Committee of Supply ‒ Head R (Ministry of Law)

Access to justice is important in every rule-of-law society, every rule-of-law country. Initiatives, such as the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme (CLAS) and Legal Assistance for Capital Offences (LASCO), serve this important function in our criminal justice system. Last year, through the support of MinLaw, CLAS was able to employ two more senior advocates to mentor the other lawyers and to take on high-stake cases. Would the Minister provide an update on what further can be done to ensure access to justice for accused persons who may not necessarily be able to afford counsel?

In terms of civil justice ‒ for there is criminal justice and then there is also civil justice ‒ in terms of civil justice, event-triggered fee arrangements have been debated but not without some controversy to promote access to justice. Would the Minister provide an update on the review to event-triggered fee arrangements in Singapore?

*Question proposed.*

The Second Schedule of the Legal Aid and Advice Act sets out the requirements that have to be satisfied for the grant of legal aid. There is some form of discretion given to the Director of Legal Aid but there are conditions attached to the exercise of these decisions. As a result, some truly deserving cases fall through the crack and legal aid is not granted. Will the Minister consider an amendment to the Act to allow for appeals to the Minister, for legal aid for such cases provided that the Director grants leave for such an appeal?

Mdm Chair, I declare my interest as a disputes lawyer in private practice.

In 2016, we saw significant positive changes in Singapore's legal industry arising from moves spearheaded by MinLaw. Amongst others, we launched the SIM University (UniSIM) School of Law to train lawyers in family and criminal law. We amended our laws to allow for third-party funding framework in the realm of international arbitration and enacted the Mediation Act to improve the framework for commercial mediation. These are important steps to diversify and add depth to the legal industry and to support our push to be Asia's leading disputes resolution hub.

In our push to be the leading legal commercial hub, we must continue to upgrade services to those who require bread-and-butter justice. We must continue to ensure that justice is accessible and available to individuals when they need it. One such area is in non-contentious probate and administration matters.

Currently, when a loved one has passed away leaving behind a property, an administrator or executor will have to be appointed by the Court to administer the estate. The administrator or executor will usually be a family member of the deceased. However, before the family member is legally recognised as an executor or administrator, he would first have to apply to Court for a Grant of Probate or Letter of Administration.

This process involves the Courts and involves engaging lawyers and may be time-consuming. Even when the grant is not contentious and straightforward, the process of making the application and finally obtaining the grant takes months. I also note that the caseload for probate matters in the Family Justice Court has increased over the years, by about 26%, between 2011 and 2015.

In our push towards digitisation and the greater use of data analytics, we should think about how to best harness the benefits of the digital age to improve our community services. Perhaps, a good comparison could be the Silver Support Scheme which is automatically extended to Singaporeans aged 65 and above who meet certain criteria. Perhaps, the Ministry could consider looking into how we may similarly use available personal information to shorten or simplify the procedure of obtaining a grant in non-contentious probate and administration cases.

In my constituency work, I have met residents who found themselves on the wrong side of the law in either civil or criminal cases. They made a mistake, but the problem is compounded because they do not know how to navigate the legal system. In some cases, it happened upstream where my residents do not know whom to approach or where to seek guidance from, before signing a contract that may prove disadvantageous to them.

What measures is MinLaw looking at to enhance access to justice and also to build basic legal awareness among the public?

Next, on legal hub, I would like to suggest the idea of "an academia of industry" ‒ a living ecosystem of cross-disciplinary deep skills and expertise; deep industry skills and knowledge to complement our internationally recognised law schools. Imagine having more legal firms with in-house expertise in FinTech, Blockchain and even the evolving impact of Blockchain-mediated "smart contracts". Imagine legal teams with deep knowledge of biotech and the legal issues surrounding genomics or personalised medicine that straddle multiple jurisdictions. Combining expertise across subject domains, this creates value and competitive advantage. And this can help us to provide skills and services in Singapore which no other legal hub can do.

Much has been said about the uncertain future economy. The legal services sector will also need to respond to the changes in the economy and transform. The developments in the region and Singapore's reputation in international commercial dispute resolution put it in good stead to find opportunities for local law practices. The small and medium-sized law practices, may, however, find it challenging to compete at this level, especially if they have not been involved in any international practice.

During the last Committee of Supply (COS) debate, the Ministry indicated that it was working with the Law Society more specifically to identify how to strengthen small and medium-sized law firms. I believe there was a six-month Legal Industry Needs Study carried out to identify the technology and capability needs of these practices. I would like to enquire more about the details of the outcome of the study. I note the Tech Start for Law Programme jointly announced by MinLaw, the Law Society and the Standards, Productivity and Innovation Board (SPRING) Singapore. I am happy to hear about this. I would like to find out more about how the Ministry is supporting the small and medium-sized law practices, especially in the areas of technology adoption and business capabilities.

There are many different sectors within the legal industry. It would be useful for Singapore law practices to be guided on the emerging needs and trends of the legal industry in the future economy. What steps will the Ministry take to ensure continued growth and development of the different sectors within the industry? Perhaps, there could be a holistic business consultancy service offered to the small and medium-sized law practices so that they can be made aware of emerging markets and the concrete steps to be part of those markets. I would like to hear the Ministry's views on this.

My first cut is on the career pathway for in-house counseI. I declare my interest as a corporate member of the Singapore Corporate Counsel Association (SCCA) and also a member of their Advisory Board.

Singapore should aim to be, and is certainly capable of becoming, the Asian hub for in-house legal capability. This will help attract multinational corporations (MNCs), whether Western or Asian, to invest or continue to invest, here. It will also feed the ambitions of SIAC, SIMC and SICC. In-house legal capability is highly exportable and it is not limited to the practice of Singapore law.

To be truly regional, the capability should not be limited to Singapore law or English law. We should seek to build expertise in the laws of the various countries in the region. Furthermore, the competencies of a regional legal counsel go beyond black letter law as they must encompass business management skills and ethical conduct.

To that end, SCCA has, in consultation with relevant stakeholders, developed a Competency Framework for three different seniorities of in-house counsel across three categories of competencies: legal, business and conduct. SCCA wants to encourage recruiters, employers and in-house counsel to use the framework as a reference guide to hiring, training and career development. The Competency Framework will be reviewed regularly to keep up to date with the market.

As SCCA is our National Trades Union Congress' U-Associate partner, we have studied this initiative and believe it to be useful for the reasons above. Hence, we will support and partner SCCA in the launch of this Competency Framework as a national standard for the in-house industry this year. However, if the Government is serious about developing the talent pool for in-house legal counsel in Singapore, then the Competency Framework needs to be mandatory at some point of time.

Singapore is one of the few countries in which in-house counsel are not required to meet any form of professional standards or any form of continuing education. This will come as a surprise to many a person in the boardroom, despite the fact that in-house legal advice privilege has been granted via statute.

A mandatory Competency Framework will compel in-house counsel in Singapore to acquire baseline knowledge that is relevant to his or her role, which constitutes a form of quality assurance to all who set up regional legal functions in Singapore. This will improve the quality of the legal talent pool in Singapore. Some quarters may say these mandatory standards and continuing education may translate into costs. I submit that even the in-house community needs to embrace Continuing Education and Training (CET), deep-skilling and SkillsFuture to stay ready, relevant and resilient.

I have spoken on this before and am raising it again to the Minister. I hope MinLaw will seriously look into reviewing the jurisdictional limits of the Small Claims Tribunal (SCT) so that more people can have economical and expedient orders and judgment to their contractual claims. In particular, I know many professional freelancers who are on a contract for service use SCT when they are not paid for their work rendered.

In this regard, I propose to raise the jurisdictional limit of SCT to clear claims of up to $20,000 and up to $30,000 with the consent of both parties to the SCT claim. Raising the claim limits will be a boon to claimants and freelance workers alike.

Since coming in force in November 2014, can MinLaw provide an update on the number of cases filed and mediated? Among all the Prevention of Harassment Act cases filed, what is the breakdown on the types, that is, how many involve community and neighbours, and how many are online, sexual and workplace harassment cases?

Mdm Chair, I thank the Members who spoke.

Fundamentally, in the areas of law and justice, we rank well because of our strong societal and institutional foundations. In terms of commitment to the rule of law, we are number one in Asia, as ranked by the World Justice Project's Rule of Law Index 2016 and the Asian Intelligence Report's Corruption Perception Index 2017. With that as the background, let me now speak about the legal sector.

Like many other sectors, the legal sector faces some challenges. I will touch on what we are doing to make Singapore a leading legal hub and to support the legal industry.

First, on strengthening our status as a dispute resolution hub. I thank Mr de Souza for noting the many good initiatives that really enhance our reputation and standing as a dispute resolution hub. Over the years, we have systematically built up our dispute resolution capabilities. We are now among the top five most preferred seats of arbitration in the world. We have well-regarded institutions which offer a suite of top-quality dispute resolution services, such as SIAC, SIMC and SICC.

Over the past year, we have further strengthened our position. We have ratified the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements. This enhances the enforceability of Singapore Court judgments. We have enacted a new Mediation Act to strengthen the enforceability of mediated settlements. And we have introduced a third-party funding framework to give businesses additional financing options for international commercial arbitration.

We are also continuing to grow dispute resolution activities in Singapore. We are renovating and refurbishing the Red Dot Traffic Building and expanding the premises of Maxwell Chambers. This will increase the capacity at Maxwell Chambers and we can have more hearings there. It will also help attract more international institutions, arbitration chambers and law firms to do that kind of work in Singapore.

Second, on the promotion and use of Singapore law. Our legal sector can benefit from the promotion of Singapore in the region. Today, we do see an increasing use of Singapore law in cross-border transactions in this region. Singapore law is one of the default options in some Baltic and International Maritime Council standard forms.

Growth in this trend must come from businesses, led by parties and industries. They will benefit from an emergence of a default Asian law.

My Ministry has also financially supported the development of centres of excellence as an added factor specialising in a number of areas, including regional law. To name a few: the Centre for Asian Legal Studies, the Centre for Banking and Finance Law and the Centre for Law and Business. These institutions will help to grow Singapore's reputation as a thought leader in the law, anchor regional legal expertise in Singapore and strengthen the recognition and use of Singapore law.

Ms Rahayu asked if Singapore Law Practices (SLPs) could be made aware of emerging markets and the concrete steps SLPs can take to be part of those markets.

There are a number of schemes available to assist SLPs in regionalisation, for example, Enterprise Singapore's (IE's) Global Company Partnership scheme. It provides support, including financial support, to Singapore law firms to build market expertise via secondments to other places.

IE also has a Double Tax Deduction for Internationalisation. It allows our law firms to deduct the expenses for overseas business development and investment study trips against taxable income. My Ministry will continue working with the relevant economic agencies to support SLPs in their growth plans and regionalisation efforts because we have to look outside Singapore.

We are also looking to establish ourselves as a centre for international debt restructuring in Asia. We are well-positioned to do that because we are a major financial, legal and business hub. We have the expertise, efficiency and legal framework. We can facilitate complex cross-border restructuring. My Ministry has, therefore, worked with the Ministry of Finance on the Companies (Amendment) Bill, and that will enhance Singapore's debt restructuring processes. We are also working with parties from the public and private sectors to promote our debt restructuring regime, attract other influential players to base themselves in Singapore and develop multidisciplinary training and education for professionals in the industry.

Beyond dispute resolution and restructuring, we are looking to develop and grow new practice areas. More will be shared when the Committee on the Future Economy (CFE) Working Group on Legal and Accounting Services releases its report in April.

We will also continue to develop intellectual property (IP) as a growth area. It is important that the IP regime allows businesses to develop and commercialise IP in a cost-effective way. We are considering ways to improve our IP dispute resolution mechanism and we are considering the recommendations made by the IP Dispute Resolution Committee.

Finally, we will also support SLPs on technology. Ms Rahayu asked about the study my Ministry did with the Law Society to identify the technology and capability needs of small and medium SLPs. The study identified technology adoption as a key area of development for SLPs. The larger firms are able to invest in money, but I think the smaller firms have challenges in keeping up, making the investments, with rapidly-changing technological advancements.

We have worked with the Law Society and SPRING, and we have kick-started the adoption of technology by SLPs. Earlier this week, we launched the "Tech Start for Law" programme. This will provide SLPs with support of up to 70% of the cost to adopt basic technology products for practice management, online legal research and online marketing. We really hope that SLPs will take advantage of it. My Ministry will go out with the message as aggressively as possible.

Other than legal technology adoption, my Ministry is also working with the Academy of Law, the Law Society, the Courts and a number of economic agencies on several other aspects relating to technology. For example, we want to develop an ecosystem to accelerate the creation and adoption of legal technology. We want to study the feasibility of online dispute resolution and setting up such platforms.

In addition, we will also review our regulations to ensure that the regulations facilitate innovation and the development of legal technology solutions.

I have outlined some of the ways in which my Ministry is working to support the legal industry. We will provide the necessary partnership, framework, support and incentives. The legal profession and the private sector have to come into that partnership, embrace the changes, grasp the opportunities, some of which are disruptive. They really have to keep up with the developments in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and beyond and strive to understand the regional market and distinguish themselves by the quality of their work and their business acumen because a fair part of the law is becoming commoditised through technology.

Together we can ensure that our legal industry remains vibrant and competitive in the years ahead.

Mdm Chairman, I will address the rest of the Members' cuts.

To ensure that our legal industry continues to be vibrant and competitive internationally, the key stakeholders of the industry must actively embrace disruptive changes and grasp the opportunities at hand. These include private practitioners, in-house counsel and law students.

The Working Group on Legal and Accounting Services under CFE which I co-chaired with Mr Chaly Mah was set up to identify growth areas and develop strategies for the legal sector's growth and development.

The Working Group report will be released next month. It contains several key recommendations to position the Singapore legal and accounting services sector for the future, in particular, the need to build thought leadership through driving standards and research and equipping legal professionals to be future-ready through deepening skillsets and industry expertise. MinLaw will be working closely with the legal industry to achieve the outcomes envisaged in the recommendations.

Let me first elaborate on our efforts in capability-building. Last year, we established the UniSIM School of Law to address the projected shortage of family and criminal practitioners in Singapore. It took in its first cohort of 60 students in January 2017. Eighty percent of the cohort are mature students with work and life experience and seeking a mid-career switch to law. Their experience will stand them in good stead to deal with the emotional demands of family and criminal law.

To help these mature Singaporean students who are not eligible for the Ministry of Education's (MOE's) tuition grant defray part of the tuition fees, we introduced the MinLaw-UniSIM Study Award. There are three award recipients this year. The UniSIM law school curriculum is practice-oriented to better prepare the students for practice when they graduate. We also want to develop future-ready legal professionals who will be able to pursue the new opportunities that will arise in high-growth areas while leveraging new technology and innovation.

Dr Tan Wu Meng spoke about the need for our lawyers to possess cross-disciplinary skills and expertise. We agree. This is important, especially in today's increasingly complex business environment. To provide holistic advice, lawyers must have deep knowledge of their business and industries. This can be achieved through a more multidisciplinary and practice-oriented law curriculum, as well as targeted efforts in continuing professional development. For example, the UniSIM School of Law has a multidisciplinary curriculum where law students learn not only the law, but also have electives in social work, counselling, psychology, forensics and criminology.

We will get feedback from the industry on the skills needed by young lawyers, study international best practices in legal education, and work closely with the National University of Singapore (NUS), Singapore Management University (SMU) and UniSIM to update their law curriculum to better prepare our law graduates for the future economy.

Some of our law students have already taken the first step towards developing such multidisciplinary and practice-oriented skills. For example, a common interest in legal technology and innovation led a group of NUS students to start a ground-up initiative, called "Alt+Law". This initiative aspires to change the legal industry by exploring technological solutions for lawyers' tasks. This informal group, which includes Computer Science and Engineering students, hopes to use data analysis to supplement expert opinion for lawyers, policymakers and clients in areas, such as sentencing guidelines. These are the types of innovative and cross-disciplinary efforts that we must cultivate and encourage.

There are also programmes on leadership and management, such as the Singapore Academy of Law (SAL)-INSEAD Law Firm Leadership Programme, as well as specialist knowledge in the identified growth areas.

Another significant group in the legal industry is the in-house counsel. We note Mr Patrick Tay's suggestion to develop the talent pool of in-house counsel in Singapore and for a mandatory competency framework.

We agree that there should be continued efforts to develop the in-house sector. We have been working closely with the Economic Development Board to promote Singapore as a choice location for regional and global headquarters, including in-house counsel teams. Based on a study of Fortune Global 500 employment in corporate functions by Aon, Singapore has more in-house legal employees than Hong Kong and Shanghai in 2014. We are actively encouraging companies to anchor their decision-makers with global or regional mandate in Singapore. This includes the in-house legal functions.

We also encourage in-house counsel to continuously raise their standards of practice. To this end, we will continue to work with the relevant stakeholders to make available programmes to help in-house counsel develop the appropriate skillsets and competencies to carry out their jobs well. MinLaw will also monitor the progress and adoption of SCCA's competency framework with a view towards revisiting the issue of whether competency frameworks should be made mandatory in the future, taking into consideration the developments in the in-house counsel space.

Several Members filed cuts relating to enhancing access to justice. Access to justice is extremely important. The best laws and best Courts will be of little effect if the ordinary citizen has no access to them. My Ministry is working closely with the Judiciary, the Law Society and other stakeholders to enhance access to justice, especially for the man-in-the-street, by ensuring legal aid and pro bono advice are available to those who need it and providing mechanisms to help resolve community disputes.

Let me address Government-funded legal aid, pro bono legal advice and legal awareness.

The Legal Aid Bureau provides civil legal aid to less-privileged Singaporeans who pass the means and merits test. The means-test framework is regularly reviewed to allow persons of limited means to qualify for legal aid. In 2013, the qualifying criteria were updated to allow approximately 25% of Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents to qualify for legal aid, up from 17% previously. This translated into about 300,000 additional Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents who can potentially qualify for legal aid.

In response to Mr Louis Ng and Mr Murali Pillai's queries, the discretion to depart from the general means-test already exists for certain vulnerable groups of people, such as those who face hardship or are involved in certain family proceedings, to qualify for legal aid. In 2007, we amended the means-test criteria to help persons facing hardship, such as sudden mental or physical disabilities, or the sudden loss of income. In 2013, we amended the means-test criteria for persons in family proceedings involving children or protection orders, in order to protect the most vulnerable persons in family disputes.

We will continue to review and update the means-test framework and qualifying criteria to ensure access to justice for people who cannot afford to hire their own lawyer. This includes considering whether additional discretion should be granted to the Director of Legal Aid or other authority for exceptional cases.

Mr de Souza asked specifically about legal aid for probate matters. First, legal aid is available for such matters, if the applicant qualifies. Second, if the estate value does not exceed $50,000, the next-of-kin can also apply to the Public Trustee to administer the estate, subject to fulfilment of certain criteria. Third, for estates exceeding $50,000, the next-of-kin may engage a lawyer to assist in the estate administration and the costs can be recovered from the estate.

Criminal legal aid is available under the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme (CLAS) run by the Law Society's Pro Bono Services Office. Since the launch of enhanced CLAS in 2015 and the Government started directly funding CLAS, the number of CLAS applicants has increased significantly.

CLAS received 2,308 applications in 2016, compared to 1,780 applications in 2014, before the Government started directly funding CLAS. All 2,308 accused persons who applied to CLAS in 2016 received basic legal advice, of which 1,373 also received full representation or legal services not involving Court attendance. This is a threefold increase, compared to 2014, where only 431 accused persons received full representation.

More applicants are being helped because of the increased coverage of enhanced CLAS, such as under the Moneylenders Act. For example, there was an elderly lady charged with assisting illegal moneylending because she was tricked into letting a stranger access her bank account. She was assigned a CLAS lawyer, who was ultimately able to get the charges dropped.

From December last year, we have provided additional funding to hire two CLAS advocates, to strengthen the scheme.

I am encouraged by the strong partnership and support from law firms for CLAS. Several law firms have taken on a significant number of CLAS cases. Many lawyers have generously waived their honoraria. The largest five law firms in Singapore have also supported the CLAS Fellowship scheme. I hope law firms will continue to support CLAS and take on more cases on a regular basis to enhance access to justice.

Madam, I see that there are just a few seconds more, if I may complete the last few paragraphs of my speech.

Thank you. Other than Government-funded legal aid, pro bono basic legal advice is also provided at many legal clinics across Singapore. There are also family, civil and criminal legal clinics run at the State and Family Courts.

The Law Society also has various schemes aimed at promoting legal awareness. These include general legal awareness talks, as well as the annual Law Awareness Week programmes.

On community justice, we have put in place various mechanisms to resolve community disputes. Our Community Mediation Centre has a good track record of mediating disputes in the community. Disputes can also be resolved at the Community Disputes Resolution Tribunals (CDRT) and SCT. The Protection from Harassment Act (POHA) provides for simplified Court procedures and Court forms for Protection Order applications.

Mr Tay spoke about initiatives in this area. The issue of increasing the SCT's jurisdiction is currently under review by my Ministry and the State Courts.

To update on POHA, as of 31 January 2017, 268 applications for Protection Orders have been filed since it took effect on 15 November 2014. These include the applications by victims of sexual, workplace and online harassment.

Out of the 96 Protection Orders granted, 59 were granted by consent. Ninety-nine applications for Protection Orders were withdrawn. Seventy-seven Expedited Protection Orders have also been granted, and 18 Magistrate's Complaints have been filed for alleged breach of a Protection Order or Expedited Protection Order. Out of the 46 applications referred to mediation at the State Courts Centre for Dispute Resolution, 23 were successfully settled and five are pending completion of mediation.

Finally, on event-triggered fee arrangements which Mr de Souza asked about, MinLaw and SAL are studying this. There are some important considerations. There are different types of event-triggered fee arrangements and they have pros and cons.

In contingency fee arrangements, the lawyer shares in an agreed percentage of the sum recovered by the client where the claim is successful. On the one hand, there is certainty upfront as the lawyer's fees are directly tied to the amount the client recovers. On the other hand, the lawyer's fees have no correlation to the work done. The lawyer could receive a large sum of money for a short trial, or a small sum for a protracted trial.

In conditional fee arrangements, the lawyer receives payment of his legal fees only if the claim is successful. The arrangement may also allow for an uplift of fees in the event of success. For such arrangements, the lawyer's fees are based on the amount of work done for the client. But it also means that there is less certainty upfront about the fees that could be incurred.

There are also other considerations, for example, whether such arrangements would give rise to a potential conflict of interest, as the lawyer has a direct financial interest in the outcome of the litigation, and whether they may increase frivolous litigation or raise litigation costs. Different countries have adopted different models. We need to carefully assess these considerations to determine the framework which is most suitable for Singapore.

Mdm Chair, may I ask the hon Senior Minister of State whether there are any steps to be taken to improve the process for the grant of non-contentious probate administrative matters? In my cut, I mentioned that the system basically has not changed and, even for non-contentious matters, the persons involved would have to make a Court application and involve lawyers as well.

I can say that we are actively reviewing not only that, but all other Court procedures where it is really for the community or the man-in-the-street. You will see that, in recent times, we have actually started simplifying various procedures. POHA, for example, is one such example where we try to make it such that the person does not need to actually instruct the lawyer in order to make an application. CDRT is yet another. So, this is an area which we will study to see whether the procedures can be simplified.

I just want to ask the Senior Minister of State, earlier on, on the POHA claims, since its inception in November 2014, how many of these that are filed involved harassment in workplaces?

I do not have a specific breakdown of the actual numbers for sexual and workplace harassment. I have given the consolidated figures. But if the Member wishes, perhaps, he can file a specific question on that.