Home / Expertise / White collar Defence & Investigations in Singapore
E X P E R T I S E

White Collar Defence & Investigations
in Singapore

The Commercial Affairs Department has been in touch. A regulator has asked questions. The board has found something in the accounts and needs to know what it is sitting on. This is the overlap the firm was built for — where a commercial problem and a criminal investigation are the same problem in two forms.

IN SHORT

White collar defence covers investigations and prosecutions for offences of dishonesty — cheating, criminal breach of trust, forgery, corruption and money laundering — usually led in Singapore by the Commercial Affairs Department, the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau or a regulator. Jerrie Tan LLC acts for individuals and companies under investigation, and conducts internal investigations for
boards.

WHAT WE ACT ON

White collar matters we are most often instructed on

These matters almost never arrive alone. The same facts typically produce a criminal exposure, a civil claim, an employment consequence and a reputational problem, and the four have to be run together.

01

CAD investigations

Representing individuals under investigation by
the Commercial Affairs Department, from first
notice through to charge or closure.

02

Corruption & CPIB matters

Investigations and prosecutions under the
Prevention of Corruption Act.

03

Corporate internal investigations

Board-directed investigations for listed companies and multinationals, conducted so the findings can be relied on.

04

Cheating & criminal breach of trust

Offences of dishonesty under the Penal Code,
including matters involving employees and
fiduciaries.

05

Forgery & falsification

Document offences and falsification of accounts,
frequently the charge that follows an internal
investigation.

06

Money laundering & asset offences

Advise on offences under the Corruption, Drug
Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes Act, as well as on assets under seizure.

07

Cryptocurrency & digital assets

Investigations involving digital assets, exchanges
and wallets, including where a civil claim runs in
parallel.

08

Cross-border assistance

Advise on the Mutual Assistance in Criminal
Matters Act 2000.

T H E R O U T E S A V A I L A B L E

What is actually on the table, and for whom

The right route depends on who the debtor is, how much is owed, and whether the underlying business or income is viable.

SIAC arbitration tracks by amount in dispute
ROUTE W H O I T A P P L I E S T O K E Y T H R E S H O L D W H A T I T D O E S
Debt Repayment Scheme Individuals in bankruptcy proceedings Debts not exceeding $150,000 The High Court may refer the debtor to the Official Assignee for a repayment plan of up to five years instead of bankruptcy. Completing the plan releases the debts admitted under the scheme.
Bankruptcy Individuals Creditor must be owed at least $15,000 A creditor may apply where the debtor owes at least $15,000, cannot repay, and has a sufficient connection to Singapore — domicile, property here, residence or business here within the past year.
Judicial management Companies that are viable (a) The company is or is likely to become unable to pay its debts; and
(b) a reasonable probability of rehabilitation, or of the interests of creditors being better served than on a winding up
Places the company under an independent judicial manager with a moratorium on proceedings, buying time to rehabilitate the business rather than break it up.
Scheme of arrangement Companies and their creditors A majority in number representing 75% in value of creditors present, followed by Court sanction A binding compromise between the company and its creditors, allowing a restructuring to proceed without liquidation.
Winding up Companies Court application or voluntary, depending on the basis for the winding up Ends the company's life: a liquidator realises the assets and distributes them, and the conduct of the directors comes under review.
HOW WE WORK

What you say in the first week is the case

“Do not wait. Evidence that could have been preserved is lost, and positions are taken that cannot be walked back.”

An investigation is not a conversation you can talk your way out of. Documents and interviews given without advice — to investigators, to an employer, to a counterparty — become the fixed points that everything afterwards is measured against.

For companies, the decision about whether and when to report, and who conducts the internal investigation, has consequences for the company and for its officers personally. Those two interests are not always aligned, and it is better to know that early.

01
Establish your actual status

Witness, person of interest, or suspect — and whether the company's interests and yours are the same. The answer changes what you should do next.

02
Preserve, do not tidy

Devices, messages, accounting records and access logs stay as they are. Deleting or reorganising material during an investigation creates a second, worse problem.

03
Prepare properly for interview

Understanding the scope of the questions, your obligations and the limits of them, before you attend rather than in the room.

04
Run the civil and criminal strategy together

A freezing application, a police report and a dismissal of an employee can each undermine the others if they are decided by different advisers on different days.

I F Y O U A R E A S K E D T O G I V E A S T A T E M E N T

Singapore’s Criminal Procedure Code requires a person examined by an investigating officer to state truly what they know of the facts and circumstances of the case — with the qualification that they need not say anything exposing them to a criminal charge, penalty or forfeiture. Two practical consequences follow:

  • silence is not a neutral option in the way it is in some other systems, and adverse inferences can arise where a fact later relied on was not mentioned when it should have been;
  • an inaccurate account given in good faith can be as damaging as an evasive one, because it becomes the document you are cross-examined on months later.
  • This is general information, not advice on your matter. What you should do depends on your status in the investigation and the facts.
About Jerrie Tan
YOUR COUNSEL

Jerrie Tan
Founding Director

Jerrie Tan is the Founding Director of Jerrie Tan LLC, a Singapore disputes practice  acting where commercial risk, regulatory scrutiny and personal liability intersect. She  has been in practice since 2013 and spent almost a decade at an international law firm working alongside leading Senior Counsel, developing a commercial disputes and corporate investigations practice with a particular focus on Mandarin-speaking and China-based clients.

She has more than 40 reported judgments and has appeared across the State Courts, the Supreme Court and the Singapore International Commercial Court. She teaches Advocacy to law graduates preparing for call to the Singapore Bar and serves as an Adjunct Fellow at the NUS Centre for Pro Bono and Clinical Legal
Education.

In a time when disputes lawyers become more and more specialised, not just in areas of practice but right down to specific roles and tasks, Jerrie’s exposure and width of practice makes her a ‘complete’ lawyer, who understands the full legal and commercial concerns of clients, and provides clients with holistic and well considered advice.

NARAYANAN SREENIVASAN S . C . · MANAGING DIRECTOR , SREENIVASAN CHAMBERS LLC

COMMON QUESTIONS

White collar investigations in Singapore, answered plainly

What should I do if the Commercial Affairs Department asks me to attend an interview?

Take advice before you attend, and do not treat the notice as an administrative formality. The first questions to answer are what your status is, what the investigation appears to concern, and whether your interests and your employer’s are aligned — because if they are not, accepting the company’s lawyer is a decision with consequences. Preserve your devices and records as they stand. Attending is generally not optional; attending unprepared is.

Broadly yes — the Criminal Procedure Code obliges a person being examined to state truly what they know of the facts and circumstances, subject to not being required to say anything that would expose them to a criminal charge, penalty or forfeiture. Singapore does not operate a general right to silence in the sense often assumed from foreign television, and adverse inferences may be drawn where a fact later relied on in a defence was not mentioned when it should have been. That combination is precisely why advice before the interview matters more here than in many other jurisdictions.

A representation is a written submission to the Prosecution. It can cover matters such as why a charge should be reduced, altered, or not proceeded with. It is made on the facts and the evidence. No lawyer can promise an outcome, and nobody has influence over prosecutorial decisions. What preparation buys is a representation that engages with the actual evidential difficulties in the case rather than asserting general good character, and that is made at a stage where the Prosecution’s position is still capable of moving.

In most cases you need to understand what you have before you can decide anything, which is what an internal investigation is for — but it should be scoped, and privileged where it can be, from the start. An investigation run informally by management, in a matter that may involve management, tends to produce findings the board cannot rely on and a paper trail that helps nobody. Directors also have their own exposure to consider, and it does not always run parallel to the company’s. The sequence — preserve, scope, investigate, then decide on reporting — is what keeps the options open.

RELATED EXPERTISE

Where an insolvency matter often begins

Speak to Jerrie before the position hardens

Consultations are by appointment and treated in confidence. Whether you are the employer or the employee, the first week is where most of the damage is done.

This page is general information only and does not constitute legal advice. It does not create a solicitor–client relationship. Outcomes depend on the specific facts of each matter. Case references are described only  as far as they appear in publicly reported judgments. Please seek advice on your own circumstances.