Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, this Bill will introduce a framework for electronic signing of oaths, declarations and notarisations. The framework will allow persons making statutory declarations, making oaths and affirmations or notarising documents to do so over video link. This move away from paper-based processes will bring time and cost savings.
I have three clarifications on the safeguards for the framework.
My first clarification is on the interpreter’s involvement. Interpretation adds another step in the communication process. This can contribute to additional complexity if done over video link. The risk of miscommunication may be higher for cases where specialised interpretation is needed, for example, for persons with special needs or disabilities.
Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary clarify if an interpreter has to be present in person with the client making the statutory declaration, oaths or affirmations? If the interpreter is allowed to be present over video link, can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary share what steps the Commissioner or Notary Public should take to ensure that the interpretation and communication is accurately done?
My second point is on the responsibility of a Commissioner or Notary Public to verify the independence of a client. The risk of clients making oaths or affirmations under undue pressure is always present, even in in-person affirmations or notarisations. However, where the Commissioner or Notary Public is only able to observe the client over video link, the risk is higher.
Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary share what steps a Commissioner or Notary Public should take to ensure that the client signs any documents independently and without any undue pressure? For example, must a Commissioner or Notary Public take additional steps to verify the persons in the room with the client and the relationships of these persons with the client?
Relatedly, can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary elaborate on the circumstances where a Commissioner or Notary Public should decline to take the oath or affirmation over video link?
My last point is on the security of communication links. The Bill does not specify the types of communication technology or platforms that can be used for the live video or television link. Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary share whether there will be any requirements on the security of the platforms that will be permitted? For instance, must the platforms have end-to-end encryption to protect the video transmission?
Allowing remote oaths, affirmations or notarisations may open up a new avenue for scammers to solicit personal data. Are there any methods in which clients can easily identify if the video links for oaths, affirmations or notarisations are valid?
Sir, notwithstanding these clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.
Watch the speech here.