The Community Disputes Resolution Tribunals’ (CDRT) powers will be enhanced to resolve neighbour dispute cases more quickly and effectively. However, Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Edwin Tong stressed that legal action should be the last resort.
Neighbours will be required to go for mediation first before filing a claim with the court, Mr Tong told Parliament on 12 November, noting that more than 70 per cent of claimants did not go for mediation before filing a claim in the past five years.
The amendments to the Community Disputes Resolution Act also empower the CDRT to issue mandatory treatment orders or interim orders under specific conditions.
If the behaviour stems from a treatable psychiatric condition, the offender can also be issued a mandatory treatment order, requiring them to undergo treatment for their condition.
An interim order may be issued if the unreasonable interference is likely to continue and substantially impact the claimant.
These orders allow claimants in serious cases to obtain relief more quickly.
Authorised officers will also be able to direct disputing neighbours to attend mandatory mediation at the Community Mediation Centre.
A new Community Relations Unit (CRU) will also be set up. Officers will be given investigatory and enforcement powers to intervene in neighbour disputes.
Mr Tong said government agencies have received more than 90,000 reports on neighbour noise over the last three years, averaging about 2,500 complaints a month.
The CRU will focus resources only on severe neighbour noise cases that are causing “disamenity” to the community, as well as severe hoarding cases, he added.
It will have the discretion to judge the severity of cases with the specific facts and circumstances of each case.
CRU will begin pilot operations in Tampines from Q2 of 2025: Sim Ann

The CRU aims to commence pilot operations in Tampines from the second quarter of 2025, said Senior Minister of State for National Development Sim Ann.
Ms Sim also elaborated on the powers of the CRU and the safeguards in place to protect residents.
Community Relations Officers (CROs) and Auxiliary Community Relations Officers must first identify themselves by showing their official identification card, which can be verified on a Ministry of National Development webpage. Impersonating an officer will be a criminal offense.
CROs will have the authority to take statements, photographs, recordings, and issue advisories and warnings. While advisories and warnings do not carry penalties, disregarding them may lead to further enforcement action.
In severe cases involving recalcitrant nuisance-makers, the CRU may refer the matter to the Housing and Development Board (HDB) for compulsory acquisition consideration. This step may be taken if all other measures fail to resolve the nuisance, and action is needed to protect the wider community.
Responding to MPs’ request to scale the CRU model, Ms Sim said:” We seek your patience for us to pilot this CRU model and review it carefully to ensure that our processes are effective and that manpower needs for expansion of coverage are sized correctly. After this bill is passed, we will continue working on the subsidiary legislation and firm up operation processes.”
In his speech, Mr Tong stressed that creating an overdependence on the state to police community behaviours at home will invariably weaken the community’s ability to self-moderate.
“These enhancements cannot be seen as a silver bullet… There will likely be cases that continue to resist resolution, even under this enhanced framework. Ultimately, this is delicate work… to balance between intervening too much with the framework that allows us all these measures of relief but also empowering neighbours themselves to take ownership and responsibility of their own difficulties, their own neighbourly problems, and resolve them themselves,” Mr Tong said.
“I call on all members to help us through our interactions with our residents to build a gracious society, where neighbours are conscious of their role in the community, to exercise mutual consideration for one another, and where differences are best bridged through discussion and compromise, and not necessarily direction or order.”