THE LEGAL SERVICE (Statement by the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Law)

Column: 1723

THE LEGAL SERVICE:

(Statement by the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Law) Prof. S Jayakumar: Mr Speaker, Sir, Members would have read that Chief Justice Yong Pung How is retiring. Attorney-General Chan Sek Keong will succeed him as the next Chief Justice, and Mr Justice Chao Hick Tin will be appointed as the next Attorney-General.

Sir, the Chief Justice and the Attorney-General are the two most important positions in our legal system. They are responsible for setting the directions for our legal system and high standards for the administration of justice in Singapore.

The Chief Justice is head of the Judiciary. As such, his is a critical

Column: 1724

appointment in developing and shaping a respected and competent judiciary and in ensuring a fair and just administration of justice in our Courts. The Attorney-General is the legal advisor to the Government. He advises Government Ministries and agencies on increasingly complex and highly specialised issues. As Public Prosecutor, he oversees and sets the standards for criminal prosecutions.

If I may make a tribute to Chief Justice Yong Pung How who was appointed Chief Justice in 1990. In his distinguished tenure of 16 years, he has built up our judiciary and legal system to vigilantly uphold the rule of law and administration of justice. He has made a lasting and outstanding contribution. He initiated wide ranging reforms to build up the legal infrastructure and develop local jurisprudence relevant to Singapore's context. He took a series of measures to clear the backlog of cases, streamlined the rules of court, and improved efficiency through extensive use of IT. He created specialist courts and Night Courts and also leveraged on alternative dispute resolution. He also introduced our own Singapore Law reports and the Senior Counsel Scheme. Sir, as a result of his leadership, we have today a judiciary that has a high standing internationally. Many judges and judicial officers from other countries who are involved in reforms or reviews of their own systems, including England, have made study visits to our Courts. This is a tribute to Chief Justice Yong's sterling contributions in enhancing the standing and reputation of our Judiciary.

Chief Justice Yong recognised that we cannot have a first-rate legal system without quality people on the High Court bench and in the Legal Service. He saw the need for officers with strong professional knowledge and skills, and the ability to adapt and respond to a rapidly changing environment. As President of the Legal Service Commission, he

Column: 1725

aggressively pursued efforts to attract talent into the Legal Service. He started the Justices' Law Clerk (JLC) programme in 1991, which he supervised himself. He personally recruited many outstanding law graduates to become JLCs, and mentored them as they worked closely with him and the judges in the Court of Appeal during their initial years of training. Former Justices' Law Clerks have moved on to other departments to provide a steady flow of talent to the whole of the Legal Service. This has resulted in high quality work and judgements.

In addition to his duties as Chief Justice, Chief Justice Yong has also served as Chairman of the Presidential Council for Minority Rights (PCMR). As I am a member of the Presidential Council for Minority Rights, Sir, I can attest to the diligent and meticulous manner with which he scrutinised every Bill passed by the House at meetings of the Council.

I would also like to say a few words about Mr Chan Sek Keong who served with distinction for 14 years as Attorney-General. He has transformed the Attorney-General's Chambers from a relatively small office to one with an efficient team of lawyers who can handle a whole range of complex legal issues in civil and commercial law, criminal law, and international law. Many of the lawyers in the Attorney-General's Chambers are acknowledged as experts in their own fields and some have been invited to assist as experts by Commonwealth and United Nations agencies.

Mr Chan Sek Keong has also made major organisational changes to build up capabilities in the AG’s Chambers. He established the International Affairs Division to advance the interests of Singapore internationally. He also set up the Law Reform and Revision Division to review and reform Singapore law and to

Column: 1726

revise and modernise our legislation. He considerably strengthened both the Civil and Criminal Law Divisions in the Chambers. Mr Chan Sek Keong also headed important policy reviews to strengthen the legal service sector. These include chairing the Committee on Supply of Lawyers and chairing the Legal Services Review Committee which resulted in the Joint Law Venture and Formal Law Alliance Schemes.

Sir, as Minister for Law, I have observed first hand the high quality of Mr Chan Sek Keong's contributions. For instance, I was present in Hamburg during the hearings of the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea in the case brought against us by Malaysia concerning reclamation within our territorial waters. He and his team did Singapore proud in ably presenting our legal arguments before that Tribunal. I should add that he has been playing a pivotal role in overseeing our preparations for the case we have with Malaysia on Pedra Branca before the International Court of Justice (ICJ). I am grateful to him for agreeing to continue with this role until the ICJ has heard and decided that case.

Mr Speaker, Sir, for the past 25 years as Minister for Law (and before that as Second Minister for Law and Minister of State for Law), I have had quite a bit to do with our laws and our legal system. Based on my experience, I can say without exaggeration that Singapore has indeed been very fortunate that Chief Justice Yong Pung How and Attorney-General Chan Sek Keong occupied those positions since 1990 and 1992 respectively. As a result of their contributions, our legal system today is consistently ranked among the top in Asia and in the world, and has contributed to Singapore's strong reputation for trust, integrity and reliability.

We have to give thought on how we go forward from there. With the new

Column: 1727

appointments which we have announced, the Government has discussed with the outgoing Chief Justice Yong Pung How, the incoming Chief Justice as well as the next Attorney-General, on how we can build on this hard won reputation. They are all agreed that the key is to have the right people in our judiciary and legal service. It is vital that we maintain a continuing inflow of talent and attract the best and most promising law graduates to the Legal Service. They are also unanimous that, to achieve this, we need to restructure the Legal Service Commission (LSC) and update our personnel management system. We also need a more systematic talent management scheme.

If I may touch on these aspects, Sir.

First, revising the structure of the Legal Service Commission. Our present legal service personnel management system is inherited from the British. The Constitutional framework for the Legal Service has remained largely unchanged since our Independence, even though the demands on legal services have changed radically. The Legal Service has grown over the years, both in quantity and quality. There are now 290 Legal Service Officers in the Legal Service, up from 45 when the service was formed in 1965. Through the Justices' Law Clerk (JLC) programme initiated by Chief Justice Yong, a steady stream of top law graduates has been brought into the service. Today, almost half of the Legal Service Officers have generalised or specialised post-graduate law degrees. We need to strengthen our personnel management system to make it more robust and responsive to the new challenges in managing talent and personnel in the expanded legal service. The LSC, as it is currently constituted, has its limitations. We need to revise both the composition and structure of the LSC.

First, we need to widen the membership of the LSC by providing for

Column: 1728

the appointment of independent members. The LSC sits at the apex of the personnel management system, and is vested with the Constitutional authority to appoint, recruit, promote and discipline all legal service officers. The LSC comprises the Chief Justice, the Attorney-General, the Chairman of PSC, a Judge of the Supreme Court as nominated by the Chief Justice, and two members of the PSC as nominated by the Chairman of PSC. They are all members by virtue of the offices that they hold. This composition has remained unchanged since Independence. So we should consider restructuring the LSC to include a wider range of experience, for example, people who have worked in personnel management, or who have knowledge of the legal service or the legal profession. They can be from the private sector, and can include retired judges or retired senior counsel. Their appointment will be subject to the safeguard of the elected President, as is the case now with the appointment of members of the Public Service Commission. This change will require amending the Constitution.

Second, we need to formalise the system of Personnel Boards under the LSC, and provide the Personnel Boards with formal powers delegated from the LSC, to appoint, recruit, promote and discipline legal officers up to a certain grade, along the lines of what is done now in the civil service. The Legal Service already has a system of Personnel Boards which is modelled after the civil service, but their powers are only informally delegated from the LSC. Whereas in the civil service, the Personnel Boards are provided for under the Constitution and have their powers gazetted. We should consider doing the same for the Legal Service, but adapted for its smaller size.

Sir, the outgoing and incoming Chief Justice as well as the incoming Attorney-General are also agreed that we should

Column: 1729

institutionalise and update the arrangements for talent management that worked under Chief Justice Yong so as to further improve the quality of the Legal Service. This requires a personnel management system that recognises outstanding officers, tracks their performance, and grooms them through assignments and training courses for future leadership roles. It also requires a system that assesses the performance and potential of legal officers against all their peers, and revises these assessments systematically and regularly as the officers advance, so that those who do well are recognised and promoted, regardless of whether or not they entered the service as Justices' Law Clerks.

The JLCs are an important source of talent for the Legal Service, but we need to also strengthen our other sources. We must continue to recruit as many of the top law graduates as possible to join the Legal Service, via the JLC and other schemes. But Sir, our objective is not to retain all of this talent in the Legal Service throughout their careers. We want some of these officers to stay on and move up to hold senior appointments in the Legal Service, while others move out to practise law in the private sector, or to follow academic careers. Later, having acquired experience and having made a name for themselves in the profession, they can be considered for appointment to posts like the Solicitor-General, Judicial Commissioners or Judges. For the top posts in our legal system, Sir, we must recruit both from within and outside the Legal Service

those who have had the widest exposure, the necessary temperament and ability. We should not revert to the old colonial Legal Service system in which promotion to the bench is only from within the service, as this would result in too narrow a range of experience at the top.

Column: 1730

Sir, we will set up a review panel to conduct a comprehensive review of how to manage and develop the whole range of talent in the service, including those recruited as JLCs, so as to ensure that all serving officers are provided with opportunities to exercise their capabilities and potential to the fullest.

In conclusion, let me say that we will have to consider carefully the changes to the personnel management system and the introduction of a more systematic talent scheme, and we will take time to study the details, including any possible amendments to the Constitution. Over the next few months, we will work out the implementation steps to bring about these changes.

Mr Speaker Sir, the legal landscape, as lawyers in the House would know, has changed tremendously in recent years, reflecting the wider changes taking place in the world. With each passing day, the frontiers of law are being pushed further and further. We need only to look at the developments in intellectual property, alternate dispute resolution, information technology and financial services. Our Legal Service, therefore, needs to keep abreast of these wider developments, and we need good and able minds in the Legal Service with expertise to advise, prosecute as well as adjudicate.

Sir, the changes to enhance and institutionalise the personnel management system in the Legal Service are, therefore, necessary to underscore our commitment to the Legal Service maintaining its high quality of people and the high standards of legal practice. I believe this will ensure a responsive and innovative legal service, and a fair and independent judiciary that will apply and uphold the rule of law impartially for all without fear or favour.

Mr Speaker: Ms Indranee Rajah, questions and clarifications only. There is no debate on the Statement.

Column: 1731

Ms Indranee Rajah (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Speaker, Sir, first, I would just like to say that that tribute to the Chief Justice was most fittingly given, because the legal profession has advanced greatly under his tenure. As a young lawyer during that period, I can attest to the fact because we felt that we were going from what we called our Formula One years - we went from zero to 100 in something like under three seconds. But the legal profession was transformed as a result. Also, with the appointment of the new Chief Justice and the new Attorney-General, I am sure that the judiciary and the legal profession will grow from strength to strength.

Sir, I would like to ask the Minister for Law to clarify two aspects of his statement. The first is on the Legal Service Commission. Clearly, the quality of the Legal Service depends on the quality of the recruitment. And I welcome his statement that the composition of the Legal Service Commission will be broadened to include perhaps people from the private sector. Legal officers nowadays cannot just be pure lawyers. They need wide skill sets. If they are dealing with international treaties, for example, they must have some knowledge of foreign relations or international relations. Similarly, magistrates and registrars need to have an understanding of the wider commercial background against which judgments are given. So I would like to ask the Minister if he could expand a little on the rationale for including a wider composition of the LSC, which I think would add value to the recruitment process.

The second aspect on which I would like to ask the Minister to clarify or expand is on talent management; in particular, his statement that they do not intend to retain all the talent in the Legal Service throughout their careers. What is interesting is that in the US, especially for lawyers, there is a lot of lateral movement - meaning, somebody from academia

Column: 1732

could go into private practice, then go into government and come back to private practice again. In Singapore, this is not so common. And when it does happen, sometimes people wonder whether there is anything wrong because he could not stay on in a particular area or segment. But, clearly, it seems to me that we must look for talent where we can find it, and that the lateral movement of talent is something that should actually be encouraged. And I would like to know the Minister's views on this.

Mr Charles Chong (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Sir, the Minister mentioned the setting up of a review panel that will review and develop talent in the Legal Service. Could the Minister tell us how he envisions talent to be developed in the service?

Prof. Jayakumar: Mr Speaker, Sir, Ms Indranee Rajah asked two questions about the rationale for an expanded LSC. As I explained in my speech, we need to expand the LSC which, if we compare it with the PSC, has a much more limited and smaller composition, and the members are all holding office by virtue of their position. We need to do what is done in the PSC - to bring in people who have knowledge of personnel management or knowledge of how things are operating in the private sector. And particularly for the legal profession, to bring in people who have knowledge and experience of both career development and personnel management as it operates in the private legal profession.

The people we are recruiting to the Legal Service are amongst the top graduates. They would have many options open to them. When we track their careers and manage their development in the Legal Service, we need to be mindful of their counterparts who are in the private sector. It is not just about remuneration. It is about how we provide the whole range of career opportunities

Column: 1733

that make the career in the Legal Service challenging and exciting.

With regard to her question on the personnel management system, I think those who are in the bigger law firms will know that from their experience, personnel management is important even in the private sector, and big law firms invest a lot in HR. We have a limited legal talent pool in Singapore generally. And within that talent pool, the Legal Service has to compete for its share of talent - compete with private law practice, with MNCs who have in-house counsels and with academic institutions. So we need people who are knowledgeable about HR practices and personnel management. I hope that if we succeed in bringing that kind of wealth of experience and perspective, then the Legal Service indeed would have the ability to meet the future challenges in grooming our bright minds in the legal service.

Mr Charles Chong asked about talent management - how do we expect the review committee to develop talent. The details will have to take time to be worked out and will be made known later. But let me say that, obviously, talent management covers several issues, including staff assessment, career advancement and remuneration. At the most basic, there is the issue of competitive remuneration, but I think that is the easier part. Other than remuneration, the challenge is how to retain the talent that we have in the Legal Service after we have attracted them to join the Legal Service. So to be able to retain talent, we need to provide challenging assignments which offer appealing training opportunities, fair share of jobs, whether in different departments of the Legal Service or in the judicial branch. At the same time, we need to ensure a fair and objective method of appraisal, a system which would map out a career progression

Column: 1734

path, and maybe even provide mentoring for individual officers.

Let me also add that we need to reassure the Justices' Law Clerks and ex-JLCs that the changes will consolidate the JLC programme. But, at the same time, we also need to let the non-JLCs know that they are not left out, and they will have an equal chance of being recognised and promoted if they prove themselves. So these are some of the areas that we will have to look into when the review committee is appointed.