may, instead of complying with the requirements mentioned in paragraph (2), make his or her application in the form and manner that the Selection Committee requires; and

must also include the following in the application:

a declaration by the applicant on whether there has been any change to the information provided in the applicant’s latest application under this rule or rule 9 (as the case may be), and if so, the relevant details of the change with supporting documents where applicable; and

the reason why the applicant did not apply for renewal of his or her appointment as a member of the Panel, before the appointment expired.

be in the form and manner that the Selection Committee requires; and

include a declaration by the applicant on whether there has been any change to the information provided in the applicant’s latest application under rule 8 or this rule (as the case may be), and if so, the relevant details of the change with supporting documents where applicable.

the applicant is registered as a psychiatrist in the Register of Specialists;

the applicant has successfully completed 3 years of psychiatry residency training in Singapore and is receiving formal training and ongoing supervision by a medical practitioner who is registered as a psychiatrist in the Register of Specialists; or

both of the following requirements are satisfied:

the applicant is registered, and authorised to practise, as a psychiatrist in a jurisdiction other than Singapore at the time of the application;

the Selection Committee has received certificates of good standing of the applicant, which are issued —

by the Medical Council or licensing authority of each jurisdiction in which the applicant is registered, and authorised to practise, as a psychiatrist at the time of the application; and

in the 3 months immediately preceding or following the application.

the applicant’s qualifications and training relating to psychiatry;

any observations by a court or tribunal, whether in Singapore or elsewhere, on the applicant’s evidence as an expert witness or on the applicant’s performance as a medical practitioner or psychiatrist;

any disciplinary action taken against the applicant as a medical practitioner or a psychiatrist, whether in Singapore or elsewhere;

any pending disciplinary proceedings against the applicant as a medical practitioner or psychiatrist, whether in Singapore or elsewhere;

any previous convictions of the applicant of offences involving dishonesty, fraud or obstruction of justice, whether in Singapore or elsewhere;

any pending court proceedings in which the applicant has been accused of offences involving dishonesty, fraud or obstruction of justice, whether in Singapore or elsewhere;

any previous refusals of the applicant’s applications for appointment or renewal as a member of the Panel, that have not been overturned on appeal;

any previous revocations of the applicant’s appointment as a member of the Panel, that have not been overturned on appeal;

where the applicant’s appointment as a member of the Panel was previously revoked —

the circumstances leading up to the revocation;

the reasons for the revocation;

the length of time between the revocation and the application; and

whether the applicant has demonstrated that the reasons for the revocation no longer exist.

an applicant to provide any additional information or documents; and

any other person to provide any information, document or opinion.

notify the Public Prosecutor and the Law Society in writing of its refusal; and

notify the applicant in writing of its refusal and the reasons for its refusal.

be made to the Selection Committee in writing;

be in the form and manner that the Selection Committee requires;

be supported by any statutory declaration that the Selection Committee requires, except that no statutory declaration is required if the complaint is made by a public officer; and

set out the grounds for the complaint and the facts supporting such grounds, and be accompanied by any supporting documents.

start revocation proceedings; or

dismiss the complaint.

notify the psychiatrist in writing that the Selection Committee is considering whether to revoke the appointment of the psychiatrist as a member of the Panel, and the potential grounds for the revocation;

give the psychiatrist one month after the date the written notice mentioned in sub‑paragraph (a) is sent to send written representations to the Selection Committee; and

notify the Public Prosecutor and the Law Society in writing that the Selection Committee is considering whether to revoke the appointment of the psychiatrist as a member of the Panel.

the complainant to provide any additional information or documents;

any other person to provide any information, document or opinion; and

the psychiatrist (or the psychiatrist’s advocate) or any other person to appear before the Selection Committee.

summarily dispose of the revocation proceedings without requesting the appearance of the psychiatrist (or the psychiatrist’s advocate) or any other person before the Selection Committee; and

adopt any procedure in the revocation proceedings as the justice of the case requires, unless the procedure is inconsistent with this rule.

the psychiatrist no longer satisfies any of the requirements for appointment in rule 10(1);

the psychiatrist has displayed, or is likely to display, a clear lack of objectivity or competence as an expert witness;

the psychiatrist had failed to comply with rule 8(5); or

any information in the psychiatrist’s application for the appointment or renewal of appointment was false or misleading in a material particular.

notify the Public Prosecutor and the Law Society in writing of its decision;

notify the psychiatrist in writing of its decision and the reasons for its decision; and

specify, in the written notice mentioned in sub‑paragraph (b), the date of the decision.

the expiration of 28 days after the date of the decision to revoke the psychiatrist’s appointment as a member of the Panel;

where the psychiatrist has filed an appeal under rule 12(1), the earlier of the following dates:

the date the revocation is affirmed by the Chief Justice or the appeal is withdrawn;

the date the psychiatrist’s appointment expires; or

where the psychiatrist has made an application for an extension of time to file an appeal under rule 12(4), the latest of the following:

the expiration of the period mentioned in sub‑paragraph (a);

the date the Chief Justice decides not to allow the extension of time;

the expiration of any extended period allowed by the Chief Justice for the psychiatrist to file the appeal;

where the psychiatrist files the appeal within the extended period mentioned in sub‑paragraph (iii), the earlier of the following dates:

the date the revocation is affirmed by the Chief Justice or the appeal is withdrawn;

the date the psychiatrist’s appointment expires.

identify the decision appealed against;

if the appeal is against a decision not to renew the appointment of the appellant, state the date on which the appellant’s latest appointment as a member of the Panel expires or has expired;

state the reasons in support of the appeal;

state whether the appellant wishes to adduce any further information, document or opinion and, if so, describe the further information, document or opinion that the appellant wishes to adduce; and

enclose the Selection Committee’s decision and reasons.

file the originating application using the electronic filing service established under Order 28, Rule 2 of the Rules of Court 2021 (G.N. No. S 914/2021); and

serve the originating application on the Selection Committee by electronic mail at the electronic mail address provided by the Selection Committee.

request —

that the appellant, the Selection Committee or any other person provide any information, document or opinion, which (unless otherwise directed by the Chief Justice) must be provided by way of a letter to the Chief Justice; and

that the appellant (or the appellant’s advocate) or any other person appear before the Chief Justice; and

allow a request by the appellant to adduce any further information, document or opinion, which must be adduced in a manner directed by the Chief Justice.

dispose of the appeal in accordance with paragraph (8) or (9);

summarily dismiss the appeal;

deliver his or her decision on the appeal in writing.

not to appoint or renew the appointment of the appellant; or

to revoke the appointment of the appellant,the Chief Justice is to —

in the case of a decision of the Selection Committee not to appoint or renew the appointment of the appellant, direct the Selection Committee to appoint or renew the appointment of the appellant, as the case may be; or

in the case of a decision of the Selection Committee to revoke the appointment of the appellant, set aside the revocation.

the references in Order 25, Rule 3 to “The Court” or “the Court” are references to “The Chief Justice” or “the Chief Justice”, respectively;

the reference in Order 25, Rule 3(3)(a) to “settlement, discontinuance or withdrawal” is a reference to “discontinuance or withdrawal”;

the reference in Order 25, Rule 3(4) to “settled or discontinued, or transferred to another Court” is a reference to “discontinued”;

the reference in Order 25, Rule 3(6) to “the giving of judgment or the dismissal of any claim or counterclaim” is a reference to “summarily dismissing the appeal”.

there are pending revocation proceedings against the psychiatrist;

once the revocation of the psychiatrist’s appointment takes effect, the psychiatrist will cease to be able to give his or her opinion on any matter concerning psychiatry (when given as the opinion of an expert) in any criminal proceedings in Singapore;

until the revocation of the psychiatrist’s appointment takes effect, the psychiatrist may still give his or her opinion on any matter concerning psychiatry (when given as the opinion of an expert) in any criminal proceedings in Singapore; and

if the revocation of the psychiatrist’s appointment takes effect after the psychiatrist has given his or her opinion on any matter concerning psychiatry (as the opinion of an expert) in any criminal proceedings in Singapore, the court hearing those proceedings may determine the weight to be given to the psychiatrist’s evidence, after considering all the circumstances of the case.