SINGAPORE ACADEMY OF LAW BILL

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Order for Second Reading read.

The Second Minister for Law (Prof. S. Jayakumar): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

Sir, the Bill before the House is to establish a body to be known as the Singapore Academy of Law which will bring together Judges, practising lawyers, members of the Legal Service, lecturers in the NUS Faculty of Law as well as law students. Through this body, it is hoped that a collegiate spirit in the legal fraternity can evolve.

Since the enactment of the Legal Profession Act more than 20 years ago, we have witnessed different stages of development in the legal profession in Singapore, in particular the vast increase in the number of lawyers. In 1958, there were 152 advocates and solicitors; in 1968, 284; in 1978, 713; and in August this year, 1,536. In addition, we have 148 Legal Officers in the Legal Service, and 51 academic staff in the Faculty of Law. This year, 204 young men and women graduated with the degree of Bachelor of Laws out of a total of 810 undergraduates in the Law Faculty, most of whom will graduate and become practising lawyers soon.

However, quantitative increases alone cannot be adequate to serve the needs of our people. A small country like ours must continuously strive for excellence in all fields, in particular those related to the provision of professional services. The legal profession provides one such valuable and essential service. As our people become increasingly sophisticated and conscious of their legal rights as well as obligations, we can expect our legal profession to attain greater heights and standards in competence, in learning and professional conduct. It is time therefore to take a giant step forward.

Each of the three main components of the legal profession at present has some sort of an association or a club - members of the Bar, the Legal Service and the academics in the University. But what is lacking is a single body which brings all of them together. There is now no forum, for instance, for the effective sharing of ideas and exchange of views. This inevitably leads to criticisms that the University is not producing enough practice-oriented lawyers, that the practitioners are not contributing significantly or interested in basic or continuing legal education, or that the Legal Service is not sufficiently attuned to the real world of legal practice.

Sir, the study of law and the practice of law are commonly regarded as two completely different areas. This situation should not be the case.

Unlike the Law Society which is an association exclusively for practising advocates and solicitors, membership of the proposed Academy will be extended to all legal officers, law teachers and advocates and solicitors. In the United Kingdom, every barrister must be a member of one of the four Inns of Court - Lincoln's Inn, Inner Temple, Middle Temple and Gray's Inn. The Inns are essentially guilds of lawyers. The Inns have always been responsible for the education of Bar students. A barrister's Inn is his professional home throughout his career. He can lunch and dine with his fellow members in the Inn Hall, use the Inn library, and join in the social life of the Inn. Each Inn is governed by Masters of the Bench, or "Benchers", consisting of senior members of the Bar. The Bench itself elects members of the Inn to fill vacancies and a Bencher normally holds office for life.

The Bill before the House today seeks to establish an institution similar to the Inns of Court in the United Kingdom with, of course, adaptations for our own particular circumstances. It has therefore been decided to take this important step forward in proposing the establishment of the Singapore Academy of Law. The primary objective is to assist the legal profession in its efforts to improve qualitatively and to achieve the highest standards of professional competence and conduct.

The Academy, Sir, will be an independent body, substantially funded at the initial stages by Government funds, and eventually moving towards financial independence. There will be four cate- gories of members; Fellows, Ordinary members, Honorary members and Associate members. All advocates and solicitors and legal officers will be members. The governing body called the Senate will comprise, amongst others, the Chief Justice as its President and all the Judges and Judicial Commissioners of the Supreme Court, the Attorney-General, the President of the Law Society and the Dean of the Faculty of Law. The Senate, under the leadership of the Chief Justice, will chart the way ahead and set the pace for the development of the Academy.

To ensure that members have a central and conducive place to meet, the Academy will be set up, with the concurrence of the Chief Justice, in the City Hall wing of the Supreme Court. There will also be a library, dining and other facilities for Judges, members of the Bar, Legal Officers and academics to meet in an informal atmosphere. Most of these facilities will be available even after office hours.

Law students could become Associate members and, subsequently, Ordinary members. It is hoped that this will help immerse the young lawyers-to-be in the world of legal practice and foster a collegiate spirit in the training of lawyers.

Eminent judges, academics and others may be elected as Honorary Fellows or Honorary or Associate members. This may preserve and foster interest in the learning and practice of and continuing education in the law by conducting seminars and lectures.

Sir, the Singapore Academy of Law holds great potential for the future of our legal profession. It will consolidate the individual strengths of the three main components of the profession, enhance cross-fertilization of ideas and promote cooperative efforts towards attainment of common objectives. With dedication, cooperation and enthusiasm of all concerned, the legal profession can move into a different and higher dimension. As I said, a major step has been taken. It now depends on all members of the different branches of the legal fraternity to work together to achieve the objectives of this Singapore Academy of Law so that a sense of tradition and inculcation of values so important to the legal fraternity can be attained.

The Bill has been circulated to the Law Society before its introduction and some of their suggestions have been taken into consideration in the drafting of the Bill. They have welcomed the objectives of the Bill.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

11.10 am

Mr Tang See Chim (Chua Chu Kang): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support this Bill. I hope the establishment of the Singapore Academy of Law will fill the void which is perceived to exist in the legal profession.

At the moment, the legal profession has a professional body in the Law Society. The Law Society, however, functions on a shoestring budget depending upon contributions from its own members. It makes do with a tiny rented space behind the Supreme Court. It has no common room for its members. There is no library. It has no place for the holding of lectures, seminars, talks and practical exercises. It has not even a place where members can meet for social and intellectual interaction. In other words, it has very little facilities. I am happy to see that these facilities are promised in clause 4(2) of the Bill.

The profession has for more than 100 years demonstrated that it has the necessary knowledge of the law and legal scholarship. If recent history is anything to go by, Mr Speaker, Sir, the profession would appear to be weak in professional ethical standards. In the United Kingdom, such standards are instilled and propagated by the Inns of Court for barristers and by the Law Society for solicitors. Hopefully, with the establishment of the Academy, the functions of which according to clause 4(1)(a) is: "(a) to promote and maintain high standards of conduct and learning of the legal profession in Singapore", this deficiency will be filled.

I have, however, three points which I would like the Minister to clarify. Firstly, in clause 5, on the composition of the Senate, the President of the Law Society will be a member but not his predecessors, whereas former Attorney-Generals as well as former Deans of the Law Faculty are eligible for membership of the Senate. Why is there this distinction? If it is thought that some former Presidents of the Law Society do not qualify, then such disqualification could be spelt out, as indeed Judges who were removed are disqualified from membership of the Senate under clause 5(4).

Secondly, Ordinary membership of the Academy for advocates and solicitors and Legal Officers is automatic and mandatory by virtue of clause 14 of the Act without election, admission or appointment by the Senate. The only time he ceases to be an Ordinary member is when he is disqualified under clause 16 or 18 of the Act which implies certain professional misconduct and carries a stigma. Perhaps a provision should be made for an Ordinary member who does not wish to be a member of the Academy to resign. At the moment, as drafted in the Bill, he cannot. Being an Ordinary member is not totally honorary. It carries certain duties and liabilities. For example, payment of a subscription, the amount of which is not determined at the moment.

Lastly, Sir, clause 25 of the Bill effectively prevents any decision of the Senate from being challenged in court. I do not think this is a desirable provision. What is going to happen if the Senate by a majority takes a decision that is considered by the legal profession to be totally perverse? What is the reason for granting the Senate this immunity to the legal process? Subject to these comments, Sir, I support the Bill.

Prof. Jayakumar: Sir, I thank the Member for his support of the Bill, and if I may touch on the comments that he has raised.

First, his question on clause 5 as to why former Presidents of the Law Society are not automatically members. The reason is quite simple. The intention is to keep the size of the Senate manageable and small. For that reason there is a cut-off date, even for former Judges and former Deans of the Law Faculty. As far as the presidency of the Law Society is concerned, there are just so many of the former Presidents that the drafters thought it fit to include just the incumbent President. Secondly, Sir, I understand from the Attorney-General that the Law Society has no objections to this particular clause. So they are quite happy with this.

Secondly, Sir, his question concerning the provision on immunity for suits. Here again, the draftsmen in incorporating the provisions have, in fact, borne in mind the practice and procedure in the United Kingdom and I understand that this is in keeping with the practice in the United Kingdom where Benchers of the Inns of Court are granted immunity from suits at the instance of students or members of the Inns. So we are just following the practice which pertains there.

The final question is on automatic membership. For the Academy to start off on a proper footing, it is necessary that all advocates and solicitors - and here I should point out that it is advocates and solicitors whether or not they possess a practising certificate - are automatically members. If that were not so, then it will be self-defeating because it will not embrace all members of the profession. I think the Member does have a point when he says that there may be some valid instances and situations where one can conceive of a person being allowed to opt out of membership or to have his membership kept in abeyance. This is something that I will have to reconsider and refer the matter to both the drafters as well as the Senate when it is constituted. It can be taken up subsequently and reviewed in the course of the actual operation of the Academy of Law.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Prof. Jayakumar.]

Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.