Second reading of the Cross-Border Railways (Border Control Co-location) Bill – Opening Speech by Mr Edwin Tong, Minister for Law & Second Minister for Home Affairs

Introduction

1. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

2. The Johor Bahru-Singapore Rapid Transit System Link, or RTS Link, is targeted to commence service this December.

3. With a peak capacity of up to 10,000 passengers per hour per direction, the RTS Link will help relieve congestion on the Causeway.

4. A key feature of the RTS Link is the co-location of both countries’ customs, immigration and quarantine facilities, or CIQ facilities, at each station.

(a) This allows passengers to undergo both departure and arrival immigration clearance before boarding the train, and no further immigration clearance is required upon disembarkation in the other country.

5. Co-location of CIQ facilities for cross-border travel is not a novel arrangement and many countries have this model.

(a) For example, France and the United Kingdom have a longstanding similar arrangement for the Channel Tunnel, from which we took reference.

6. Even so, as this arrangement may be new to some Singaporeans, allow me to sketch out how the process will work for a typical traveller taking the RTS Link from Woodlands North Station in Singapore, to Bukit Chagar Station in Malaysia.

7. After going through the RTS Link fare gate at Woodlands North, the traveller will first undergo security checks and departure clearance by ICA officers.

8. The traveller will then proceed for arrival immigration clearance at Malaysia’s CIQ zone at Woodlands North, which is located one level below ICA’s departure clearance, in the same building. Malaysia’s officers will be deployed there to conduct immigration clearance and also conduct selective security checks.

9. After arrival clearance, the traveller will go to the departure train platform and board the train to Bukit Chagar Station in Malaysia.

(a) The traveller will not need to undergo further immigration clearance upon arrival in Malaysia, and can just walk off the train straight into Johor Bahru.

(b) Nevertheless, Malaysia’s officers at Bukit Chagar Station may conduct further selective security checks, inspect customs permits, and collect taxes and duties, where necessary.

10. For travellers coming into Singapore, the immigration clearance process at Bukit Chagar Station in Malaysia will be identical, with travellers clearing both departure and arrival clearance at Bukit Chagar Station.

11. Through the co-located clearance arrangement, travellers will experience a more seamless and streamlined journey.

12. For this arrangement to work, each country will deploy its officers to the other country’s territory to carry out the necessary CIQ functions.

13. The purpose of this Bill is to give effect to these arrangements concerning the co-location of CIQ facilities, as well as the coordination between Singapore and Malaysia in railway security matters and cross-border incident management.

14. These arrangements were codified in two bilateral treaties:

(a) The RTS Link Bilateral Agreement, signed in 2018; and

(b) The Supplementary Agreement to the Bilateral Agreement, signed in 2025.


Approach of the Bill

15. The approach for this Bill is for its provisions in the main body to have application to railways constructed under Singapore’s Cross-Border Railways Act 2018 in general, and for the provisions pertaining to specific railways, like the RTS Link in this case, to be contained in Schedules. The bilateral treaties and provisions specific to the RTS Link are listed in the First and Second Schedules respectively.

16. This allows our laws to accommodate future cross-border railways with a co-located model, should we come to such an arrangement in the future.

17. The Bill, therefore, cannot be read in isolation, and we must have regard to the arrangements contained in the Bilateral, as well as the Supplementary Agreements.

18. In addition, in order to operationalise the co-located CIQ model, Malaysia must also pass domestic legislation to give effect to the arrangements set out in the bilateral treaties. This is because the arrangements are substantively mirrored for both countries.

19. In addition, reciprocity is a key principle which underpins the Bill’s provisions.

20. The privileges and protections that the Bill accords to Malaysia’s officers deployed in Singapore are, by design, contingent upon the privileges and protections which Malaysia’s legislation accords to Singapore officers deployed in Malaysia.

21. Malaysia’s legislation for the RTS Link passed both chambers of its Parliament earlier this year, and provides for these reciprocal privileges and protections.


Key Features of the Bill

22. The provisions of the Bill, Sir, cover four broad areas:

(a) First, co-located border control functions, in both Singapore and Malaysia;

(b) Second, cross-border incident management, including the establishment of concurrent criminal jurisdiction on board trains in transit between both countries;

(c) Third, other matters such as data protection, as well as protection and immunities for Malaysia’s officers deployed in Singapore; and

(d) Fourth, related and consequential amendments to other Acts.

Co-Located Border Control Functions

Enabling Malaysia’s CIQ Operations in Singapore

23. Let me take this in turn. I will start with the co-located border control functions in Singapore, addressed in Part 2 and Part 3 of the Bill. There are four main aspects to this.

24. First, the Bill circumscribes the areas in Singapore within which Malaysia’s officers can perform their CIQ duties.

(a) For the RTS Link, these designated areas lie within the Woodlands North Station.

(b) Clause 7 empowers the Minister for Home Affairs to demarcate the designated areas.

(c) Clear signages will be displayed at all the designated areas at Woodlands North Station to ensure that the public is aware of the perimeter of these areas.

25. To be clear, there is no change to territorial boundaries and the designated areas for Malaysia remain Singapore’s territory and subject to Singapore’s laws.

(a) What this Bill does is to provide formal legal permission for Malaysia’s officers operating in the designated areas in Singapore, to carry out their border clearance and security checks on travellers departing for Malaysia.

(b) Clause 8 makes clear that Singapore law continues to apply within the designated areas.

(c) The list of Malaysian laws which would be allowed to apply within the designated areas are strictly for CIQ clearance and security checks, and these are contained in Paragraph 16 of the Second Schedule.

26. Second, the Bill empowers the Minister to approve which Malaysian officers may be deployed in Singapore.

(a) Clause 9 states that only officers whom the Minister recognises as Malaysian preclearance officers in relation to a cross-border railway are allowed to be deployed in Singapore.

(b) Clause 11 limits the duration of these deployments, and

(c) Clause 12 authorises the Minister to withdraw recognition of any Malaysian officer at any time without providing a reason.

27. Under exceptional circumstances, such as a massive outage or perhaps a public health emergency,

(a) Malaysia might need to deploy additional manpower in the designated areas in Singapore at short notice.

(b) Clause 10 allows for such expeditious deployments for a limited period, provided the Malaysian Government gives written notice under this provision.

28. Third, the Bill authorises the calibrated exercise of powers by Malaysia’s officers within the designated areas in Singapore.

29. Clauses 4 and 5 provide a list of “ordinary”, or routine, powers required for the conduct of CIQ duties in the context of a cross-border railway.

(a) These include requiring individuals to present travel and import documents, screening checks, such as requiring travellers to put their bags through scanners, and so on.

30. Clause 13 states that Malaysia’s officers are authorised to conduct border clearance and railway security checks to the extent conferred by Malaysian border control laws.

(a) Their exercise of powers is subject to the limits set out in Clauses 14 to 18.

(i) This spells out the specific legal powers that Malaysia’s officers can exercise within the designated areas, and the scope of its application.

31. Paragraph 4 of the Second Schedule provides for “special”, or additional, powers that Malaysia’s officers may exercise while performing CIQ duties within the designated areas for the RTS Link.

(a) These include carrying restraining devices such as batons and handcuffs when on official duty, and using reasonable force to detain disorderly individuals or those who pose a threat to public security.

(b) When an individual is detained, Malaysia’s officers must, as soon as is practicable, transfer custody of the person to an appropriate Singapore officer.

32. Fourth, the Bill empowers Singapore officers to check for items that are controlled or prohibited under Malaysian law.

(a) This is catered for to streamline the conduct of checks between Singapore and Malaysia under the co-located clearance model.

(b) Clause 19 enables Singapore officers to check for such items, even if they are not prohibited or controlled under Singapore law.

(c) Malaysian officers at Bukit Chagar station are similarly empowered by Malaysia’s legislation to check for items prohibited or controlled under Singapore law.

33. If an item that is prohibited or controlled under Malaysian law is found through these checks,

(a) Clause 20 permits Singapore officers to allow the traveller to voluntarily discard the item as a condition for boarding the train.

(b) There will, however, be exceptions, such as where an item poses a threat to human safety, is a live creature, or constitutes evidential material relevant to an investigation.

(c) Then in such cases, the item must be removed from the traveller or taken possession of by Singapore officers.

Enabling Singapore’s CIQ Operations at Malaysia

34. Sir, we are committed to ensuring that Singapore officers deployed to Malaysia to safeguard our borders will be able to do so effectively and with peace of mind.

(a) That is the focus of Part 4 of this Bill.

35. Clause 22 states that, as a precondition for sending Singapore officers to Malaysia,

(a) the Minister must be satisfied that Malaysian laws allow Singapore officers to conduct their official duties in Malaysia properly, under the orders of their own commanding officers, and that they are conferred with the powers, duties and privileges of their counterparts in Malaysia.

(b) This is in addition to the protections and immunities that Malaysia’s legislation accords to Singapore officers deployed to Malaysia.

36. Clause 24 makes clear that every Singapore officer deployed to Malaysia in relation to cross-border railways has the same powers, rights and immunities as they do when performing the same duties in Singapore.

(a) The clause also provides that the limits to the exercise of powers by Malaysia’s officers in Singapore apply similarly to the exercise of powers by our officers in Malaysia.

(b) So this means, for example, that Singapore officers are not allowed to make an arrest when in Malaysia’s territory.

37. Clause 25 provides for prescribed Singapore border control laws to apply within Singapore’s designated areas in Malaysia, to empower our officers to carry out border clearance and security checks.

(a) The list of Singapore border control laws applicable for the RTS Link is set out at Paragraph 17 of the Second Schedule.

(b) This will ensure that the level of checks done is comparable to that at our other checkpoints, and that there will be no compromise to our border security.

Cross-Border Incident Management

38. Besides checkpoint operations, we must also be prepared for contingencies that may occur on a moving train.

(a) Safety and security incidents may occur from time to time, due to technical faults or as a result of sabotage, resulting in trains stopping mid-way during the trip.

(b) Officers from both countries may then be required to respond, even if the incident occurs within the other country’s territory.

39. For this reason, the Bill includes provisions for managing incidents that occur on the railway tracks, or on trains moving between the countries (or what we call “trains in transit”, for short).

40. The codification in law provides legal certainty for the officers who will be called upon to respond.

41. Beyond the Bill’s provisions, Singapore and Malaysia have also developed detailed protocols and standard operating procedures to facilitate timely and coordinated responses to such cross-border incidents on the RTS Link. Officers will be trained and empowered to keep travellers safe and secure.

42. Both countries will hold joint exercises prior to the commencement of the operationalisation of the revenue service, and on a regular basis thereafter, to ensure continued operational readiness.

Principles and Powers for Managing Cross-Border Incidents

43. Mr Deputy Speaker, allow me to give an overview of the key principles on which Singapore and Malaysia have agreed for managing cross-border incidents on the RTS Link.

(a) These principles form the basis of Paragraph 14 of the Second Schedule.

44. First, where a train is able to complete its journey, any incident on board will be managed by the authorities of the country in which the train stops.

45. Second, if a train stalls and is unable to complete its journey, the country in whose territory the train is situated will manage the incident.

46. Third, if a train stalls at the stretch of railway tracks located between the respective administrative boundary markers of both countries, represented by Pier 47 for Malaysia and Pier 48 for Singapore, both countries have agreed to use the nose of the train as the marker to determine the country with primary responsibility to manage the incident. The country with primary responsibility will be the Incident Manager in this case, and will have command and control over incident management.

47. So in the case of a train bound for Singapore, so long as the nose of the train has not crossed Pier 48, Malaysia will be the Incident Manager.

48. However, once the nose has crossed Pier 48, Singapore will be the Incident Manager. And this is so even if most of the train’s length remains otherwise within Malaysia’s territory.

49. For a Malaysia-bound train, so long as the nose has not crossed Pier 47, Singapore will be the Incident Manager.

50. Once the nose has crossed Pier 47, Malaysia will be the Incident Manager, and in similar terms, even if the train’s length remains within Singapore’s territory.

51. Third, in the absence of a train, for incidents occurring on the railway tracks between Piers 47 and 48, the country whose officers arrive on the scene first will be the Incident Manager. So there might be a scenario where you might have persons on the track where there’s no train. And in such a case, the country whose officers arrive first will take control of the situation and will be designated the Incident Manager.

52. Fourth, for all cross-border incidents, when one country has assumed the role of Incident Manager, the other country shall render the necessary support upon request.

53. Last, to ensure coordinated response, when each country’s officers need to cross the administrative boundary marker of the other country during incident management, they must obtain prior consent of the other country before doing so.

54. However, if the incident is determined to be a search and rescue operation or a medical evacuation, then each country’s officers need only inform the other country before crossing over.

55. Part 5 of the Bill sets out the scope, duties and powers for officers managing cross-border incidents.

(a) Under Clause 29, cross-border incident management operations will be limited to the premises where an incident has occurred and its immediate vicinity as is reasonably necessary for an effective response.

56. Clause 28 empowers our officers to carry out cross-border incident management duties within the locations prescribed by Clause 29, including in Malaysia’s territory if necessary.

(b) It also allows Malaysia’s officers to carry out equivalent duties in Singapore’s territory, if necessary.

57. Clause 27 spells out the scope of these duties. These include the protection of people from injury or death, and the protection of public property from damage or loss, whether arising from criminal acts or in any other way.

58. Paragraph 15 of the Second Schedule further sets out the range of powers that Malaysia’s officers are allowed to exercise in Singapore’s territory for the purpose of cross-border incident management at the RTS Link, and makes clear that these must be exercised with reasonable force.

(a) Clause 30 limits the extent to which Malaysia’s officers may exercise these powers.

59. Clause 31 states that Malaysia’s officers are not allowed to make any arrest in Singapore’s territory during cross-border incident management operations.

(a) In the same vein, neither are Singapore’s officers allowed to make any arrest in Malaysia’s territory during such operations.

Concurrent Criminal Jurisdiction

60. Apart from major cross-border incidents, we must also consider routine crimes that may take place on board RTS Link trains, such as theft or perhaps, outrage of modesty.

61. Singapore and Malaysia have agreed that both countries will have concurrent criminal jurisdiction over criminal offences that occur on board trains in transit, as well as over the stretch of railway tracks located between Piers 47 and 48.

62. Otherwise, the respective country in whose territory the offence happens will have criminal jurisdiction.

63. Clause 39 under Part 7 of the Bill establishes Singapore’s jurisdiction over criminal offences on board trains in transit in the general context of cross-border railways, including when the train is in Malaysia’s territory, and at certain defined zones of the railway tracks.

64. For the RTS Link, any person who commits an offence under any Singapore law while on a train in transit would be treated as if the person had done so in Singapore. This then enables Singapore to investigate and prosecute offences committed at these locations, even if they might be outside Singapore.

65. Malaysia, through its legislation, has also established jurisdiction over criminal offences on board trains in transit and on the railway tracks between Piers 47 and 48.

66. Singapore has worked out with Malaysia a method for determining which country has primary right to exercise jurisdiction in any given case. If someone commits an offence on a moving train, what Singapore and Malaysia have agreed on is that the country where the train completes its journey will be accorded the primary right to exercise jurisdiction.

67. In coming up with this principle, we took reference from the arrangement between the UK and France at the Channel Tunnel.

(a) This is also similar to the approach taken towards investigating offences onboard airborne aircraft, where the destination country has primary right.

68. It therefore does not matter whether travellers file a police report in Singapore or in Malaysia.

(a) We also have a referral system in place:

(i) if a country receives a report for which it does not have primary right to exercise jurisdiction, it will refer the case to the other country.

(ii) Should the country without primary right wish to conduct investigations into the matter, it may request for the other country to waive its right.

(b) This framework ensures clarity of jurisdiction when the exact location of the offence is unclear.

(c) It also allows Singapore to investigate offences where there is public interest to do so.

Other Matters

69. The Bill also addresses other matters such as those concerning data protection, as well as protection and immunities for Malaysia’s officers in Singapore.

Reciprocal Data Protection

70. Let me just cover these provisions briefly. With both countries’ CIQ facilities co-located in both stations, data protection is a key consideration, and this is the subject of Part 6 of the Bill.

71. Clause 37 provides that all information and data collected or generated by Singapore officers in Malaysia in the course of official duties, whether within the designated areas or during cross-border incident management, these all shall be treated as if they were collected or generated in Singapore and governed by Singapore law.

72. Clause 38 provides that documents, devices and equipment belonging to the Singapore Government shall be immune from seizure, confiscation or any other form of interference, when installed, kept or situated within defined areas in Malaysia.

73. The protection of Singapore’s data and the inviolability of our documents, devices and equipment have been provided for in Malaysia’s legislation as well.

74. On a reciprocal basis,

(a) Clause 35 of the Bill provides for the protection of information and data collected or generated by Malaysia’s officers in Singapore in the course of official duties.

(b) And similarly, Clause 36 provides for the inviolability of documents, devices and equipment belonging to the Malaysian Government when installed, kept or situated within defined areas in Singapore.

Protection and Immunities

75. Part 8 of the Bill confers protection on Malaysia’s officers deployed in Singapore.

76. Clause 42 deems every officer that Malaysia deploys to Singapore, whether for the purpose of performing border control duties or cross-border incident management, to be a public servant for the purposes of specific provisions under the Penal Code and the Protection from Harassment Act.

77. This extends to Malaysia’s officers the same level of protection against abuse as Singapore public servants, in the course of their conducting official duties.

78. In addition, Clause 43 confers immunity on the actions of Malaysia’s officers in Singapore from Singapore’s criminal, civil and administrative jurisdictions.

(a) This is provided those actions are committed in the course of official duties.

(b) The Malaysian Government may waive this immunity at its discretion.

79. Mr Deputy Speaker, I mentioned earlier that reciprocity underpins the provisions of this Bill, and we want our officers in Malaysia to be able to work with peace of mind.

(a) If it is found that what Malaysia’s legislation accords to our officers are substantially less favourable than what this Bill accords to their officers,

(b) Clause 44 empowers the Minister to issue regulations that disapply or modify any provision of the Bill in relation to Malaysia’s officers in Singapore.

(c) This is our commitment to our own officers who work tirelessly to safeguard Singapore’s borders.

Related and Consequential Amendments to Other Acts

80. The last part of the Bill proposes amendments to other Acts that are consequential upon the enactment of this Bill, or related to the purposes of this Bill.

Adaptation to Requirements of Cross-Border Railways

81. First, amendments are proposed for the purpose of adapting existing laws to the requirements of a cross-border railway.

(a) So, for example, Clause 63 amends Section 5 of the Immigration Act to empower the Minister to prescribe an area outside Singapore as an authorised point of entry or immigration control post.

(b) For the RTS Link, Singapore’s designated areas at Bukit Chagar station will be prescribed as an authorised point of entry.

82. Another example is Clause 51, which amends Section 24 of the Coroners Act, so that coronial jurisdiction may be asserted in cases where a death occurs on a train in transit,

(a) even if outside Singapore, if the body is transported into Singapore.

(b) This allows Singapore to investigate cases of unnatural death that have been reported, where there is public interest to do so.

Deployment of Singapore Officers in Malaysian Territory

83. Second, amendments are proposed for the purpose of allowing the deployment of Singapore officers to Malaysian territory to perform official duties.

(a) Clauses 48, 65 and 70 amend the Civil Defence Act, Immigration Act and Police Force Act respectively.

(b) These amendments empower the Minister to send SCDF, ICA and SPF officers to Malaysia for the purpose of performing official duties in relation to cross-border railways, including for cross-border incident management.

Extra-territorial Offences and Enforcement Powers

84. Third, Sir, amendments are proposed to extend criminal jurisdiction to Singapore’s designated areas in Malaysia’s territory for certain offences.

(a) These are largely offences under Singapore’s immigration laws.

(b) So, for example, if ICA officers in Malaysia detect the use of forged passports, the amendments to the Passports Act under Clause 69 would allow them to seize the forged passports.

85. Some offences under the Infectious Diseases Act and the Regulation of Imports and Exports Act have also been made extra-territorial, to the extent necessary for Singapore officers in Malaysia to enforce public health measures as well as our import laws.


Conclusion

86. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the RTS Link will be a major artery for travel between Singapore and Malaysia.

87. This Bill is a key supporting pillar of the RTS Link. It gives effect to a comprehensive set of arrangements that facilitate co-located CIQ clearance, and also undergirds jointly developed protocols for coordinated management of cross-border incidents.

88. This will help to ensure that the RTS Link experience for travellers is not only convenient and seamless, but also safe and secure.

89. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.