The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) doesn't typically regulate non-financial misconduct specifically. But non-financial misconduct can be caught by its guidance in various ways, giving it latitude to take enforcement action where appropriate.
The fitness and propriety criteria are drawn widely. They can cover complaints, charges and convictions, and other regulatory and ethical non-compliance anywhere in the world. Whether a failure results in disciplinary action (and what action is taken) depends on seriousness and the surrounding circumstances, among other things - which gives the MAS some wiggle-room to act against non-financial misconduct, but does not yet give firms and individuals as much clarity as is given, for example, by the UK Frensham decision.
The guidelines on firms' measures to address individual accountability and conduct are widely expressed and could catch some non-financial misconduct as well. Further, the MAS' ongoing revisions to its misconduct reporting regime will require firms to report certain non-financial misconduct as well as conduct internal investigations and submit investigation reports to the MAS.
Want to learn more? We've published a podcast episode on Singapore's approach to non-financial misconduct and whistleblowing in financial services firms.
Click here to listen (and subscribe with your favourite podcast app). This is the latest in our podcast series on global approaches to non-financial misconduct and complements our publication reviewing the approach in 12 key jurisdictions - you can find the publication and all episodes here.
The factors relevant to honesty, integrity and reputation include "an unwillingness to … uphold any professional and ethical standards, whether in Singapore or elsewhere".