Why are there new rules on psychiatric expert evidence in criminal court cases?

SINGAPORE – From Dec 31, psychiatrists must be admitted to a panel before they can testify as an expert in criminal proceedings, as part of new criminal procedure rules relating to expert evidence.

It comes amid a rise in the use of psychiatric expert evidence in criminal cases.

In a media statement, the Ministry of Law said that as expert evidence from psychiatrists plays a critical role in the criminal process, it is crucial to ensure that the standards of objectivity and competence expected of expert witnesses are met consistently.

A selection committee comprising a Supreme Court Judge, a district judge and an officer from the Ministry of Health would decide on the appointment of psychiatrists to the panel.

A: Greater awareness of mental health issues has contributed to a rise in the use of psychiatric evidence over the years, experts said.

Psychiatric evidence assists the court in determining if an accused person was suffering from a psychiatric condition at the time of the offence, and if so, whether the condition has a causal or contributory link to the offence.

Mr Mark Yeo, a director at Fortress Law Corporation, said psychiatric evidence may be used during a trial to show that the accused did not have the requisite intention to commit the offence.

It may also be used as a mitigating factor in sentencing, or to seek a mandatory treatment order (MTO) in certain cases, he added.

Offenders given an MTO have to undergo treatment to address their conditions in lieu of time behind bars.

Dr Jacob Rajesh, a senior consultant psychiatrist at Promises Healthcare, said cases of murder may be reduced to culpable homicide if there is a substantial contributory link between the mental disorder and the offence.

A: The Ministry of Law said the panel was established to better safeguard the objectivity and quality of psychiatric expert evidence in the criminal courts.

Dr Jacob said an expert witness is expected to be objective and independent. The duty of the expert is to the court and not to the person who has paid for the report, he added.

He said: “Psychiatrists are expected to explain the basis of the diagnosis, explain their opinions about the causal or contributory link and other relevant psychiatric factors… the court will decide on whose evidence is preferred.”

Mr Yeo noted that such evidence relies on a psychiatrist’s clinical judgment, and it was normal for psychiatrists to differ in their professional opinions.

“However, there have been instances in the past when a psychiatrist essentially abdicates his duty to the court and simply parrots what his client wishes him to say,” said Mr Yeo.

In one case in 2014, a woman charged with arranging a marriage of convenience sought to rely on a medical report which opined that she had depression.

Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, who heard her appeal, said the medical report was not only “patently lacking in objectivity”, it was also “plainly erroneous” in stating that the offender had been used in a marriage scam.

A: Applicants have to meet two eligibility criteria.

The person must either

Be registered as a psychiatrist in Singapore, or
Has completed three years of psychiatry residency training in Singapore and is receiving formal training and ongoing supervision by a registered psychiatrist, or
Be a foreign-registered psychiatrist with a certificate of good standing issued by the foreign licensing authority.

The selection committee must also be satisfied that “there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant has displayed, or is likely to display, a clear lack of objectivity or competence as an expert witness”.

There is an avenue of appeal for those whose applications are rejected.

There will also be a transitional phase where psychiatrists can still give expert evidence in criminal cases in specific scenarios, such as where the psychiatrist’s treatment or assessment of the accused had started before Dec 31, 2025.

The panel’s website at

http://www.psychpanel.gov.sg

/ will also provide a central and public directory of all the appointed members.

A: Dr Jacob noted that application is voluntary and there may be some psychiatrists who are not trained in forensic psychiatry or do not have experience in forensic psychiatry who may not apply.

“Personally, I do not feel that the pool of psychiatrists will be restricted as long as enough numbers of psychiatrists apply.

“However, the appointment panel will scrutinise the applications and will be the deciding authority regarding the appointment of psychiatrists to the panel,” he said.

Mr Yeo said the eligibility criteria are designed to be inclusive, and a psychiatrist would not be excluded simply because a court has rejected his opinion in the past.

He said the creation of a publicly available list of psychiatrists may even increase the pool of available psychiatrists, as accused persons and defence counsel may not always know which psychiatrists are open to giving expert evidence.

Read Full Article At Source