DELIVERING JUSTICE TO THE COMMUNITY Annual Report 2015 SHARED VISION CONTENTS Inspiring public trust and confidence through an effective and FOREWORD BY THE HONOURABLE accessible justice system THE CHIEF JUSTICE 2

MISSION MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE STATE COURTS 6 Serving society with quality judgments, timely dispute resolution and ORGANISATION CHART 12 excellent court services CELEBRATING 40 YEARS AT HAVELOCK SQUARE 13 CORE VALUES Fairness DELIVERING JUSTICE TO THE COMMUNITY 25 Accessibility Launch of State Courts Centre for Dispute Resolution 26 Launch of Community Justice and Tribunals Division 27 Independence, Integrity, Impartiality Responsiveness SERVING SOCIETY 29 Significant Initiatives 30

INSPIRING PUBLIC TRUST AND CONFIDENCE 45 Caseload Profile 46 Significant Cases 48 Local and International Awards 57 Our International Profile 59 Visits by Distinguished Guests in 2015 63

THE PEOPLE OF STATE COURTS 65 Presiding Judge and Heads of Division 66 Leadership Team 67 State Courts Committees 2015 68 Public Service Month Activities 70 Cohesion Day 2015 71 Staff Event Highlights 72

National Day and State Courts Awards 76 State Courts, Singapore Annual Report 2015

1 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

Foreword by The State Courts published their caseload is expected to increase. THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE first annual report in 1999 and These community disputes continued to do so every year are managed by the newly- since then. These annual reports established Community Justice enable the stakeholders of the and Tribunals Division (CJTD). justice system, in particular, the members of the public, to better Another milestone for the State understand the work of the Courts in the year 2015 was Courts and the role they play in the launch of the State Courts our community. This is important Centre for Dispute Resolution. in fostering public trust and Like the CJTD, this Centre places confidence in the judiciary as an emphasis on the use of well as for accountability to the mediation to resolve disputes. people we serve. The use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) through court- The title of this annual report based mediation is not new in is “Delivering Justice to the State Courts. However, the the Community”. The State establishment of a specialised Courts’ commitment towards centre to provide ADR services the excellent delivery of across the entire range of cases justice remains steadfast and highlights the State Courts’ unwavering. This annual report emphasis on ADR as the first reflects the excellent work of the stop of the litigation process. State Courts on so many fronts, as the Presiding Judge and his colleagues continue in their quest “The ultimate goal is to to ensure justice for all.

preserve peace and maintain Foreword by harmony in our community. In 2015, the State Courts dealt with approximately 326,450 At the same time, this helps The Honourable the Chief Justice cases, an increase of more us ensure that justice can than 14,000 cases compared

Annual Report 2015 be accessed through a to the previous year. With variety of dispute resolution the commencement of the Protection from Harassment methods, with a continuing Act and the Community focus on controlling costs.” Disputes Resolution Act, the State Courts, Singapore

2 3 4 State Courts, Singapore Annual Report 2015 BACK TOCONTENTSPAGE oeih” “evc” “Well- “Service”, Foresight”, categories including “Organisational various in highly organisation the ranked Courts Health Organisational Survey 2015. The staff of the State the in results strong extremely garnering I regard, for this Courts State the congratulate In staff. our by environment work well-regarded very a external by matched is stakeholders our State serving the in the Courts of that work delighted excellent also am I law andlegalrights. the of awareness public increase to talks such hold to continue to plans are there that understand I and public, the by well-received were talks The evenings. the in talks informative of series a and week- a day,the in exhibition public long held Courts State the Awarenesswhere “Public Week” the the during particular, organised programmes in applaud, I activities. outreach community and education legal several in participate and organise to time make to able were Courts State the of Administrators Court and Courts, I am pleased that the Judges State the in justice dispensing of priorities daily the and caseload heavy the Notwithstanding landmark inourcommunity. distinctive and familiar a become has that building whiteoctagon-shaped iconic the of memorial fitting a be would report annual the of cover the on painting this of use the that felt was it Building, Courts State the of anniversary to 2009. As 2015 marked the 40 prior stood it as Building Courts State the of Seng, Kim Ong Mr artist, watercolour eminent Singaporean by painting a features report annual this of cover The team andcommendtheirefforts. leadership the congratulate I and morale, staff high appreciably is “Teamwork”.There and Being” upholding the Rule of Law.” for rankings international high achieve to Singapore helping confidence, and trust public enjoyed consistently has world- that a judiciary class – today is it what into system justice Singapore’s developing towards made have Courts State the the of contributions us reminds “It th

Republic ofSingapore Chief Justice SUNDARESH MENON annual report. this aptlyof title the in encapsulated as community the to justice deliver to continue will confidence that the State Courts utmost the have I Singapore. of dedication in serving the people and work hard their for State Courts the of CourtAdministrators and Judges the all to appreciation my extend I to the future. attention our turn we as apace continues and underway already is Building Courts State new the on work Meanwhile,

The Honourable the Chief Justice Chief the Honourable The 5 by Foreword BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

Message from the DELIVERING JUSTICE TO We were privileged to be able PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE STATE COURTS THE COMMUNITY to convey our appreciation to all our pioneering Judges and Court 2015 was an eventful year Administrators who have helped as Singapore celebrated her bring us to where we are today. golden jubilee as a nation. As the State Courts reflected on Two New Justice Divisions our contributions to Singapore’s The justice divisions of the progress over the last 50 State Courts have traditionally years, we are mindful of the operated according to the areas need to continue delivering of law which they deal with. The fair and accessible justice to State Courts now deal exclusively the community to ensure our with civil and criminal matters. country’s continued progress in Although the Civil Justice the next 50 years and beyond. Division and Criminal Justice Division handle discrete areas 40th Anniversary of the of law, there are occasions when State Courts Building the two areas intersect and a On 15 September 2015, we holistic approach is called for to celebrated the 40th anniversary better serve our court users. With of the State Courts Building. this in mind, we established the We were joined by The Community Justice and Tribunals Honourable Attorney-General Division to provide a centralised V K Rajah SC, Judges and Judicial location for the resolution of all Commissioners of the Supreme community justice issues, such as community disputes, harassment Court, former Senior District Message from the Presiding Judge of the State Courts Judges Mr Michael Khoo SC issues and small claims. We and Mr Errol Foenander, former also established the State Courts Registrars of the State Courts, Centre for Dispute Resolution, our stakeholders in the justice which consolidates our court- system, and Mr Sonny Chan based Alternative Dispute and Mr Lee Kut Cheung who Resolution services, and serves as Annual Report 2015 were the key persons involved the focal point in providing these in the design and construction services for civil, criminal and of the State Courts Building. relational disputes. State Courts, Singapore

6 7 8 State Courts, Singapore Annual Report 2015 BACK TOCONTENTSPAGE cue pros o ces two access to persons accused unrepresented allows This matters. criminal to extended Primary Justice Project (PJP) was the disputes, family and civil in involved parties for Originally Project toCriminalMatters Extension ofPrimaryJustice enhancements totheprocess. future for feedback obtain to Bar the engage and process new the of efficacy the monitor to continue will We cases. of civil value lower disposal faster a in has resulted and effective be to has proved CMC the implementation, been its after has year One well-received. (CMC) management conference case early the of mechanism the that showed 2015 of end the at conducted survey user A achieved. being is – of cost level proportionate a at and expeditiously cases resolve to – 108 Order of aim main the that encouraging signs from case outcomes in 2015 are There 2014. of November in Court of 108 Rules the Order of cases. the introduction in civil culminated project value This lower the for processes simplifying and rules into procedural look to began Courts State the 2013, In Claims Lower Value Simplifying Civil Processesfor or likely upon conviction. upon likely Thereor imprisonment term is mandatory issues, or those in cases where an psychiatric or mental have who those charges, persons multiple facing accused assist remanded to primarily intended is It stage. conference pre-trial and mentions include the both at cases to lawyers of volunteer assistance the with 2015 February in expanded was GPS to assist such accused persons. avenue The court-directed a is Scheme (GPS) for criminal cases Plea for Guidance andThe support. advice, information, for needs unresolved many may have counsel by represented not are who persons Accused Plea Scheme Enhanced Guidancefor in relationtotheircases. decisions informed more make enable more accused persons to will this matters, criminal to PJP the of extension lawyer. the With a by represented are who persons accused to only Resolution, which were previously available Case and Criminal System Case Management Criminal the namely, prosecution, the and persons accused between negotiation processes plea important f igpr, ad Transport Land Singapore, of Authority Monetary Association, Workshops Motor Singapore Singapore, of Association Insurance General the including stakeholders, external our engaged since have We cases. and faster more effective resolution of such the and the with protocols compliance of level higher a ensuring of objective the cases with 2015, in Injury commenced Personal Accident and for Motor Protocols Non-Injury Pre-action and Review of the Practice Directions Accident Cases Protocols forMotor Strengthening Pre-Action facilities totheremandarea. video-link and area waiting a with fitted chambers PTC three comprising centre dedicated a into them integrating by PTCs criminal of management the enhances Centre new the 17, Court at located Previously operations on on 3 began December 2015. level, mezzanine located the Centre, (PTC) Conference Pre-Trial new The Pre-Trial ConferenceCentre as ofDecember2015. programme GPS Enhanced the under managed cases 76 were

of each other. After conducting other.After each of presence the in issues concurrently, expert on giveevidence will witnesses expert opposing procedural where a technique “hot is or tubbing” procedure CEE The (CEE) Procedure Concurrent ExpertEvidence second quarterof2016. the in operation into come will Practice Directions and Protocols revised The stakeholders. with our consultations the from feedback the procedures, account into taking and protocols the Work is apace to update and revise Singapore. of Society Law The of Committee Damage Property Centre Personalthe and Limited, Injury/ Resolution Disputes Industry Financial Authority, euig h drto o the of duration the reducing with the CEE procedure, besides that agreed programme pilot the in Participants hearings. AD and trials civil in feature permanent a procedure CEE the availabilityof the make to 60A) (PD 60A Direction Practice (AD) hearings, the State Courts issued damages of andassessment trials civil expert in evidence admit CEE to the procedure of use the explore programme to pilot 18-month an

Presiding Judge of the State Courts State the of Judge Presiding 9 the from Message 10 State Courts, Singapore Annual Report 2015 BACK TOCONTENTSPAGE o s mte o lgl and legal of matter a as do we what Ps’: ‘3 they the on centre governance, of context the In our common. are judiciaries facing challenges varied of the many that affirmed debate, and and discussion lively much generated programme The excellence. journey court towards ongoing our in procedures and processes innovating and change leading Courts shared our experience in State JGP.The the in part took Asia, the Middle East and Africa in jurisdictions 15 from officials and Administrators Court Judges, comprising participants Twenty-seven 2015. July 31 to 27 from judiciaries overseas for (JGP) Programme Judicial Governance the conducted we International, College Civil the Service with partnership In International Relations before theCourt. presented being evidence expert on clarity greater provided This cross-examination. of sequential method traditional the to compared as dispute in issues the on opinions another’s one placed to discuss and consider trial, expert witnesses are better at theStateCourts. enabling and energising everyone engaging, at working keep and We willkeepstriving todobetter organisation. the of perception staff’s the showed in improvement strong dialogues and the that Survey note to heartened are We improvement. for continuous feedback their solicit Administratorsto Court with our sessions dialogue 17 series of a conducted the we Survey, Following categories. comparable all across Singapore and private sector organisation in public as well as agency public sector typical the than better significantly doing be to Courts State the showed Norm National Singapore the and Norm Survey Engagement Public Employee the Service to Comparisons Survey. second Health Courts Organisational our State the commissioned 2015, In Administrator Dialogues Survey andCourt Organisational Health andjustice stakeholders. users court staff, our – People manage we how and Processes, our operate and manage we Policy, how judicial Award by the Public Utilities Board. (Silver) Certification Building Efficient Water the and website, Courts Marketing State the Web for Association the by 2015 Award Excellence” of Standard “Government Development, Web in Achievement Outstanding Project, the Justice Primary the for Category Care Community the in Awards Singapore FutureGov the include awards received we which for initiatives Other (ICMS). System Management and Filing Case Criminal Integrated the for awards three including 2015, in awards several conferred be to honoured were Courts State The Awards udne f h Cif Justice Chief the of and guidance leadership visionary for the grateful are We clear. are values and mission vision, Our endeavours. daily justice our through upholding by serving society of task important the with charged are we justice; of heart the at are Courts State the observed,Justicepreviously has Chief the Honourable The As CONCLUSION

Presiding Judge oftheState Courts SEE KEEOON our justicesystem. in confidence and trust inspire to commitment, and diligence with duties our discharge we as focussharp in purpose core our keep to continue will we and

Presiding Judge of the State Courts State the of Judge Presiding 11 the from Message BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

ORGANISATION CHART CELEBRATING AT HAVELOCK SQUARE Presiding Judge of the State Courts

Deputy Subordinate Courts Building Presiding Judge at Havelock Square from 1975 of the State Courts

Internal Audit Unit

Civil Community Criminal Centre for Corporate Strategic Criminal District and Magistrates’ Court Justice Justice & Justice Dispute Services Planning & Division Tribunals Divison Resolution Division Technology at South Bridge Road (circa 1950s) Division Division

Civil Trial Community Specialised & General Civil Communications Planning, Courts Group Disputes Trial Mentions Dispute Directorate Knowledge • Courts Courts Group Resolution • Management & Civil Registry • • • Court Services Library Department • Community Commercial Specialised Directorate • Bailiffs Disputes Crimes Group Civil Dispute • Section Tribunals • Resolution Financial Organisational • Centralised • Policy & Excellence & Performance Appeals PTC Court Criminal Management Civil District Court at Empress Place Dispute Directorate Management • • Department (circa 1940s) Resolution • Registry Crimes against • Property Group • Infrastructure Information • Centre for Development & Dispute Procurement Technology Crimes against Department Persons Group Resolution Directorate Registry • • • International Community People Development & Relations Courts Group Section Annual Report 2015

Planning • Directorate Crime Registry Coroner’s Court at Outram Road (1956) State Courts, Singapore

12 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

ANNIVERSARY

The Coroner’s Court was housed with 1970 - 1971: The Need for a History of the State Courts Building the Criminal District and Magistrates’ In the year of Singapore’s golden jubilee, the State Courts commemorated a Courts at South Bridge Road until Centralised Building significant milestone in their history on 15 September 2015, as their iconic building they moved to Outram Road in 1956. at 1 Havelock Square turned 40. The date marked four decades of delivering As the Courts were situated at justice to the people of Singapore from the centralised and accessible premises of different locations in the city, the State Courts Building, formerly known as the Subordinate Courts Building. members of the public were often unsure as to which courthouse they should go to and did from time to time show up at the wrong Before the State Courts Building Over the years, the expansion of courthouse. Thus, the move to was constructed in 1975, various the Magistrates’ Courts saw some centralise all the courthouses in Courts had existed and operated of their Courts being situated at one building was a practical and a at different locations in pre-war different locations along New Coroner’s Court, Outram Road – Entrance necessary one. colonial buildings for many years. Bridge Road. front from Outram Road (1956) (Source: Public Works Department The dispersed locations made Collection, courtesy of National Archives The Parliamentary debates in 1970 access to justice a challenge to of Singapore) and 1971 also revealed that the court users then. various court buildings were in a bad state. As described by one Civil District Courts member, Mr J.F. Conceicao, “… Before 1975: Various Courts Built in 1827, the Old Parliament an atmosphere of physical gloom, at dispersed locations Building was home to the Civil congestion and dilapidation hangs District Courts in the early 1900s over our subordinate courts…” The Police Court at South Bridge Road, Criminal and Coroner’s Courts Singapore (circa 1900s) until the Courts moved to Empress and visiting these Courts was “quite The Criminal District and (Source: Lim Kheng Chye Collection, Place in the 1930s. Due to spatial a depressing experience”. Thus, the th Magistrates’ Courts were situated courtesy of National Archives of Singapore) constraints, the 4 District Court Subordinate Courts Building was at South Bridge Road. They dated operated out of the Supreme Court conceived to locate all the lower back to 1877 and were also known Known to older Hokkien- and Building. It only moved back into Courts under one roof and provide throughout the years as the “Police Cantonese-speaking Singaporeans the Civil District Courts Building in for a dignified courthouse that th Courts”, “Magistrates’ Courts”, as see pai poh, the former Sepoy 1948, when the 5 District Court would befit a modern and forward- and “Criminal District and Police Lines Police Station in Outram shifted into the South Bridge Road looking nation. st nd Courts”. In 1951, two temporary housed the 1 and 2 Traffic Courts Police Courts. rd Celebrating 40 Years at Havelock Square courthouses were built in Hong Lim in the 1930s. The 3 Traffic Court was Ideals and Symbolism Green. These buildings remained created in 1967 at 395 New Bridge of the Building there until the completion of the Road. They were later re-designated The Ministry of Law approached a th th th State Courts Building in 1975. as the 10 , 9 and 7 Magistrates’ private architectural firm Kumpulan Annual Report 2015 Courts respectively. Akitek to propose a design that would reflect the gravitas and presence of the Courts. The result was an iconic octagonal architecture Civil District Court, Singapore (circa 1940s) (Source: Courtesy of National Archives with circulation spaces that meet of Singapore) the functional needs of the different State Courts, Singapore user groups.

14 15 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

ANNIVERSARY

was one of the first in Singapore to 1980s to-date: Growth have an environmentally-sensitive design, through the creation of a within the Building This Building has become an full height central atrium which icon; a landmark symbolising our was illuminated by natural lighting. The Building was originally integral role in the justice system. designed to house 26 courtrooms It has served us well. There were It was also reported to be the first 2 government “fireproof” building in over an area of 30,600m . To “nips and tucks” and additions Singapore, as a sprinkler system of cope with an increasing caseload and alterations to improve the Photograph courtesy of Chew C S water pipes were put in place as part and a broadening jurisdiction Building’s interior over the years. The design of the Building reflected of the anti-fire measures to protect the over the years, more courtrooms But by and large, it looks similar a conscious intent to reinforce the wooden wall panels in the courtrooms. had to be added. By 1993, there to how it was in 1975… This is a Courts’ mission to enhance access to were 40 courtrooms and 28 strong testament to how resilient justice. Areas commonly frequented Due to its special design, the State hearing chambers. and enduring the Building has by members of the public, like the Courts Building has established itself proven to be, withstanding the registries, the Information Counter as a landmark in the Havelock Road Through the years, various test of time over the past 40 years. and the main Mentions Court (Court area. The Building was gazetted for improvements and enhancements Judicial Commissioner See Kee Oon, 26), were located on the ground conservation on 10 July 2013. were made to the Building’s floor so that court users need not interior and facilities. For example, Presiding Judge of the State Courts shuttle over different levels for their modifications were made with in his Address during the “State Courts Building: Celebrating 40 Years” cases. The Building is also noted the introduction of the Small event on 15 September 2015 for its clever design that allows for 1972-1975: Construction Claims Tribunals in 1985, Night the circulation of the judiciary, the of the Building Courts in 1992 and the Primary persons in custody and the public to Dispute Resolution Centre (now In 1972, the Singapore government take place in separate spaces. known as the State Courts Centre The Future of the Building called for tender-bids and construction for Dispute Resolution). Changes works at Havelock Square began The Building is also symbolic of the were also made in 2008 when the In 2014, the State Courts shortly after in 1973. forward-looking ideals of the Courts, Community Court was established, embarked on the construction as its design marked a significant in 2010 when the HELP Centre of a new building that will have In September 1975, the Building departure from the neo-classical was set up, and in 2015 when the the capacity to support the long- was completed. Arrangements style that was often adopted for Community Justice and Tribunals term demands on the Courts. The were made for most of the Courts courthouses and followed the Division was launched. On 7 new building will have over 60 modern movement towards a new overseeing criminal and civil March 2014 following the name courtrooms and over 50 hearing Celebrating 40 Years at Havelock Square matters, including the Coroner’s era of design. The building project change of “Subordinate Courts” chambers to handle the increasing Court, to move into the building. was also significant as it was the to “State Courts”, the building was workload of the State Courts. first time that a private architectural On 15 September 1975, the then renamed the State Courts Building. firm was engaged to work in Subordinate Courts Building opened

Annual Report 2015 After the State Courts move into its doors to court users. collaboration with the then Public the new building, the current State Works Department in a public Courts Building will be retrofitted development project. The Building for the Family Justice Courts. State Courts, Singapore

16 17 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

ANNIVERSARY Honouring our Pioneers

Past Heads since 1975 Judges and Court Administrators since 1975

(Left to Right) First row: Principal District Judge Tan Puay Boon, Deputy Presiding Judge Jennifer Marie, Mr Errol Foenander, Judicial Commissioner See Kee Oon, Mr Michael Khoo SC, MR T S SINNATHURAY Principal Director Bala Reddy, Principal Director James Leong Second row: Mr Lau Wing Yum, Mr Alfonso Ang, Judicial Commissioner Hoo Sheau Peng, Senior District Judge Mr Francis Remedios, District Judge Low Wee Ping, Mr Toh Han Li 1971 - 1978

MR MICHAEL KHOO Senior District Judge 1978 - 1984

(Left to Right) First row: Mr Yong Yung Kiong, Mr Lee Cheong Hoh, Mr Khoo Oon Soo, Mr Tan Lian Ker, Mr Ibrahim Burhan, Dr S Chandra Mohan, Mr Francis Tseng Second row: Mr Roy Neighbour, District Judge Hamidah Ibrahim, MR ERROL FOENANDER District Judge Liew Thiam Leng, Judicial Commissioner Foo Tuat Yien, Senior District Judge Mr Leslie Chew SC, Mr Sarjit Singh, District Judge Tan Peck Cheng 1984 - 1992 Celebrating 40 Years at Havelock Square MR RICHARD MAGNUS Senior District Judge 1992 - 2008 Annual Report 2015 (Left to Right) First row: Mr Ismail Bin Mat, Mrs Yeow-Mak Yuen Ling, Ms Noraini Binte Haji Omar, Ms Anne Mathew, Mr Glenfield De Souza, Mr Sivanandan Nadarajoo, Ms Lucy Goh, Ms Carmen Seah, Mrs Mok-Goh Kit Soon, Ms Irene Lee, Ms Rosalind Yap, Ms Jennie Phua, Ms Teresa Teow Second row: Mr James Chuah, Mr Manickam s/o Pr Periasamy, Mr Mohd Abdullah B Rahim, MR TAN SIONG THYE Mr Jumahat Bin Ahmad, Mr Ajmer Singh s/o Sohan Singh, Mr Chew Chuee Seng, Mr Lee Chun Yip, Chief District Judge Mr Yong Siew Kin, Mr Richard Lau Boon Teow, Mr Lashman Singh s/o Thaman Singh, Mr Mohamed Yusof Bin Mohamed Arshad, Mr Joseph John, Ms Patricia Png, State Courts, Singapore 2008 - 2013 Mr Kok Long Seng, Mr Ng Han Cheong, Mr Cheong Yuen Kwan

18 19 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

ANNIVERSARY Commemorative events for Public Awareness Week On the evenings of 17 and 18 th In September 2015, as part of the September 2015, members of the 40 anniversary of celebrations to commemorate the the public attended a series of 40th anniversary of the State Courts informational talks. Topics covered the State Courts Building Building, the Public Awareness by the State Courts included To mark the 40th anniversary of the State Courts Building, the past and present Week was held for the public to Magistrate’s Complaints, filing a Judges and staff of the State Courts celebrated not just the physical space that find out more about the various claim at the Small Claims Tribunals, played a pivotal role in the delivery of justice since 1975, but also the people who avenues for dispute resolution making a motor accident claim, had worked in the Building and had contributed to the administration of justice available at the State Courts. court mediation, enforcement of for the past four decades. The commemorative events started in December 2014, judgments and the key features culminating in the anniversary event on 15 September 2015. of the simplified civil process for claims not exceeding $60,000. The participants were also given State Courts Art Competition an insight into the work of the An art competition was held from 1 Community Disputes Resolution December 2014 to 6 February 2015 Tribunals which came into for staff and their family members operation on 1 October 2015 to to submit entries in the form of deal with neighbourly disputes. drawings, paintings, graphic designs and photographs based on the themes, “What State Courts Mean to Me” and “Octagon Turns 40”. The winning entries now adorn A week-long public exhibition was several pillars on Level 1 of the State held at the State Courts Atrium from Courts Building, while the other 14 to 18 September 2015, where entries are displayed on the wall members of the public visited leading to the Pre-Trial Conference informational booths set up by the Centre on the mezzanine level. State Courts, Community Justice All the entries have also been Centre, Community Mediation reproduced on a banner displayed Centre, Singapore Police Force outside the State Courts Building. and The Law Society of Singapore’s Pro Bono Services Office to find Speakers from the Community

out about court processes and Justice Centre, Community Celebrating 40 Years at Havelock Square There were 22 entries received, the programmes offered by the Mediation Centre, The Law Society and they were evaluated based participating agencies. Several of Singapore’s Pro Bono Services on a combination of votes cast videos explaining the various Office and the Legal Aid Bureau

Annual Report 2015 by staff for their favourite entries shared the legal assistance schemes processes and services provided by and scores accorded by a panel of the exhibitors were also screened available to the community and judges. Former District Judge Mr during the exhibition. the programmes their agencies Rahim Jalil, known for his keen offered. The participants also interest in the arts, was invited to had the opportunity to have their be part of the judging panel. questions answered by a panel

State Courts, Singapore comprising the various speakers.

20 21 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

ANNIVERSARY

Commissioners of the Supreme He also took the opportunity to Courts to the then Subordinate Court, as well as former Senior honour the former Registrars, Judges Courts Building. He shared how District Judges Mr Michael Khoo and staff from Singapore’s Pioneer he had found this Building to be SC and Mr Errol Foenander, former Generation, and thanked the Judges, “opulent” and spacious when Registrars, retired Judges and staff of staff, stakeholders and justice compared with the old colonial the State Courts. Mr Sonny Chan and partners for their contributions and courthouses he had been working in. Mr Lee Kut Cheung, who were the commitment to providing access to He also shared how he had seen the key persons involved in the design justice for all Singaporeans. vast changes since 1975 when there and construction of the State Courts were insufficient Judges to occupy Building, were also present. all the courtrooms then, to the present when there is a shortage of courtrooms and hearing chambers. To him, this demonstrated how the State Courts have progressed over the past 40 years.

A commemorative video specially commissioned to document the In his welcome remarks, Judicial State Courts Building’s heritage Feedback on the talks was positive Commissioner See Kee Oon, was screened during the event. The and the participants agreed that the Presiding Judge of the State Courts, video recounts the history of the information from the presentations thanked all those who had worked State Courts Building and features was useful and relevant. A large in the State Courts to bring them unique insights and recollections majority also agreed that the talks to where they are today. Special on the Building from Mr Sonny Guests were also treated to special were a good way for them to learn mention was made of the former Chan, Mr Lee Kut Cheung, and performances by State Courts’ about the various dispute resolution Senior District Judges, Mr T S former and present State Courts very own talents. Judge Wong Li processes and types of services Sinnathuray, Mr Michael Khoo SC, Judges and staff. Apart from Tein sang an original composition, provided to the community. Mr Errol Foenander, Mr Richard highlighting the unique design of “Court of Honour”. Magnus and Mr Tan Siong Thye, who the State Courts Building, the video “State Courts Building: led the then Subordinate Courts also highlights the special role that Celebrating 40 Years at Havelock Square Celebrating 40 Years” over the years with dedication and the Building has played in making The anniversary event, “State Courts great distinction. justice accessible to the people in Building: Celebrating 40 Years” was the last 40 years. Annual Report 2015 held on 15 September 2015. The event was attended by 300 guests Mr Francis Remedios, who was and staff, including the Honourable Registrar of the then Subordinate Attorney-General V K Rajah SC, the Courts in 1975, shared his fond Honourable Judge of Appeal Justice memories of the move of the various Andrew Phang, Judges and Judicial State Courts, Singapore

22 23 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

This was followed by a choir of Judges singing the “State Courts DELIVERING JUSTICE Anthem”. Composed specially for the occasion, the lyrics are STATE COURTS ANTHEM TO THE COMMUNITY especially meaningful as they serve as a reminder of the vision Music composed by Judges Josephine Kang and David Lim and mission of the State Courts. Lyrics composed by Judges Marvin Bay, Carrie Chan, Kenneth Choo, Samuel Chua, Ronald Gwee, Josephine Kang, Kevin Kwek, David Lim, Sarah Tan, Terence Tay, Wong Li Tein and Michelle Yap

We are called to serve with honour and courage And keep the Rule of Law in our land To render what’s just with grace and mercy And guard the rights of every man

Without fear or favour, affection or ill-will We’ll do what’s right to all manner of people Upholding justice firm and fair In the State Courts of Singapore

To inspire trust in this Bastion of Justice We’ll meet our duty faithful and true And onward we’ll go with our purpose abiding To mete to each right and wrong its due I am grateful to the Judges and Judicial Officers and the staff of Without fear or favour, affection or ill-will the State Courts for the immense We’ll do what’s right to all manner of people Upholding justice firm and fair contribution they have each made In the State Courts of Singapore in helping us to deliver a system of justice that is fair, accessible With pride and courage, duty and honour and affordable. For the last 40 We’ll do what’s right to all manner of people years, they have done their work Upholding justice firm and fair in this Building and it has become In the State Courts of Singapore a landmark in Singapore.

Annual Report 2015 The Honourable the Chief Justice

Sundaresh Menon in his Congratulatory Remarks during the “State Courts Building: Celebrating 40 Years” event on 15 September 2015 State Courts, Singapore

24 26 State Courts, Singapore Annual Report 2015 BACK TOCONTENTSPAGE These services include mediation include services These range of matters in the State Courts. Centre The offers ADR services for a to resolvingeach dispute. an provide approachholistic and integrated to services ADR different the consolidates Centre now the law, the different of aspects traverse may parties between dispute a reality, in that Registry for mediation. Recognising Crime the to referred were offences criminal minor for individuals by Primary filed Magistrate’sComplaints while the to Dispute Resolution Centre for ADR, referred were Courts State the at filed claims civil Centre, the of launch the to Prior the useofADR,State Centre Courts forDispute Resolution waslaunched system.Buildingcases thatenterthecourt uponthisphilosophyofencouraging of justice in the Statedelivery It Courts. is promoted as the “first stop” for all Alternative disputeresolution (ADR)hasbeenanintegralcomponenttothe on 4March 2015by The Honourable theChief Justice Sundaresh Menon. CENTRE FORDISPUTERESOLUTION LAUNCH OFSTATE COURTS Singapore MediationCentre. the by accredited been havewho mediators volunteer and Peace the Judges of the State Courts, Justices of District by handled are sessions ADR The evaluation. neutral and otiuin o mdaos rm a from mediators of contributions the featuring by Singapore within movement mediation wider the highlights publication The A Practical Guide”. Singapore: in “Mediation entitled publication Reuters Thomson a of the Centre also featured the launch of launch ADR official the community, the with collaboration Courts’ State the with keeping In h Sae ors ad solicitors. and Courts, State the of Judges practitioners, and experts mediation academics, include Singapore. within Thecontributors mediation of maturation the to diverse range of disciplines, attesting h Lw oit o Singapore. of Society Law The and Development, Family Social and of Ministry Education, of Ministry Youth, and Culture Community,of Ministry Affairs, Home of Ministry Law, of Ministry Chambers, Attorney- General’s the from stakeholders by attended ceremony, opening the officiated Menon Sundaresh Justice Chief the Honourable The and Tribunals Division (CJTD).TheCJTDhandlesahybrid ofcivilandcriminal On 24April 2015,theState CommunityJustice launchedthenewly-formed Courts matters, and is a one-stop service toaddress community-baseddisputes.matters, andisaone-stopservice LAUNCH OFCOMMUNITYJUSTICE AND TRIBUNALS DIVISION

lawyers involved. no with judge-led and low-cost informal, are CDRT the under haveProceedings exhausted. been mediation through resolution a reaching at efforts all after neighbours between disputes involving cases hears CDRT The on 15 November 2014. effect into came which Act Harassment from Protection the undercases and (SCT), Tribunals Claims Small existing the 2015, October 1 on effect into came which Act Resolution Disputes Community the under established (CDRT) Tribunals the Resolution Disputes oversees Community CJTD The of mediation. the cultural and psychological aspects the community and in the Courts, and within mediation training, including Singapore, ofin practised mediation aspects many covers publication The

to the Community the to 27 Justice Delivering 28 State Courts, Singapore Annual Report 2015 BACK TOCONTENTSPAGE rm ml cam between claims consumers andsuppliers. small from arising the disputes of for resolution forum low-cost speedy and a provides SCT The resolution ofcommunitydisputes. conciliatory through society in that hoped promoted be will harmony greater is it CJTD, the of as a whole. With the establishment system justice the and users court benefitting thereby experts, matter of subject cultivates synergy and processes a together brings disputes community with indealing specialisation CJTD’s The the onlineworld. face who harassment in the physical and/or victims for recourse criminal and civil provides Act Harassment from Protection The SERVING SOCIETY BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

Significant Initiatives In every case, the Court and Magistrate’s Court cases which CIVIL JUSTICE DIVISION may modify, simplify and/ commenced on or after 1 November or dispense with any or all 2014 in which the parties are of the procedures prescribed permitted by the Court to appoint CONCURRENT EXPERT Unlike the traditional sequential in PD 60A to ensure that the separate expert witnesses. CEE procedure is carried out EVIDENCE PROCEDURE method of questioning witnesses which can take days, the CEE smoothly without causing any unnecessary increase in costs. On 1 August 2015, the new procedure aims to enable parties to PEOPLE DEVELOPMENT save time and costs by encouraging a Practice Direction 60A (PD 60A) Lawyers and expert witnesses who took effect. PD 60A provides for pre-trial discussion among the experts To promote lifelong learning and to narrow the issues in dispute, and participated in the pilot programme professional development among the use of the Concurrent Expert for the CEE procedure gave positive Evidence (CEE) procedure in civil by having all the experts testify the its staff, the Civil Justice Division disputed expert issues as a panel feedback on their experience. organised a comprehensive trials and assessment of damages The cases which had utilised the hearings, with the parties’ consent. in one sitting. The CEE procedure series of training sessions on facilitates a fair and candid exchange CEE procedure involved quantity various aspects of the civil This followed an 18-month pilot surveyors for renovation and programme from 2 January 2014 to of the experts’ opinions which can justice process. The sessions, be rigorously tested in real time. construction disputes, accident conducted by the Judges of the 30 June 2015 to explore the use of reconstructionists for road traffic the CEE procedure to admit expert Such a procedure also assists the Division, were complemented Court in understanding the expert accidents, motor surveyors for by regular dialogues held among evidence in these hearings. PD 60A assessing the cost of repairs of also makes the CEE procedure a issues more readily. the members of the Division motor vehicles, and medical who also had the opportunity to permanent feature in civil trials and specialists for personal injury assessment of damages hearings. PD 60A also streamlined critical observe hearings in chambers aspects of the CEE procedure to cases. The participants agreed that to gain first-hand experience on encourage the adoption of the CEE unlike the sequential method used how the hearings are conducted. The CEE procedure or “hot tubbing” in traditional cross-examination, is a procedural technique where procedure by litigants: Senior staff members also shared the CEE procedure required less their thoughts on the ethos of opposing expert witnesses will trial time. give evidence on expert issues Only a Joint Expert Report needs the public service to imbue a to be prepared by the parties stronger sense of purpose in the concurrently, in the presence of In addition, the CEE procedure each other. and experts. The format of the administration of civil justice Joint Expert Report is annexed allowed expert witnesses to be in Singapore. In addition, the better placed to discuss and Unlike the traditional sequential to the Practice Direction so that Division developed a mentorship parties can make reference to it. consider one another’s opinions programme to cultivate a better on the issues in dispute. understanding among its team The parties and experts have members of the roles that each considerable flexibility in The CEE procedure is also extended plays in the civil justice system.

Annual Report 2015 to all District Court cases and scheduling the joint experts’ discussion for preparing the Joint Magistrate’s Court cases which commenced before 1 November Expert Report. This may take the Serving Society form of face-to-face meetings, 2014 and are not subjected to video- or tele-conferences, the simplified process for civil or other appropriate modes claims not exceeding $60,000, State Courts, Singapore of communication.

30 31 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

Significant Initiatives and avenues for legal advice COMMUNITY JUSTICE AND available to them. To facilitate applications, two computers with TRIBUNALS DIVISION printing facilities and the relevant template forms are available for use at the CDRT. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE The CDRA also establishes the COMMUNITY DISPUTES Community Disputes Resolution RESOLUTION ACT Tribunals (CDRT) as part of the State Courts, to hear cases involving intractable disputes The Community Disputes Resolution between neighbours. The CDRT Act (CDRA) came into effect on • Same queue number for matters is intended to be the last resort 1 October 2015. on the same day for disputing neighbours, when Court users can use the same all other means of resolving the The CDRA creates a new assigned queue number for all dispute have been unsuccessful. statutory tort of interfering with matters relating to their SCT case the enjoyment or use of places of on the same day. For example, The CDRT, which is part of the residence. The underlying principle the same queue number will Community Justice and Tribunals is that no person should cause be used for their consultation, Division (CJTD), is located on Level unreasonable interference to his or hearing or collection of 1 of the State Courts Building. NEW QUEUE MANAGEMENT her neighbour’s enjoyment or use of documents after the consultation that neighbour’s place of residence. SYSTEM AT THE SMALL or hearing concludes. This The tort can include any act or Pre-Filing Consultation at CDRT CLAIMS TRIBUNALS reduces the confusion court users omission by a neighbour causing the might face if they had obtained To serve court users better, the Small unreasonable interference, such as Filing of Documents different queue numbers for excessive noise, smell, smoke, light Claims Tribunals (SCT) implemented different services at the SCT. or vibration, littering, obstruction, a new queue management system surveillance or trespassing. Pre-Trial Conference on 26 August 2015. The key features of the new Centralised Queue Management System are: Disputing neighbours should first Tribunal Hearing seek to resolve the matter amicably between themselves, failing which, Workflow of the CDRT • Self-registration of attendance Court users attending a consultation they should then approach their grassroots leaders who are trained as An important aspect of the at the SCT can register their community peacemakers to facilitate CDRT process is the pre-filing attendance themselves by scanning Annual Report 2015 a resolution. If a resolution cannot be consultation. The consultation the barcode on their Notice reached, the matter may be referred enables court users to clarify of Consultation. They no longer

to the Community Mediation Centre any questions they might have need to get a queue number and Serving Society for mediation by volunteers trained about the CDRA and the CDRT’s wait for their turn to register their in community mediation. processes. It also helps court users attendance at a counter. to better understand the options State Courts, Singapore

32 33 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

SELF-SERVICE (ACRA) database and purchase INTEGRATED PRE-TRIAL PROCEDURAL CHANGES INFORMATION the search results on the spot, or opt CONFERENCE CENTRE FOR IDENTIFICATION OF KIOSK AT THE for a copy of the search results to be DECEASED PERSONS emailed to them. COMMUNITY JUSTICE To enhance the management of AND TRIBUNALS Pre-Trial Conferences (PTC), the When the body of a deceased PTC chambers in Courts 17 and DIVISION (CJTD) person is sent to the mortuary at 18 were relocated to the new the Health Sciences Authority, the Pre-Trial Conference Centre on 3 family members are required to To provide greater convenience December 2015. The relocation turn up at the mortuary the next to court users, a self-service allows PTC matters to be heard in day for a formal coronial viewing information kiosk was installed in a centralised location while Courts and to identify the deceased. This the CJTD’s premises. The kiosk 17 and 18 can be reinstated as trial can be a very traumatic experience allows court users to conduct Courts. The Pre-Trial Conference for the family members. Thus, searches on the Accounting and Centre has three PTC hearing procedural changes are being Corporate Regulatory Authority’s chambers, video-link facilities introduced in phases to minimise and a waiting area for prosecutors, this trauma. Phase 1, which was lawyers, accused persons and their implemented on 24 June 2015, family members. There is also a made the formal coronial viewing Significant Initiatives dedicated service counter where optional if the family members CRIMINAL JUSTICE DIVISION staff will manage the PTC process had seen the deceased at the and attend to users’ enquiries. hospital or scene of death. Phase A queue management system will 2 will allow family members to EXTENSION OF PRIMARY Resolution (CCR), were opened be implemented to enhance the identify the deceased through JUSTICE PROJECT TO only to accused persons who were scheduling of the PTC hearings. photographs in cases where they CRIMINAL MATTERS represented by a lawyer. However, have not seen the deceased at the there were a significant number of hospital or scene of death. accused persons who did not have The Primary Justice Project (PJP) a lawyer and as a result, they did was originally meant for parties not have the benefit of adequate involved in civil and family information or legal advice for SENTENCING disputes. In December 2015, the purpose of plea bargaining. INFORMATION AND the PJP was extended to accused With the extension of the PJP to RESEARCH REPOSITORY persons in criminal cases. One criminal matters, accused persons of the key objectives for this may receive basic legal services at On 14 September 2015, the State enhancement was to facilitate the a reduced fee which will cover at Courts’ Sentencing Information and

Annual Report 2015 expeditious disposal of suitable least one round of representations Research Repository (SIR) was made criminal matters. Previously, to the prosecution as well as available online to the public via two important plea bargaining attendance at CCMS and CCR. This LawNet Premium, a subscription- Serving Society processes between accused persons will enable the accused persons to based service managed by the and the prosecution, namely, make more informed decisions in the Criminal Case Management relation to their cases.

State Courts, Singapore System (CCMS) and Criminal Case

34 35 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

Singapore Academy of Law. The SIR who are unrepresented may use the to the regulation of the mediation under the guidance of experienced is an online database that provides SIR to understand sentencing trends industry, and the development of mediators. District Judge Dorcas sentencing information on cases in order to make informed decisions international mediation. Quek was one of the judges presiding decided in the State Courts, including on their cases. over the finals of the inter-school those which were appealed in mediation competition held during the High Court. Consistency and the Conference. transparency in sentencing practices is enhanced through the provision of comprehensive and dynamic SKYPE MEDIATION sentencing information. Prior to April 2015, adhoc The SIR allows users to filter arrangements were available to the sentencing information to parties who were residing overseas identify sentencing patterns and to participate in mediation map out specific case outcomes. through Skype. Prosecutors, members of the Criminal Bar, and accused persons INCREASING AWARENESS OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION Significant Initiatives Brochures providing information STATE COURTS CENTRE FOR about the mediation and neutral DISPUTE RESOLUTION evaluation processes were produced to help lawyers and parties in a dispute prepare for mediation. These MEDIATION FORUM FOR International Mediation Centre), Mr brochures were also translated into PRACTISING MEDIATORS Loong Seng Onn (Executive Director, other languages to assist litigants In recognition that such arrangements Singapore Mediation Centre), who do not speak English and are are becoming more common with without lawyers. Members of the In conjunction with the launch of Associate Professor Ian MacDuff the increased mobility of parties, public can view the brochures on the State Courts Centre for Dispute (Director, Dispute Resolution the Skype mediation scheme was the State Courts’ website under Resolution on 4 March 2015, a Initiative, Singapore Management institutionalised in April 2015. “Interested in Mediation/ADR”. mediation forum “A Joint Session for University), Associate Professor Under the scheme, parties who can Mediators – Discussing What Is Close Joel Lee (Director, Singapore produce evidence that they have On 30 October 2015, participants of to the Heart of Mediators” was held International Mediation Institute), difficulty travelling to Singapore

Annual Report 2015 the Peacemakers Conference 2015 in the afternoon for the mediation and District Judges Ong Chin Rhu, may apply to have their mediation visited the State Courts where they community in Singapore to come Kevin Ng and Joyce Low. sessions held through Skype, with learnt about court mediation. This together for a time of collective the consent of the other party. The Serving Society Conference is organised annually by reflection and exchange of views. The panellists and participants scheme is also available to foreign Peacemakers Consulting Services Pte The Forum featured a panel shared their thoughts on a range of incorporated entities with no local Ltd for secondary school students to discussion with Mr George Lim, topics, from the progress made in presence or representative.

State Courts, Singapore learn and hone their mediation skills, SC (Deputy Director, Singapore Singapore in the use of mediation

36 37 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

PROFESSIONALISATION a system that reflects the value of Significant Initiatives OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE work done by mediators. CORPORATE SERVICES DIVISION RESOLUTION (ADR) Bearing in mind the importance of ensuring that ADR remains widely With effect from 1 May 2015, ADR accessible, the vast majority of civil fees were introduced for higher value claims, including all Magistrate’s civil claims within the District Courts’ NEW AWARDS TO LAUNCH OF SERVICE Court claims, motor accident jurisdiction. Court ADR fees of $250 RECOGNISE GOOD SERVICE EXCELLENCE PORTAL, claims, personal injury claims, and per party for District Court cases were SErvice gridS Magistrate’s Complaints for minor introduced under Order 90A rule To encourage the service-centric criminal offences, continue to be 5A of the Rules of Court. This change culture in State Courts, the GEM In October 2015, “SErvice gridS” exempted from Court ADR fees. arose from the need to put in place (Going-the-Extra-Mile) Awards was launched on the State Courts were given to recognise staff who Intranet as a one-stop portal for staff “Go the Extra Mile” in delivering to access resources that would help excellent service in the course of them deliver excellent services. Significant Initiatives their daily work. The resources include guidelines INTERNAL AUDIT UNIT and protocols on the expected To further encourage excellent service standards, and service- service delivery at the unit or related training programmes which GUIDELINES FOR “GUEST AUDITOR” team level, two new annual team staff might find beneficial to attend. awards were introduced in 2015. INTERNAL AUDITING PROGRAMME The portal also provides regular They are the GEM Team Award updates on the service performance and GEM Special Commendation achieved at the divisional and The Internal Audit Unit (IAU) In 2015, the IAU introduced a Award. The GEM Team Award organisational levels, including developed a set of guidelines to programme to allow a State Courts recognises the section or registry information on officers who enable the Audit Committee and staff member, who is from another that had received the highest had received compliments from senior management to review section and has a suitable auditing number of compliments, and members of the public. the internal controls for financial background, to serve as a “guest the team from the Small Claims reporting and the compliance with auditor”. The feedback from the Tribunals was the first to receive laws and regulations. This includes “guest auditor” serves to improve the this Award. The inaugural GEM reviewing whether the appropriate State Courts’ financial prudence. Special Commendation Award levels of response are in place to Through the programme, the “guest was presented to the Bailiffs adequately address audit risks. The auditor” will also gain a deeper Section in recognition of its efforts guidelines also enable the IAU to understanding of the internal audit to provide excellent services determine the amount of resources process and will be able to share this in spite of the challenging needed to assess the robustness of with his or her colleagues. Annual Report 2015

circumstances it had faced. recommended remedial actions, and to ensure that follow-up action is taken. Audit issues are monitored Serving Society and regularly highlighted to the Audit Committee. State Courts, Singapore

38 39 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

IMPROVEMENT OF AXS m-Station application on their UPDATES ON THE they could harness their strengths SERVICE CAPABILITIES smartphones. With these convenient CONSTRUCTION OF to contribute to the State Courts’ AND DELIVERY IN payment options, court users no THE NEW STATE shared vision and mission. longer need to take time off work THE COURTROOMS and make multiple trips to the State COURTS BUILDING Courts to pay their fine instalments. In August 2015, a new framework Following the groundbreaking was introduced to enhance the ceremony for the construction of the proficiency and professionalism new State Courts Building in May of court interpreters. Judges could 2014, piling works commenced provide direct feedback on the immediately thereafter. On 27 May services provided by the court 2015, the tender for superstructure interpreters. This would help to works was called and works are improve service delivery in the expected to commence in 2016. courtrooms. In addition, courtrooms were equipped with an enhanced Tender preparation is in progress Digital Audio Recording and for various other works for the new Transcription system to provide Building. In 2016, the main entrance better audio recordings of court of the current State Courts Building On 7 December 2015, the proceedings. With the new system, will be relocated from Havelock “Creativity and Innovation in the dedicated recording channels are Square to Upper Cross Street to Workplace” Learning Festival available for all the parties in the facilitate the construction works. presented everyone with the courtroom and this enables the opportunity to visit various public transcribers to accurately identify IMPROVEMENT WORKS and private sector organisations to the parties who spoke during the TO THE STATE COURTS LEARNING AND learn about the different ideation hearing, thereby improving the BUILDING DEVELOPMENT processes practised. The knowledge quality of court transcriptions. OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALL that staff had gained would help The establishment of the them develop programmes for Community Justice and Tribunals To encourage continual learning improving the State Courts’ delivery MORE CONVENIENT Division and State Courts Centre and development among staff, of justice to the community. PAYMENT OPTIONS FOR for Dispute Resolution introduced several training events were COURT FINE INSTALMENTS new registries in the State Courts held in 2015. The “Values and In addition, the inaugural “Talks@State Building. Efforts were made to Ethics Awareness Seminar” was Courts” series was launched to Since 29 January 2015, court users ensure that court users who have conducted on 22 June 2015, enhance staff’s learning. Experts have more convenient payment matters at these registries would where staff discussed the ethical from different fields were invited dilemmas they may face at the to give talks and share their Annual Report 2015 not need to shuttle over different

options to pay their State Courts fine instalments. They can do so before levels. As such, several offices workplace and how to overcome insights on a wide variety of topics, on Level 1 of the Building were them. At the “Personal Strengths including legal issues, leadership

10pm on the day the instalment Serving Society payment is due through various AXS relocated so that the areas could Learning Journey” on 24 July and management, and world channels – the AXS kiosks which be refurbished to accommodate 2015, staff discovered their affairs and trends. Kick-starting this are located island-wide, the AXS these new registries. personal strengths and learnt how series was Mr Tan Chade-Meng,

State Courts, Singapore e-Station on the Internet, or the

40 41 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

a Singaporean who is Google’s the attendees were able to learn against two possible scenarios the ORGANISATIONAL cultural ambassador. He shared about the latest developments in organisation may face in 2030. EXCELLENCE WEEK 2015 his experience in combining various fields of work that could The aim was to ascertain if the goodness and mindful leadership have an impact on the work of the strategies were robust enough to be The 2015 Organisational Excellence at the workplace. State Courts. used in future for the State Courts (OE) Week, themed “Get FIT with to meet the challenges brought OE”, was held from 5 to 8 May The “Fireside Chat” series was about by an evolving society. 2015. The OE Week aimed to introduced in August 2015 as The exercise enabled gaps in the refresh and reinforce interest in a staff capability development existing strategies to be identified OE-related initiatives such as initiative. The series provides and improved. innovation and continuous process opportunities for staff to meet improvement. Guest speakers from and interact with leaders from organisations which had received other public sector organisations. Business Excellence Awards, Through the sessions which were such as the Defence Science and held in a small-group setting, Technology Agency and OCBC Bank, were invited to share their experiences in innovation and change management. Exhibition Significant Initiatives booths were also set up and STRATEGIC PLANNING AND interactive activities were organised TECHNOLOGY DIVISION to raise awareness of OE. SERVICE MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK PROJECT FORMATION OF DIVISIONAL SCENARIO PLANNING PLANNING UNITS The State Courts were invited by In 2015, a scenario planning the Public Service Division to In June 2015, Divisional Planning exercise was conducted by a core pioneer a Service Management Units (DPUs) were formed to lead team from the Strategic Planning Framework project to improve the each division in its planning and and Technology Division to identify delivery of services across seven development-related activities. The and prepare for possible scenarios other agencies in the public sector. Strategic Planning and Technology which might arise in future. The team As part of a pilot programme in Division worked with the DPUs to interviewed the State Courts’ key 2015, State Courts’ staff were help the Divisions formulate their leadership personnel to identify interviewed as part of an evaluation long-term plans, and improve court the main concerns and key driving of the quality of their services. processes, procedures and services forces that might impact the State A study was also conducted Annual Report 2015 to court users. Courts in the long term. During to determine how the services the Corporate Retreat in July provided to litigants-in-person 2015, the participants tested the filing for Magistrate’s Complaints Serving Society organisation’s existing strategies and applications under the Protection from Harassment Act could be improved. State Courts, Singapore

42 43 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

JUDICIAL GOVERNANCE their countries’ experiences PROGRAMME in judicial reforms while the INSPIRING PUBLIC TRUST State Courts were given the The State Courts, in collaboration opportunity to share Singapore’s AND CONFIDENCE with the Civil Service College experience in areas such as International, organised a leadership and change, and the multilateral Judicial Governance State Courts’ innovations in Programme from 27 to 31 July organisational processes and 2015. The programme was well- procedures. The participants received, with 27 Judges and also visited key stakeholders senior Court Administrators from in the legal system, including 15 countries in Asia, the Middle the Supreme Court, Singapore East, and Africa participating in Academy of Law, Singapore the programme. The participants Judicial College and The Law held lively discussions about Society of Singapore. Annual Report 2015

State Courts, Singapore

44 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

CASELOAD PROFILE

CASELOAD PROFILE 2014(*) 2015(p) CASELOAD PROFILE 2014(*) 2015(p) CRIMINAL JUSTICE DIVISION 250,222 271,300 COMMUNITY JUSTICE AND 11,835 10,890 TRIBUNALS DIVISION (CJTD) Criminal and Departmental/Statutory Board Protection from Harassment Act Criminal Charges¹ 60,084 59,900 Originating Summonses - 11 180 Departmental/Statutory Board Charges 116,865 143,700 Applications for Protection Order (PO)/ 4 and Summonses Non-Publication Order (NPO) Traffic Charges and Summonses 67,215 62,000 Community Disputes Resolution Act

Others Community Disputes Resolution N.A 10 Tribunals Claims5 Coroner’s Court Cases 4,200 3,900 Magistrate’s Complaints 1,858 1,800 Small Claims Tribunals6

CIVIL JUSTICE DIVISION 50,384 44,260 Small Claims Tribunals Claims 11,824 10,700 Originating Processes 34,027 29,690 TOTAL 312,441 326,450 Writs of Summonses (DC & MC) 28,810 29,100 Originating Summonses 408 590 Notes Probate² 4,809 N.A (*) Figures for 2014 are subjected to revision. Family and Juvenile Court cases are excluded. (p) Projected Figures. 1 Include DAC, MAC, PSS, PS & other charges. Interlocutory Applications 14,159 12,370 2 Probate matters are handled by the Family Justice Courts and excluded from State Courts’ caseload with effect from 1 January 2015. 3 Summonses 10,297 9,100 3 Exclude O.25/37. 4 Applications for PO/NPO commenced on 15 November 2014. Summonses for Directions (O.25/37) 3,495 3,100 Inspiring 5 Filing for Community Disputes Resolution Tribunals Claims commenced on 1 October 2015. Summary Judgment (O.14) 367 170 6 The Small Claims Tribunals (SCT) came under the CJTD in 2015. The SCT was part of the Civil Justice Division in 2014. Public Trust and Confidence Annual Report 2015 Others Taxation 138 100 Assessment of Damages 2,060 2,100 State Courts, Singapore

46 47 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

Significant Cases • Under the above-mentioned from its offices. According to the guidelines, minor psychiatric Plaintiff, internal investigations CIVIL JUSTICE DIVISION disorders would attract awards had confirmed that the two other between $1,000 and $3,000. employees who had access to the CRLs did not remove and/ Plaintiff had received a total of 75 ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES • The Plaintiffs should not receive or have possession of the lists. messages from the Defendant over IN HARASSMENT CASES an award higher than an award Circumstantial evidence available the same time period. given to a victim who suffers indicated that the Defendant had (1) Kok Tuck Peng v Gabriel Baldwin a mild psychiatric disorder as wrongfully removed the CRLs from In both suits, the Defendant took (2) Chong Teck Yoon v Gabriel Baldwin a result of harassment. They the Plaintiff’s possession. no part in the proceedings and The first two assessments of should therefore receive an had allowed a default judgment damages arising from claims under award on the lower end of the The circumstantial evidence to be entered against him. the Protection from Harassment Act above-mentioned scale. marshalled against the Defendant were heard in 2015. The Plaintiffs was said to be the following: In the Assessment of Damages in both suits were claiming against The Court then awarded the sums hearing, the Court found the an ex-colleague. of $1,400 and $1,800 (excluding • The Defendant knew that the following: costs) to the first and second CRLs, which were required on a The Defendant was a driver in Plaintiffs respectively. daily basis, were of vital importance • The “Guidelines for the Supersonic Maintenance Service to the Plaintiff and would have Assessment of General Damages Pte Ltd (“the Company”) who, after been of great advantage to a in Personal Injury Cases”, which his resignation from the Company CIRCUMSTANTIAL competitor company. in 2014, alleged that there were is widely used and referenced by counsel, is an appropriate EVIDENCE salary arrears, unpaid leave and • The Defendant was the primary overtime pay due to him. As a reference point for the scale Humming Flowers & Gifts Pte Ltd person-in-charge of the CRLs. result, he proceeded to send many of damages to be awarded in v Lee Gwee Noi text messages to his ex-colleagues cases under the Protection from The Plaintiff is a wholly-owned • The Defendant was one of three which included demands, threats Harassment Act. subsidiary of Noel Gifts International persons who had the keys to and warnings. access the CRLs, and the other • The threats made by the Ltd which is in the business of two individuals did not take Defendant were quite mild selling flowers, gifts and hampers. The first Plaintiff was the Operations the CRLs. Manager of the Company and the in relation to inter alia the commencement of investigations The Defendant was the ex-sales second Plaintiff was the General • The Defendant had behaved or the lodging of complaints manager of the Plaintiff and had left Manager of the Company. The first suspiciously for some months Inspiring with the Ministry of Manpower the company in late 2011. Plaintiff had received a total of before she tendered her resignation. 42 messages from the Defendant against the Plaintiffs. In 2012, the Plaintiff filed a suit Public Trust and Confidence over a three-day period from 20 • The Defendant had stayed Annual Report 2015 claiming, essentially, that between August 2014 to 22 August 2014, • Both Plaintiffs had suffered minor February and March 2012, it was back in the office later than and over a one-and-a-half-month distress at best as a result of the discovered that its Customer usual between September and period from 5 October 2014 to 17 text messages. Refer Lists (CRLs) which contained October 2011. November 2014, while the second vital customer information were missing and had been removed State Courts, Singapore

48 49 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

• The CRLS were found missing the Defendant “rendered it Significant Cases about a week after she went on improbable” that the CRLs were garden leave. vital customer documents used COMMUNITY JUSTICE on a daily basis and/or the AND TRIBUNALS DIVISION • The Defendant had started a Defendant had been behaving competing business. suspiciously for months before she resigned. PROTECTION ORDER At the PTC which the Applicant and After the trial, the Court held inter UNDER THE PROTECTION Respondent attended, the Court alia that: • If the Defendant had behaved directed both parties to attend a FROM HARASSMENT ACT suspiciously and the Plaintiff’s counselling session conducted • Where allegations of senior management had been by court counsellors, as provided In August 2015, the Applicant reprehensible conduct are alerted, the CCTV footage of under Order 109 rule 2 of the Rules commenced proceedings under made, the standard of proof the Plaintiff’s premises “should of Court. The Court encouraged section 12 of the Protection from borne by a plaintiff is “one of a have been preserved for imminent both parties to use the opportunity to Harassment Act for a Protection balance of probabilities based recourse” and would not have share with each other their feelings, Order against an ex-boyfriend on cogent evidence”. been overwritten. their intentions for the relationship whom she had broken up with in and how each of them would like 2013. Even though the Applicant • The discrepancies within the • In general, the circumstantial the other party to conduct him or had changed her mobile phone Plaintiff’s case on what evidence forming the “construct herself moving forward. number after the breakup, documents or folders were lost or of the case” against the Defendant the Respondent succeeded in taken “impugned the Plaintiff’s was “far from being cogent” and Through the counselling session, obtaining her new number. entire claim”. “was utterly defeasible”. the Respondent understood and accepted that his relationship with Between May 2014 and August • The delays relating to the alleged On this basis, the Plaintiff’s claim the Applicant had irretrievably 2015, the Respondent called the discovery of the lost CRLs and against the Defendant was dismissed. broken down and that the Applicant Applicant multiple times and sent the belated accusations against no longer wished to have any her numerous messages asking communication with him. her to meet him and to reconcile with him, threatening her with Having settled the underlying physical violence and informing emotional issues surrounding the her of his attempts to harm himself. breakdown of their relationship, The Applicant was granted an both parties entered into a Expedited Protection Order against settlement agreement on how they Inspiring the Respondent pending a Pre-Trial would conduct themselves in future, Conference (PTC). An Expedited

pursuant to which the Applicant Public Trust and Confidence Protection Order has the same

Annual Report 2015 discontinued the court proceedings. effect as a Protection Order, but is a temporary order granted under section 13 of the Act where the circumstances require an urgent intervention. State Courts, Singapore

50 51 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

APPLICATION UNDER THE of the Community Disputes Significant Cases COMMUNITY DISPUTES Resolution Act 2015 (CDRA) CRIMINAL JUSTICE DIVISION RESOLUTION ACT for causing excessive noise. The Applicant applied for an injunction against the Respondent The Applicant and Respondent live PUBLIC PROSECUTOR V He consented to 119 charges to reduce the noise levels between in the same block of Housing & under the Computer Misuse 8am and 10pm, and to stop the JAMES RAJ S/O AROKIASAMY Development Board (HDB) flats, and Cybersecurity Act and two noise between 10pm and 8am. with the Applicant living in the unit charges of drug consumption under Over a period of about three months directly below the Respondent’s. the Misuse of Drugs Act to be taken At the Pre-Trial Conference, in 2013, a person who called himself According to the Applicant, into consideration for the purpose the Tribunal Judge ordered the “The Messiah” hacked into a number stomping and dragging noise of of sentencing. Applicant and the Respondent to of Singapore-based websites, such varying duration and volume could go for mediation at the CMC, as as those of the People’s Action be heard from the Respondent’s flat The Judge opined that the principles provided under section 30(2) of Party Community Foundation, the on a daily basis, at various times of of general and specific deterrence the CDRA. Ang Mo Kio Town Council and The the day and night. were of prime focus in determining Straits Times Blog, and replaced the the appropriate sentence. The During the mediation session at the contents of the websites with various The Applicant sought assistance Judge also considered a number CMC, the Applicant acknowledged offensive messages. from the HDB Branch Office to of aggravating factors such as the that the noise disturbance had alleviate the noise disturbance. escalation of James Raj’s cyber improved considerably and both “The Messiah” was ascertained Representatives of the Branch criminality, his malice in committing parties subsequently entered into a to be James Raj s/o Arokiasamy Office, as well as the Chairman the offences and the alarm and fear settlement agreement. (James Raj), who was facing drug of the Resident’s Committee, caused to the public by the very charges and was out on bail when spoke with the Applicant and public manner that the offences After the mediation session, the he committed the hacking offences. Respondent. Both parties were were perpetrated. Finally, the parties returned before the Tribunal Investigations revealed that he had also invited to undergo mediation Judge recognised that as Singapore Judge and the Applicant discontinued also unlawfully scanned several at the Community Mediation is a major Information Technology the court proceedings on the basis of government websites, including Centre (CMC), but the Respondent centre, cyber intrusions and threats the settlement agreement. those of the Prime Minister’s Office declined to do so. pose considerable danger to its and the Singapore Prison Service, economy. As such, there was a need for security vulnerabilities. James In October 2015, the Applicant to send a strong signal to James Raj Raj faced further charges of commenced proceedings against and like-minded individuals to hacking into a Fuji Xerox server deter them from pursuing such

the Respondent under section 4 Inspiring which led to, amongst others, him criminal enterprise. downloading the statements of a

bank’s customers. Public Trust and Confidence James Raj was sentenced to a total Annual Report 2015 of 56 months’ imprisonment. James Raj pleaded guilty to 39 charges under the Computer Misuse and Cybersecurity Act and one charge of drug consumption under the Misuse of Drugs Act. State Courts, Singapore

52 53 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR V After a two-day trial, Yee was statements. The remaining charges his head below his ears and pushing AMOS YEE PANG SANG convicted of both charges were taken into consideration for a ten-year-old’s mouth, causing the and sentenced to four weeks’ the purpose of sentencing. back of the child’s head to hit a imprisonment. Yee had previously cupboard behind her. The accused On 27 March 2015, shortly after rejected the options of probation In meting out a total of four was charged with ten counts under the death of Mr Lee Kuan Yew, and being sent to the Reformative months’ imprisonment, the Judge section 5(1) of the Children and Singapore’s first Prime Minister, Training Centre. considered that Ello had published Young Persons Act. He pleaded Amos Yee Pang Sang (Yee) a seditious publication that would guilty to four charges and consented uploaded a video entitled “Lee Yee appealed against his conviction promote ill-will and hostility to the remaining six charges being Kuan Yew is Finally Dead!” on and sentence. On appeal, the trial between different classes of people, taken into consideration for the YouTube. In the video, Yee had Judge’s decision was affirmed by namely, Singaporeans and Filipinos purpose of sentencing. criticised the late Mr Lee and the High Court. in Singapore. The Judge also Christians by likening Mr Lee to commented that Ello’s provocative The Judge sentenced the accused to Jesus Christ and making remarks conduct, if left unchecked, could a total of three weeks’ imprisonment, against Christianity. Yee then result in discrimination against the noting that the accused’s actions uploaded an image of two stick PUBLIC PROSECUTOR V innocent and law-abiding Filipino constituted a gross breach of trust figures, purportedly representing ELLO ED MUNDSEL BELLO residents in Singapore. and authority. Mr Lee and the late former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Ello Ed Mundsel Bello (Ello), Margaret Thatcher, engaged in a a 29-year-old Filipino, was an sexual act. assistant nurse in Tan Tock Seng PUBLIC PROSECUTOR V CASES OF CHEATING BY Hospital. Sometime in mid-2014, MUHAMMAD ABDUL GANI SIM LIM SQUARE SALESMEN Yee was charged for uploading the Ello posted a number of derogatory video with the deliberate intention and offensive comments against On ten separate occasions between In 2014, Chew Chiew Loon Jover to wound the religious feelings of Singaporeans on his Facebook 2012 and 2013, Muhammad Abdul (Chew) made headlines in the news Christians, and for electronically page and his comments were Gani, a welfare and religious teacher when he purportedly gave a customer transmitting the obscene image. circulated extensively on various at the Pertapis Children’s Home a refund of $1,010, ordered by the social media sites. (PCH), meted out inappropriate Small Claims Tribunals, in the form An issue that arose in relation to corporal punishment on the of coins. Subsequently, there was a the second charge was whether Ello was charged with two counts of children under his care. PCH is news report of a Vietnamese tourist the image of the two stick figures publishing seditious publications a gazetted Place of Safety and an who had knelt in front of Chew and engaged in a sexual act was under the Sedition Act. He was Approved Home under the Children begged him for a refund after the obscene. The trial Judge considered also charged with three counts and Young Persons Act. Its residents tourist had purchased an allegedly Inspiring that teenagers were likely to of making false statements to the are vulnerable and at-risk children overpriced mobile phone from access the blog post on which police, including lodging a police between the ages of four and twelve Chew’s shop. Yee had uploaded the image and report to allege that an unknown referred by the Youth Court, family Public Trust and Confidence Annual Report 2015 that the image would deprave person had falsely attributed the service centres or the Ministry of Police investigations were conducted and corrupt them. The trial Judge offensive online comments to him. Social and Family Development. after multiple complaints and added that the image would meet police reports were filed against with the “strongest disapproval Ello pleaded guilty to one charge Some of the acts committed by the Chew. Subsequently, Chew and and condemnation” of any right- under the Sedition Act and accused included lifting a seven- four of his former employees, Koh thinking parent or teacher. two charges for making false year-old off the ground by grabbing Guan Seng (Koh), Kam Kok Keong State Courts, Singapore

54 55 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

(Kam), Kelvin Lim Zhi Wei (Kelvin) persons, including the church’s and Lim Hong Ching (Lim), were founder and senior pastor Kong LOCAL AND INTERNATIONAL AWARDS charged with multiple counts of Hee (Kong), were charged in 2012. cheating by conspiracy. Chew was also charged with other ancillary The charges involved a substantial FUTUREGOV OTHER AWARDS FOR offences related to his dishonest amount of church funds that were SINGAPORE AWARDS INTEGRATED CRIMINAL business practices. utilised for sham bond investments CASE FILING AND between 2007 and 2009 in support On 7 April 2015, the State Courts MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Koh, Kam, Kelvin and Lim had of the church’s “Crossover Project”, were conferred FutureGov Singapore pleaded guilty to between one another substantial amount of Awards in the Community Care Singapore Infocomm Technology and six charges each while Chew church funds that were deployed Category and E-Government Federation (SiTF) Gold Award had pleaded guilty to 12 charges; for “round-tripping” transactions Category, for the Primary Justice On 1 October 2015, the State each had multiple other charges to create the false impression that Project and the Integrated Criminal Courts received the Gold Award for taken into consideration for the the sham bond investments had Case Filing and Management System “Best Innovative Use of Infocomm purpose of sentencing. They had paid off, and the falsification of respectively. The awards were Technology (Public Sector)” for admitted to adopting unlawful accounts to facilitate the fraudulent conferred in recognition of the State their Integrated Criminal Case tactics to cheat their customers transactions. The “Crossover Courts’ excellence in administering Filing and Management System into paying highly inflated prices Project” had promoted the secular and delivering citizen-facing (ICMS). The award was conferred for mobile phones sold at Chew’s pop music career of Kong’s wife, programmes, and their vision and by the Singapore Infocomm shop. They had also behaved Ho Yeow Sun, also known by her project management excellence in Technology Federation (SiTF). in a “thuggish” manner to bully performing name “Sun Ho”, as part deploying technology. their customers into submission of the church’s evangelism efforts. when the customers tried to back out from their overpriced mobile After 140 days of hearing that phone purchases. Each of them spanned over two years, the six was sentenced to between four and accused persons were found 14 months’ imprisonment, while guilty of between three and ten Chew was sentenced to 33 months’ charges of criminal breach of imprisonment and ordered to pay trust and/or the falsification of a fine of $2,000. accounts. Kong was sentenced to eight years’ imprisonment and the five other co-accused were CASE OF MISUSE OF sentenced to between 21 months’ Inspiring CHURCH FUNDS BY CITY and six years’ imprisonment. The SiTF Awards recognise local

technology innovations and the Public Trust and Confidence HARVEST CHURCH LEADERS The accused persons have appealed organisations that develop and Annual Report 2015

against their convictions and harness them. The ICMS received this Pursuant to the Commercial Affairs sentences, and the Prosecution accolade for its ability to synthesise Department’s investigations into has cross-appealed against the disparate processes, workflows and the alleged misuse of church funds sentences. The case is currently systems into one single platform by certain members of the City pending before the High Court. to enable the accurate and timely Harvest Church (CHC), six accused

State Courts, Singapore sharing, retrieval and exchange of

56 57 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

information among criminal justice creativity, promote economic and WATER EFFICIENT flow rates and flush volumes, and stakeholders. Ms Shirley Wong, trade relations, and to facilitate BUILDING CERTIFICATION implementing the PUB’s water Chairman of the SiTF and a judge technology transfer. (SILVER) AWARD efficiency management system. for the SiTF Awards, said one of the notable aspects of the ICMS was The State Courts were presented the how 34 agencies worked together OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENT Water Efficient Building Certification to develop an integrated end-to-end (Silver) Award by the Public Utilities system that transformed Singapore’s IN WEB DEVELOPMENT, “GOVERNMENT STANDARD Board (PUB) on 1 October 2015. The judiciary system. award recognises the State Courts OF EXCELLENCE” AWARD 2015 for being exemplary performers in water efficiency, through their efforts The State Courts’ website was such as installing water-efficient revamped and launched on 31 fittings, adopting water-efficient December 2014 to better serve court users by providing them with quicker and easier access to information about the State Courts. In May 2015, the mHearing application OUR INTERNATIONAL PROFILE Photograph courtesy of SiTF for mobile devices which provides In 2015, Singapore scored well in various surveys conducted by several international the hearing schedules for pre-trial organisations. The results of these surveys are a tribute to the high quality of justice Asia Pacific ICT Alliance conference cases was introduced dispensed by the Singapore Judiciary. (APICTA) Awards to complement the information In November 2015, the State Courts available on the State Courts’ were conferred a merit award at the website, to further enhance court legal framework was once again Asia Pacific ICT Alliance (APICTA) users’ access to information. INSTITUTE FOR rated very positively, securing the Awards Ceremony 2015 held in MANAGEMENT second position after Hong Kong Colombo, Sri Lanka. The State Courts For its user-centric interface and DEVELOPMENT (IMD) which took first place (Table 1). were recognised in the Government easily navigable web architecture, the World Competitiveness and Public Sector category for the State Courts’ website was conferred Yearbook 2015 The legal and regulatory framework Integrated Criminal Case Filing and the Outstanding Achievement in encourages the competitiveness Management System (ICMS), which Web Development, “Government In June 2015, the IMD assessed and of enterprises has transformed a predominantly Standard of Excellence” Award 2015 ranked 61 economies in the world

by the Web Marketing Association on their ability to create and maintain Inspiring paper-based process to an electronic YEAR RANKING OF RATING court environment. (WMA) in September 2015. the competitiveness of enterprises. SINGAPORE (Score of 0=worst, 10=best) Founded in 1997, the WebAwards One component of the assessment Public Trust and Confidence The APICTA Awards is an programme organised by the WMA was whether the legal and 2015 2 7.86 Annual Report 2015 international awards programme is billed as the longest-running regulatory framework encouraged that aims to increase Infocomm annual website award competition the competitiveness of enterprises. Table 1: IMD – Ranking of Technology (ICT) awareness in the dedicated to naming the best In this aspect, Singapore’s ranking Singapore’s Legal and community and assist in bridging websites in 96 industries while has consistently been high over the Regulatory Framework the digital divide. It is also designed setting the standard of excellence for last decade. In 2015, Singapore’s to stimulate ICT innovation and all website development. State Courts, Singapore

58 59 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

Another assessment component • Efficiency of Legal Framework in WORLD BANK GROUP FRASER INSTITUTE was whether justice had been Settling Disputes Worldwide Governance Indicators Economic Freedom of the fairly administered. In this aspect, • Efficiency of Legal Framework in (WGI) Report 2015 World Report 2015 th Singapore was ranked 13 (Table 2). Challenging Regulations The only other Asian economies The WGI project surveyed 215 The Economic Freedom of the • Judicial Independence ranked in the top 20 were Hong Kong economies annually from 1996 World Report measures the degree • Property Rights and Japan, which took the fifth and to 2014, for their performance to which the policies and institutions 16th places respectively. • Intellectual Property Rights across six indicators of governance, of the countries surveyed are including the Rule of Law indicator. supportive of economic freedom. Justice is fairly administered In 2015, Singapore again attained The 2015 report ranked 157 favourable scores and rankings. In the 2015 report, Singapore scored countries and territories on their YEAR RANKING OF RATING It stands among the top five well under the Rule of Law indicator. SINGAPORE (Score of 0=worst, degree of economic freedom in 10=best) global economies, particularly five broad areas, one of which 2015 13 8.07 for the efficiency of its legal The Rule of Law indicator measures was “legal structure and security frameworks in settling disputes, public confidence level and the of property rights”. The variables and for protecting property and degree of abidance to the rules of measured under this area include: Table 2: IMD – Ranking of Singapore’s intellectual property rights. society. This indicator takes particular Administration of Justice Singapore maintained the first notice of the quality of contract • Judicial Independence position, which it has held since enforcement, property rights, the • Impartial Courts 2009, for having an efficient legal police, and the Courts, as well as the WORLD ECONOMIC framework for dispute resolution. likelihood of crime and violence. • Protection of Property Rights FORUM (WEF) • Military Interference in Rule of Singapore has been well-placed in the Global Competitiveness Report Institution Pillar - Ranking Law and Politics top 10 per cent over the past 10 years 2015-2016 of Singapore • Integrity of the Legal System under the Rule of Law indicator (Table 4). (Score of 1 = worst, 7 = best) • Legal Enforcement of Contracts The WEF 2015-2016 report ranked • Regulatory Costs of the Sale of YEAR 20152015 Rule of Law 140 countries to present a picture Real Property of the competitiveness of their Efficiency of (i) 1 YEAR RANKING OF SCORE • Reliability of Police Rank SINGAPORE (Max.2.5 Points) economies. The report evaluated Legal Framework – (ii) 10 • Business Cost of Crime 12 economic pillars, one of which (i) Settling Disputes 2005 10 1.76 (ii) Challenging (i) 6.2 Score 1.63 was concerned with the economies’ Regulations (ii) 5.2 2006 17 Singapore has maintained its institutional framework. Strong 2007 17 1.64 position in the top 20 per cent Judicial Rank 23 Inspiring institutions are a critical component 2008 17 1.64 Independence Score 5.5 band for this indicator since 2000. to an economy, as they protect the 2009 18 1.60 Rank 4 rights of the people, and provide Property 2010 16 1.68 Public Trust and Confidence Rights In the latest report, Singapore

Annual Report 2015 stability and confidence for Score 6.3 2011 15 1.73 was ranked first among the Asian individuals and businesses to engage Intellectual Rank 4 2012 10 1.77 countries assessed and sixth out of in economic activities. Property Rights Score 6.2 2013 11 1.74 the 157 countries and territories 2014 11 1.89 ranked, surpassing Hong Kong and Under the institutional pillar, there Table 3: WEF – Ranking of Japan, which held the 14th and 20th were five sub-indicators relating to Singapore’s Judiciary Table 4: World Bank Group – places respectively.

State Courts, Singapore the judiciary: Worldwide Governance Indicators

60 61 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

HERITAGE FOUNDATION THE WORLD JUSTICE VISITS BY DISTINGUISHED GUESTS IN 2015 AND WALL STREET JOURNAL PROJECT Index of Economic Freedom Rule of Law Index 2015 Report 2015 The Rule of Law index developed by The Index of Economic Freedom The World Justice Project measures measured 186 countries across how the rule of law is experienced by ten indices of economic freedom. the general public around the world. High scores (on a 0-to-100 scale, In the 2015 report, 102 countries with 100 being the highest score) were assessed across nine factors: represent high levels of freedom i.e. low levels of government • Constraints on Government Power interference in the economy. In • Absence of Corruption 2015, Singapore was ranked the • Open Government second freest economy, trailing • Fundamental Rights Hong Kong by only 0.2 points. • Order and Security • Regulatory Enforcement Singapore also scored 90 points • Civil Justice in the “property rights” index, a • Criminal Justice score that has been maintained • Informal Justice (not included in since 1995. The strong protection the aggregated scores and ranking) of property rights in Singapore Photo courtesy of Supreme Court has provided the foundation Singapore was ninth in the global for the country’s sustained ranking and maintained its lead in the economic freedom. The report also Rule of Law in Asia, ahead of Korea On 12 October 2015, President implemented to enhance the commented that Singapore has one (11th), Japan (13th) and Hong Kong (17th). Tony Tan Keng Yam visited the State delivery of justice, while Judicial of Asia’s best intellectual property Courts and Family Justice Courts Commissioner Valerie Thean, regimes and that the commercial Singapore performed strongly in all for the first time. President Tan was Presiding Judge of the Family Courts function well. the eight factors assessed, coming in briefed by Judicial Commissioner Justice Courts, shared about the first for “Regulatory Enforcement” and See Kee Oon, Presiding Judge of Family Justice Courts’ first year of claiming third position for “Absence the State Courts, on the recent establishment and the challenges Highlights of the 2015 Index of Corruption”, “Civil Justice” and initiatives the State Courts had for the future. of Economic Freedom: “Criminal Justice”. In this regard, Inspiring Five “Free” Economies Singapore’s justice system was widely

1 2 3 4 5 recognised as being one of the best. Its Public Trust and Confidence

Annual Report 2015 criminal justice system was one of the

most timely and effective, while its civil system was top for having a “Civil justice Hong Kong Australia New Switzerland Singapore Zealand [that] is not subject to unreasonable delays”. There were also high levels of confidence that the delivery of justice in

State Courts, Singapore Singapore was free of discrimination.

62 63 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

DATE DETAILS THE PEOPLE OF STATE COURTS 3 Mar Judge Abdul Qader Habib, Supreme Court of Afghanistan, and delegation from the Afghanistan Case Management Monitoring Board

30 Mar Magistrate Simon Young, Queensland Magistrates Court, Australia

8 Apr Chief Judge Edward Simarmata, Baubau District Court, Indonesia

12 Aug The Honourable Justice Phattarasak Vannasaeng, Secretary-General of the Office of the Judiciary, and delegation from the National Legislative Assembly of Thailand

20 Aug Mr Sonam Tashi, Deputy Chief Attorney, and delegation from the Office of theAttorney General, Bhutan

9 Sep Counsel Husain Hamza Al Dwaila, Director of Government Case Management, and delegation from the Abu Dhabi Judicial Department, United Arab Emirates

22 Sep The Right Honourable Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury, President of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

26 Oct Mr Wang Lansheng, Deputy Director General, IT Center of the Supreme People’s Court, and delegation from the Supreme People’s Court, People’s Republic of China

28 Oct His Excellency Dr Bassam Al-Talhouni, Minister of Justice of Jordan, and Judges from the Amman Court of First Instance, Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan Annual Report 2015 24 Nov Judge Kwon Chang-hwan and delegation from the Supreme Court of Korea

14 Dec Judge Shin Matsumoto and delegation from the Supreme Court of Japan State Courts, Singapore

64 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

PRESIDING JUDGE AND HEADS OF DIVISION LEADERSHIP TEAM

(Left to Right) (Left to Right) First row: Deputy Presiding Judge and Registrar of the State Courts Jennifer Marie, First row: Senior Director Victor Yeo, Principal District Judge Tan Puay Boon, The People of State Courts Annual Report 2015 Judicial Commissioner See Kee Oon, Presiding Judge of the State Courts Deputy Presiding Judge Jennifer Marie, Judicial Commissioner See Kee Oon, Second row: Principal District Judge (Civil Justice Division) Tan Puay Boon, Principal Director Bala Reddy, Principal District Judge Ong Hian Sun, Senior Director (Strategic Planning and Technology Division) Victor Yeo, Principal Director James Leong Principal District Judge (Criminal Justice Division) Ong Hian Sun, Second row: Yong Khai Ling, Lim Lay Kim, Dalbir Kaur, Lim May Leng, Principal Director (Community Justice and Tribunals Division) Bala Reddy, Anne Durray, Papinder Kaur, District Judge Wong Peck, Lim Hwei Chen Principal Director (State Courts Centre for Dispute Resolution) James Leong Third row: District Judge Siva Shanmugam, Phoo Meng Teck, Chan Wai Yin,

State Courts, Singapore Teh Ah Seok, Geoffrey Lim, District Judge Lim Wee Ming

66 67 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

STATE COURTS COMMITTEES 2015

INTERNSHIP COMMITTEE

CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY COMMITTEE

STAFF BENEFITS COMMITTEE

DIVISIONAL PLANNING UNITS AND DIVISIONAL KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT, LIBRARY & TRAINING STAFF REPRESENTATIVES WELFARE COMMITTEE The People Annual Report 2015

WORKPLACE ECO SAFETY AND COMMITTEE HEALTH of State Courts COMMITTEE State Courts, Singapore

68 69 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

PUBLIC SERVICE MONTH ACTIVITIES COHESION DAY 2015 In celebration of SG50, the annual Public Service Week was extended into Cohesion Day 2015 was held on 8 December 2015 at the Gardens by the Bay. a month-long celebration in October 2015. In conjunction with this, the State The event was entitled “Discovery Day @ the Dome” (D3), and it gave staff the Courts held their Service Excellence Week from 5 to 9 October 2015, during which opportunity to get to know their colleagues better. activities were organised to recognise staff who had demonstrated great service, celebrate the State Courts’ achievements in enhancing service delivery and reinforce the organisation’s commitment towards serving society with excellent court services. To welcome the staff to the event, Staff also got to learn new skills members of the various State together during the terrarium, Courts’ committees performed an soap-making and coffee-painting The “Say Thanks” activity gave staff on 8 October 2015. The award energetic opening dance number. workshops as well as Zumba the opportunity to express their recipients were Mr Aston Chow Presiding Judge See then launched session, while they enjoyed getting appreciation for their colleagues (Executive, Financial Policy and a colourful light ball to officially to know their colleagues better. who had provided great service. Management Directorate, Corporate kick off the event. They purchased and penned Services Division), Mr Bakhit Bin their compliments on cards Mohd Ridwan (Bailiff, Bailiffs’ specially handcrafted by clients Section, Civil Justice Division), Mr of the MINDS Social Enterprise, James Chuah (Assistant Registrar, an organisation that creates Small Claims Tribunals, Community employment opportunities for Justice and Tribunals Division) and Ms people with intellectual disabilities. Shanti d/o Ramakrishnan (Executive, A total of 307 cards were sold with Operations Management, Criminal the sales proceeds going to the Justice Division). MINDS Social Enterprise and the State Courts Corporate Social Several staff members also visited Responsibility Fund. the Inland Revenue Authority The main highlight of D3 was the of Singapore and Ministry of Nature Discovery Trail where staff Manpower’s Contact Centre to from different divisions worked learn about these agencies’ best together in groups to complete practices in service delivery and their their missions while exploring innovative service initiatives. the gardens. The People Annual Report 2015

State Courts’ recipients of the PS21

Star Service Award 2015 were of State Courts recognised during the Service Excellence Observance Ceremony State Courts, Singapore

70 71 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

STAFF EVENT HIGHLIGHTS

21 MAY 2015 State Courts Cup – 2 MARCH 2015 Cross Country Run State Courts Cup – Indoor Games Tournament

22 JUNE 2015 9 – 10 APRIL 2015 Learning Day Donation Drive for Nursing Home

21 APRIL 2015 14 AUGUST 2015 Court National Day The People Annual Report 2015 Administrators Carnival Appreciation

Day of State Courts State Courts, Singapore

72 73 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

5 SEPTEMBER 2015 State Courts Cup – Bubble Soccer Tournament

8 DECEMBER 2015 Cohesion Day 14 NOVEMBER 2015 State Courts Cup – Bowling Tournament

9 DECEMBER 2015 “Judiciary Cares” (Joint Corporate Social Responsibility Day with Supreme Court and Family Justice Courts) The People Annual Report 2015 7 DECEMBER 2015 Learning Festival of State Courts State Courts, Singapore

74 75 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

NATIONAL DAY AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS STATE COURTS AWARDS

NATIONAL DAY AWARDS STATE COURTS AWARDS

Public Administration Medal (Silver) Manager of the Year District Judge P Siva Shanmugam • Mr Dean Yeo Sin Haw The Editorial Committee • Ms Samsiah Bte M Mizah Public Administration Medal (Bronze) • Ms Lau Pei Pei Alycia Cheryl Ho Ms Mikaela Oh Yuen Ling Henedick Chng Court Administrator of the Year Commendation Medal • Ms Winnie Thong Siew Wah Michelle Chiang • Mr Phang Tsang Wing • Ms Tan Jia Hui Lim Lay Kim • Mr Muhamad Nezam • Ms Noor Israni Ibrahim Bin Zakaria • Mr Balasubramaniam s/o Long Service Award Advisors Tharmalinggam • Ms Rokiah Bte Harun District Judge Samuel Chua • Mr Lim Geok Kwee Albert Public Service Medal • Ms Anees Parvin District Judge Carrie Chan • District Judge Shaiffudin • Ms Chan Wai Yin District Judge Sandra Looi Bin Saruwan • Ms Siti Aishah Bte Ali • Ms Wahidah Banu Abu Bakar District Judge Michelle Yap Efficiency Medal • Ms Sandhya Gopinathan • Mrs Mary Doris Gnanaraj • Mr Raymond Loh Kee Yong In Consultation with • Ms Asmahan Bte Amir Judicial Commissioner See Kee Oon, • Ms Noor Israni Ibrahim Presiding Judge of the State Courts • Ms Shariza Bte Mohamed Shariff Deputy Presiding Judge Jennifer Marie • Ms Low Peck Lan Heads of Divisions Long Service Medal • District Judge Christopher With Warmest Appreciation to Goh Eng Chiang All who have contributed to this publication Annual Report 2015

• Ms Chan Wai Yin • Mr Rick Chia Yew Tuck • Mr Peter Ong Khian Guan • Mr Muhamad Nezam Bin Zakaria • Mr Tan Cheng Siong • Mr Johari Bin Satiman State Courts, Singapore

76 BACK TO CONTENTS PAGE

State Courts, Singapore 1 Havelock Square Singapore 059724 1800 587 8423 www.statecourts.gov.sg StateCourtsSingapore