Committee of Supply – Head R (Ministry of Law)

The Chairman: Head R, Ministry of Law, Mr Christopher de Souza, you can take all the three cuts together.

Singapore – Regional and Global Legal Hub

Mr Christopher de Souza (Holland-Bukit Timah): Mr Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head R of the Estimates be reduced by $100".

A Forbes article entitled, "Singapore: What happens when a nation state endorses legal innovation?" stated, "The Singapore Academy of Law has identified three separate, interlocking areas of focus for legal innovation and transformation. One, fostering a global perspective; two, adaptation of technology to advance and democratise legal service delivery and three, human-centered capability building through education and training."

These are important components to further secure Singapore as a global and regional legal hub. Furthermore, an effective and efficient legal system, a good body of legal precedents, effective international dispute resolution bodies such as SIAC, Maxwell Chambers, SICC, the Courts, a qualified legal Bar, in-house counsel and AGC make for an excellent and formidable formula for the further growth of Singapore as a legal hub. What measures will MinLaw undertake to further bolster Singapore’s reputation as a regional and global legal hub?

Another important aspect is promoting the use of Singapore law. How will MinLaw help to promote Singapore Law as the law of choice governing domestic, international and cross-border agreements at the time the parties sign those agreements? This will ensure Singapore Law’s body of case precedents is relevant and applicable to the rapid changes in how business is conducted. The more Singapore law is used, the more relevant it becomes and the more parties will want to choose it. The net effect is the development of Singapore’s jurisprudence not only locally but regionally, and quite possibly globally.

Thus, how will the Ministry support the increased use of Singapore Law as the governing law in contracts and Singapore as the jurisdiction in which rights arising from the contract are adjudicate upon should disputes arise.

Civil, Criminal and Community Justice

Civil and commercial disputes are getting more complex, with cross-border parties a now-regular occurrence in proceedings. Similarly, cybercrimes and the transitional nature of some syndicates make criminal cases making their way to court more varied and complicated. With further criminological studies into how early intervention in youths can deter them from crime, sentencing flexibility is needed in our community courts.

How are we developing each of these legal spheres and the important partners in them – being the Courts, the Bar, SIAC and the AGC – such as to develop Singapore into a global and regional legal hub for corporate and dispute resolution legal work which achieves fair and accurate outcomes within an efficient and effective legal system to the benefit of Singaporeans, the region, and the global network?

Accessibility to Justice

Next, Mr Chairman, Singapore possess a solid rule of law system for the adjudication of rights. In order for the system to be available to all who need recourse to it, what measures has MinLaw put in place to ensure that persons of limited means continue to have access to legal aid and, by extension, the Courts and the legal system? After all, justice is attained only if one has access to it.

Question proposed.

Ensuring Access to Justice

Ms Rahayu Mahzam (Jurong): Having legal troubles is often an unexpected event, which many typically do not financially prepare for and litigation often is physically, emotionally and financially draining. So, when there is a need to commence action or defend a case in Court, it is common to hear of situations where the individual is financially stretched and has difficulties financing legal costs. The inability to finance one’s litigation could possibly result in the inability to pursue justice in a case.

The Legal Aid Bureau, the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme and the legal clinics help to provide assistance to those who may not be able to afford to pay for legal advice or representation. I also welcome the amendment to the Legal Aid and Advice Act last year which sought to enhance the process and provision of legal aid to ensure access to justice. It is always a calibration but I would like to ask if there are other efforts which could be put in place to ensure that persons of limited means continue to have access to legal aid.

On this note, I would like to repeat the proposal I made before in this House to encourage and incentivise low bono efforts by lawyers. We have many lawyers already doing pro bono work but this often comes at a cost to the lawyer’s earnings. A law practice is also a business and would have overheads and operational costs just like any other professional service. Bearing this in mind and considering the need to close some gaps, we may therefore want to cast our sights on a more sustainable solution which could be a win-win solution for all.

I would therefore like to ask if MinLaw would consider developing a framework to support low bono efforts by lawyers to augment existing legal aid schemes?

Legal Aid

Mr Chen Show Mao (Aljunied): Sir, I understand we do not currently provide legal aid for arbitration, as it is customarily a private, consensual dispute resolution process; and typically, arbitration is used for high value commercial dispute resolution, and involves much higher costs compared to court litigation.

But Sir, it is increasingly not the case. Increasingly, in some standard form mass market consumer contracts that ordinary Singaporeans enter into without much room for negotiation, such as some insurance policies, there are contractual requirements that the parties go to arbitration in the event of a dispute. They must go to arbitration. No legal proceedings. Even for needy Singaporeans with good claims under their insurance contracts who have met the Legal Aid Bureau’s Means test and Merits test for aid.

To belabour the point, these are needy Singaporeans who are poor enough, who have good enough claims, and who could otherwise have pressed their claims in court with the help of legal aid if the contract had not contained this arbitration clause.

So, there are many good reasons why an insurance company that drafts the policy would want such an arbitration clause. But one effect of such a clause is that it may keep a needy Singaporean from pressing a meritorious claim in the event of a dispute, since Legal Aid currently does not cover the costs of arbitration proceedings. Sir, even one such case that falls through this particular crack feels unnecessary.

I would like to ask that the Minister look into extending aid to eligible recipients, namely Singaporeans who have met the means test and the merits test for legal aid to help them cover the cost of arbitration proceedings to which they have been mandatorily directed by arbitration clauses in standardised contracts used in large volume.

6.30 pm

Protection from Harassment Act

Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (West Coast): Since coming in forth in November 2014, can Ministry of Law provide an update on the number of cases filed, mediated and heard on an annual basis from 2014 to 2018 under the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA)? Among all Prevention of Harassment Act cases filed, what is the breakdown of the type of cases, example, how many involve community, neighbours; how many are online harassment, how many are sexual harassment cases and how many are workplace harassment cases. If the State Courts have not started monitoring the type of cases, can I suggest it starts to do so, as this will give us a better appreciation of the different types of harassment happening on the ground. By the same token, I suggest that the decisions and judgment of the State Courts and selected POHA cases, particularly those cases of interests, be published so that complainants and perpetrators know and will keep within the boundaries of the law.

Mediation for Commercial Disputes

Mr Sitoh Yih Pin (Potong Pasir): Mr Chairman, I like to declare my interest that I am a practicing accountant. Not too long ago, my firm had the unfortunate experience to be involved in a commercial dispute that resulted in my firm taking a legal suit against a defendant party. I say this, with the greatest of respect to the many litigation lawyers in this House – that being a litigant is not a pleasant experience.

In the business world, civil litigation has traditionally been the primary tool for commercial dispute resolution. However, those, amongst us, who has ever been involved in litigation will tell you that it is a costly and resource intensive exercise for the litigants concerned. The litigants often have little or no control over the process and at the end of the day, it often produces outcomes that leaves one or sometimes both litigants dissatisfied.

The commercial dispute that my firm was involved in was referred to the Singapore Mediation Centre for Mediation as a form of alternative dispute resolution. This, I understand, is something that is strongly encouraged by the Courts in recent years. I was hesitant at the outset, unsure if a mediated settlement was possible, especially in disputes where parties were deeply entrenched in their respective commercial positions. I must say that I was pleasantly surprised. The Mediation was expertly handled with clear directions and targets set by the experienced and professional Mediators. I found the Mediation format to be less contentious, driven by parties instead of lawyers and crafted to empower parties to directly address their key concerns in the dispute, hear from each other and seek a solution where both parties are prepared to accept.

From a commercial perspective, Sir, I could see Mediation as a cost effective and efficient mechanism for businesses to resolve commercial disputes without being embroiled in litigation. In the premises, I invite Minister to share with this House the Ministry’s plans, if any, to promote the greater use of Mediation as a platform to resolve commercial disputes.

The Chairman: Mr Murali, you have four minutes for your three cuts.

Improving Estate Administration Process

Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Sir, I would like to declare my interest as a lawyer in private practice. On the first cut, in last year's Committee of Supply deliberations, I suggested that the estate administration process for a person dying intestate, meaning without a will, be looked into with a view to simplifying the procedure. As Members would know, currently, if the value of the estate of a person who died intestate is less than $50,000, the Public Trustee is able to administer the estate without the need for the family to make a court application. However, this option is not open for estates worth more.

Since the Government has access to identity data of beneficiaries of a person who has passed away intestate such as his or her spouse, children and parents, there is scope to devise a more cost-effective and efficient system to administer the estate, hopefully without the need to involve the court system.

The hon Senior Minister of State, as she then was, informed that the Ministry would undertake a review of the estate administration system after the completion of the work on the civil justice system reform. I would be grateful for an update on this matter.

Extending Third Party Funding Categories

On the next cut, as Members of this House may remember, in January 2017, amendments were made to the Civil Law Act to enable third party funding for international arbitration and connected matters. Given that third party funding can potentially facilitate access to justice by enabling parties who may not have sufficient financial means to prosecute their claims, I had suggested that the framework be extended to litigation cases.

There is also a case to allow for third party funding for commercial litigation cases in the Singapore International Commercial Court, particularly the offshore cases. The hon Senior Minister of State, as she then was, informed this House that the Ministry would like to test the third party funding framework within the international arbitration sphere before deciding to expand the categories. She also stated that the relevant stakeholders will be consulted too. I would like to respectfully seek an update on this matter.

Singapore as an International Legal Hub

In 2015, the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC) was established with a view to broaden the suite of dispute resolution options here, apart from international arbitration and mediation, and further enhance Singapore’s standing as a leading international dispute resolution centre.

As stated by the hon Senior Minister of State, as she then was, in this House, the underlying objective is for the SICC to be a neutral venue for international commercial litigation for parties with little or no connection to Singapore but who need and value a neutral jurisdiction with a strong tradition of the rule of law, experienced and respected commercial judges and legal services of high quality.

The SICC currently has, in addition to our own experienced Supreme Court judges, 16 International Judges, who are also highly regarded jurists in their own jurisdictions. The diversity of the SICC judges’ backgrounds add to the strength of the SICC. Despite being recently set up, the SICC has already drawn compliments from commentators for the quality of its judgments.

Also, the jurisdiction of the SICC has been widened to enable it to hear cases involving international arbitration law; an area which all the SICC judges would be very familiar with. In addition, Singapore acceded to the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements which allows SICC judgments to be enforced in jurisdictions of the contracting parties, thereby broadening the reach of SICC judgments.

I would like to seek an update from the hon Minister on the development of SICC as well as his Ministry’s efforts to entrench Singapore as a choice location for dealing with international disputes as well as how Singapore’s legal industry would benefit from such efforts. I also seek an update from the Ministry on its review of my suggestion that Singapore accedes to the Apostille Convention to facilitate easier recognition of foreign legal documents in Singapore.

Support for Law Firms and Legal Sector

Ms Rahayu Mahzam: Like other industries, the legal sector also has to transform in this changing economy. There is new technology available that could increase productivity and developing areas of law which firms could venture into to grow their business. I would like to ask about the efforts being done to help small and medium law practices, to leverage on technology to remain relevant, build internal capabilities and access regional opportunities.

At the Singapore Academy of Law Annual Lecture last year, the Chief Justice commented that the profession’s response to legal technology has been lukewarm. He highlighted a 2017 study by the Law Society which found that only 9% of small and medium-sized law practices used technology enabled productivity tools. There is indeed hesitation on the part of the small and medium firms, because unlike bigger firms, they cannot afford to dedicate resources and time to this effort in the midst of continuous and ongoing legal work. I appreciate the efforts with TechStart and FLIP. However, perhaps, the support could be enhanced with the provision of customised consultancy services to study work processes in that specific law firm so as to make a business case for adopting legal technology and appropriate proposals on the transition process which would address the firm’s unique needs.

I also appreciate the Lawyers Go Global programme that could help law firms internationalise. In this regard, are there specific efforts to ensure lawyers and law firms can venture into new areas of law? Many small and medium firms may only be doing family law and general litigation in the domestic market. If they wish to access regional opportunities, they may need to develop new practice areas. Would the Ministry consider providing support for those who wish to do so, perhaps through the proper curation of Continuing Professional Development courses?

Legal Para-professionals in Singapore

Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (West Coast): The illegal industry is not spared from the onslaught of disruptive forces. Technology, stiff global competition and growing commercialisation of the law will radically transform the depth and breadth of practice and traditional models of legal work. The report of the working group on legal and accounting services and the professional services industry transformation map advocate for the transformation of industry through development of high growth areas, innovation, reskilling and upskilling the workforce boosting productivity and internationalisation of practices. However, much of the conversation has centered on firms and lawyers. I would like to ask the Minister of Law, what plans are in the pipeline to develop legal para-professionals who are also significant contributors in the ecosystem.

At the recent round table discussion with legal para-professionals jointly organised by NTUC and the Singapore Academy of Law, para-professionals shared that they faced pay limitations and career bottlenecks and encountered employers who were not able to fully appreciate the potential of para-professionals. Concerns were also raised on the viability of the para-professionals with the introduction of technology, such as Artificial Intelligence. While this round table discussion was only the first of the series of engagements to better understand the needs of para-professionals and the support they need in the work place. The consensus was that, more must be done to better recognise the potential of our para-professionals.

I have three suggestions on how the potential of our para-professionals can be maximise in tandem with our industry transformation push. First, expand the value proposition. To accelerate industry transformation efforts, we need to expand the value proposition of para-professionals. Some possible complementary roles that para-professionals can undertake are – Innovation Managers or Transformation project roles to drive legal innovation or transformation in workplace. Learning and Development roles to grow legal and legal-tech skillsets. Technology roles to enable adoption of legal technology to boost productivity such as e-discovery, case management and legal research and analytics tools. Business Development roles to understand foreign legal jurisdictions to enable internationalisation.

Second, continuous learning, to enable para-professionals to take on these expanded new roles, it must be provided with access to continuous learning opportunities provided by industry recognised or endorsed training providers.

And third, structured wage and skills pathways for progression. Structured wage and skills pathways can provide guidance to employers on how to maximise the potential and value add of the para-professionals to their organisation and provide for para-professionals progression and upward labour mobility.

The Chairman: Mr Christopher de Souza, you can take both your cuts.

Internal Capabilities – Legal Industry

Mr Christopher de Souza (Holland-Bukit Timah): Chairman, in order to tap on the regional opportunities in the legal market, firms need to be prepared to explore spheres outside Singapore. Allow me to declare my interest as a practising lawyer. International arbitration where parties are often cross-bordered is one key area of regional opportunity. Also, in October last year, a new Singapore infrastructure dispute management protocol was introduced to help mega infrastructure projects around the region manage disputes and minimise the risks of time and costs overruns. How is Ministry of Law, assisting firms in Singapore with ideas for technological advancement or Blue Ocean Strategies to tap on the Regional Market thereby creating more job opportunities for Singaporeans and being better able to serve Singapore based or Singapore owned companies.

Property and Commercialisation of Intellectual Property (IP)

Next, innovation and invention drive corporations to better their products. As a result, lives of consumers improved. To incentivise such innovation, corporations' Intellectual Property (IP) must be protected. How is Ministry of Law bolstering Singapore's already formidable IP Protection regime such as to incentivise more companies to invest in, protect, and commercialise their IP here. Thank you.

The Chairman: Mr Patrick Tay, you can take both cuts.

IP Protection for FinTech Sector

Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: Ever wary of minimising burn rate, technology startups may be tempted to differ investment in Intellectual Property protection. To those we have not tried to protect Intellectual Property, it feels complex and expensive. Too often, start-ups end up forfeiting Intellectual Property rights by neglecting to protect their hard work.

6.45 pm

Some simple and cost-effective techniques can minimise the anxiety yet help protect core assets. Can IPOS consider extending and expanding the current funding and support mechanism for our local FinTech Start-Ups and provide a one-stop service to educate, advise and hand-hold our start-ups in this IP protection journey? This will range from advising on patent protection and taking cognisance of non-patent intellectual property rights.

IP Protection for Creative Sector

My second cut – Intellectual Property Protection for the Creative Sector. There are more than 30,000 in Singapore’s creative sector workforce. This figure encompasses many freelance and self-employed workers in the creative sector.

I have spoken to and engaged many of these professional freelancers in the past years through the Labour Movement. In fact, IPOS has worked closely with the Labour Movement as part of the Copyright Act review and has engaged the freelance professionals within the Labour Movement's network. The workers and the Labour Movement are thankful for the close partnerships. Speaking on behalf of the thousands of professional freelancers in the creative sector, from photographers to actors, actresses, scriptwriters, graphic designers or creative directors, can Ministry of Law explore to see how the copyright regime can be further strengthened to better protect the creative ideas and works of these many creative freelancers?

Intellectual Property

Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo (East Coast): Mr Chairman, with digitalisation, ideas and innovation become increasing important for companies to differentiate themselves and compete effectively. Hence, the management of these intangible assets and intellectual property is key.

How are Singapore businesses identifying and using intellectual property (IP) to grow and expand their businesses and have they been successful? What measures are in place to assist Singapore businesses in commercialising their IP?

The Committee on the Future Economy (CFE) has identified IP as a key driver of Singapore's future economic growth. To enable this, we must have a skilled and competent base to support companies in the protection and commercialisation of their IP. With this focus on innovation, what are the job opportunities and careers for Singaporeans in IP? What measures are in place to develop and grow the talent base of Singaporeans in IP?