Personal Data Protection Act, offence of unauthorised re-identification of anonymised information
Personal Data Protection Act 2012, s.48F (Part 9B), as added by Act 40 of 2020
In force since .
An enforcement supervision rule binding public and private bodies.
- Obligation class
- Prohibition
What it requires
- Do not re-identify, or cause the re-identification of, the person to whom anonymised information held by an organisation or a public agency relates unless the organisation or agency authorises it, knowing that it is unauthorised or reckless as to whether it is (section 48F(1)).
These lines are LexLint's reading of the law's text.
If you get it wrong
Criminal exposureYes
Criminal exposure note
Unauthorised re-identification of anonymised information is punishable on conviction by a fine not exceeding $5,000, imprisonment for up to 2 years, or both (section 48F(1)).
Penalty structure
Fine under section 48F(1), with imprisonment of up to 2 years, or both.
- Rule
- Fixed only
- As of
- Currency
- SGD
- Fixed cap
- 5,000
What this law does
Section 48F makes it an offence for an individual to take any action to re-identify, or cause the re-identification of, the person to whom anonymised information in the possession or under the control of an organisation or a public agency relates, where the organisation or agency has not authorised the re-identification and the individual knows that it is unauthorised or is reckless as to whether it is.
On conviction the penalty is a fine not exceeding $5,000, imprisonment for up to 2 years, or both. The offence binds individuals, and Part 9B does not apply to a relevant public official in a Singapore public sector agency, or to a director, officer or employee of the Monetary Authority of Singapore in respect of information acquired in the performance of their duties.
The accused has a defence, to be proved on a balance of probabilities, where the information on the affected person's identity is publicly available, where another law permits or requires the re-identification or a court order authorises or requires it, where the accused reasonably believed it was for a specified purpose and notified the Commission or the organisation as soon as practicable, or where the accused reasonably believed they had the legal right to do it for a purpose other than a specified purpose.
Where a public agency shares anonymised information under a data sharing and use direction, a re-identification that the direction or a further authorisation under it does not authorise is treated as unauthorised.
When LexLint raises it
When your app profile says your app processes personal data.
Back to the example · Lint your app
Page updated .