DOCSLIB.ORG

Text (PDF)1063KB***Contempt of Court

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Text (PDF)1063KB***Contempt of Court jU l 2011 Jul 2011 | S i n g a p o r e a c a d e m y o f L aw In Focus 03 The Honourable Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong shares his views on contempt of court issues. 06 Harry Elias SC examines the ambit of acts of contempt in relation to lawyers’ conduct. 12 Ang Cheng Hock SC and Tay Yong Seng provide an overview 03 of the law of civil and criminal contempt. 18 Jeth lee speaks to members of the legal fraternity to find out Cover what contempt of court means to rules of court them. 27 A look at the recent decision on the law on contempt of court for scandalising the judiciary. InsIghts 27 34 Yap Teong liang gives guidance on how to deal with challenges in family law practice. Side Bar 44 Adrian Tan brings us true-life examples of contempt of court around the world. 34 44 July 2011 In Focus Inter Se is a everythIng must come to an end and after publishing Inter Se publication of: (and its predecessor) for 22 years, we are sad to announce that this July 2011 issue will be its swansong. It has been quite an experience. Inter Se began as a simple way of disseminating information and reaching out to our members. It started as a four-page SAL Newsletter, which only narrated past events and announced forthcoming activities, that soon morphed into something bigger to include case and legislation updates and thought-provoking articles. Chief Executive With progress came change, bringing about other effective Serene wee avenues for SAl to further its objectives: e-alerts to members; a tier-1 Editors journal for articles; and online services in the form of lawNet and eileen Khoo Singapore law Watch for legislation and case updates. elizabeth Sheares This final issue (unlike another defunct publication’s) contains no Editorial Committee crosswords nor “libels or any hidden mocking messages”; the absence anita parkash of which is due solely to a lack of any grouse to air, and not out of Bala Shunmugam foo Kim Leng deference to the law on defamation, vis-à-vis contempt which is the ranald or theme for this issue. The proofs were ready for publication in July 2010 when, as Murphy’s law would have it, news broke of Alan Shadrake’s case 1 Supreme Court lane, level 6, Singapore 178879. just as we were about to go to print. Aware that the subject matter was Tel: 6332 4388 Fax: 6334 4940 sub judice and the issue incomplete if the court’s decision was excluded, © 2011 Singapore Academy of law we thus put the issue on hold till final judgment was delivered, and a case summary could be included. The judgment of the High Court in All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, Alan Shadrake’s case was delivered on 3 and 16 November 2010 stored in any retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by (see [2011] 2 SlR 445, [2011] 2 SlR 506) and by the Court of Appeal any means, whether electronic or on 27 May 2011 (see [2011] SCCA 26): see also p 27 of this issue for mechanical, including photocopying and recording, without the permission a commentary on the decision of the Court of Appeal. of the copyright holder. We hope you will enjoy this last issue of Inter Se. Q & A wIth chIeF JustIce Views expressed by the contributors are not necessarily those of the We have a number of people to thank: Academy, Academy Publishing nor the Editors. Whilst every effort chan seK Keong has been made to ensure that chief Justice Chan Sek Keong and the executive Committee – for the information contained within their complete trust and unending good humour shown to the team in is correct, neither the Academy, The honourable last year, and more recently in your opening of the Academy Publishing, the contributors charge. nor the Editors can accept any Chief JusTiCe Chan legal year speech this January, you spoke about responsibility for any errors or contributors – who unfailingly delivered despite their heavy sek keong shares his omissions or for any consequences proceedings relating to contempt of court. why is this professional schedules. This periodical would be nothing without their resulting therefrom. views on ConTempT of an important issue, and have there been any specific .................................... input. CourT wiTh Inter Se. events or trends that have prompted your comments? adrian tan – our witty but unwitting “freelance writer” who most Publishing Consultant This is an important issue because it affects public cindy Koh likely assumed his Jan–Jun 2008 issue contribution would be a one-off confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the request. Design courts in deciding disputes especially where the our chief Executive and the editorial Committee – Inter Se’s think fariszan mazlan tank members who still had the energy to come up with themes and contempt directly impugns these judicial values. mediactive sub-topics after a long day at work. Specifically, what I had in mind was the contempt mediactive pte Ltd Mediactive – the graphic designers (since May 2003) who came through committed by a few youths wearing T-shirts 31B Kreta Ayer Road imprinted with a picture of a kangaroo, and also the Singapore 088998 each and every time even though the given timeframe for completion Tel: 6242 4987 mysteriously and progressively became shorter with each passing issue. contempt committed by an officious bystander And lastly, our readers who have supported us through the years. Thank you! 02 • | 03 In Focus In Focus from a foreign country to remember this Judges from other particularly in academic They have refrained law of contempt. India against one of our High type of contempt journals, and no such author from imposing deterrent enacted a contempt of Court judges in relation is a common common law jurisdictions may has ever been taken to task sentences on contemnor. court statute some time to a matter which did not law offence. be more tolerant of abuse for what he has written. I cannot say whether this will ago. Other common law concern him. The rationale of and opprobrium being flung change, as it must depend jurisdictions may also have punishing such you have said that at present, on the circumstances of done likewise. Of course, do you see the laws relating kind of contempt at them, but that does not punishments for contempt each case, especially the the draftsman should also to contempt of court in is to uphold the mean that we should follow of court are unlimited and at gravity of the contempt. take into account the current singapore developing authority of the the discretion of the judges, state of the law of contempt similarly to or differently from court which is an their example. although the courts have do you envisage any in common law jurisdictions. those in other jurisdictions? indispensable exercised great restraint in difficulties in the drafting or Future developments in the are there any aspects of the institution for the the past. until such offences enforcement of legislation law can also be provided for singapore judicial, political or administration of have been put into statutory relating to contempt of by enacting an appropriate social system that would have justice. Judges from other appreciate or share the same form, what kinds of contempt court offences, and what provision similar to s 5 of the a unique impact on the nature common law jurisdictions sense of responsibility that of court offences should precautions should be taken Criminal Procedure Code, or penalties for contempt of may be more tolerant of a judge holds with regard be considered particularly to prevent these? save that the referenced court proceedings here? abuse and opprobrium to his office. Scurrilous serious, and what guidelines No, to the first part of the jurisdiction may be widened The law on contempt being flung at them, but remarks, unless firmly dealt should be borne in mind question. None, to the to include all common law of court is fairly well that does not mean that we with, would inevitably by the courts in meting out second part of the question jurisdictions. developed in Singapore. should follow their example. undermine public punishments? so long as the draftsman There are many kinds We do not mind criticism, confidence in the Judiciary. I have mentioned the is familiar with the general Inter Se thanks the Chief of contempt. The more even harsh criticism, of the This is the reason why the more serious offences in principles of contempt Justice for agreeing to this controversial kind is that merits or justice of our courts punish contemnors, my previous comments. and the rationale of the interview. known as “scandalising” the decisions, on grounds that and not, as some people Any baseless allegation that court. It covers allegations are not related to our fitness seem to think, to immunise a judge is not independent, such as that the Judiciary to hold judicial office. and protect themselves especially vis-à-vis the Courts have always accepted criticisms is not independent or Many critics consider from criticism in their work Executive or that he is impartial or that the that the law of contempt is or to restrict freedom corrupt or which undermines which do not impugn their integrity or good judges are pro-Executive obsolete in modern times, of speech. Courts have public confidence in him or faith, such as, that the reasoning of a judge in all cases involving the and some have suggested always accepted criticisms her as a judge, is serious.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • This Paper Has Been Published in the Journal of Business Law and The
    Supreme Court of Singapore, 1 Supreme Court Lane, Singapore 178879, t: (65)-6332-1020 _________________________________________________________________________________________________ This paper has been published in the Journal of Business Law and the Supreme Court Library Queensland gratefully acknowledges the permission of the editor, Professor Robert Merkin, to reprint it in the Yearbook. A version of this essay was delivered at the Current Legal Issues Seminar in the Banco Court on 12 September 2013. I would like to express my deepest appreciation to Ms Andrea Gan and Mr Jonathan Yap, Justices’ Law Clerks, Supreme Court of Singapore, as well as to Asst Prof Goh Yihan of the Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore, for their helpful comments and suggestions. I would also like to dedicate this essay to all the participants who displayed an extraordinary (and, I might add, rare) degree of enthusiasm and (above all) friendship. All errors remain mine alone. Further, all views expressed in this essay are personal views only and do not reflect the views of the Supreme Court of Singapore. Andrew Phang Our Vision: Excellence in judicial education and research. Our Mission: To provide and inspire continuing judicial learning and research to enhance the competency and professionalism of judges. The Challenge of Principled Gap-Filling — A Study of Implied Terms in a Comparative Context by The Honourable Justice Andrew Phang Boon Leong* There has been a veritable wealth of literature on implied terms — ranging from doctoral theses1 to book chapters,2 articles3 and (more recently) a book.4 What accounts for this interest? Perhaps the simplest explanation is that it is an extremely important topic with at least two important functions — one substantive, the other theoretical.
    [Show full text]
  • The Development of Singapore Law: a Bicentennial Retrospective1
    (2020) 32 SAcLJ 804 (Published on e-First 8 May 2020) THE DEVELOPMENT OF SINGAPORE LAW: A BICENTENNIAL RETROSPECTIVE1 The present article reviews (in broad brushstrokes) the status of Singapore law during its bicentennial year. It is not only about origins but also about growth – in particular, the autochthonous or indigenous growth of the Singapore legal system (particularly since the independence of Singapore as a nation state on 9 August 1965). The analysis of this growth is divided into quantitative as well as qualitative parts. In particular, the former constitutes an empirical analysis which attempts – for the very first time − to tell the development of Singapore law through numbers, building on emerging techniques in data visualisation and empirical legal studies. Andrew PHANG Judge of Appeal, Supreme Court of Singapore. GOH Yihan Professor of Law, School of Law, Singapore Management University. Jerrold SOH Assistant Professor of Law, School of Law, Singapore Management University; Co-Founder, Lex Quanta. I. Introduction 1 The present article, which reviews (in broad brushstrokes) the status of Singapore law during its bicentennial year since the founding of Singapore by Sir Stamford Raffles in 1819, is of particular significance as English law constitutes the foundation of Singapore law. The role of Raffles and his successors, therefore, could not have been more directly 1 All views expressed in the present article are personal views only and do not reflect in any way the views of the Supreme Court of Singapore, the Singapore Management University or Lex Quanta. Although this article ought, ideally, to have been published last year, the immense amount of case law that had to be analysed has led to a slight delay.
    [Show full text]
  • SOL LLM Brochure 2021 Copy
    SMU – Right in the Heart of Asia’s Hub, Singapore Masters of Laws In the dynamic, cosmopolitan hub that is Singapore, you will find a vibrant city-state that pulses with the diversity of both East and West. LL.M. in Judicial Studies Situated at the cross-roads of the world, Singapore is home to multinational companies and thousands of small and medium-sized LL.M. in Cross-border Business and Finance Law in Asia enterprises flourishing in a smart city renowned for its business excellence and connectivity. With its strong infrastructure, political Dual LL.M. in Commercial Law (Singapore & London) stability and respect for intellectual property rights, this City in a Garden offers you unique opportunities to develop as a global citizen. Thorough. Transnational. Transformative. Tapping into the energy of the city is a university with a difference — the Singapore Management University. Our six schools: the School of Accountancy, Lee Kong Chian School of Business, School of Computing and Information Systems, School of Economics, Yong Pung How School of Law, and School of Social Sciences form the country’s only city campus, perfectly sited to foster strategic links with businesses and the community. Modelled after the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, SMU generates leading-edge research with global impact and produces broad-based, creative and entrepreneurial leaders for a knowledge-based economy. Discover a multi-faceted lifestyle right here at SMU, in the heart of Singapore. The SMU Masters Advantage GLOBAL RECOGNITION SMU is globally recognised as one of the best specialised universities in Asia and the world.
    [Show full text]
  • THE OXFORD and CAMBRIDGE SOCIETY of SINGAPORE Patron: H.E
    THE OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE SOCIETY OF SINGAPORE Patron: H.E. Lee Hsien Loong Prime Minister of Singapore 21st Dec 2020 Short Note about the Oxbridge Society of Singapore (www.oxbridge.org.sg) For more than 100 of the last 200 years, Oxbridge alumni have been Prime Ministers, Governors and Colonial Secretaries of Singapore. It was an Oxbridge alumnus , Lord Hastings, who also gave the green light for the founding of modern Singapore in 1819. Our history mirrors that of modern Singapore, initially comprising the colonial administrators post War and then the dynamic core of our independence leaders including Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew; Law Minister Eddie Barker, who drafted the Proclamation of Independence, which PM Lee Kuan Yew called “an adroit bloodless coup” and also our Separation Agreement from Malaysia; and Chief Justice Wee Chong Jin . The Society was ultimately registered with the Registrar of Societies in 1961. On our website are photographs of our founding President of Singapore, Yusof Ishak, and founding Prime Minister of independent Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, attending our annual dinners in the 1960s. From that start, the Society morphed into becoming the wider alumni grouping for our returning Oxbridge scholars, who were taking on not just political leadership but also leadership of the administrative service, professions, armed forces, judiciary and the media. Over time, this membership has happily grown to include our private sector alumni. Our members now comprise the 3000 plus alumni of both Cambridge and Oxford, most of whom are Singapore citizens, but also several hundred expatriates based here, some of whom are also office holders within the Society.
    [Show full text]
  • Rule of Law Without Democratization: Cambodia and Singapore in Comparative Perspective
    Griffith Asia Institute Research Paper Rule of Law without Democratization: Cambodia and Singapore in Comparative Perspective Stephen McCarthy and Kheang Un ii About the Griffith Asia Institute The Griffith Asia Institute produces relevant, interdisciplinary research on key developments in the politics, security and economies of the Asia-Pacific. By promoting knowledge of Australia’s changing region and its importance to our future, the Griffith Asia Institute seeks to inform and foster academic scholarship, public awareness and considered and responsive policy making. The Institute’s work builds on a long Griffith University tradition of providing multidisciplinary research on issues of contemporary significance in the region. Griffith was the first University in the country to offer Asian Studies to undergraduate students and remains a pioneer in this field. This strong history means that today’s Institute can draw on the expertise of some 50 Asia–Pacific focused academics from many disciplines across the university. The Griffith Asia Institute’s ‘Research Papers’ publish the institute’s policy-relevant research on Australia and its regional environment. The texts of published papers and the titles of upcoming publications can be found on the Institute’s website: www.griffith.edu.au/asiainstitute ‘Rule of Law without Democratization: Cambodia and Singapore in Comparative Perspective’ 2018 iii About the Authors Stephen McCarthy Stephen McCarthy is a Senior Lecturer in South East Asian politics in the School of Government and International Relations and a member of the Griffith Asia Institute at Griffith University. He received his PhD in political science from Northern Illinois University and has published widely on Burmese politics and South East Asia in international journals including The Pacific Review, Asian Survey, Pacific Affairs, Democratization and International Political Science Review.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of the Singapore Criminal Justice Process
    (2019) 31 SAcLJ 1042 (Published on e-First 23 July 2019) THE EVOLUTION OF THE SINGAPORE CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROCESS This article analyses the Singapore criminal justice process in the context of Herbert Packer’s Crime Control and Due Process models. It begins by analysing the features and goals of the two models before applying them to recent changes and developments in the Singapore criminal justice system. The article will focus in particular on developments in societal attitudes and values, legislative and executive policy, detention without trial, amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed), the statement of facts in guilty-plea cases, Kadar disclosure and the judicial discretion to exclude evidence. Following an analysis of these developments, the article will then assess the change in balance between the two models in the Singapore criminal justice system as well as comment on the trend and future of our criminal justice process. Keith Jieren THIRUMARAN LLB (Hons) (National University of Singapore) I. Introduction 1 The criminal justice process is the backbone of society that provides the context in which the substantive criminal law operates. The process includes all the activities “that operate to bring the substantive law of crime to bear (or to keep it from coming to bear)” on accused persons.1 In his seminal book2 and article,3 Herbert Packer espoused two renowned models that elucidate the framework for analysing the criminal justice process: the Crime Control Model and the Due Process Model. This article will analyse the unique Singapore criminal justice process to determine where it currently lies on the spectrum between the two models.
    [Show full text]
  • Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon
    RESPONSE BY CHIEF JUSTICE SUNDARESH MENON OPENING OF THE LEGAL YEAR 2018 Monday, 8 January 2018 Mr Attorney, Mr Vijayendran, Members of the Bar, Honoured Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen: I. Introduction 1. It is my pleasure, on behalf of the Judiciary, to welcome you all to the Opening of this Legal Year. I particularly wish to thank the Honourable Chief Justice Prof Dr M Hatta Ali and Justice Takdir Rahmadi of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia, the Right Honourable Tun Md Raus Sharif, Chief Justice of Malaysia, and our other guests from abroad, who have made the effort to travel here to be with us this morning. II. Felicitations 2. 2017 was a year when we consolidated the ongoing development of the Supreme Court Bench, and I shall begin my response with a brief recap of the major changes, most of which have been alluded to. 1 A. Court of Appeal 3. Justice Steven Chong was appointed as a Judge of Appeal on 1 April 2017. This was in anticipation of Justice Chao Hick Tin’s retirement on 27 September 2017, after five illustrious decades in the public service. In the same context, Justice Andrew Phang was appointed Vice-President of the Court of Appeal. While we will feel the void left by Justice Chao’s retirement, I am heartened that we have in place a strong team of judges to lead us forward; and delighted that Justice Chao will continue contributing to the work of the Supreme Court, following his appointment, a few days ago, as a Senior Judge.
    [Show full text]
  • Singapore C of a on Consideration in Variation of Contracts.Pdf
    IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE [2020] SGCA 106 Civil Appeal No 45 of 2019 Between Ma Hongjin … Appellant And SCP Holdings Pte Ltd … Respondent In the matter of HC/Suit No 765 of 2016 Between Ma Hongjin … Plaintiff And (1) SCP Holdings Pte Ltd (2) Biomax Technologies Pte Ltd … Defendants GROUNDS OF DECISION [Contract] — [Consideration] — [Necessity] [Contract] — [Consideration] — [Failure] [Contract] — [Variation] — [Consideration] [Civil Procedure] — [Pleadings] [Civil Procedure] — [No case to answer] TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................1 BACKGROUND ..............................................................................................4 THE DECISION BELOW ..............................................................................7 THE PARTIES’ ARGUMENTS ON APPEAL.............................................9 ISSUES ............................................................................................................10 OUR DECISION ............................................................................................11 ISSUE 1: THE APPLICABLE TEST UPON A SUBMISSION OF NO CASE TO ANSWER ........................................................................................................11 ISSUE 2: WHETHER THE APPELLANT HAD ADEQUATELY PLEADED THAT THE SA WAS SUPPORTED BY CONSIDERATION ...............................................16 ISSUE 3: WHETHER CL 9.3 OF THE CLA DISPENSED WITH THE NEED FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION
    [Show full text]
  • 4 Comparative Law and Constitutional Interpretation in Singapore: Insights from Constitutional Theory 114 ARUN K THIRUVENGADAM
    Evolution of a Revolution Between 1965 and 2005, changes to Singapore’s Constitution were so tremendous as to amount to a revolution. These developments are comprehensively discussed and critically examined for the first time in this edited volume. With its momentous secession from the Federation of Malaysia in 1965, Singapore had the perfect opportunity to craft a popularly-endorsed constitution. Instead, it retained the 1958 State Constitution and augmented it with provisions from the Malaysian Federal Constitution. The decision in favour of stability and gradual change belied the revolutionary changes to Singapore’s Constitution over the next 40 years, transforming its erstwhile Westminster-style constitution into something quite unique. The Government’s overriding concern with ensuring stability, public order, Asian values and communitarian politics, are not without their setbacks or critics. This collection strives to enrich our understanding of the historical antecedents of the current Constitution and offers a timely retrospective assessment of how history, politics and economics have shaped the Constitution. It is the first collaborative effort by a group of Singapore constitutional law scholars and will be of interest to students and academics from a range of disciplines, including comparative constitutional law, political science, government and Asian studies. Dr Li-ann Thio is Professor of Law at the National University of Singapore where she teaches public international law, constitutional law and human rights law. She is a Nominated Member of Parliament (11th Session). Dr Kevin YL Tan is Director of Equilibrium Consulting Pte Ltd and Adjunct Professor at the Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore where he teaches public law and media law.
    [Show full text]
  • OPENING of the LEGAL YEAR 2019 Speech by Attorney-General
    OPENING OF THE LEGAL YEAR 2019 Speech by Attorney-General, Mr Lucien Wong, S.C. Monday, 7 January 2019 Supreme Court Building, Level Basement 2, Auditorium May it please Your Honours, Chief Justice, Judges of Appeal, Judges and Judicial Commissioners of the Supreme Court, Introduction: AGC in Support of the Government, for the People 1 2018 was a fast-paced year for the Government and for the Attorney-General’s Chambers. The issues occupying the thoughts of Singapore’s leaders were complex and varied, with several key themes coming to the fore. These themes shaped our work over the past year, as we strove to be a strategic partner in support of the Government’s plans and initiatives, for the benefit of our country and its citizens. I will touch on three of these themes. 2 The first theme was our Smart Nation. This initiative aims to tap on the ongoing digital revolution in order to transform Singapore through technology. The Smart Nation vision is for Singapore to be a world-class leader in the field of digital innovation, resting on the triple pillars of a digital economy, digital government, and digital society. The Smart Nation revolution will play a critical part in ensuring our continued competitiveness on the world stage, powered by digital innovation. 1 3 Data sharing was and continues to be a critical aspect of this initiative. To this end, a new law was passed in 2018 which introduced a data sharing regime among different agencies in the Singapore Government. The Public Sector (Governance) Act 2018, which was drafted by our Chambers in support of this initiative, underpins and formalises a data sharing framework for the Singapore public sector.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 International Justice Forum 2019 MANAGING
    International Justice Forum 2019 MANAGING QUALITY OF JUSTICE: GLOBAL TRENDS AND BEST PRACTICES Justice Steven Chong I. Introduction 1. In the global discourse on justice and quality of justice, much has been said about the substantive aspects of the law and justice – the importance of developing sound legal principles, a consistent body of jurisprudence, and adherence to the rule of law ideal. Somewhat less has been said of the procedural aspects – the legal rules of procedure which balance due process and the efficient running of the system. But almost nothing is said of what, in my view, is a matter oft-overlooked, and yet of critical importance – court administration and management. 2. The judiciary is, of course, an organ of state, but it is also, elementally, an organisation. Like any organisation, the courts face issues of administration and management – budgeting, human resources, public communications – and failings in these respects are just as much a threat to the administration of justice as are failings in the quality of its decisions. The key to success lies not just in elocution, but in execution; and failure lurks not just in the spectacular, but in the mundane as well. 3. This pragmatic thinking is almost hardwired into the Singaporean consciousness. Our founding Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, himself a former lawyer, put it this way: “The acid test of any legal system is not the Judge of Appeal, Supreme Court of Singapore. I wish to acknowledge the valuable assistance of my law clerk, Mr Reuben Ong, in the research of this paper. 1 greatness or grandeur of its ideal concepts, but whether in fact it is able to produce order and justice in the relationships between man and man and between man and the State.”1 Being an island-nation with no natural resources and a tiny population entirely dependent on entrepot trade and foreign investment, the development of a robust, respected and sophisticated legal system which commands the confidence of foreign traders and investors is nothing less than a matter of survival for us.
    [Show full text]
  • Singapore's New Home-Grown Legal Team Li Xueying 639 Words 16 April 2008 Straits Times English (C) 2008 Singapore Press Holdings Limited
    Prime News Singapore's new home-grown legal team Li Xueying 639 words 16 April 2008 Straits Times English (c) 2008 Singapore Press Holdings Limited Law Minister, Chief Justice, Attorney-General and Solicitor-General are all from NUS A NEW generation of leaders is taking the helm in the legal field, and they have one thing in common: they went to the law school here. They are: incoming Law Minister K. Shanmugam, Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong, Attorney-General Walter Woon and Solicitor-General Koh Kuat Jong. All four were home-groomed at the National University of Singapore, or the University of Singapore as it was known in earlier years. This common feature was highlighted by Mr Shanmugam yesterday in a wide-ranging interview with The Straits Times, his first since the announcement of his Cabinet appointments earlier this month. Giving his take on it, he said: 'To some extent, it would mean a good understanding of the local legal scene, legal training and development.' They also would have benefited from being involved in local law for many years, he added. Mr Shanmugam himself would have clocked 23 years as a top litigator here, by the time he takes over the Law Ministry mantle from Professor S. Jayakumar on May 1. On what will be the hallmark of the new slate of legal leadership - 'exciting and interesting' was how he put it - he said: 'Each person brings a different skill set to the table.' CJ Chan, 71, appointed two years ago, was a 'doyen' among corporate practitioners while Prof Woon, 52, who became the Attorney-General last Friday, is 'exceptionally bright' and has experience as a diplomat.
    [Show full text]