S Jayakumar
Singapore
“It is well and good for countries to announce various targets and emissions. But one vexing issue ultimately is: what will be the method for verifying compliance with each country's announced measures? Another vexing issue, of course, is the issue of financing.”
“I would appreciate it if she were to give me some specifics of the negative feedback. But the general feedback I have had about our judiciary, both of the Supreme Court and the Subordinate Courts, has been nothing but positive.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the information that I have is that there is always medical advice present when caning is administered and that if the medical opinion is that caning cannot proceed beyond a certain point, that medical opinion will be observed and the caning will not proceed.”
“Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Transport in view of the recent announcement to make immediate improvements to the public transport system (a) whether the Ministry has set a timeline for the increase in frequency of feeder bus services; and (b) whether the Ministry can immediately target such services that are currently running at…”
“SCDF will continue to work with HDB and other relevant agencies to ensure that such older buildings with one exit staircase meet the prevailing fire safety requirements when they undergo major renovation or upgrading works. CIVIL SERVICE PENSIONERS 3.”
“The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (Mr Teo Ser Luck) (for the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports): Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, I would like to take Mrs Jessie Phua's and Dr Lim Wee Kiak's questions together as they both relate to the same issues.”
The complete record
Every one of 3,291 lines we hold for S Jayakumar, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 66.
“The basic approach is 80% or 90% majority vote based on share values depending on the age of the development, whether it is 10 years or more, or less than 10 years. We will retain that. But in addition to 80% or 90% of the share values, the proposal is that there must also be 80% or 90% majority vote of the total number of units in the development - in other words, share values as well as the number of units. For purely residential apartments, this will not be a problem because almost invariably 80% or 90% share values will also be 80% or 90% of the units. Why are we doing this? It is because it will address a problem which is particularly felt in mixed developments. There is unhappiness of residential unit owners in a mixed development who hold lesser share values despite owning a substantial floor area and substantial number of units. For example, in a mixed development, the residential units could be amounting to 60% of the total number of units but they have only 20% of the share values. Shopping complexes may have 40% of the units but they may have 80% of the share values. So the residents are out-voted. We therefore have this proposal for the majority of 80% or 90% to be also a percentage majority of the total number of units. Secondly, we intend to give the Strata Titles Board a certain power to increase the sale proceeds in certain cases. Let me explain. This concerns the distribution of the sale proceeds. We will not change the basic approach for the distribution of the sale proceeds. The basic approach is that the majority owners in the en bloc process will still have to decide on the distribution method most suitable in their particular circumstances.”
“But with the clinics that we have in mind, if the Member Ms Ellen Lee is talking about minor regulatory offences and people do not know where to turn to, I think we can consider this under the proposed legal clinics. 4.00 pm I was asked how long the Legal Aid Bureau would take to successfully complete the cases. It is very difficult to measure this for any particular year, because in some cases, the applicant may not have given all the information. They may have to come several times, as they may not have given all the documentation, all the facts. It depends on the cooperation of the other party, if it is a contested matter, and so on. But I would say that if we take divorce cases, in 2006, the average time taken for the Legal Aid Bureau to complete a case was about 20 months. Sir, on the whole, I think that the Legal Aid Bureau will take into account the points made by the Members. We have these changes and let us see how we can progress. On en bloc sale, this is a topic very much in the news recently and much feedback has been received, including those voiced by the Members who spoke on this. Last year, I appointed a study team to look into the en bloc sale process and the laws, and they have made a number of recommendations. I have also had several sessions of discussions with the President of the Strata Titles Boards and his three Deputy Presidents. We have discussed and they have agreed to the recommendations of the study team which I will now outline. Basically, we have three areas of changes or proposals. The first concerns the method or process by which we decide on whether an en bloc sale can proceed. We will retain the basic approach.”
“I have discussed this with the Mayors and they have expressed support and enthusiasm and we intend to launch a pilot project starting with, say, two legal clinics. We will discuss this further with the Mayors as to the ideal location for this, either at the CDC or at the community centre. And if it works out well, then we may try to expand to have more clinics. We intend to partner with the Law Society. The Law Society of Singapore has, separately on its own, done a study on legal aid and pro bono work. One of the main recommendations is for practising lawyer to do 25 hours of pro bono work annually. I think the Law Society's proposal is commendable. In fact, as I have said before, the Law Society is doing good work, not only with the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme - CLAS - but also with the volunteers who work with the Legal Aid Bureau. I have discussed this with the President of the Law Society as well as the Co-Chairmen of their study team. They have expressed support for the changes which I outlined just now and they want to work with us. We will therefore partner with the Law Society to encourage more lawyers to volunteer pro bono services at the Legal Aid Bureau as well as at the proposed legal clinics. We are now working out the operational aspects of such collaboration and we hope that the first clinic can be set up some time in the second part of this year. Some other specific questions were asked, for example, whether some of the criminal cases can be dealt with. I have explained in this House before the approach the Government takes for civil legal aid, for capital cases, and that the Law Society of Singapore handles the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme.”
“So what we intend to do is to try to expand the coverage of the legal aid, from the current 30th percentile to the 40th percentile of households based on household income. How do we intend to do this? We will first increase the personal deductibles from $3,000 to $4,500 and for the dependants' deductibles, we will increase it from $2,000 to $3,500. At the same time, we will also align the disposable capital limit from $7,000 to $10,000 to match the qualifying disposable income limit. With these changes, we believe that we will be able to increase the coverage to up to the 40th percentile. And with these changes, the qualifying monthly household income for a family of four will increase from $1,900 to $2,600. The second change we intend to do, and this relates to what Mr Hri Kumar mentioned, is the question of discretion. Yes, we realise that even after the changes of means test, there may be some cases which do not satisfy the means test, but because of the circumstances of the case, may, nevertheless, be deserving of help. So what we will do is for the Director of Legal Aid Bureau to be given greater discretion to offer help to those who are facing such specific hardships, for example, someone who may not have met the means test but suddenly has lost his job, requires urgent help or someone who has suddenly physical or mental incapacity. Thirdly, we intend to establish legal clinics, and this relates to the point by Dr Teo Ho Pin on outreach. We cannot be everywhere in Singapore but what we intend to do is to set up, on a trial basis, legal clinics which will not be providing full-fledged legal aid, but, rather, basic legal advice and information where members of the public can go to as first-stops to get basic information.”
“Sir, I thank the Members who have spoken on the Ministry of Law. I would respond to the comments made on legal aid, en-bloc sales and also Ms Sylvia Lim's questions on age of majority and my colleague, the Senior Minister of State, Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee, will respond to the remaining points. First, on legal aid. The thrust of what the Members have said is whether the Legal Aid Bureau can do more and whether the Ministry can do more. I would like to answer that straightaway by saying, yes, we will endeavour to do more and we will do it in three ways. One is through adjustments to the means test. Second is through giving some discretion to the Director of Legal Aid. And third is through a partnership with the Law Society of Singapore. I will elaborate on each of these. First, relating to the means test, Mdm Cynthia Phua and others have asked whether the means test has been too harsh. The answer is really that the position is not that bad because before we adjusted the means test in 2001, about 70% of the applicants qualified. When we adjusted the means test in 2001, some 89% to 90% of the applicants qualified. I was asked to provide figures. Last year, 9,696 cases were registered, about 89% qualified. I will say that it is only a small handful of applicants who do not qualify. After the 2001 revision, the qualifying monthly household income, say, for a family of four, taking into account their personal and dependants' deductibles, increased to about $1,900 - not the $850 figure that the GPC Chairman, Dr Teo Ho Pin, indicated. But, nevertheless, I have asked my officials to review this last year and see how we can do more to assist the lower-income group and perhaps also some in the lower part of the middle income who may need legal assistance.”
“I am pleased to say that in response to the Steering Committee’s call for an integrated, inter-Ministry approach to disability issues, the Government will set up an inter-Ministry standing committee at the senior management level led by the Permanent Secretary to address disability issues holistically. This committee will report to the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports. It will be supported by two governing panels to look at the core areas of early intervention and education, and at employment. The Government will study the other recommendations of the Enabling Masterplan Steering Committee. The inter-Ministry committee will closely monitor the implementation of these recommendations from the Enabling Masterplan report that are accepted by the Government.”
“Last year, Infocomm Development Authority (IDA) and MCYS announced that they would work with the Society of Physically Disabled to set up an Infocomm Accessibility Centre to provide, among other things, IT training for persons with disabilities. This will enhance their learning, employment and connectivity with the world. From 2004 to 2008, Ministry of Education will put in about $55 million a year to help children with special needs. Special Needs Officers (SNOs) have been deployed to mainstream schools to support and provide specialist intervention for children with learning disabilities. In addition, for Special Education, Ministry of Education has supported training of teachers, improvements in curriculum and the building of purpose-built schools. All these measures that I have mentioned above involve the relevant Ministries taking ownership and responsibility, and working closely with MCYS on the challenges at hand. Many Helping Hands On top of Government agencies working together, we firmly believe that there must be a "Many Helping Hands" approach if we are to address disability issues holistically. The National Council of Social Service (NCSS), voluntary welfare organisations, the community, employers, families and persons with disabilities themselves - all have a role to play toward the integration of persons with disabilities. Enabling Masterplan MCYS and NCSS have appointed an Enabling Masterplan Steering Committee with representatives from the people, private and public sectors. The Steering Committee was formed in September last year to chart the development of programmes and services in the disability sector for the next five years. The Steering Committee has released its report this morning.”
“Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) whether the responsibility of integrating disabled people into mainstream Singapore should primarily be under the domain of the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports and the charity sector; and (b) whether each Ministry can take ownership, develop basic policies and work plans to address these within the individual functions of health, housing, employment, defence, law, education and community integration. The Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Wong Kan Seng) (for the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports (MCYS) is responsible for defining the needs and issues of the disability sector. However, MCYS does not work in isolation. Instead it works with the other Ministries to formulate policies that assist the disabled and ensure their integration into society. Sir, we have made progress in the last few years to promote integration. For example, we are making our transport and physical infrastructure friendly to both the frail elderly and persons with disabilities. Since 2000, the MRT stations have been retrofitted and made barrier-free. In 2006, the first wheelchair-accessible buses were introduced. By 2010, 40 per cent of our bus fleet will be wheelchair-accessible. The HDB and the Town Councils have begun work on making our housing estates barrier-free accessible. It will take time, precinct by precinct, but we will get there by 2011. To help persons with disabilities get employment, MCYS set up the ENABLE Fund in July 2006. Funding was provided by the Workforce Development Agency (WDA) and MCYS works with the Singapore National Employers’ Federation (SNEF) to administer it.”
“First, they were not intended to be implemented separately from the others, but as an integrated package entrenching all the critical Constitutional provisions over which the President should have a special role. And that continues to be the intention. The second reason, Sir, is that the Constitution Amendment Act (No. 41 of 1996) which amended this was drafted on the basis of this intention. I have been advised by the Attorney-General that, having regard to the provisions of that Act, Article 5(2A) has to be brought into operation as a whole and cannot be brought into operation in part. Let me add in closing, Sir, that whether the Article is entrenched or not, the Government has made it a practice to always seek the President's views whenever it intends to move Constitutional amendments that affect the relevant provisions. The President's views have been reflected in the respective Second Reading speeches in this House. We have not made any amendments which the President had not agreed with, except once in 1995 when we referred a legal question to a Tribunal of Supreme Court judges set up under Article 100, which ruled in favour of the Government's interpretation of the Constitution. Column No : 1239 INTEGRATION OF DISABLED PEOPLE INTO MAINSTREAM (Responsibility of Ministries) 11.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, as for the first part of the Member's question, we are not ready to bring Article 5(2A) into operation soon. This is because we are still refining the Presidential safeguards, especially in regard to the country’s reserves. This is a gradual process that requires time. Sir, when we enacted the provisions in our Constitution for an elected Presidency, we were conscious that those changes were unique and unparalleled elsewhere. Our clear and stated intention was to refine the scheme and to iron out all the issues that may arise in the light of experience over time, before bringing the entrenchment provisions into operation. As Members know, we have previously made amendments to refine the framework to deal with issues that had not really been anticipated. As the Prime Minister had informed this House last year on 13th November, the Government intends to amend the definition of how much Net Investment Income (NII) from our past reserves can be spent by the current Government. We are currently studying this complex problem carefully. Any changes, as a result of that review, will require an amendment to the Constitution. This will be an important amendment which affects the core duty of the elected President to protect the past reserves of the Government. After that amendment, we will need some years of experience operating under the revised rule before we can entrench this and other provisions concerning the elected President. As for the second part of the Member's question, whether we can bring into operation the provisions relating to elections and fundamental liberties or rather the entrenchment, we cannot do so for two reasons.”
“The specific data requested by the Member is not tracked by the Courts. To compile such data, a massive exercise will have to be mounted to individually review thousands of case files to ascertain the reason why the accused person was in remand and not on bail. Even then, it would not be possible to state whether the accused person was in remand because he could not post bail or because he chose not to be on bail, e.g. because he intended to plead guilty and wished to have the period of remand taken into consideration for the purposes of sentencing. Therefore Court administrators have not been requested to embark on such an exercise. Nonetheless, the Court administrators have tracked the accused persons who were in remand as at 31st December 2006. There were 373 accused persons who were in remand. After a period of about two weeks, of those remandees out of this batch of 373 accused persons who were still in remand, the assessment by the authorities is that only four of them were in remand because they were unable to furnish bail. Of course there were others in remand who chose not to be bailed out as they had indicated their intention to plead guilty and would subsequently request the sentencing court to take into consideration their period in remand for the purposes of sentencing. Of these four accused persons, three of them are local while the remaining one is a foreigner. All four accused persons were in remand for less than four weeks. ADDITIONAL FOREIGN RESIDENTS (Projection) 3. Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs if he will provide a projection, for the next 5 years, of the number of additional foreigners the Government intends to add to the resident population of Singapore and for which skill sector or industries.”
“Other amendments: registration of licence of pending trademarks Other than aligning our trademarks regime with the provisions of the Treaty, this Bill also seeks to provide businesses with greater flexibility in trademark management. Specifically, clause 4 amends section 41 to allow the registration of licences relating to pending trademarks and not just registered trademarks. This is to enable third parties to take note of the licensee’s interest in the trademark. It is useful even if the trademark is pending registration as some trademarks can quickly acquire goodwill and become highly desirable for licensing through franchising. This proposed amendment will enhance our business-friendliness and put Singapore on par with jurisdictions such as the UK and Australia. To sum up, Sir, this Bill will bring about greater convenience to businesses as well as update our trademarks regime to be on par with international practices. It will also enable us to ratify and participate in the Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks so that applicants filing trademarks in Singapore may benefit when the Treaty comes into operation. Consultations by IPOS indicate that the proposed changes have been welcomed by trademark applicants and supported by the trademark agents in Singapore. Sir, I beg to move. 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. S Jayakumar]. Bill considered in Committee. [Mr Speaker in the Chair]”
“These bundles of registrations can be assigned, renewed or licensed as bundles as well. To implement a multiple-class system, clause 3 of the Bill amends section 17 of the Trade Marks Act to allow the registration of a series of similar trademarks in two or more classes of goods or services. To complement a multiple-class system, clause 2 introduces a new section 5A to allow the division of a trademark application into two or more applications. This is because there may be times when an applicant may wish to divide up a multiple-class application into two or more applications. For example, the applicant may wish to register the trademarks for those classes that do not face opposition first, instead of holding the entire multiple-class application back. Relief measures for procedural oversight Sir, the Treaty also provides for relief measures to alleviate procedural mistakes by trademark applicants so that they do not lose the rights to the trademarks filed. This is because there may be instances when they miss certain time limits to respond to objections or queries from the Registrar of Trademarks and their trademark applications then become treated as withdrawn. There may also be instances when applicants may need more time to respond to the Registrar. To comply with the Treaty, clause 5 amends section 108 for rules to be made on extending time limits and for reinstating withdrawn trademark applications. For consistency with the other rule-making provisions in the Act, clause 5 also removes the technical requirement for the Minister to consult IPOS on rule changes since these are inevitably done in consultation with IPOS.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, this Bill seeks to amend the Trade Marks Act to pave the way for Singapore to ratify the Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks. That Treaty is the tangible outcome of a very successful diplomatic conference that the World Intellectual Property Organisation held in Singapore in March last year. The Treaty further harmonises trademark registration procedures and provides for electronic filing, making it more convenient for businesses to register and manage their trademarks globally. For applicants filing trademarks in Singapore to gain from the benefits of the Treaty, we need to bring our domestic trademarks regime into full compliance with its provisions, and also for us to ratify the Treaty. Provision for multiple-class system Sir, our trademarks regime is already largely compliant with the provisions of the Treaty. But for full compliance, we need to amend the Trade Marks Act to enable IPOS to fully implement a "multiple-class" trademark registration system. For trademark registration, goods and services are categorised into 45 classes as defined in the Third Schedule of the Trade Mark Rules. Currently, those wishing to register a trademark with IPOS in more than one class have to submit a separate application for each class. With a multiple-class system, they only need to submit one single application for all the applicable classes. This will make it more convenient for trademark owners and their agents, as they will be able to manage their trademark registrations in appropriate bundles instead of handling each registration individually. For example, only one registration will be necessary for all classes of goods and services claimed for the same trademark.”
“Based on the developments that have undergone en bloc sales from the year 2000 to October 2006, 72.3% of owners are Singaporeans, 15.4% are permanent residents and foreigners, and 10.9% are companies. BREAK-INS AND CAR VANDALISM IN HDB HEARTLANDS 2. Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs if he will provide an update on the trend from 2000 to the present of cases of (i) apartment break-ins in HDB heartlands; and (ii) car vandalism, in particular, punctured tyres in HDB multi-storey carparks.”
“These programmes, taken as a whole, will serve to educate, encourage and equip Singapore firms to develop, protect and exploit their IP, including patents, so that they can reap the maximum reward for their creative efforts. EMPLOYMENT ACT (Violations) 21. Mr Yeo Guat Kwang asked the Minister for Manpower (a) how frequently does his Ministry carry out enforcement actions against employers violating the Employment Act; and (b) if his Ministry did a follow-up with the employer of the Bangladeshi worker who was asked to work more than 12 hours a day and did not even have gloves to protect himself from injury.”
“As Dr Tan has pointed out, local patent filing figures have held steady over the past few years. However, this should not be a cause for concern. Firms seek patent protection in markets where they intend to exploit their inventions commercially and these markets may not necessarily include Singapore. For Singapore, what is more critical is for companies here to seek patent protection overseas in order to grow beyond our domestic market. One of the measures we look at is patent applications by Singapore-based entities in our major export markets. For instance, the number of patent applications filed by Singapore-based entities in the US, a major market, nearly doubled from 460 in 1999 to 880 in 2004. In terms of the number of international patent applications filed by developing countries through the Patent Cooperation Treaty, Singapore is ranked fourth in 2005 after far larger economies such as Korea (4,747), China (2,452) and India (648). To further encourage the growth of patents filed by Singapore entities especially in overseas markets, IPOS will continue to promote greater awareness on the importance of IP protection through initiatives such as its monthly IP Consult sessions, the "Promising IP Enterprises" program and seminars on foreign IP regimes. IPOS is also working with IE Singapore to help Singapore firms with their IP management as they internationalise under IE Singapore's capability development programmes. Further, EDB administers a scheme - the "Patent Application Fund Plus" - to help defray the cost of obtaining patents. Since its inception in October 2002, an average of about 80 applications have been approved annually.”
“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 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. MONEYLENDERS (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 3.25 pm”
“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 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.”
“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.”
“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. 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.”
“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 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 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 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.”
“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 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.”
“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 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).”
“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 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.”
“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 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.”
“We have this issue, whether it is with United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand, as to why certain universities are included or not included. Let me say that these four universities are arrived at after consultations with the United States authorities. SINGAPORE BUSINESS FEDERATION (Mandatory membership) 2. Mr Steve Chia Kiah Hong asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what is the purpose of legislating for compulsory membership of the Singapore Business Federation ("SBF"); (b) how can business owners who find SBF irrelevant to their needs, terminate their membership; and (c) if the Minister will rectify this legislation to make it non-compulsory for small and big businesses which are not interested in joining the SBF.”
“Students who have obtained their degree from the universities, like students who have obtained their degree from other scheduled universities, will have to comply with the requirements for admission to the Singapore Bar. Assoc. Prof. Chin Tet Yung (Sembawang): I would like to ask the Minister why only four American universities are selected and why some of the more notable and major US universities with respectable law degrees, like Yale and UCLA, are excluded.”
“The Member is right about our laws permitting foreign lawyers to practise arbitration. We are not just looking at foreign lawyers/counsels flying in when retained to appear for specific cases. What we are trying to encourage really is full service firms that specialise in arbitration, especially in specialist fields. So, Singapore law firms can form such an association to boost their capabilities. Foreign law firms would be able to establish a presence or base here, so to speak, to serve the region, bring dispute resolution work from various parts of the region to Singapore. The firms that may be interested in this may not be the same firms that are already here for international financial transactions. So, we are thinking that collaboration with Singapore law firms could allow the foreign firms become more competitive in terms of pricing their services for work involving Singapore law - China work, India work, perhaps. So the FLA, local and foreign partners, through that mechanism, can then market their arbitration service as a global service, as it were, that includes Singapore law services in arbitration. Her next question was about the proposal to allow foreign lawyers to have an equity stake in Singapore law firm - whether that foreign lawyer who takes such a stake can, by the very act, practise in Singapore. The answer is, no. That person will have to comply with whatever requirements that already exist for practice of Singapore law. The third question is with regard to the four degrees in the United States that would be recognised for the purpose of admission.”
“Prof. Png has asked for the number of criminal convictions, divided between commercial and other criminal cases, which were appealed on points of law and the success rate of such appeals. I am afraid that records are not kept in a form that distinguishes between the grounds of appeal and between commercial and non-commercial cases. A total of 1,310 Magistrate's appeals were filed between the years 2001 to 2005. Of these, 67 were successful in that the sentence was reduced or the conviction set aside by the appeal court. To compile the information by grounds of appeal and type of case, it will require a huge exercise to manually review all the case files to ascertain and subjectively classify the actual grounds of appeal and the nature of the case. Even then it is not reasonable for me to ask the Courts to embark on such an exercise. Most appeals are based on mixed grounds of fact and law. Furthermore, there is also no clear cut definition of a "commercial" crime and the offences in our statutes are not readily classified as commercial or non-commercial. Some offenders may be charged with ordinary criminal offences even though the context is fully commercial, for example, the offence of cheating. There is one case in the last five years where the defence applied for the case to be transferred from the District Courts to the High Court. The case involved two accused persons and an alleged breach of the Companies Act. The application for a transfer of this case was successful. The judge who heard the case did not deliver a written judgment. I would add that the grounds for a transfer of a criminal case from the District Courts to the High Court are set out in the Criminal Procedure Code, and the judge would have found one or more of them to be applicable. APPENDICES”
“If the statutory demand is not complied with or set aside within 21 days, the debtor must enter into a wage reorganisation scheme. And the debtor who intends to petition for his own bankruptcy will also be subjected to the proposed wage reorganisation scheme. Under the scheme, the debtor must complete his repayment plan within 3-5 years. When payments under the plan have been completed, the debtor will be released from his obligations. My Ministry is now studying this recommendation and consulting some stakeholders to see if such a scheme can work in cases where, for example, the size of the debts is within practical limits for wage earners, such as $100,000 and below. I think if the scheme works, it will achieve a win-win outcome for both debtors and creditors. A debtor will be able to stave off consequences of bankruptcy, be more likely to remain in gainful employment and thus be in a better position to repay his debts. It also benefits the creditors who can then recover more of the debt which would otherwise have to be written off. Sir, my Senior Minister of State will deal with the other issues.”
“And the objective of these talks is to create awareness and promote the importance of financial planning. We hope that these will bear fruit in reducing the incidence of bankruptcies amongst younger people. I was also asked about pre-bankruptcy efforts and the success of the pre-bankruptcy and mediation centre. In 2005 alone, about 2,100 debtors turned to the centre for information and advice. They also handled 15 mediation cases, of which four were successfully resolved to the satisfaction of both creditors and debtors. I was asked whether there is any mechanism for negotiation between debtors and creditors in place. Dr Maliki also asked whether the centre can do more and whether we could pay more attention to the plight of bankrupts in the middle income group. In addition to the efforts by the centre, let me touch on the recommendation by the Omnibus Insolvency Legislation Committee, which I spoke about last year. The Committee found that our current bankruptcy regime does not provide sufficient avenues for the debtor to negotiate a settlement with his creditors to avoid bankruptcy. The Committee has recommended a simpler pre-bankruptcy procedure for the individual debtor who is capable of repaying his debts. They identified Chapter 13 of the US Bankruptcy Code as a workable model. It provides a framework for reorganisation proceedings to allow individual debtors to enter into repayment plans with creditors to pay off the debts over a few years. The Committee now recommends a wage reorganisation scheme that is based on the US Chapter 13 with some modifications to meet our local needs. The trigger point for the scheme would be when a statutory demand is served on the debtor by one of his creditors, or when a debtor self-petitions for bankruptcy.”
“Correspondingly, the number of bankruptcy orders by the High Court has also decreased to 3,542, which is a drop of 22%. I was asked about the profiles. The majority are in the age range of 41-50 years. The second highest group is the age group of 31-40 years. The age group of 41-50 years also accounts for almost 40% of new bankrupts in 2004 and 2005. I was asked about self-petitions. Most of the bankrupts were made bankrupt by creditors. I am glad to say that the self-petition cases are a very small percentage at 4.3% in 2004, and it came down in 2005 to 2.7%. Of these self-petition cases in 2005, the age group of 31-40 years accounts for 46%. The main cause of insolvency cited by non-business related bankrupts, including in self-petition cases, is really credit card debts. Other causes included default in payment of other credit facilities, losses incurred from speculation, suffering from ill health or standing as a guarantor for various loans and situations. Dr Maliki asked for an update of the self-petition management team set up by the Official Assignee. I am glad to say that through the efforts of this team, the number of self-petition cases has dropped in the past year. In terms of absolute numbers, the number of self-petition cases dropped by 33%, from 941 cases in 2004 to 632 cases in 2005. I was also asked what we are doing about bankruptcies among younger people. As a percentage of all new bankrupts, those from the 21-30 years age group has risen marginally, from 9.4% in 2004 to 9.9% last year. To ensure that young people are able to manage their personal finances, the Insolvency and Public Trustee's Office has recently, with institutions of higher learning like the Singapore Polytechnic, organised consumer education talks.”
“I should add that those who do not satisfy the means test are not really left without recourse because the Legal Aid Bureau does refer them to the many other avenues for legal assistance such as the many free legal clinics that are run by voluntary groups elsewhere in Singapore. The other point she made in the closing part of her intervention was about criminal legal aid and whether we consider extending it. In the limited time we have today, I do not want to go into details. But this has been explained in this House on several occasions as to why the State cannot, on the one hand, expend resources in having an excellent Attorney-General's Chambers and prosecution system who are selective in prosecutions and, at the same time, to expend State resources to defend those who are being prosecuted by the Attorney-General's Chambers. But this is a fine argument that can be debated. 5.30 pm Having said that, I have personally encouraged the Law Society to develop its Criminal Legal Aid Scheme, and I have personally, in fact, given support to them for golf tournaments and other measures to raise funds. I will continue to do the same. But if the Member feels strongly about the position taken by the Government on this issue other than for capital cases where, of course, we provide legal assistance, then she could pursue this either in a Question for oral answer or in an Adjournment Motion. Let me now turn to the two questions on bankruptcy by Dr Mohamad Maliki and Mr Ahmad Khalis. Let me first deal with the request for information on the trends of bankruptcy. The fact is that the numbers have come down. In 2005, there were 4,078 bankruptcy petitions. This was a drop of about 20% compared to the previous year.”
“Mr Chairman, I thank the hon. Members who have spoken. I will answer the questions on legal aid and bankruptcy and my colleague, Senior Minister of State, will take the questions on intellectual property rights. First, on legal aid. The Member, Ms Indranee Rajah, spoke about the many instances where some people who are in need of legal aid will not qualify under our current criteria. But I need to put matters into context. The approach of looking at the disposable income for the previous year is one that is used in other jurisdiction. Also, to put matters into context, for the past three years, at least 90% of the applicants for legal aid actually have satisfied the means test. For the first 10 months of last year, the figure went up to 94%. So only a small number of people do not meet the financial eligibility criteria for legal aid. However, I am sympathetic to her point, which is that we may come across some cases, from time to time, which may be deserving of legal aid, but because of the provisions and the criteria they may not be able to receive legal aid from the Legal Aid Bureau. From the figures I have given, I think the overall system and the means test are working. What she is arguing for is really some flexibility to deal with such cases. I will discuss with the Director of Legal Aid to examine how we can work into the system some flexibility or discretion to deal with the real hardship cases, for example, where the person has lost his job and is facing an array of civil actions but whose past income falls outside the criteria. We come across it in our meet-the-people sessions. So, we will look into her suggestions to see how we can put some flexibility without radically changing the overall system.”
“By its nature, bankruptcy proceedings have to be conducted in public view with no uncertainty over the identity of the persons involved. When a person is adjudged a bankrupt, the Official Assignee who administers the bankrupt's estate has a duty to advertise the bankruptcy of the person with his full name and NRIC No. for a number of reasons. Firstly, it would enable persons holding on to the bankrupt's assets to ascertain the bankrupt's identity and surrender these assets to the Official Assignee for distribution to the creditors. Secondly, it serves to inform the creditors and the general public not to extend any fresh or further credit to the bankrupt or to enter into any transactions with the bankrupt which may be set aside or be made void to the detriment of the lender. Thirdly, it will ensure that persons with similar names are not wrongly identified as being insolvent and dealt with as such by other parties. IN-VEHICLE UNIT (Use for car parking applications) 2. Prof. Ivan Png Paak Liang asked the Minister for Transport if there is any progress towards adapting the in-vehicle unit (IU) so that the cashcard can be used for streetside parking and in car parks where it is not cost-effective to build an ERP-type gantry.”
“Assistance will also be declined if there are substantial grounds to believe that the accused is being targeted by the foreign country on account of his race, religion, sex, ethnic origin, nationality or political opinions. Sir, I beg to move. 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. S Jayakumar]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. CASINO CONTROL BILL Order for Second Reading read. 3.08 pm”
“This will be at our discretion, and it will not be applied retrospectively to confiscation orders made before the changes are brought into force. Let me hasten to assure the House, Sir, that this does not mean that we will not in future enter into mutual legal assistance treaties with other countries. We will still do so in specific cases, for example, where a bilateral treaty will give both sides greater assurance of mutual assistance. However, what this amendment seeks to achieve is to avoid a situation where we cannot give timely assistance to a non-treaty country which needs our assistance to prosecute a terrorist or a major international criminal. The present approach can also be a disadvantage for us when we seek assistance from a country with whom we do not have a treaty, if they invoke the reciprocity principle. Safeguards I also wish to assure the House that there are many safeguards in the Act to prevent abuse and to prevent unnecessary intrusion by foreign authorities into the privacy of our businesses and individuals. All the current safeguards which are in the Act will continue to apply. For example, there is a general power to decline a request if it is not in the public interest to provide the assistance. Our own investigations will take priority and no assistance will be rendered if it could prejudice a local investigation or local criminal proceeding. Assistance will also be declined if a foreign authority is merely "fishing" for information that might be of use against a person or a corporation. The Act has many safeguards against such "fishing expeditions". For example, section 22 of the Act, on production orders, requires that a foreign request must be made for a particular item or document.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act was enacted some six years ago in 2000 as part of Singapore's commitment to help combat crime on a global scale. That Act provides for various forms of assistance to foreign countries. This law was enacted before the events of September 11, 2001. Post-911, it has become increasingly urgent for countries to cooperate closely, especially in the combatting of terrorism. In the light of our experience and also in the light of this changing international climate after 911, we have concluded that we need to make some amendments to the Act. The present Act can be said to have an element of rigidity. For example, certain forms of assistance which involve coercive measures, such as search warrants in aid of a criminal prosecution in a foreign country, can only be provided if there already exists a mutual legal assistance treaty between us and the requesting country. In practice, however, it is desirable to have some flexibility. The purpose of this Bill, therefore, is to amend the Act to allow us to render such assistance, on a case-by-case basis, to countries where there is no such mutual legal assistance treaty. This is provided for in clause 3 of the Bill, which provides for discretionary assistance in the absence of a treaty, but only if the requesting country gives an undertaking of reciprocity, ie, that it will comply with a future request by Singapore for similar assistance involving a similar offence. Clause 2 of the Bill makes consequential amendments to the definition section of the Act to allow Singapore to enforce a foreign confiscation order from a country with which we do not have a mutual legal assistance treaty.”
“Sir, with the expanded jurisdiction, the SCT will be empowered to deal with a wider range of disputes that consumers are likely to be involved in. This Bill also amends the Small Claims Tribunals Act to require leave of court to proceed with an appeal against an order made by the SCT. Sir, let me explain. At present, appeals against an SCT order can be made as of right to the High Court, but only on a question of law or on the ground that the claim was outside the jurisdiction of the SCT. The scope for an appeal is deliberately narrow, in order to promote finality, and to avoid highcosts in appealing that may exceed in fact the sums in dispute. The Bill amends the Act to require the leave of the District Court before an appeal can be made against an SCT order. With this amendment, the position of appeals against SCT orders will be brought into alignment with appeals against decisions of a District Court or a Magistrate’s Court. The grounds for appeal will not be affected or further limited by this amendment, whose main effect is to ensure that the parties will not be put to unnecessary expense, for example, in cases where there is no prospect of an appeal succeeding. Sir, I beg to move. 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. S Jayakumar]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. Column No : 1831 MONEYLENDERS (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 3.23 pm”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, this Bill amends the Small Claims Tribunals Act to expand the jurisdiction of the Small Claims Tribunal (SCT)and to require leave of court before an appeal can be made against an SCT order. If I may explain, Sir, the SCT was established almost 20 years ago to provide a quick and inexpensive forum to resolve small claims between consumers and suppliers. We have been gradually expanding the jurisdiction of the SCT over the years. At present, the SCT deals with claims arising from contracts for the sale of goods or provision of services and claims for damage to property, excluding damage arising in connection with motor vehicle accidents. The claim limit is $10,000, but itcan be raised to $20,000 with the consent ofboth parties. This Bill seeks to expand the jurisdiction of the SCT, to allow it to determine claims arising from short-term residential tenancy agreements not exceeding two years, which are normally straightforward and not complicated. This amendment will benefit both landlords and tenants, as it provides them with a speedy and cost effective means of resolving some of their disputes. Landlords seeking to recover unpaid rent within the small claims limit, as well astenants who have either rented an entire property or a single room in disputes over rent deposits, will now have aquicker and cheaper avenue to press these claims.The expanded jurisdiction only applies to residential properties. The SCT will not have the jurisdiction to hear disputes arising from leases of commercial properties, as such leases are likely to be quite technical and far more complicated.”
“In particular, the requirement for law corporations to have professional indemnity insurance of $2 million will also apply to LLPs. Sir, the Bill also clarifies the application of certain provisions of the LPA to locum solicitors. From 1st April 2005, lawyers have been allowed to practise as locum solicitors. The Act will be amended to clarify that law pupils may not serve their pupillage under locum solicitors. In addition, the Act currently requires a solicitor who has not been in active practice for three out of the preceding five years to undergo additional training as prescribed by the Council of the Law Society, if he wishes to apply for a locum practising certificate. This Bill amends the Act to allow such a solicitor to apply for the locum practising certificate, if he has practised as a locum solicitor within the period of three years immediately preceding his application, without having to undergo the requisite training. Sir, I beg to move. 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. S Jayakumar]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. Column No : 1829 SMALL CLAIMS TRIBUNALS (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 3.18 pm”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, this Bill amends the Legal Profession Act to enable lawyers to form Limited Liability Partnerships (LLPs) as an alternative business structure for legal practice. The provisions are modelled on the provisions in the Legal Profession Act relating to law corporations, provisions which have worked well over the past five years. Sir, in 2004, the Government introduced limited liability partnershipsas a new business form in Singapore, and the Limited Liability Partnerships Act 2005 came into force in April 2005. Sir, these amendments are needed to allow legal practices to be converted to or constituted as LLPs. Lawyers who are not sole proprietors can form ordinary partnerships or law corporations with other lawyers. The addition of an LLP option will provide lawyers with the ideal combination of limited liability, whilst preserving their status as "partners" with the flexibility of a partnership. Sir, I should say that leading law firms in the United States and United Kingdom and elsewhere are increasingly converting to LLPs, which are generally acknowledged to be a much more pro-business corporate structure. But let me stress that there will be no compromise in protecting the interests of clients. The Law Society will exercise regulatory and ethical control over lawyers practising in LLPs. Lawyers seeking to register LLPs to practise law must obtain the approval of the Law Society. In addition, rules will provide that all partners of the LLP must be lawyers. Existing rules relating to professional conduct, solicitors accounts, publicity and professional indemnity will be extended to LLPs.”
“For example, since 2002, we have made it even more convenient for Singaporeans to assess if they are eligible for legal aid by getting staff at the Marine Parade and Woodlands Community Mediation Centres to help applicants apply the means test to their individual circumstances. Those who do not satisfy the means test are not without recourse. The Legal Aid Bureau furnishes them with a list of the many free legal aid clinics that are run by voluntary groups, such as the Singapore Association of Women's Lawyers. The Legal Aid Bureau duty officers will also advise unsuccessful applicants on how to tap these community services. ACCUSED PERSON (Rights to legal counsel) 4. Ms Eunice Elizabeth Olsen asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs (a) what rights does an accused person have to legal counsel and to be informed of the grounds of his arrest; (b) what are the built-in safeguards in police procedures and investigations to protect an accused person's constitutional rights; and (c) how legal consultation can impede police investigations.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, legal aid is available to Singapore citizens and Permanent Residents who satisfy the "means test" in our legislation based on the applicant's financial circumstances and whose civil case satisfies an independent panel of solicitors on the "merits test", that is, the applicant has a reasonable legal case in his favour. The means test and merits test ensure that public funds are properly used to help the needy on their legal claims. Over the years, we have expanded the "means test" to take into account the cost of living and other factors. It was last revised in April 2001, where the disposable income limit was increased from $7,000 to $10,000 per annum and the allowable deductions for calculating the disposable income was increased to $3,000 for the applicant and $2,000 for each dependant. Let me assure the Member that, with this more generous means test, a family of, say, four, comprising two parents and two dependent children where only the husband is working, will satisfy the means test for legal aid if the father's gross monthly income is about $1,900 (after making deductions for himself, CPF and his dependants). I also want to assure the Member that more applicants now satisfy the means test. In FY2004, 92% of the applicants satisfied the means test, up from 90% the previous financial year and 81% in FY 2001. In the first three months of FY2005, 93% of applicants satisfied it, in other words, fewer applicants are now being turned away. With this improved situation, and the last revision being just four years ago, I do not see an urgent need to expand the scope of legal aid. But let me, however, assure the Member and the House that we continually review the means test and will be prepared to adjust it whenever necessary.”
“No, Sir. The question, if you read it carefully, was whether we will amend our laws to specifically provide for sentencing to take into account low intelligence, and my answer was that rather than legislating for the myriad of factors that come into play, this is best left to the courts. ACCESS TO LEGAL AID 3. Ms Eunice Elizabeth Olsen asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Law (a) how access to legal aid is determined; (b) what is being done to ensure that those who are in need of legal aid are able to receive it; and (c) whether more can be done so that the net of legal aid can be cast wider.”
“There is no code as such because when an offence is reported and has to be investigated and the authorities have identified the accused as the offender, then, as the Member knows, a set of procedures comes into play which involves the Police. The Police would have to investigate the facts of the case and also the facts pertaining to the individual will have to be taken into account. If it appears from the investigation that there are certain factors which are relevant, including the person's state of mind, these will be brought to the attention of the Public Prosecutor when the investigation papers go out. I would say that a whole myriad of factors come into play concerning the individual. If the issue of mental disability comes into play, then we must realise that mental disability has a wide range from mild to severe. And what the investigation officers and the prosecutors would have to bear in mind is whether the person knew what he was doing was wrong. That is the established principle in our jurisprudence. If the person did not know the nature of the act and what he was doing was wrong, then, of course, that would be a defence for the action. As to whether there is a fixed code, I do not think there is a rigid fixed code. Let me say that I know that the Attorney General is constantly reviewing the procedures and, in this particular kind of situation, I know that the Attorney General, as part of his normal review of investigative procedures, in consultation with the Police, will be reviewing to see whether there is any room for improvement.”
“I think if the Member had listened to my answer, I did say that during the investigation stage and during the stage when the prosecutorial decision is made whether to charge or not to charge and, if to charge, what kind of offence to charge, these factors are taken into account. But I would not go so far to say that there is a blanket rule that in X situation, a person can expect, as a right or as an entitlement, that he will not be charged. I think all this must depend on a careful consideration of the facts of the case, the facts pertaining to that particular individual and probably taking into account the views of doctors or people trained in a particular area.”
“It is neither desirable nor practical to amend our laws to provide, for example, different scales of punishments for different levels of IQ scores, with low sentences for offenders with low intelligence and severe sentences for brilliant or smart offenders. Ultimately, what constitutes the most appropriate sentence must depend on the facts of each case. In my view, Sir, it is best to leave that decision to the Judge instead of trying to legislate for the various combination of extenuating circumstances which may be applicable in different cases.”