Political Risk:
Moderate
Score:
64/100
Defence and Security Policy and Policy Transparency
Q1
83/100
Is there formal provision for effective and independent legislative scrutiny of defence policy?
View Question
Like other aspects of Singapore’s public policy, the defence policy is open for debate in Parliament. MPs can file questions on defence policy and…
Explore
Parliamentary debates take place annually, with the Committee of Supply (COS) sessions especially relevant for defence procurement, policies, and related incidents [1]. It provides…
Explore
Parliament can approve laws and reserves the right to amend or reject the defence budget. However, this is highly improbable in Singapore’s context, given…
Explore
Q2
17/100
Does the country have an identifiable and effective parliamentary defence and security committee (or similar such organisations) to exercise oversight?
View Question
There is no formal committee for defence oversight in the Singapore Parliament, with typical functions of such a committee known to be taken up…
Explore
The current members of the GPC-DFA do not possess known defence policy or procurement experience, which brings into doubt their ability to weigh in…
Explore
The GPC-DFA is superficially an independent body, and its members can file parliamentary questions querying the defence minister on defence policies, including conscription matters,…
Explore
The GPC-DFA provides the ministry with feedback and suggestions, and is consulted by the ministry on issues of public interest [1,2]. It also regularly…
Explore
The GPC-DFA does not conduct long-term oversight on defence policies, including conscription matters, expenditure, personnel, and foreign partnerships [1]. As part of the government…
Explore
The GPC-DFA provides the ministry with feedback and suggestions, and is consulted by the ministry on issues of public interest [1]. GPC-DFA members file…
Explore
Q3
63/100
Is the country’s national defence policy or national security strategy debated and publicly available?
View Question
There is ample evidence of a wide-ranging and enduring debate within the executive, legislature, and public over defence-related matters, although the topic of corruption…
Explore
There is a consistent effort to articulate the scope and scale of security threats faced by the country [1], and linking these challenges to…
Explore
Although there is an increasing interest in public feedback on National Service, the government maintains opaque on defence procurement processes and military operations. There…
Explore
The public can easily access defence policy documents on MINDEF’s website, as well as other affiliated agencies [1, 2], although these are largely superficial…
Explore
Q4
42/100
Do defence and security institutions have a policy, or evidence, of openness towards civil society organisations (CSOs) when dealing with issues of corruption?
View Question
The government does not articulate any formal processes to engage with independent civil society organisations (CSOs), although there is also no evidence to suggest…
Explore
CSOs in Singapore are governed by strict regulations set forth by the Ministry of Home Affairs, which has significant powers over the behaviour and…
Explore
There is evidence indicating government engagement with CSOs on defence-related matters, although these mainly revolve around continued support for conscription (National Service) and enhancing…
Explore
Q5
100/100
Has the country signed up to the following international anti-corruption instruments: UNCAC and the OECD Convention?
View Question
Singapore is a signatory to the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) Convention [1] and other international anti-corruption instruments (ADB/OECD Anti-Corruption Initiative) and is…
Explore
Singapore has complied with UNCAC obligations. According to an independent assessment conducted by UNODC, members have noted the country’s efforts in raising awareness and…
Explore
Q6
50/100
Is there evidence of regular, active public debate on issues of defence? If yes, does the government participate in this debate?
View Question
The media regularly covers defence developments in Singapore, largely relating to National Service, new capabilities, and policy announcements. The media is also able to…
Explore
There is evidence that the government engages in regular discussion with the public about defence issues through a range of online and physical platforms.…
Explore
Q7
88/100
Does the country have an openly stated and effectively implemented anti-corruption policy for the defence sector?
View Question
The Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) and the Singapore Armed Forces’ (SAF) anti-corruption framework includes internal directives and codes of conduct with explicit guidelines, mandatory…
Explore
Although a zero-tolerance policy and comprehensive measures on corruption have been outlined in the public-facing statements by the MINDEF and the CPIB [1], there…
Explore
Q8
92/100
Are there independent, well-resourced, and effective institutions within defence and security tasked with building integrity and countering corruption?
View Question
MINDEF set up the MINDEF Anti-Corruption Committee (MACC) in 1997 to oversee anti-corruption policy, framework and measures in MINDEF/SAF. Its secretariat is tasked to…
Explore
An audit committee, which convenes every two months, examines reports and remedial actions [1]. The IAD reports to civilian leadership in MINDEF and is…
Explore
MINDEF departments and SAF units are expected to serve as the forefront against corruption; they are responsible for maintaining effective internal controls on a…
Explore
Q9
NS/100
Does the public trust the institutions of defence and security to tackle the issue of bribery and corruption in their establishments?
View Question
This indicator is not assigned a score in the GDI. There are no known surveys that record public opinion towards corruption in defence, although…
Explore
Q10
92/100
Are there regular assessments of the areas of greatest corruption risk for ministry and armed forces personnel, and are the findings used as inputs to the anti-corruption policy?
View Question
Although there is no evidence suggesting that comprehensive risk assessments take place within the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) and the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF),…
Explore
The MINDEF’s Internal Audit Department (IAD) submits an annual report detailing its risk assessment and findings [1, 2].
Explore
The IAD is mandated to develop and regularly update the MINDEF and the SAFs’ anti-corruption policy and institutional action plans [1, 2]. Political leaders…
Explore
Defence Budgets
Q11
67/100
Does the country have a process for acquisition planning that involves clear oversight, and is it publicly available?
View Question
MINDEF/SAFs long-term and multi-year acquisition programmes are premised on its defence and security budget plans, which are discussed and approved in Parliament during each…
Explore
Singapore’s defence and security strategy is openly discussed and approved in Parliament and there are provisions for planning oversight and budget audit by the…
Explore
Oversight on defence procurement is essentially limited given that such procurement initiatives are carried out in confidence within the MINDEF, the SAF, and the…
Explore
Q12
50/100
Is the defence budget transparent, showing key items of expenditure? And it is provided to the legislature in a timely fashion?
View Question
A defence budget is released annually, which provides a top-line view of the overall budget, the expenditure for the two preceding financial years, and…
Explore
Singapore’s financial year (FY) begins on 1 April of every calendar year and ends on 31 March of the next calendar year. All government…
Explore
Q13
38/100
Is there a legislative committee (or other appropriate body) responsible for defence budget scrutiny and analysis in an effective way?
View Question
Government Parliamentary Committees (GPCs) have been set up by the People’s Action Party (PAP) in 1987 to scrutinise legislation and programmes of the various…
Explore
Although the GPC-DFA members can scrutinise the defence budget, there is no evidence to suggest that it has exercised its right to query and…
Explore
Q14
25/100
Is the approved defence budget made publicly available? In practice, can citizens, civil society, and the media obtain detailed information on the defence budget?
View Question
The defence budget [1] has consistently failed to provide a detailed breakdown of annual expenditure. For example, the published defence budget estimates for 2019…
Explore
The defence budget [1] has consistently failed to provide a detailed breakdown of annual expenditure. For example, the published defence budget estimates for 2019…
Explore
The Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) has set up the MINDEF Communications Directorate to address media queries regarding MINDEF/SAF matters [1]. It also maintains a…
Explore
Q15
67/100
Are sources of defence income other than from central government allocation (from equipment sales or property disposal, for example) published and scrutinised?
View Question
The Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) and the Singapore Armed Forces’ (SAF) annual budget is exclusively provided for by the Singapore government. All revenue from…
Explore
The MINDEF and SAF do not have other sources of income beyond the annual budget allocated by the government [1]. There is a robust…
Explore
The MINDEF and the SAF do not have other sources of income beyond the annual budget allocated by the government [1, 2]. There is…
Explore
Q16
88/100
Is there an effective internal audit process for defence ministry expenditure (that is, for example, transparent, conducted by appropriately skilled individuals, and subject to parliamentary oversight)?
View Question
The Internal Audit Department (IAD) performs risk assessment throughout the year and produces an annual report [1], but there is no known schedule of…
Explore
The Internal Audit Department performs audits and reviews on behalf of the MINDEF Audit & Risk Committee (MARC), chaired by MINDEF’s Permanent Secretary (Defence…
Explore
Independent external audits of MINDEF/SAF expenditure has been carried out by the AGO on an annual basis [1] as well as by the PAC…
Explore
There is evidence that the MINDEF acknowledges and performs remedial action on irregularities found by internal and external agencies such as the AGO and…
Explore
Q17
75/100
Is there effective and transparent external auditing of military defence expenditure?
View Question
The Ministry of Defence’s (MINDEF) internal audits are complemented by external oversight by the Auditor-General’s Office (AGO), which conducts independent annual audits of MINDEF/SAF…
Explore
The AGO’s independence is enshrined in the Constitution. [1] There has been no evidence of it being partial in its audits, although Auditor-General is…
Explore
There is no evidence that external audit reports of general MINDEF expenditure have been made available to the public via the government or independent…
Explore
Formally, the MINDEF Audit and Risk Committee, chaired by Permanent Secretary (Defence Development), monitors performance of audit findings. In addition, the Auditor-General’s Office and…
Explore
Nexus of Defence and National Assets
Q18
100/100
Is there evidence that the country’s defence institutions have controlling or financial interests in businesses associated with the country’s natural resource exploitation and, if so, are these interests publicly stated and subject to scrutiny?
View Question
The Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) and the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) is directly financed by the government’s consolidated fund. There are also clear provisions…
Explore
Singapore is an island state with little to no natural resources for exploitation. Therefore it largely relies on human capital, trade, and services for…
Explore
There are no known natural resource exploitation activities in Singapore. There are strict laws against civil servants and defence personnel engaging in private businesses,…
Explore
This indicator has been marked Not Applicable, as there is no evidence that Singapore’s defence institutions have controlling or financial interests in businesses associated…
Explore
This indicator has been marked Not Applicable, as there is no evidence that Singapore’s defence institutions have controlling or financial interests in businesses associated…
Explore
Organised Crime
Q19
100/100
Is there evidence, for example through media investigations or prosecution reports, of a penetration of organised crime into the defence and security sector? If no, is there evidence that the government is alert and prepared for this risk?
View Question
Although there is sporadic evidence of involvement of military officers in criminal activities such as bribery and prostitution, there is no evidence of penetration…
Explore
The Singapore government has recognised that organised crime has grave implications for the country’s security writ large, and put in place specific legislation in…
Explore
Q20
92/100
Is there policing to investigate corruption and organised crime within the defence services and is there evidence of the effectiveness of this policing?
View Question
Internally, the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) relies on its Military Police to uphold and enforce military law, order and discipline within its ranks [1].…
Explore
The Singapore Armed Forces Act has explicit provision for the enforcement of law and discipline by the Military Police [1]. However, neither its operating…
Explore
The SAF is expected to treat every member of its service personnel fairly and equally under the military justice system, regardless of race, rank…
Explore
Control of Intelligence Services
Q21
NEI/100
Are the policies, administration, and budgets of the intelligence services subject to effective and independent oversight?
View Question
The policies and administration of intelligence services are supervised only by the executive, and there is limited judicial and parliamentary oversight of certain aspects…
Explore
There is not enough evidence to score this indicator,. This is due to the lack of public information on the extent and effectiveness of…
Explore
Q22
38/100
Are senior positions within the intelligence services filled on the basis of objective selection criteria, and are appointees subject to investigation of their suitability and prior conduct?
View Question
In accordance with Article 100 of the Constitution, the recruitment and promotion of public officers are explicitly premised on formal qualifications, experience and merit…
Explore
Meritocracy is widely seen as Singapore’s main principle of governance, with most (if not all) aspects of formal education and government/armed forces careers based…
Explore
There is not enough information for scoring this indicator. There is no evidence to suggest that external parties are consulted in the vetting process,…
Explore
Export Controls
Q23
38/100
Does the government have a well-scrutinised process for arms export decisions that aligns with Articles 7.1.iv, 11.5, and 15.6 of the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT)?
View Question
Singapore signed the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) in December 2014 but has not yet ratified it. There is no evidence that arms exports have…
Explore
This indicator has been marked Not Applicable, as Singapore has not ratified the ATT [1].
Explore
Arms exports are sporadically debated in Parliament [1], but there is no evidence to suggest that it has exercised its powers to influence decision-making…
Explore
Lobbying in Defence
There is no direct legal framework governing lobbying activities in Singapore. Lobbying is indirectly regulated through the Political Donations Act (PDA) which provides for…
Explore
This indicator has been marked Not Applicable, as there is no specific legislation for regulating lobbying in defence procurement, although the PDA requires all…
Explore
This indicator has been marked as Not Applicable, as Singapore does not have legislation that regulates lobbying in the defence sector. The PDA is…
Explore
This indicator has been marked as Not Applicable, as Singapore does not have legislation that regulates lobbying in the defence sector. Besides internal audits,…
Explore