2nd reading opening speech by Mr Tan Kiat How on the Endangered Species (Import and Export) Amendment bill 2022

Jul 4, 2022

Mr Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for National Development, I beg to move 'That the Bill be now read a second time.’

Illegal wildlife trade threatens the survival of endangered species, and harms habitats and ecosystems around the world.

Singapore is committed to the global fight against illegal wildlife trade. As an international trading hub, we take this issue very seriously.

We are a signatory to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, or CITES. CITES ensures that international trade in wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival in the wild.

We have also put in place a Whole-of-Government enforcement framework, and we work closely with regional and international partners, to stop illegal wildlife shipments from passing through our borders. For example, through our close collaboration with our counterparts in China, we seized a record haul of elephant ivory passing through Singapore in 2019. The ivory was worth more than $170 million Singapore dollars, and it came from more than 300 African elephants. Our efforts also helped the Chinese authorities to arrest 14 suspected criminals.

Last August, we opened our Centre for Wildlife Forensics, to enhance our science and research capabilities, in collaboration with international partners and local experts. Recently, our studies with Professor Samuel Wasser from the University of Washington found that most of the large ivory seizures made globally over the past decade came from repeated poaching at the same location, and even from the same families of elephants. Such insights help us better understand the patterns and networks of illegal wildlife trade, and we share them with our international partners to facilitate cross-border enforcement. This will help source countries to focus on tackling elephant poaching hotspots and the illegal export of ivory, and destination countries to curb consumer demand for ivory products.

The Centre for Wildlife Forensics was also recognised as a CITES Reference Laboratory^[1] in June. This recognition is a testament to Singapore’s capabilities in wildlife forensic science, in supporting the implementation and enforcement of CITES. It also attests to the high standards of the Centre in conforming to ISO quality assurance standards for wildlife forensic testing. With this, we can help other CITES Member States carry out wildlife forensic analyses, on top of sharing our experience and expertise with them. This will aid them in investigating and prosecuting illegal wildlife trade cases more easily. Together, we can then strengthen our efforts against the criminal syndicates and networks that conduct illegal wildlife trade.

Within Singapore, we also continue to partner key stakeholders and the community, to raise awareness on our role in tackling illegal wildlife trade, and in protecting our planet’s biodiversity. This includes regularly engaging industry stakeholders, such as the maritime industry, e-commerce companies, and financial institutions – And, reaching out to the wider public through outreach and education programmes, such as webinars and exhibitions, to better understand their roles in tackling the illegal trade in wildlife. For example, just this March, our volunteers under NParks’ Youth Stewards for Nature Programme organised the World Wildlife Day Regional Youth Symposium – Which brought youths around the ASEAN region together, to discuss ideas and solutions to tackle illegal wildlife trade in Southeast Asia.

Amendments to the ESA

These are some of the steps that we have taken to combat the threat of illegal wildlife trade. But this threat is constantly evolving. Because illegal wildlife trade is so profitable, smugglers are constantly looking for loopholes to exploit. So beyond strengthening our research capabilities, partnerships and engagements, we must ensure that our regulations and enforcement tools remain up-to-date and effective.

The Endangered Species (Import and Export) Act, or ESA for short, is the key legislation that supports Singapore’s regulation of trade in the wildlife species protected under CITES. It gives us the powers to take enforcement action against illegal traders. For example, through the ESA, we have established a domestic ban in ivory trade since last September, to support international efforts against the illegal trade in elephant ivory.

We are now proposing to amend the ESA, to strengthen our regulations for the trade of CITES species, and to enhance our penalties and enforcement powers against such illegal trade.

In drafting these amendments, we consulted a wide range of partners and stakeholders, including traders, shipping companies, industry associations, academics and non-profit organisations. I would like to thank all of them for their valuable suggestions.

Last November, we also embarked on a public consultation on the ESA amendments and on Singapore’s approach to combating illegal wildlife trade. We have carefully studied the feedback received and incorporated relevant suggestions in our amendments in the Bill. This includes additional amendments to make the Act more effective and more closely aligned with relevant domestic and international laws on endangered species.

Mr Deputy Speaker Sir, let me now take Members through the key features of this Bill.

Key Amendments to the Bill

This Bill seeks to amend the ESA in four key areas.

First, to strengthen Singapore’s regulatory regime for trade in CITES species;

Second, to align the ESA more closely with CITES Resolutions;

Third, to introduce stiffer penalties for illegal trade for CITES species;

And, fourth, to strengthen NParks’ enforcement powers so that it can tackle illegal wildlife trade more effectively.

Let me now go through each of these areas.

Strengthen Singapore’s regulatory regime for trade in CITES species

First, on our requirements for CITES species traded in Singapore.

Currently, traders are required to produce a CITES permit or certificate when importing, transiting, exporting, or re-exporting CITES species in Singapore. This allows NParks to verify that the trade in these species is legal, sustainable, traceable, and in line with CITES requirements.

We are making amendments to the ESA to provide greater clarity for all stakeholders – In particular, on the requirements for the transit of CITES species through Singapore; and the documents required for such trade.

First, we will amend the definition of “transit” in the ESA to make clear when CITES species are considered to be in transit in Singapore. Today, the ESA states that for a CITES species to be considered “in transit” in Singapore, the species must among other things, be brought into Singapore solely for the purpose of taking it out of Singapore. We recognise that the ESA could be clearer on how this “sole purpose” requirement is to be satisfied, such that there is no ambiguity on when species are considered “in transit”. Clause 3 therefore replaces this requirement with a stipulation that traders who bring CITES species in transit through Singapore must among other things, provide NParks with a document that specifies a port, airport or any other place outside Singapore as the destination for the CITES species. This document must also be issued on or before, or within 14 days after, the date on which the CITES species is brought into Singapore. Traders can provide a Bill of Lading, air waybill or sea waybill, which state the final destination of the CITES species transported. These are among standard transport documents used in international shipping today. A list of accepted documents will be prescribed in subsidiary legislation.

Second, we will make clear the permits that traders need to obtain from the countries of export, re-export or import, for CITES species in transit in Singapore.Today, traders are required to produce CITES permits for CITES species transiting in Singapore. Where the countries of export, re-export or import are not CITES Parties, “written permission”, which is not defined in the Act, can be produced instead. This is for NParks to verify that the species have been legally exported, and will be accepted by the country of import.

To ensure that NParks receives the information it needs for such verification, Clause 4 makes it clear that the permits, certificates, or any other similar documents submitted must contain information that will be prescribed in subsidiary legislation. Where the countries of export, re-export or import are CITES Parties, traders should continue to present valid CITES permits or certificates containing the prescribed information to NParks. Where these countries are not CITES Parties, traders will be required to present valid permits, certificates or any other similar document containing the prescribed information to NParks. The prescribed information will include details of the competent authorities approving the export, re-export or import of the CITES species, as well as the scientific names, source and quantity of the specimens traded.

With these amendments, we aim to provide greater clarity on the requirements for the transit of CITES species in Singapore. Traders will not have to make significant changes to their existing business operations. But following these amendments, we will be able to better differentiate between CITES species which are meant for import into Singapore and species which are meant for transit. NParks can then take appropriate enforcement action against those who illegally import or transit these CITES species.

Align with CITES Resolutions

Let me now move on to the second key area of the Bill, on how our amendments will align the ESA more closely with CITES Resolutions. The amendments will strengthen Singapore’s existing strict stance against illegal trade in CITES species. CITES Resolutions provide guidance and recommendations on how CITES Parties should interpret and implement CITES rules and regulations on wildlife trade.

As a responsible CITES Party, we follow the CITES Resolutions closely, where they apply to us. At the same time, we continue to ensure that trade can flow freely and easily, so that we maintain our status as a global trade hub.For example, NParks issues CITES permits for CITES species exported, re-exported and imported in Singapore in accordance with the permit requirements set out in the relevant CITES Resolution. This ensures that our permits are recognised and accepted by other CITES authorities.

We are now amending the ESA to ensure that our laws are even more closely aligned with the CITES Resolutions.

Clause 2 amends the ESA to make clear that our regulations apply to hybrid animals of CITES species, as though they are full species. These are animals whose recent lineage include species listed in CITES Appendices I or II, including species that are either threatened with extinction and species for which trade is regulated for their continued survival. Taking the Bengal cat as an example, the Bengal cat is a cross between the wild Asian Leopard Cat, a CITES-listed species, and the domestic cat. CITES permits are required for the trade in Bengal cats, which have a wild Asian Leopard Cat ancestor in their lineages, up to four generations that precede it. Although the ESA doesn’t currently explicitly require this, our traders have been producing such permits when trading Bengal cats.

Clause 2 also makes clear that urine, faeces or ambergris are not regulated under the ESA. As these waste products are naturally excreted, their collection does not threaten the survival of any CITES species in the wild. This brings our regulations on the trade in animal parts or derivatives more in line with CITES’s recommendations in this area.

Lastly, Clauses 4 and 5 make clear that permits, certificates or any other similar documents issued retrospectively – after the date of the export or re-export of the CITES species, or that contain unauthorised alterations, are not accepted for the trade of CITES species in Singapore. Retrospectively issued documents can only be accepted if the documents are for trade in CITES Appendix II or III species and, the circumstances that led to the retrospective issuance were not caused or contributed to by the trader. This amendment will strengthen enforcement against those who trade in CITES species without valid permits or other documents.

Enhanced penalties

Mr Deputy Speaker, I will now touch on the third key area of the Bill, which is to introduce stiffer penalties for endangered wildlife trade offences under the Act.

We last enhanced the penalties under the Act in 2006.

However, the value of smuggled endangered wildlife has continued to rise over the years. For example, in 2019, we seized a shipment with around 12 tonnes of pangolin scales that were worth over $48 million, as well as around 9 tonnes of elephant ivory worth over $17 million.

Thus, after careful review and consultation with stakeholders and the public, and considering the latest domestic and international laws on endangered species, we will enhance our penalties further, to keep pace with the times and to increase deterrence against illegal wildlife trade.

We will increase the fines and jail terms that can be meted out for individuals who illegally trade in CITES species. Clause 4 increases the maximum fine for illegal trade in Appendix I species, from $50,000 to $100,000, and the maximum imprisonment term, from two years to six years.Clause 4 also increases the maximum imprisonment term for the illegal trade in Appendix II and III species, from two years to four years. Wildlife trade offences in relation to Appendix I species have stiffer penalties as these species are threatened with extinction and the impact of illegal trade on their survival is much more severe.

We will also increase our penalties for the domestic trade in CITES species to align with that for international trade. This means that individuals who illegally sell CITES species, such as rhino horns, tiger parts, and elephant ivory in Singapore, will be subject to the same higher penalties. This is to enhance deterrence and reflect a similarly strict stance against the illegal domestic trade of endangered species.

Offenders that are corporations, unincorporated associations or partnerships who illegally trade CITES species will also be subject to higher penalties than individual offenders. This is because such entities generally have more resources and the means to move larger quantities of illegally traded CITES species, compared to individuals. Clause 4 will amend the ESA to increase the maximum fine for corporate offenders who illegally trade in CITES species, up to $200,000 for each specimen of an Appendix I species and up to $100,000 for each specimen of an Appendix II or III species. We will also introduce higher maximum imprisonment terms of eight years for Appendix I species and six years for Appendix II or III species, to penalise individuals within corporate offenders (such as directors or managers), more strictly.

We will also raise the maximum aggregate fine further across the board, for both individual and corporate offenders, to match the market value of all the illegally traded CITES species comprised in the offence. This ensures that the penalties are proportionate to the potential gains from the illegal trade of such CITES species, which have risen over time. The maximum aggregate fines for individual offenders will be set at $500,000 or $1,000,000 for individual and corporate offenders respectively, or the market value of the CITES species at the material time of the offence, whichever is higher. For example, in 2020, a South African trader was sentenced to 17 months’ of jail for transiting through Singapore, from South Africa to Vietnam, with 22 kilograms of rhinoceros horns without a valid CITES permit. As rhinoceros horns are worth over $30,000 per kilogram, the offender could also face a maximum aggregate fine of $760,000, if he had been subject to the stiffer penalties in the Bill, instead of the $500,000 today.

At the same time, Clause 10 will amend section 17 to penalise any person who misleads the authorities. Today, the ESA only penalises false, but not misleading statements or documents. For example, a trader applying for an import permit may deliberately mislead NParks officers by providing once-legitimate supporting documents that have since been revoked by the document issuer. These changes will enhance our ability to take enforcement action under the Act against individuals or entities who mislead the authorities.

Apart from these enhancements, the Bill also provides greater clarity to existing penalties in the Act. Currently, the Act provides for fines for illegal trade offences to be issued for each CITES species. This is currently defined to mean any animal or plant specified in the Schedule of the Act. Clause 4 does not change the current position, but makes it clear that that the fines are levied on a per specimen basis. In other words, the offender would be fined on the basis of each specimen of the CITES species, such as each piece of rhinoceros horn or elephant ivory, comprised in the offence.

Taken together, these revisions to the penalties will serve as a strong deterrent and enforcement against illegal trade in wildlife.

Enhance enforcement powers and facilitate investigation

Lastly, the Bill will also make other changes to clarify and strengthen NParks’ enforcement powers, and facilitate investigations on illegal wildlife trade offences.

First, the amendments will enhance NParks’ powers to seize items under the Act. For example, if NParks seizes a shipment of non-CITES timber planks, with illegally traded elephant ivory concealed beneath those planks, the current ESA only allows NParks to seize the elephant ivory. Clause 6 makes clear that NParks may also seize items that are used to conceal CITES species, in this case, the timber planks.

In addition, under Clause 9, conveyances such as cars and vans that were used to commit a wildlife trade offence may also be seized. These changes will further deter against illegal wildlife trade as would-be smugglers would stand to lose their vehicles, as well as any additional cargo that was used to commit the offence.

Nonetheless, we recognise that there must be safeguards to the expanded powers in respect of conveyances. Under Clause 9, large conveyances (of more than 200 tonnes net), and aircrafts and trains used for regular passenger service to and from Singapore, as well as conveyances that were used unlawfully without the owner’s consent, may not be forfeited. In addition, the Courts may only order the forfeiture of other conveyances, if a person was convicted of an offence under the Act, and the conveyance was used in the commission of the offence.

Clause 9 also introduces amendments to the forfeiture framework in the ESA. Currently, the ESA allows the mandatory forfeiture of CITES species and other items upon conviction for illegal wildlife trade offences under section 4 or 5 of the Act today. Clause 9 replaces such mandatory forfeiture with court ordered forfeiture in criminal proceedings. This will also apply to any offence under the Act.

The Bill also updates provisions to align the Act with other recent legislation, including the Wildlife Act, which came into force in 2020. For example, Clause 12 will introduce protections against liability for NParks’ authorised officers, if they have acted in good faith and with reasonable care in the execution of any power, or performance of any function, under the Act.

At the same time, the amendments will enhance NParks’ operational efficiency and investigative capabilities, as well as facilitate its prosecutions – For example, Clause 8 will allow NParks’ authorised officers to be accompanied or assisted by persons, such as auxiliary police officers, in their inspections, searches, and seizures of premises or shipments of goods. NParks’ authorised officers will also be allowed to dispose of perishable seized items, such as turtle eggs, under Clause 6, to avoid incurring unnecessary storage and maintenance costs. Relatedly, Clause 12 allows for documents produced by authorised NParks officers, to be admissible as evidence and taken as factual unless proven otherwise.

Lastly, Clause 12 will also insert new protection for informers by allowing for the non-disclosure of information during the court proceedings that might lead to the identification of an informer. This is to encourage more individuals to provide information regarding illegal wildlife trade, given that NParks often relies on tip-offs to enforce against illegal wildlife trade/smuggling.

Conclusion

Mr Deputy Speaker, this Bill is important as it strengthens Singapore’s regulatory and enforcement regime for the trade in endangered species. It reflects our firm commitment to tackle the global issue of illegal wildlife trade, as a Party to CITES.

And the amendments will enable us to continue taking effective action against illegal wildlife trade, as it evolves over time, for example, from brick-and-mortar to virtual markets. In 2021, NParks seized more than 90 animals that were being sold online as exotic pets, in an island-wide raid. This included several CITES species, such as the Burmese Python and tarantulas that had been illegally imported. 13 individuals are currently under investigation for the sale of these animals. NParks will continue to monitor and enforce against the sale of illegally imported CITES species, which will in future be subject to heavier penalties under the Bill.

The amendments are also largely aimed at strengthening NParks’ enforcement against illegal wildlife trade – the smugglers, and errant traders. And, any offence made out under the Act will depend on the investigation findings of each case.

For the large majority of the industry, who have been responsibly following the requirements in the trade of CITES species, the amendments will have minimal impact on their existing processes or business operations. And, we thank you for your cooperation and for doing your part to safeguard our Earth’s natural heritage and environment.

Everyone can play a part in combating the illegal trade in wildlife, and in protecting our planet’s biodiversity. For example, when buying a pet, do patronise licensed pet shops and ask the seller for a CITES permit if you are buying a CITES species such as dragonfish or sulphur-crested cockatoo. Do also refrain from buying items which may contain endangered animal or plant parts, or illegal wildlife products, such as elephant ivory. Together, we can reduce the demand for endangered wildlife and contribute towards stopping the illegal wildlife trade.

Let me round up by emphasising again that Singapore is resolved in our fight against illegal wildlife trade. This is a continuous effort. In partnership with the international community, we will continue to play our part to safeguard our Earth’s natural heritage – not just for ourselves, but also for our future generations.

Mr Deputy Speaker Sir, I beg to move.