Law / Singapore

Personal Data Protection Act, comprehensive consent-based regime

Act 26 of 2012 (Singapore), as amended by the Personal Data Protection (Amendment) Act 2020, Act 40 of 2020

In force since .

A comprehensive regime rule binding private bodies.

How the hook was established
express
What makes it apply
User location
Audit expectation
on_request
Who audits it
Regulator

What it requires

  • An app that collects, uses, or discloses the personal data of an individual in Singapore must obtain the individual's consent, or rely on a Part 3 or Schedule exception, and must state its purpose for the collection, use, or disclosure.

These lines are LexLint's reading of the law's text. Also read by: Personal Data Protection Commission of Singapore (PDPC) (guidance, recorded ); Piper, Martin v Singapore Kindness Movement [2025] SGHC 173, General Division of the High Court of Singapore, judgment of (recorded ).

In the frameworks

NIST Privacy Framework
  • CT.PO-P1Policies, processes, and procedures for authorizing data processing (e.g., organizational decisions, individual consent), revoking authorizations, and maintaining authorizations are established and in place.
  • CM.AW-P1Mechanisms (e.g., notices, internal or public reports) for communicating data processing purposes, practices, associated privacy risks, and options for enabling individuals’ data processing preferences and requests are established and in place.

Our reading of where this law's duties sit in each framework. It never says that running a control meets the law. How we read a framework against the law

Who enforces it

Settledness

As of
Case link
https://www.elitigation.sg/gd/s/2025_SGHC_173
Guidance link
https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/-/media/files/pdpc/pdf-files/advisory-guidelines/ag-on-key-concepts/advisory-guidelines-on-key-concepts-in-the-pdpa-17-may-2022.pdf
Case citation
Piper, Martin v Singapore Kindness Movement [2025] SGHC 173, General Division of the High Court of Singapore, judgment of
Guidance body
Personal Data Protection Commission of Singapore (PDPC)
Open questions
How long a period to opt out must an organisation give before it may rely on deemed consent by notification to use individuals’ voice data or facial images?

What it makes you log

Who may demand the log

Regulator

What the log must hold

Consent or opt-out state

Logging duty

Section 22A(1) makes an organisation that refuses an access request preserve a complete and accurate copy of the personal data concerned for not less than a prescribed period, and section 43(4)(b) makes the consent that excuses a message to a Singapore number one that is evidenced in written or other form accessible for later reference. The prescribed period is set in subsidiary legislation the row does not cite, so no retention figure is coded. The Commission may require an organisation to produce a specified document under paragraph 1 of the Ninth Schedule when it investigates under section 50. Parts 3 to 6A name no log or register of their own: the data-breach assessment of section 26C and the retention limit of section 25 are not records. Part 9 reaches a message to a Singapore telephone number where its recipient is present in Singapore when it is accessed, which is coded as the hook; its other prong, that the sender is present in Singapore, is a location of the sender and is left out.

Kind
Implicit
As of
Provision
Section 22A(1) (a copy of personal data preserved after a refused access request), with section 43(4)(b) (consent to a specified message evidenced so as to be accessible)
Trigger
  • personal_data_processing
  • consent_or_optout

What this law does

Drafted with AI

Drafted with AI from the cited sources under the direction of UnGovr staff. UnGovr holds editorial responsibility for this page. How this site is made

Research summary

Legal information, not legal advice. This is LexLint's own research summary of a public legal source, and it creates no attorney-client relationship. For decisions that matter, consult qualified counsel in the relevant jurisdiction. About LexLint

PDPA applies a single consent-based framework to all personal data processing by organisations in Singapore: collection, use, or disclosure requires consent or a Part 3 or Schedule exception, and the Act does not distinguish controller from processor by name, instead regulating organisations directly with pass-through duties on data intermediaries.

There is no statutory sensitive-category or biometric-specific tier; every category of personal data, including a faceprint or voiceprint, is regulated under this one uniform standard.

When LexLint raises it

When your app profile says your app processes personal data.

Back to the example  ·  Lint your app

Page updated .