Singapore doesn’t have one big AI law. So how is it regulating AI?

I’ve been looking into Singapore’s approach to AI regulation, and what I find interesting is that it hasn’t gone the same route as the EU with one big, all-encompassing AI law. Instead, Singapore uses a mix of existing laws, sector-specific rules, and governance frameworks. What caught my attention is how this approach has evolved over the years, especially with the rise of generative AI and, more recently, AI agents. Singapore now has guidance specifically for AI agents, covering things like setting limits, keeping humans responsible, controlling access, and maintaining records. It raises an interesting question: does AI regulation need one comprehensive law, or can a combination of existing laws and practical guidelines work better as the technology keeps changing? I put together a video covering Singapore’s AI regulation journey from 2017 to 2026, including the key laws, frameworks, and what organisations need to pay attention to today. Check out the latest video @ Latha-ai-governance to watch it. I aim to educate industry professionals regarding AI Governance. Which approach do you think works better: one major AI law or a more flexible framework like Singapore’s?