01

CONTENTS

02 43 Foreword by The Honourable Awards and Accolades the Chief Justice Quality Award with 44 Special Commendation Our International Profile 48 Participation in International 55 Conferences and Exchanges 04 Internship and Attachment Programmes 59 Caseload and Statistics 60 Message from the Chief District Judge Visits by Distinguished Guests in 2011 62 Notes of Appreciation 64

12 67 Organisation Chart Quality Judgments & Excellent Court Services Quality Judgments 68 Child Focused Resolution Centre 70 Family Night Court 70 13 HELP Centre 71 Our Divisions New and Improved Facilities for Court Users 72 Court Volunteers 73 Criminal Justice Division 14 Public Perception of the Subordinate Courts 74 Civil Justice Division 19 Family and Juvenile Justice Division 24 Corporate and Court Services Division 30 Strategic Planning and Training Division 38 75 Our People Welcomes and Farewells 76 Staff Event Highlights National Day Celebrations 78 National Day Awards 80 Subordinate Courts Awards 80 Public Service Week Activities 81 Corporate Social Responsibility Activities 81 Cohesion Activities 82 Other Social Events 82 Judges and Staff of the Subordinate Courts 84 SUBORDINATE COURTS Foreword by The Honourable the Chief Justice 02 Annual Report 2011 03

been laudable initiatives by the Subordinate FOREWORD BY Courts – such as the regular publication of the Subordinate Courts newsletter and THE HONOURABLE establishing Communities of Practice with stakeholders – to engage and reach out to THE CHIEF JUSTICE the community.

I also congratulate the Subordinate Courts for being awarded the Singapore Quality The Subordinate Courts have, over the counselling and mediation services for Award with Special Commendation, which last decade, surmounted organisational divorcing couples with young children is the highest honour given by SPRING and operational challenges. The number represents a major step in the provision Singapore. This award attests to the and variety of cases tried or heard by of holistic family justice. A Family Night unstinting drive by the Subordinate Courts the Subordinate Courts’ Criminal, Civil, Court has been introduced to deal with to serve with excellence. The Subordinate and Family and Juvenile Justice Divisions mentions of maintenance summonses at a Courts have now embarked on a new reflect the changing landscape of our time that is convenient for the parties. The journey, as they plan for the design and society. To ensure that the administration Criminal Case Resolution programme is building of a new Subordinate Courts of justice is in tune with social needs, the another innovation that has been successful Complex to meet their expanding functions. Subordinate Courts have gone beyond in facilitating open dialogue between the I am confident that the Subordinate Courts, merely adjudicating cases; they have been Prosecution and the Defence. Further, the amidst these developments, will continue proactive in discerning potential docket Subordinate Courts have set up specialised the journey to attain “greater heights” and or other problems in these cases in order community sentencing courts to deal with “new horizons”, as aptly encapsulated in Chief Justice to address them in a timely manner. They the new community sentencing regime the theme of this year’s Annual Report. have also been working closely with the introduced by the Criminal Procedure Republic of Singapore

community to develop and refine many of Code 2010. I wish the Subordinate Courts a fulfilling their programmes. In short, the Subordinate journey in the year ahead. Courts are determined to remain a first-class With respect to civil justice, the Subordinate judicial institution, one that is shaped by Courts introduced a pre-action protocol the community and serving the community for personal injury claims to streamline by partnering with it. the management and encourage early settlement of such claims. New processes I am pleased to read in this Annual Report such as neutral evaluation are also being about how the Subordinate Courts have explored in order to give the parties more taken on this role with much passion choices in selecting the most appropriate over the past year. The setting up of the Alternative Dispute Resolution method for Child Focused Resolution Centre to offer their civil disputes. In addition, there have SUBORDINATE COURTS Message from the Chief District Judge 04 Annual Report 2011 05

Improvement to MESSAGE FROM THE court processes

CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE In 2011, the Justice Divisions introduced various initiatives and programmes aimed at achieving a more optimal management and resolution of cases in the Subordinate 2011 was another year of achievements, Court and Service Courts. We work in unison towards changes and new beginnings for the Excellence – Singapore entrenching the new service-centric ethos. Subordinate Courts. On 1 October 2011, Quality Award with Ms Hoo Sheau Peng, the former Registrar Special Commendation Enhancements to of the Subordinate Courts, left us to take up the Criminal Justice the appointment of Deputy Chief Counsel The Subordinate Courts have embraced Processes of the Civil Division of the Attorney- service-centricity as an integral part of our General’s Chambers. We thank Ms Hoo mission to dispense quality justice to our Criminal Case Resolution Sheau Peng for her invaluable contributions court users. In recent years, we have made Criminal Case Resolution (CCR) was first and dedication during her tenure with the concerted efforts to effect a paradigm shift piloted in 2009 to introduce a court-driven Subordinate Courts. At the same time, when dispensing justice to our court users. mediation framework for criminal cases we welcomed to the Subordinate Courts We have made a seismic shift from a court- so as to reduce the high percentage of Ms Jennifer Marie, who took over as centric to a service-centric ethos. We serve “cracked trials” (i.e. trial dates were wasted Registrar, and also assumed the concurrent our court users and society with wisdom or unused when accused persons decided Regulatory Offences Case appointment of Deputy Chief District Judge. and from our heart and with compassion. to plead guilty on the first day of trial or the Management System The quest for service excellence is a Prosecutor withdrew the charge, etc.). CCR An important initiative implemented by We continued to focus on court and continuous process. Since acquiring the has since proven to be highly effective in the Criminal Justice Division was the service excellence. We relentlessly sought Singapore Quality Award (SQA) in 2006, minimising the wastage of court resources implementation of the Regulatory Offences ways to improve our court processes to we have not rested on our laurels. We have occasioned by “cracked trials”. Since the Case Management System (ROMS), a fully further enhance the quality of justice we made transformational changes and scaled CCR programme was piloted in 2009, 108 computerised and paperless management administer. Indeed, the theme of this year’s greater heights of court excellence. Last CCR cases have been heard up to end system for regulatory offences. ROMS Annual Report “Greater Heights, New year, we were honoured to be conferred the December 2011. 68 of these cases were replaced the Tickets & Summons System Horizons” encapsulates two of the key prestigious Singapore Quality Award with successfully resolved without the need for (TICKS), which was in operation for over goals and aspirations that have shaped Special Commendation (SQA SC) by trial. This has resulted in savings of some 129 19 years. ROMS interfaces with other much of the Subordinate Courts’ initiatives SPRING Singapore. We satisfied a team judge-days. CCR has now been formally court information technology systems, such and developments. of seven assessors, including a German institutionalised within the Subordinate as the Subordinate Courts Case Recording assessor, that our court excellence journey Courts’ criminal case resolution framework. and Information Management System II has made quantum leaps over the past five and the Finance Management System. years and that we have also exhibited global leadership amongst international judiciaries. SUBORDINATE COURTS Message from the Chief District Judge 06 Annual Report 2011 07

This creates a one-stop information portal General’s Chambers, Central Narcotics claims to be first heard by the Financial night so that litigants do not have to that has greatly increased our efficiency Bureau, Health Sciences Authority, Industry Dispute Resolution Centre (FIDReC) take leave of absence from their work. in managing regulatory offences. I Ministry of Home Affairs, and Singapore without the need for lawyers. Last year, the The Family Night Court was therefore would like to express my gratitude to Police Force. claim value for the FIDReC-NIMA Scheme established in November 2011 to hear the various enforcement agencies for the was increased from $1,000 to $3,000. maintenance-related applications. The successful implementation of ROMS. Enhancements to the Family Night Court now convenes every Their cooperation and coordination Civil Justice Processes New ADR processes Tuesday night. were critical in ensuring a smooth We also extended the scope of ADR transition from TICKS to ROMS. These The Subordinate Courts have been an active processes to cover assessment of The Family and Juvenile Justice Division enforcement agencies are the Accounting proponent of Alternative Dispute Resolution damages proceedings. The “Guidelines has also adapted its operations to address and Corporate Regulatory Authority, as a means of resolving disputes. I would for the Assessment of General Damages a number of new legislation which took Agri-Food & Veterinary Authority of like to list some of these initiatives. in Personal Injury Cases”, a book jointly effect in 2011. Singapore, Building and Construction published by the Civil Justice Division and Authority, Central Provident Fund Board, Pre-action protocol for the setting out Child Focused Resolution Centre Housing and Development Board, Inland Personal Injury cases the common monetary awards given for (CFRC) Revenue Authority of Singapore, Land In May 2011, as part of the Subordinate different types of personal injuries, has also A major initiative undertaken by the Family Transport Authority, Media Development Courts’ continuous efforts to promote greatly assisted parties in their settlement and Juvenile Justice Division involved the Authority, National Environment Agency, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) as efforts. This is because parties are aware establishment of the new Child Focused Public Utilities Board, Singapore Civil a means of dispute resolution, the Civil that the Courts rely on the guidelines in Resolution Centre (CFRC) in September Defence Force, Traffic Police, and Urban Justice Division issued a pre-action protocol this book when making their awards. This 2011. The CFRC was established in Redevelopment Authority. for Personal Injury (PI) cases. This was to brings about transparency and certainty, response to amendments to the Women’s streamline the management of PI cases. and has contributed to the steep settlement Charter. It provides counselling and Establishment of the Drugs Courts The protocol provided for the automatic rates for personal injuries cases. Separately, mediation for divorcing couples with We are always keen to harness the referral of PI claims for ADR before the we also commenced a pilot programme children. This is aimed at resolving post- synergies and benefits associated with Primary Dispute Resolution Centre within a to introduce Neutral Evaluation as a divorce parenting and care arrangements. differentiated case management. Over designated time after the commencement further ADR option. We also explored the As there is a lack of space at the Family the years, we have, therefore, established of the action. We hope to achieve a more feasibility of taking expert evidence using a and Juvenile Court building, this new various specialist courts such as the timely resolution of such cases. witness conferencing approach. centre is housed at Level 4 of Central Community Courts, Traffic Court, and Mall, located at 1 Magazine Road. This Coroner’s Court, to handle specific types Increasing the jurisdiction of Enhancement to the location is selected for the convenience of cases. In 2011, we added the Drugs the FIDReC-NIMA Scheme Family Justice Processes of court users as it is near the Family and Courts to our list of specialist courts. The jurisdictional limits of the FIDReC- Juvenile Court building. The establishment of the specialist Drugs NIMA Scheme were further extended in Family Night Court Courts has enhanced our management of 2011. The FIDReC-NIMA Scheme was In our regular dialogues with our drug cases. It has also helped us develop first introduced in May 2008. It aims to stakeholders, there was a request for greater synergies with our stakeholders create a cost efficient framework for the us to help working litigants involved in who are involved in the prosecution resolution of low-value non-injury motor hearings before the Family Courts by of drug offences, such as the Attorney- accident (NIMA) claims by requiring such scheduling some court proceedings at SUBORDINATE COURTS Message from the Chief District Judge 08 Annual Report 2011 09

Implementation of amendments e-Calendar Improvements to Quality Bench to the Women’s Charter and the The e-Calendar System was successfully Physical Infrastructure International Child Abduction implemented in the Criminal Justice Division. The quality of justice the Subordinate Act 2010 It replaces the paper calendar system that Improvements to amenities Courts dispense is intricately tied to the Following the amendments to the Women’s was previously used to manage court We continually strive to improve our quality of their bench. Training of Judges Charter, the Family Courts have begun diaries. The e-Calendar System provides physical infrastructure for the benefit and therefore remains high on our list of to hear applications for financial relief a real-time update of court availability comfort of court users. Public lifts were organisational priorities. brought by applicants involved in foreign and schedules. It thereby greatly facilitates upgraded, and the Atrium at the mezzanine annulment, divorce and judicial separation the fixing of trial and hearing dates. The level at the Subordinate Courts building The induction programmes for new District proceedings where the requisite nexus with e-Calendar System is currently used in Court was furbished and transformed into a Judges and Magistrates have been Singapore is established. A wider range 17, and will be rolled out progressively to comfortable meeting or rest area for court revamped to make them more structured of reliefs in relation to the enforcement the Family and Juvenile Justice Division. users and staff. There are lounge tables and meaningful. They now have to sit for of maintenance orders can now also be and chairs, vending machines and even and pass online tests to ensure that they sought before the Family Courts. These DART Project free Wifi. Lawyers have given glowing are competent and have acquired all include orders requiring the defaulting We launched the Digital Audio Recording compliments for the new Atrium. knowledge necessary for the job. parties to furnish security, to attend financial and Transcription (DART) pilot project in counselling, to perform community service, 2010 to facilitate the recording of court We also established a private waiting Knowledge Management (KM) at the and orders requiring the Central Provident proceedings and optimise the use of area in the Protection Order Services Subordinate Courts was also embraced Fund Board to release defaulting parties’ scarce judicial resources. This project was office at the Family and Juvenile Court with the establishment of the KM Unit. In employment and contribution details, rolled out to the other Courts in 2011. building so that victims of family violence line with the KM journey, the Jurist Resource among others. With the coming into effect of DART facilities are now available in all the have greater privacy and are placed in a and Information System 2 was introduced. the International Child Abduction Act 2010 three Justice Divisions. therapeutic setting. Knowledge capital is important to the (ICAA) in March 2011, child abduction Subordinate Courts. We also have better cases and child custody and access cases Foreign Interpreter New Subordinate Courts Complex research and navigational features to which fall within the ambit of the ICAA Management System The plans to build a new Subordinate access legal knowledge. These efforts go are now also heard by the Family Courts. In 2011, we developed the Foreign Courts Complex are progressing well. An a long way in cementing our position as a Interpreter Management System (FIMS) open design competition was launched in learning organisation. Leveraging on to improve the management of part-time September 2011, and the final design is Technology foreign interpreters in court proceedings. expected to be decided in June 2012. FIMS tracks the deployment of such foreign Leveraging on Information Technology to interpreters from the time requests are made serve our court users better remains one of to the assignment of the interpreters to the our perennial quests. relevant Courts. This has resulted in greater efficiency and savings. SUBORDINATE COURTS Message from the Chief District Judge 10 Annual Report 2011 11

Community Engagement more holistic understanding of the Courts’ Excellence. During that trip, a meeting functions and operations. was arranged for a few parliamentarians Engagement with our stakeholders at a of the host country to discuss with me on meaningful level is critical to the effective Corporate Social Outreach the transformation of their judiciary. In the functioning of the Courts. As a way of giving back to society, we course of this meeting, they were also organised fund-raising activities during very interested to know how Singapore Engagement with the Law the National Day period, and raised maintained an incorruptible judiciary. Society of Singapore a total of $29,300 for the Children’s We regularly engage and elicit Cancer Foundation. Thus, 2011 has been another fruitful year feedback from members of the bar on for the Subordinate Courts. It was made new initiatives and other relevant issues. On 2 December 2011, the Civil Justice possible by the collective hard work The Civil Justice Division, in collaboration Division organised “Love, Hope and Dreams”, and dedication of all our Judges, court with the Singapore Academy of Law’s another corporate social responsibility administrators and support staff. As we Professional Affairs Committee and the programme. It was attended by some 30 reflect on our achievements last year, we Forum of Senior Counsel, also held a children of Beyond Social Services, a must not lose sight of the fact that there are series of lectures on best practices in civil local charity. The children were given an yet many challenges and possibilities that procedure at the Subordinate Courts. The educational tour of the Subordinate Courts lie ahead. Looking ahead into the new lectures were very well attended. and treated to performances by staff. A year, we must remain vigilant and sensitive $5,000 cheque donated by court staff to the changing needs of society. We have Engagement with Court Volunteers was also presented to the charity. to constantly reinvent ourselves to meet We continue to engage volunteers, society’s expectations of us as dispensers including Justices of the Peace, mediators Conclusion of quality justice. With the unswerving and law students from local universities, commitment and support of our staff, I in a wide range of court functions such as The pinnacle of all our achievements in am confident that the Subordinate Courts mediation, counselling and manning of our 2011 was attaining the SQA SC. Many will continue to scale greater heights and HELP Centre. We are extremely grateful to SQA organisations had unsuccessfully tried conquer new horizons in the years to come. our court volunteers for their contributions to attain the SQA SC. There are presently and services. We hosted the annual Court only five organisations in Singapore, Volunteers’ Appreciation Dinner at the including the Subordinate Courts, which TAN SIONG THYE Hilton Hotel on 18 November 2011, with have been awarded the SQA SC. This is Chief District Judge the Honourable Judge of Appeal, Justice indeed a great effort and we are humbled as our guest of honour. by this award.

Internships I am also heartened to narrate an anecdote We have also taken steps to formalise about my happy yet humbling experience our internship programmes. We ensure arising out of my trip to a foreign country that law students serving internships at the while tasked to deliver a keynote address Courts would acquire a meaningful and in an international conference on Court SUBORDINATE COURTS 12 Annual Report 2011

ORGANISATION CHART

Chief District Judge Tan Siong Thye

Deputy Chief District Judge Jennifer Marie

Senior District Judge Senior District Judge Registrar Senior District Judge Senior Director Foo Tuat Yien Jennifer Marie Leslie Chew Thian Yee Sze

Family and Corporate Strategic Criminal Justice Civil Justice Juvenile Justice and Court Planning and Division Division Division Services Division Training Division

• Centralised PTC • Family Trial Courts Corporate • General Group • Strategic Planning Court • Mental Capacity Services • Commercial Group - Planning Unit • Commercial Crimes Court - Research & • Communications • Torts Group Knowledge Group • Juvenile Court - Corporate Development Unit Communications • Primary Dispute • Community Court • Protection Order Resolution Centre • Information Group - Service Relations Services Unit Technology • Small Claims • Crimes Against Department • Family Resolutions • Finance Tribunals Property Group Chambers • Organisational • Human Resource • Civil Registry • Crimes Against Excellence and OUR • Maintenance Management Persons Group - Bailiffs Performance Mediation • Infrastructure Management • Specialised and Chambers Development - Centre for Research DIVISIONS Mentions Courts and Statistics • Counselling and Group - Organisational Psychological Excellence Unit • Crime Registry Services Court Services • Training • Child Focused • Interpreters Resolution Centre • Records • Knowledge Management Management and • Family Registry Library Resources • Digital Recording SUBORDINATE COURTS Our Divisions Criminal Justice Division 14 Annual Report 2011 15

CRIMINAL JUSTICE Specialised functions Courts* Courts 5, 8, Trial Courts specialising in criminal cases relating to crimes 15, 18, 25#, DIVISION against persons. 33, 36

Mentions Courts for criminal cases (Courts 23 and 26); and The Criminal Justice Division is the largest division in the Subordinate Specialised Courts such as the Bail Court (Court 26), Traffic Court Courts 14, 21, Courts. The Division comprises Criminal Trial Courts, Mentions Courts, (Court 21), Summonses & Regulatory Matters Court (Court 14) and 22, 23, 26# Specialised Courts, and a centralised Pre-Trial Conference Court. Coroner’s Court (Court 22). These Courts collectively deal with more than 99 per cent of all criminal cases in Singapore. For the efficient disposal of the myriad of The Crime Registry, which provides administrative support to the cases that come before the Criminal Courts, the Division is organised Courts in the Division and also attends to Magistrate’s Complaints and Crime Registry into seven specialised groups, each headed by a group manager. The criminal case mediation. Division is headed by a Senior District Judge. * Correct as at Jan 2012. The Courts may be allocated to different groups from time to time. # Courts 25 and 26 also operate as Night Courts (Courts 25N and 26N) from 6pm every working day.

Significant Initiatives Specialised functions Courts* Foreign Interpreter Management System Centralised Pre-Trial Conference (PTC) Court, which centrally manages In 2010, the Criminal Justice Division Courts to certify the service rendered. This and assigns cases for trial in the various Trial Courts, and ensures that Court 17 collaborated with the Corporate and ensures accountability and speeds up the judicial resources are efficiently allocated. Court Services Division to replace remuneration of the Foreign Interpreters. In the manual administration of Foreign addition, FIMS has a built-in intelligence Courts 2, 3, 6, Trial Courts specialising in criminal cases relating to commercial crimes, Interpreters’ services with the Foreign feature to recommend the assignment of the 7, 9, 10, 11, corruption, immigration, special drugs and intellectual property. Interpreter Management System (FIMS). same Foreign Interpreter to the same case 24, 35, 39 Commissioned on 30 November 2011, previously heard in Court. This facilitates FIMS provides a single platform of services continuity, and enhances the quality of Community Courts, specialising in community-related cases and cases using e-forms. The Courts can submit their interpretation. With the implementation of Courts 19 & 20 relating to public order. requests for Foreign Interpreters through FIMS, the Courts have achieved higher FIMS. They can track the status of their productivity and efficiency, resulting in

Trial Courts specialising in criminal cases relating to property offences, Courts 4, 12, requests and know which Foreign Interpreter savings of both time and court resources housebreaking, gaming and gambling offences, and employment- 13, 16, 34, has been assigned to them. The system in the administration and management of related offences. 37, 38 also routes service details to the respective the Foreign Interpreter services. SUBORDINATE COURTS Our Divisions Criminal Justice Division 16 Annual Report 2011 17

Regulatory Offences Case Management System Significant Cases In July 2011, the Criminal Justice Division Prosecutors. This reduces discrepancies, launched a new system called the enhances sentencing accuracy and PP v A: Criminal Procedure PP v Peter Usit Musa & Ors: Regulatory Offences Case Management provides up-to-date information on the status Code (CPC) 2010 – More Tools to Kallang Slashers System (ROMS) to replace the Tickets of the case. The system also has a built-in Address Offending Behaviour At the other end of the spectrum of & Summons System (TICKs), which had intelligent feature to highlight all pending With the coming into operation of the criminality, the Courts continued to carry managed regulatory offence cases for the cases against a defendant. This allows the new Criminal Procedure Code 2010, out their important role in safeguarding the last 19 years. The paperless system takes Courts to optimise court scheduling and the Criminal Justice Division now has interests of the public. An example of this care of a substantial proportion of the case deal with all the pending cases against the more tools at its disposal to address the involved the treatment of a gang of seven load of the Division. defendant at the same court session. This in diverse causes of criminality. One example foreign workers from Sarawak who went on turn improves efficiency and increases the where these tools were deployed involved a brutal robbery spree in the Kallang area With interfaces between other systems case disposition rate. the case of A (male, age 19) who was in 2010, with some armed with parangs. such as the Subordinate Courts Case a bright student at a polytechnic and Five victims were randomly targeted, and Recording and Information Management With ROMS, defendants take responsibility who was caught for a serious offence one later died from the injuries inflicted System II (SCRIMS II) and the Finance for their cases through the ROMS kiosks of Housebreaking by Night under on him. The gang was later rounded up Management System (FMS), ROMS located outside the courtrooms. Through section 457 of the Penal Code. Through after a manhunt by the police. Three gang serves as a one-stop information portal. In the system, they may indicate their next assessments conducted by the Community members now await trial for murder in the addition, the system removes the need for intended course of action, e.g. to plead Court Secretariat, it was established by an High Court. The other four gang members prosecuting agencies to file their cases in guilty, pay fine, etc. Institute of Mental Health (IMH) psychiatrist were all dealt with in the Subordinate the Subordinate Courts as they can do so that A had a sexual fetish involving female Courts after investigations revealed that online from their office premises. ROMS has helped the Subordinate Courts undergarments, and this was the primary each of them played a lesser role. Three and their stakeholders to achieve higher reason he trespassed into homes to steal gang members (Peter Usit Musa, Sylvester ROMS also enables the sharing of essential productivity and efficiency at the whole- female lingerie. Further assessments with his Beragok and Landa Sulai) were each information, such as case status and of - government level in the management of parents were conducted, and an in-depth sentenced to six years’ imprisonment and sentencing details, between the Judges and regulatory offences. report from the IMH psychiatrist confirmed 12 strokes of the cane for gang-robbery that the treatment prognosis for A’s fetishism under Section 395 of the Penal Code, for was positive. The Court placed A under a their part in kicking and hitting one of the Mandatory Treatment Order (MTO) for 24 robbery victims. A fourth gang member months in a bid to address the root cause (Shahman Milak) was sentenced to two of his offending behaviour. This case is an years’ imprisonment and six strokes of the example of a young accused person who cane for attempted robbery under Section benefitted from the changes made in the 393 of the Penal Code. law. Without the benefit of the Community Court Conferences, A’s parents would have remained hesitant rather than proactive in their role involving the son’s need for treatment; and without the MTO, A’s hope for a bright future could have been dashed. SUBORDINATE COURTS Our Divisions Criminal Justice Division / Civil Justice Division 18 Annual Report 2011 19

PP v Tan Cheng Yew: Coroner’s Inquiry - Courts. In addition, all non-contentious Justice Finally Served Franklin Heng: Death after CIVIL probate applications are dealt with at the The law was also similarly brought to bear Liposuction Operation Civil Registry. on sophisticated white collar criminals who In 2011, there were landmarks set by the other JUSTICE caused massive losses. Former lawyer, specialist courts in the Criminal Justice Division. Primary Dispute Resolution Centre Tan Cheng Yew, fled the country in 2003 One of these involved the Coroner’s Inquiry DIVISION The Primary Dispute Resolution Centre after misappropriating client’s funds. After into the death of 44-year-old Franklin Heng, (PDRC) offers litigants an alternative to spending six years on the run, he was finally then Chief Executive Officer of YTL Pacific resolve the matter instead of going through caught in June 2009 when he travelled to Star, who underwent a liposuction operation The Civil Justice Division handles the litigation process at the Civil Registry or Germany on business while working as performed by general practitioner Dr Jim a variety of disputes involving the Civil Trial Courts. The PDRC facilitates a legal counsel in the USA under a fake Wong of the Reves Clinic. Mr Heng failed to claims of up to the sum of the resolution of cases at an early stage passport and an assumed name. Although fully revive after the operation and was rushed $250,000 and other matters such through mediation before a Judge- Tan resisted the extradition proceedings by ambulance to Tan Tock Seng Hospital as probate. It comprises the Mediator. This process has many benefits vigorously, he was finally extradited back where he was pronounced dead. An Civil Registry, which includes for litigants, such as savings in time and to Singapore in October 2009 to face autopsy on the deceased later found multiple the Bailiffs Section, the Primary costs and avoiding stress caused by going charges. Tan faced six charges of Criminal punctures in his stomach and intestines. Dispute Resolution Centre, through cross-examination in a hearing. Breach of Trust and of Cheating under Over 15 days, the Court received evidence Civil Trial Courts and Small Sections 409 and 420 respectively of the from 17 witnesses, six of whom were experts Claims Tribunals. Civil Trial Courts Penal Code. He claimed trial to all of them. in their respective medical fields. At the If alternative dispute resolution efforts are At the trial, the Prosecution opted to proceed conclusion of the Inquiry, the Coroner found unsuccessful, or if litigants are unable to on two charges under each provision, and that Dr Jim Wong had inadvertently caused Civil Registry resolve their dispute, the case may proceed on April 2011, Tan was found guilty by the injuries to the deceased. The cause of The Civil Registry is where all civil cases for trial before a Judge in an open court. the Court after an extensive review of the death was determined to be asphyxia due filed in the District Court and Magistrates’ The public are generally permitted to attend evidence. The amount involved in the four to airway obstruction when the deceased Courts begin and usually end. It begins all open court hearings. The Judge ensures charges proceeded with totalled more than became deeply sedated with the anaesthetic when a litigant files a court document to that the trial is fair, and that justice is not $4.8 million. During the court proceedings, drug, Propofol. This was also the drug that start a civil action, and ends after the only done, but is also seen to be done. it transpired that Tan fled in 2003 to was linked to the death of pop star Michael litigant successfully enforces the judgment Australia after racking up $6 million in Jackson. This case was significant for not only with the assistance of the court bailiffs. At Small Claims Tribunals gambling debts. No restitution was made. being the first death which occurred after a each step of the legal process, there is The Small Claims Tribunals (SCT) is another After considering all the factors, the Court liposuction operation, but also for being one a team of dedicated court administrators alternative to litigation in the District and imposed custodial terms of between three of the latest series of inquiries now conducted who attend to the court user and process Magistrates’ Courts. It is available to any and five years on the charges and ordered under the new Coroners Act 2010. Under the the legal applications. The Judges in person who claims less than $10,000 (or two terms to run consecutively, making a new Act, the Coroner no longer needs to come the Civil Registry adjudicate these legal $20,000 if litigants agree in writing), in a total sentence of nine years’ imprisonment. to any conclusion on criminal responsibility, applications, such as originating summonses, prescribed category of claims, such as a but will focus on ascertaining the facts and interlocutory summonses, summary judgment claim in contract for the sale of goods or circumstances behind a death instead of applications and assessments of damages. provision of services. The claim may be apportioning blame. A case may be resolved at the Civil Registry resolved through mediation before an SCT or it may proceed for trial in the Civil Trial registrar. A hearing before an SCT referee SUBORDINATE COURTS Our Divisions Civil Justice Division 20 Annual Report 2011 21

will be fixed if there is no settlement. At SCT, Pre-action protocol for personal to choose whether or not to accept the litigants cannot be represented and this injury claims determination or award. As parties are not helps to keep the costs low for litigants. A pre-action protocol for personal injury permitted to have legal representation for claims was implemented with effect from 1 these low value NIM A cases, legal costs in Significant Initiatives May 2011 to streamline the management resolving such disputes are avoided. and promote early settlement of such claims. Amendments to the Subordinate The protocol also provides for personal Pilot Programme for Neutral Courts Act injury cases to be automatically referred to Evaluation (NE) as an Alternative A significant event for the Civil Justice court dispute resolution early into the action, Dispute Resolution (ADR) Option Division in 2011 was the amendments to Working with Stakeholders to i.e. within eight weeks after a memorandum PDRC commenced a 6-month pilot the Subordinate Courts Act which came Support Best Practices of appearance is entered by the defendant. programme to introduce NE as a further into effect on 2 January 2011. Prior to the Between February and April 2011, the This provides the parties with an opportunity ADR option on 17 October 2011. NE amendments, apart from the amount or value Civil Justice Division, in conjunction with to resolve the matter early in the proceedings involves the parties and their lawyers making of a claim (which remains a relevant criterion the Professional Development and Practice with the assistance of the PDRC, reducing succinct presentations of their case at a post-amendment), another important criterion Chapter of the Singapore Academy of potential expenditure on legal costs. It also hearing to be presided by a Judge as the to determine whether a claim was to be Law’s Professional Affairs Committee and sets out costs guidelines for cases where the Evaluator. As the NE process is evaluative mounted in the High Court or the Subordinate the Forum of Senior Counsel, conducted a sum settled or awarded is less than $20,000 in nature, the parties and their lawyers are Courts was the nature of the claim. The series of five lectures on best practices in to help parties to agree on the issue of costs expected to apprise the Evaluator of all key Subordinate Courts were responsible only civil procedure at the Subordinate Courts. as part of their overall settlement. evidence available to them at that juncture. for certain expressly defined categories of The purpose of the lectures was to share Based on the arguments and evidence claims such as contracts, torts or property. best practices when preparing for a civil Management of Low-Value Non- presented at the NE hearing, the Evaluator The amendments generally permit claims litigation case. Mr Thio Shen Yi, SC, Mr Injury Motor Accident (NIMA) will deliver an evaluation of the relative within the monetary limits to be commenced Andre Maniam, SC, Mr Ang Cheng Hock, cases by the Financial Industry merits of the parties’ claims and/or defences in the Subordinate Courts so long as they are SC, Mr George Lim, SC, and Mr Francis Dispute Resolution Centre Ltd at the conclusion of the hearing. not expressly reserved for the High Court by Xavier, SC, took turns to conduct lectures (FIDReC) the amendments or specific statutes, such as and each lecture was followed by a panel By the Subordinate Courts ePractice Direction This process is expected to be particularly matters involving judicial review. This has discussion chaired by Senior District Judge No. 4 of 2011, the claim value threshold in useful in cases where parties desire an resulted in a more efficient court process Leslie Chew. The response to the lectures was respect of the FIDReC pre-action protocol for evaluation of the merits of their case to and savings for litigants as they can now go overwhelming. There were 538 attendees. low value NIM A claims introduced on 17 form a basis for settlement negotiations. to the Subordinate Courts, where costs are The feedback was also positive and the March 2008 was extended to claims below To evaluate the relative strengths of each lower than in the High Court, if the value of series of lectures has been very successful in $3,000. The FIDReC-NIM A pre-action side’s technical evidence, parties are their claim is within the Subordinate Courts’ reaching out to civil litigation practitioners in protocol aims to facilitate early settlement encouraged to agree on the use of a single monetary limits. the Subordinate Courts. of such disputes by FIDReC before any joint expert. If there is no such agreement, civil action is filed in Court. FIDReC will parties may elect to bring their own experts manage these claims through mediation and to the NE hearing where the Evaluator will if necessary, adjudication. The determination hear their evidence simultaneously instead or award of the adjudicator is binding on of sequentially as in a trial. This process, the motor insurer while the claimant is free called witness conferencing, is expected SUBORDINATE COURTS Our Divisions Civil Justice Division 22 Annual Report 2011 23

to reduce the time and costs expended by and its insurers (collectively referred to as Deputy Registrar. The parties agreed on the painting. He was credited to be the first the parties. the “Defendants”) for a liquidated sum as quantum of the medical expenses incurred Chinese master to fuse traditional Chinese medical expenses (“partial disability claim”) and future medical expenses to be incurred form with Western techniques. Xu Bei Hong New directions and forms have been pursuant to provisions in WICA and the Civil by the Plaintiff but could not agree if they are paintings are highly coveted, with some implemented for assessment of damages Law Act. At the hearing in the Civil Registry, recoverable by the Plaintiff and if they are pieces worth millions of dollars. In February court dispute resolution (ADCDR) and the main issue was whether the Plaintiff could to stand as part of or ought to be deducted 2007, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant pre-assessment of damages conferences maintain a common law action against the from the agreed damages to avoid double $100,000 for what was thought to be a Xu in regard to disputes where interlocutory Defendants for a partial disability claim recovery. The basic rule is that damages Bei Hong painting. A few weeks later, the judgments have been entered for damages notwithstanding having already obtained in negligence are purely compensatory in Plaintiff discovered that the painting was to be assessed. Procedures have also been orders under WICA. The Defendants argued nature and in assessing damages for loss not an original painting, and he sued the put in place for litigants to apply for a fast- that all the Plaintiff’s rights had merged with sustained by the injured party, any gain Defendant for a refund of monies paid. This track ADCDR session to be convened after the WICA Order, that the Plaintiff’s action which is received by him, which he would case took an interesting twist when halfway interlocutory judgment has been entered. amounted to an abuse of process and not have but for the injury, prima facie will through the Defendant’s cross examination, These measures help to efficiently resolve the that the Plaintiff cannot proceed separately be taken into account. However, it is also the Defendant admitted that the painting quanta of damages where liability has first under WICA and common law. The Plaintiff well established that the basic rule admits was actually a cheap machine-generated been established. disagreed and argued that the writ action two categories of exceptions, commonly print. Subsequently, the Defendant fell ill merely sought to quantify the partial disability referred to as the ‘insurance exception’ and and the Court adjourned the trial for the SIGNIFICANT CASES claim referred to in the WICA Order. The the ‘benevolence exception’ (which was Defendant to recuperate. When the trial Deputy Registrar accepted the Defendants’ not applicable in this case). The principle resumed, the Defendant failed to appear Ge Zhao Hui v Ho Tong Seng submission and noted that the WICA Order of the ‘insurance exception’ is premised on for cross examination, and also did not Engineering Construction Pte Ltd expressly provided for a mechanism for the whether the injured party had taken out inform his lawyer of his whereabouts. The & SHC Capital Limited partial disability claim to be quantified. It and paid the premiums under the insurance Court then granted default judgment for the The Plaintiff was employed by a construction was also held that the Plaintiff’s interpretation policy which generates the payments to Plaintiff. Several months later, the Defendant company (“Employers”) as a construction of WICA went against Parliament’s intention. him. In this case, the ‘insurance exception’ engaged new lawyers to apply to set aside worker. During the Plaintiff’s period of The Plaintiff’s appeal against this decision applied as the Plaintiff had paid the the default judgment. For such applications, employment, he was injured when deployed was dismissed. premiums. The District Judge upheld the it is incumbent on the applicant to furnish to the Employers’ sub-contractor (“Sub- Deputy Registrar’s decision that both the good reasons for being absent at trial. In Contractor”). He then made a claim for Koh Chin Hwee v Ang Dixon medical expenses incurred and future this regard, the Defendant informed the permanent incapacity compensation by The Registrar’s Appeal arose out of the medical expenses to be incurred by the Court that the reason for his absence was relying on the Work Injury Compensation usual type of torts claims heard regularly Plaintiff were recoverable at law by the because the president of a foreign country Act (“WICA”). The Commissioner of Labour in the Subordinate Courts. The Plaintiff was Plaintiff as part of the agreed damages. had invited him to an overseas meeting and assessed the Plaintiff’s claim and made injured in a motor accident in February had tasked him to go on a secret mission separate orders against both the Employers 2007 and claimed for damages against Lawrence Wong Chun Lam and for the foreign government. The Defendant’s and the Sub-Contractor (“WICA Order”). the Defendant. The matter was mediated another v Tong Lian Joo @ Tong lawyer, however, was unable to provide The order against the Sub-Contractor was by successfully at the Primary Dispute Djoe and another any details of this alleged covert mission. consent and was duly satisfied. Subsequently, Resolution Centre, and the parties entered This trial involved a painting allegedly After careful consideration, the Court found because the Employers were unable to meet an Interlocutory Judgment (interim judgment drawn by the famous Chinese painter Xu Bei the Defendant’s explanation lacking, and the Plaintiff’s demands, the Plaintiff started on liability) by consent in April 2009, Hong. Xu Bei Hong (1895 –1953) is widely dismissed the application. a writ action against the Sub-Contractor with the damages to be assessed by the recognised as the father of modern Chinese SUBORDINATE COURTS Our Divisions Family and Juvenile Justice Division 24 Annual Report 2011 25

• Applications for subsequent variation Matters relating to children and FAMILY AND JUVENILE of maintenance orders and orders young persons concerning the children where The Juvenile Court, one of the courts JUSTICE DIVISION circumstances change over the years. within FJ J D, handles all criminal charges against juveniles in Singapore. Although While some matters may have to be it exercises criminal jurisdiction in hearing The Family and Juvenile Justice children for years to come. To effectively determined through a contested court these matters, it operates differently from Division (FJJD) deals with four handle the issues presented for consideration, hearing, every effort is made to provide other criminal courts. The concern for broad categories of cases: the Family Court is keenly aware of the need the opportunity for parties to work towards rehabilitation and restoration assumes divorce-related proceedings, to be sensitive to the underlying issues and achieving consensus on what the way greater emphasis relative to deterrence, family protection and provision the needs of the parties in the future. forward should be. The emphasis is on the incapacitation and even sentencing parity. matters, mental capacity cases use of collaborative and less-adversarial There is a greater need for holism and a and matters relating to children The Court’s role as an impartial adjudicator processes, such as the CHILD (Children’s sense of family-orientation, which takes and young persons (their of family disputes encompasses the role of Best Interest, Less Adversarial) Programme, into account factors and circumstances offences, their adoption, care, protecting family obligations to ensure that that do not intensify animosity but instead from a multi-disciplinary perspective. and guardianship). rights are upheld and responsibilities are strengthen the parties’ ability to cooperate fulfilled. To preserve the psychological and in co-parenting their children unimpaired by physical well-being of all family members, the acrimonious litigation. FJ J D’s primary role is to deal with and use of counselling and mediation by a team adjudicate family-related legal disputes, of highly experienced in-house counsellors Family protection and provision providing finality and closure to what can and mediators is and always remains a high matters be acrimonious legal contests. priority, especially in the case of children FJJD hears all applications for orders and victims of abuse. relating to family violence and protection, A critical role of FJ J D has been to go beyond orders relating to maintenance (not the legal issues to explore and provide Divorce-related proceedings consequent upon divorce), orders relating holistic solutions to the parties, using means The divorce-related applications handled by to children under the Guardianship of The Juvenile Court also handles applications that, as far as possible, do not intensify the FJ J D include: Infants Act, as well as orders for enforcement for ‘Care and Protection’ orders and ‘Beyond conflict, and focus on the way ahead rather of maintenance. Orders made by the Parental Control’ orders under the Children • Applications to commence divorce than on the past. Syariah Court for maintenance and by the and Young Persons Act. Possible orders in proceedings; Tribunal for the Maintenance of Parents these cases include placement under a fit This approach is anchored in the recognition • Applications for nullity or judicial can also be enforced at the Family Court. person or residence in a juvenile institution. that family disputes stand apart from other separation; kinds of disputes. Most family disputes that Mental capacity cases The Family Court handles applications • Applications for consequential division reach the Courts are likely to have a long FJ J D handles all proceedings under the under the Guardianship of Infants Act of matrimonial assets (where the value and difficult past underlying the legal issues. Mental Capacity Act in its Mental Capacity and the Adoption of Children Act. Orders of the assets falls below $1.5 million), Furthermore, unlike other disputes, many Court. Orders can be made appointing can be made concerning the custody of and for maintenance orders and orders parties will have to continue to interact in deputies to act on behalf of persons lacking children and their adoption. concerning the custody and care of the future, in that they need to co-parent their mental capacity. children; and SUBORDINATE COURTS Our Divisions Family and Juvenile Justice Division 26 Annual Report 2011 27

Partnerships and State after a Contracting State has declared jobs or does not disclose his current order the transfer of divided matrimonial stakeholder engagement its acceptance of Singapore’s accession. employer. The Women’s Charter has also assets into a child’s Child Development Critical to the work of the division are been amended to allow complainants to Account (“CDA”) as financial provision for the partnerships and complementary 17 Contracting States have accepted lodge a report with the credit bureau, with the child. Such monies would be treated relationships with stakeholders, who Singapore’s accession (as at 24 October consequent effects on the creditworthiness as the parents’ contributions to the CDA provide support services for parties who 2011). They are: Uruguay, Bahamas, of the defaulter. and would attract the Government’s co- appear in the Courts. They include the Germany, New Zealand, People’s Republic matching contribution. Ministry of Community Development, of China (on behalf of the Hong Kong and In relation to divorce, the amendments to Youth and Sports, the Panel of Juvenile Macau Special Administrative Regions), the Women’s Charter now allow the Court Court Advisers, governmental and non- Greece, Czech Republic, Argentina, Latvia, to provide financial relief to an applicant SIGNIFICANT CASES governmental family support agencies, Serbia, Sweden, Israel, Belgium, Estonia, who is legally separated or divorced, or family service centres and volunteer Slovakia, France and Spain. whose marriage was annulled, in foreign Setting aside of an ancillary mediators, who assist in the mediation of jurisdictions. The applicant must obtain matters order maintenance and divorce cases. Implementation of amendments the leave of court before making such A husband confronted his wife with to the Women’s Charter an application. Further, the Court has the evidence of her infidelity and informed her SIGNIFICANT INITIATIVES When dealing with persons who default on jurisdiction to hear such an application that he would divorce her. His solicitors maintenance payments, the Family Court only if one of the parties to the marriage then produced a draft deed of settlement in The International Child Abduction has the power to, amongst others, order the was domiciled in Singapore on the date respect of ancillary matters, a copy of which Act 2010 defaulter to serve a term of imprisonment when the application for leave was made the husband gave to the wife eight days The International Child Abduction Act (ICAA) and/or to make their maintenance payments or on the date the divorce, annulment or after the confrontation. She subsequently was enacted on 16 September 2010 and via an attachment of earnings order. With judicial separation took effect in the foreign signed the deed about a month after she came into force on 1 March 2011. The the amendments to the Women’s Charter in jurisdiction; or one of the parties to the was confronted. purpose of the ICAA is to give effect to the January 2011, the Court now has, with effect marriage was habitually resident for a Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects from June 2011, a wider range of powers continuous period of one year in Singapore The salient features of the deed provided of International Child Abduction (“the in the enforcement of maintenance orders, immediately preceding the date when the that the husband would have sole custody Convention”), to which Singapore acceded including the power to order the defaulter application for leave was made or the date of the children, that the matrimonial home on 28 December 2010. The objectives of to furnish security by way of a Banker’s the divorce, annulment or judicial separation would be transferred to him without any the Convention are twofold: firstly, to secure Guarantee, to attend financial counselling took effect in the foreign jurisdiction. If the refund of her CPF contributions and that the prompt return of children under 16 years and to perform community service. Further, Court is satisfied that it is the appropriate she waived her right to maintenance. who were wrongfully removed to or kept when an attachment of earnings order is forum, the Court can order financial relief The divorce was uncontested and interim in any Contracting State and secondly, to contemplated, the Court can order the such as the division of matrimonial assets judgment was granted. ensure that the rights of custody and access Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board to and maintenance of the wife and children. in Contracting States are respected. With provide the complainant with the defaulter’s Thereafter, four ancillary pre-trial conferences effect from 1 March 2011, proceedings employment and contributions details for the Where the division of matrimonial assets were held in respect of the ancillary matters. under the ICAA are dealt with by the Family last 12 months. This facilitates the issuance is concerned, consequential amendments The wife did not attend any of them and was Court. The Convention will only come into of a new attachment of earnings order in have been made to the Child Development similarly absent on the day of the hearing force between Singapore and a Contracting situations where the defaulter has changed Co-Savings Act to enable the Court to for the ancillary matters. SUBORDINATE COURTS Our Divisions Family and Juvenile Justice Division 28 Annual Report 2011 29

The Court made an ancillary order on Whether a counsel, who of this when the wife took out applications the integrity of the legal profession. The terms similar to that of the deed. About five previously acted in a matter for for discovery and interrogatories for husband’s appeal was allowed and the months later, the wife filed an application a company, where one party in information relating to the company to wife’s counsel was restrained from further to set aside the ancillary order. The Family a divorce had been managing support her case for the division of assets acting for the wife in the ancillary divorce Court Judge allowed the application and set director and a substantial and maintenance. The wife’s counsel, with proceedings. The wife’s appeal to the High aside the ancillary order on the grounds that shareholder, may be conflicted information from the previous retainers Court was subsequently withdrawn. if the matter was litigated, the wife had a from acting for the other party in with the company, would know or be in real prospect of success. On the husband’s the divorce in ancillary divorce a position to know what information to ask appeal to the High Court, the Judge was of proceedings relating to the for and if the information provided by the the view that the ancillary order should be division of matrimonial assets husband was false or lacking in any way. construed as a consent judgment instead of a default judgment. The Judge allowed the The husband and wife were at the ancillary The District Judge held that firstly, the appeal and reinstated the ancillary order. matters stage of divorce proceedings when husband was a former client of the wife’s the husband applied for an injunction for the counsel within the meaning of section 2(1) The Court of Appeal allowed the wife’s wife’s counsel to be restrained from further of the Legal Profession Act or a person who appeal and set aside the ancillary order. acting for the wife. The Deputy Registrar was involved in or associated with a former The Court of Appeal was of the view that the dismissed the application and the husband client of the wife’s counsel and secondly, that ancillary order was not a consent judgment appealed to a District Judge. The issue was the subject matter of two previous retainers as the actual consent of both parties was whether the wife’s counsel was in breach of and the ancillary divorce proceedings were not signified to the Court, since the wife rule 31 of the Legal Profession (Professional related matters. Although the husband’s was wholly absent from the ancillary matters Conduct) Rules (“PCR”), which prohibits a company had been the client of the wife’s hearing, when the order was made. counsel, who has acted for a client in a counsel in the previous matters, the husband, matter, from thereafter acting against the as its managing director, was the person The Court of Appeal further held that there client (or against persons who were involved who had power to retain and employ the was no provision for the concept of a default in or associated with the client in that matter) wife’s counsel to act for the company. judgment in the context of matrimonial in the same or any related matter. proceedings as Rule 3(2) of the Matrimonial This point was also acknowledged by Proceedings Rules expressly excluded The wife’s counsel had previously acted the wife who said she believed that the the operation of Order 13 of the Rules of for the husband’s company in three matters husband was the sole beneficial owner of Court. Where an ancillary order is made from 1997 to 2002. The husband was the said company. The subject matter of the in the absence of a party, that party could a founder and then managing director of two previous retainers involving the assets apply under Order 35 Rule 2 of the Rules of the company. The basis of the husband’s and financial position of the company were Court for the judgment to be set aside. On application for the injunction was that the matters related to the division of the parties’ the facts of the case, the Court of Appeal wife’s counsel would have come to know of matrimonial assets. In addition, there was was of the view that the wife would have his assets, his relationship to and the set-up a larger public interest beyond the need to a real prospect of success if the case was of the company during the time when the protect against the disclosure of confidential adjudicated, and therefore set aside the counsel had acted for the company. The information; to preserve the solicitor-client ancillary order. husband had only realised the significance relationship of trust and confidence and SUBORDINATE COURTS Our Divisions Corporate and Court Services Division 30 Annual Report 2011 31

SRU aims to deliver excellent court services In the Subordinate Courts’ continuous CORPORATE AND COURT through identification of relevant training quest towards service excellence, SRU programmes for service staff, and set service launched the inaugural Service Excellence SERVICES DIVISION standards for all staff. The Unit supervises Conference on 20 May 2011. As a lead- service-related activities, including managing up to the conference, a series of activities complaints and compliments from court revolving around service-centricity was users, and provides support to the Quality conducted. Staff tested how service- The Corporate and Court Services Division (CCSD) provides essential Service Manager. centric they were through the “What is services to the other divisions of the Subordinate Courts. Led by the your Service Quotient” quiz, developed Deputy Chief District Judge, CCSD is organised into various sections In 2011, the Corporate Communications from the service improvements identified and staffed by a team of subject specialists. It is the administrative Unit produced the refreshed educational since the Subordinate Courts embarked backbone of the Subordinate Courts. brochures for the Family and Juvenile Justice on their service excellence journey. As a Division. The contents were updated to demonstration of the senior management’s ensure that they were easily understood by commitment towards service excellence, the Communications Section the layperson. Chief District Judge (CDJ) served court users at various service desks, e.g. the Information The Communications Section comprises the Corporate Communications As part of the revamp of the Subordinate Counter, Small Claims Tribunals (SCT), Unit which serves as a link between the Subordinate Courts and Courts website, the Corporate Communications Protection Order Services, and the HELP external parties, and the Service Relations Unit (SRU) which develops Unit completed a user requirement study. In Centre. He was greeted with smiles from and implements initiatives to promote a service-centric culture. addition to benchmarking against both local those who knew who he is. Sharing how he and overseas agencies which provide a good felt about his service encounters, CDJ said The Corporate Communications Unit undertakes communication activities which help to web experience, the Unit also conducted he served two court users who initially did enhance the public’s understanding and appreciation of the Subordinate Courts’ role in focus group dialogues with staff members not look too happy to be at SCT. As he the judicial system. This is done through communication channels like the media, website, who serve the public. This ensures that the processed their applications, they eventually corporate collaterals and outreach programmes. revamped website addresses the common warmed up to him. He added that being issues faced by court users and better serves courteous helped to defuse the otherwise their needs. The end product will be one that tense service encounters. is user-friendly and developed to offer court users better access to the services provided by the Subordinate Courts.

The key activity in 2012 will be to review the web architecture of the Subordinate Courts website. As part of its greater outreach efforts in 2012, the Unit will also conduct tours for stakeholders to promote greater understanding of the work of the Subordinate Courts. SUBORDINATE COURTS Our Divisions Corporate and Court Services Division 32 Annual Report 2011 33

The Service Excellence Conference also The Finance Section also set up a call engagement strategies. The a preliminary review of the existing provided the perfect platform to give centre to provide prompt responses to both Section also spearheads nomenclature. It will introduce a revised set out the inaugural “Service Staff of the internal and external phone enquiries, in manpower planning policies to of nomenclature which will more accurately Quarter” Award, aimed at rewarding line with the Subordinate Courts’ emphasis identify and groom potential reflect one’s job scope and position in the staff who provided excellent services to on service excellence. leaders for organisational renewal Subordinate Courts hierarchy. court users. The quarterly award, together and leadership succession. with other annual and monthly awards, is Together with the Family and Juvenile In the area of performance management, part of the larger Recognition & Reward Justice Division, the Finance Section besides reviewing the ranking and promotion Framework, which aims to recognise and introduced a payment system to enable In 2011, the HRM Section reviewed and processes to establish a fair and robust reward staff who go the extra mile when parties granted maintenance to obtain enhanced its recruitment process and performance management framework that serving court users. their monthly maintenance payments more retention strategies. It expanded its pool rewards and recognises deserving staff, promptly. In addition, the Section had an of job applicants by tapping on diverse the HRM Section successfully aligned four The key initiative for SRU in 2012 will be internal re-organisation in August 2011, recruitment platforms and streamlined its promotion months (in April, May, July and the development of an automated system which has enhanced the on-the-job training, orientation programme for new staff. A September) to one in April. to track the compliments and feedback job expansion and career development of quarterly dialogue session with newly- received. The system will also serve as an its officers. recruited staff was initiated to obtain their Staff well-being and satisfaction are information repository to facilitate searches feedback and better address their concerns. accorded significant emphasis to ensure of past feedback to better address court Moving forward, to enhance the Subordinate a conducive work environment. The users’ queries. Courts’ financial management processes, The HRM Section has also worked with initiatives introduced by the HRM Section the Finance Section is developing a new the various Divisions to ensure an equitable in 2011 include securing subsidised mobile Finance Section financial management system which will allocation of new headcount among them. phone-line subscription rates for staff. The be implemented in 2012. This system will New middle-management positions were Section also oversees the Health and The Finance Section ensures the enhance efficiency in revenue collections created, which enhanced the operation and Welfare Committee which regularly rolls management and optimisation and payments. In addition, a portal will be management of the Divisions. Staff morale out programmes aimed at improving the of the financial resources of set up in the Subordinate Courts’ intranet has also increased as a result. physical well-being of staff. the Subordinate Courts. It is to share finance-related information and also responsible for providing directives with staff. The HRM Section placed considerable accurate finance services emphasis on manpower planning during the promptly, in compliance with Human Resource year in review. To build a sustainable and prescribed guidelines. Management Section effective workforce, the Section embarked on a comprehensive review of the manpower The Human Resource requirements of all Divisions, both current In 2011, the Finance Section implemented Management (HRM) Section and over the long term. Concurrently the Job the decentralisation of budget management aims to position the Subordinate Grading Exercise where every post within to the various sections. This has further Courts as an employer of choice the organisation is evaluated and graded enhanced flexibility in the budget usage through its recruitment, retention has resulted in an optimal organisational and expenditure planning of the sections. and staff development, career structure for the Subordinate Courts. In line progression and employee with this, the HRM Section has completed SUBORDINATE COURTS Our Divisions Corporate and Court Services Division 34 Annual Report 2011 35

Moving forward, the HRM Section will the Community Court Secretariat Office at continue to streamline and enhance its level 3 of the Subordinate Courts building, processes and programmes to better serve in addition to relocating the Community its internal customers. To further improve staff Courts to level 3. Three new mediation retention and engagement, the Section will chambers were created at the Small Claims work on a mentoring framework for new Tribunals to meet the increasing demand staff. It will also partner the Civil Service for mediation services. Both public lifts College to develop a customised course on in the Subordinate Courts building were interview techniques. Targeted at non-HR upgraded with a faster speed and improved supervisors, this course would equip them ventilation. The entrance of the Subordinate with the requisite interview techniques and Courts building has been adorned with A turnstile system was also installed at the shortlisted by a panel of jurors for Stage 2 skills, and enable the Subordinate Courts to refreshing landscape to create a calming entrance of the Subordinate Courts building of the competition. There will be a public find the right person for the right job. and therapeutic environment for court users. to enhance the security of the courthouse. display of the submissions of the finalists as The ID Section also created a waiting area The first table-top security exercise on how to well as the preliminary designs submitted by The HRM Section also aims to develop an at the Protection Order Services within the deal with bomb threats and chemical attacks all entrants at Stage 1 in March 2012 to HR portal to serve as a one-stop centre for Family and Juvenile Court building to offer at the Subordinate Courts was conducted accord them the due credit and recognition. HR-related information for staff. applicants greater privacy. with the Singapore Police Force, Singapore Among the panel of nine jurors are eminent Prison Service and Singapore Civil Defence and respected architects, including Mr Infrastructure Development In July 2011, the ID Section launched Force during the year in review. Moshie Safdie who designed the celebrated Section Refresh@Atrium, a newly furbished facility Marina Bay Sands Singapore. The winner is at the Subordinate Courts building to In July 2011, the Workplace Safety and expected to be announced by June 2012. The Infrastructure Development provide a place for people to rest and hold Health Committee was formed to ensure (ID) Section is responsible discussions. Court users can snack on food a safe workplace and healthy environment In 2012, the ID Section will restore the for the planning, upgrading, from the vending machines. There is also free for staff and court users. Risk management façade of the Family and Juvenile Court development, management and Wifi access for those who need to connect champions and risk assessment teams were building. The public toilets at levels 3 and 5 maintenance of the facilities to the Internet. appointed to conduct safety audits at various of the Subordinate Courts building, and staff and security of the Subordinate offices and common areas. toilets will also be upgraded. The security Courts. The Section also These new and improved amenities were infrastructure will be enhanced to ensure a manages the procurement of introduced to provide a warmer and To meet the increasing demand for space, comprehensive coverage of the surveillance office equipment and supplies to friendlier atmosphere for court users. a new Subordinate Courts Complex will cameras in the two court buildings. In ensure smooth court operations. be built. The new complex comprises a addition, a smart digital closed-circuit Security within the Subordinate Courts has new building and the existing Subordinate television (CCTV) intelligence system will also been enhanced with the installation Courts building which will be retrofitted and be adopted. This state-of-the-art surveillance In 2011, the ID Section completed several of secured bars in the docks in the court renovated. An Open Design Competition system will complement the traditional CCTV key projects. It managed the setting up rooms. This allows the removal of handcuffs for the new Subordinate Courts Complex system, allowing real time alerts of unusual of the Child Focused Resolution Centre, on accused persons during hearings so that was launched on 15 September 2011. 19 activities such as trespass, and enhance the a new initiative of the Family and Juvenile they can take notes during the hearings. At designs were received under Stage 1 of overall security at the Subordinate Courts. Justice Division. It also saw to the set up of the same time, security is not compromised. the competition, of which two have been SUBORDINATE COURTS Our Divisions Corporate and Court Services Division 36 Annual Report 2011 37

Interpreters’ Section Records Management Unit Digital Recording Unit

The Interpreters’ Section The Records Management The Digital Audio Recording comprises Chinese Interpreters, Unit (RMU) provides effective and Transcription (DART) pilot Malay Interpreters and Indian safekeeping, retrieval and project, which aims to replace Interpreters. The interpreters preservation of court records. the manual recording of court provide accurate and proceedings by Judges, was prompt interpretation and implemented in 2010. translation services. In 2010, RMU earmarked 37 million pages of court records for microfilming. During the year in review, all records of the Civil Justice With DART, Judges will be able to Their work extends to the recording of Division, which totalled about 16 million dedicate themselves to perform their core complaints at the Crime Registry and the pages, were microfilmed. The microfilming work more effectively and efficiently. Protection Order Services, and accompanying of records from the Family and Juvenile Currently, 15 Criminal Courts are equipped the Duty Judge and Prosecuting Officer to Justice Division is expected to complete in with DART facilities. This will be extended the hospital to read out charges to accused December 2012. to more Criminal Courts and the Civil and persons who are unwell and cannot be Family Courts in 2012. brought to Court. The interpreters also perform Concurrently, RMU successfully completed mediation at the Family Court. In addition, a files relocation exercise, freeing up the interpreters are appointed as Commissioners much needed space to accommodate the for Oaths to administer oaths or affirmations cases that are processed in the Subordinate in respect of affidavits for submission to the Courts daily. RMU will work with the Subordinate Courts. relevant divisions to create an inventory via a newly implemented bar-coding system to In line with the service - centric culture, the account for the different case types. With an interpreters will conduct basic language electronic system in place, it will be easier courses for front - line staff in 2012 to enable to retrieve case files. them to serve court users more effectively. Moving forward, RMU will microfilm The Indian Interpreters manage the records from the Criminal Justice Division Foreign Interpreters’ Management Unit to better account for the various case (FIMU), which oversees the engagement types and to free up more space within of ad-hoc foreign interpreters. FIMU will the Subordinate Courts. produce a comprehensive handbook to guide foreign interpreters to provide quality interpretation services and uphold the standards of the profession. SUBORDINATE COURTS Our Divisions Strategic Planning and Training Division 38 Annual Report 2011 39

the identified strategic challenges, the the best and most appropriate platforms STRATEGIC PLANNING Planning Unit, in consultation with all the such as multi-agency forums, strategic Divisions and with the endorsement of partnerships and technology. It highlights AND TRAINING DIVISION management members, drew up the first- seven strategic thrusts which the Subordinate ever Subordinate Courts Strategy Map Courts will focus on in the pursuit of their (see Figure 1). The Strategy Map is built on mission and vision. The strategic thrusts are the philosophy of better serving the society also organised according to the Balanced Established in October 2008, the Strategic Planning and Training through the establishment of a strong Scorecard framework to strengthen their link Division (SPTD) is responsible for identifying and analysing the driving resource foundation and by leveraging on to the key performance areas. forces of change relevant to the work of the Subordinate Courts, recommending strategies to manage challenges in an increasingly Figure 1 complex operating environment, as well as catalysing strategic Subordinate Courts Strategy Map initiatives which further Subordinate Courts’ mission, vision and strategic thrusts. VISION A leading subordinate court serving society Serving Society In 2011, SPTD was reorganised to better exploring more collaborative opportunities

reflect the synergies among the respective within and outside the public sector. To provide an effective and accessible system of justice, MISSION departments and units within the Division. inspiring public trust and confidence Strategic Planning SPTD has also made headway in STRATEGIC THRUSTS (3-5 YEARS) institutionalising forward planning, The Strategic Planning arm of the Division, ideation and change management in which includes the Planning Unit and the Deliver quality Collaborate more actively Provide excellent COMMUNITY the Subordinate Courts. By proactively Research and Knowledge Development judgments with key stakeholders and court services strategic partners Leveraging engaging our internal stakeholders Unit, contributes towards building a future- on the best and establishing strategic collaboration ready judicial institution by identifying and platforms with key partners, the Division is able proposing processes and mechanisms that to anticipate, welcome and execute the Subordinate Courts should put in place INTERNAL Put in place a variety of processes Encourage the innovative change more efficiently and effectively. to improve the administration of justice. PROCESS for timely resolution of disputes use of technology As momentous ideas rarely emerge from individual “eureka” moments, but are Planning Unit built out of a collection of existing ideas The Planning Unit drives planning initiatives – big or small – reassembled into useful such as the annual Corporate Retreat LEARNING Develop & maximise Manage & leverage on the effective Establishing new configurations, the Division aims which kicks off each year’s planning cycle & GROWTH the potential of our people creation and sharing of knowledge a strong to promote the spirit of innovation and and the annual workplan development, resource foundation change-readiness by strengthening the ensuring that forward planning needs are FINANCIAL – Accountability & Transparency engagement with stakeholders as well as regularly addressed. In 2011, to address SUBORDINATE COURTS Our Divisions Strategic Planning and Training Division 40 Annual Report 2011 41

Research and Knowledge developments, socio-economic issues and with the requisite skills to stay ahead of the Centre for Research and Statistics Development Unit economic changes and pressures. curve and provide added value to court users The Centre for Research and Statistics 2011 was a significant and fruitful and the general public at large. Towards (CReST) tracks, monitors and reports on year for the Research and Knowledge The Unit also drives the “Ideas Crucible”, an this end, the Training and Development the performance of the Subordinate Courts Development Unit. With the reorganisation ideation think-tank which takes the form of Unit has developed and implemented the through the analysis of operational data, of SPTD, the Unit was delinked from the regular meetings with senior management Learning and Development Road Map for results of key performance indicators, and Research & Resource Centre and parked through which members of the SPTD all Judges and court administrators to build conduct of community and user surveys. under the umbrella of the Strategic Planning brainstorm and propose innovative ideas competencies, maximise the potential of each Recommendations based on such statistical Department to more accurately reflect its and ways to enhance the administration officer, and to nurture a culture of learning, information are made to senior management portfolios and functions. The young and of justice. Some of these ideas which have sharing and continuous improvement within in relation to areas requiring attention lean Unit was instrumental in supporting emanated from the “Ideas Crucible” include the Subordinate Courts. or improvement. CReST also conducts decision-making by SPTD and senior video-conferencing capabilities through quantitative research studies that highlight management in respect of the organisation’s the use of tablet PCs to optimise court Organisational some of the recent trends in the profile of strategies, policies, programmes and interpretation resources, the e-Calendar Excellence & cases and court users of the Subordinate initiatives. In addition, it provided research and initiatives relating to community justice. Performance Courts. This is intended to enhance the ability support on various organisational initiatives Management of the Subordinate Courts to refine court and project development through qualitative processes and case management, and to research and analysis, and comprehensive Organisational Excellence Unit improve resource management. In addition, environmental scanning of the international The Organisational Excellence Unit (OEU) CReST undertakes environmental scans legal landscape so that the Subordinate was set up to develop and institutionalise of the rankings of Singapore’s legal and Courts can benchmark against the best initiatives in organisational development judicial system as inputs to the Subordinate and continue to strive for excellence. and excellence at the Subordinate Courts’ benchmarking efforts. In 2011, Courts. Its main focuses are to strengthen CReST completed the review of the One of the Unit’s key achievements has organisational resilience and build a Subordinate Courts’ Justice Scorecard after been a strengthened judicial research In addition, through targeted research, the strong foundation of systems and processes, extensive consultations with stakeholders capability through the circulation of the Research and Knowledge Development Unit as well as to champion continuous from all the Divisions. “Horizon Window”, an internal newsletter has been an element of support to building improvement in the Subordinate Courts consolidating identified international driving up intellectual capital through development of through benchmarking, after-action review Information trends and forces through environmental judicial resources. These initiatives include the and internal process review. OEU also Technology Department scans, cross-jurisdictional studies, surveys development of a series of Bench Books for helps to assess the organisational health and international comparisons. The key areas of judicial practice for each Justice for the Subordinate Courts on a periodic The Information Technology Department Horizon Window is a resource for Judges Division and the development of judicial basis, and to engage internal stakeholders (ITD) manages the development, and court administrators and aims to equip training videos. with regards to organisational excellence deployment and use of Information the Subordinate Courts with insights into initiatives. In 2011, OEU played a pivotal Communication and Technology (ICT) the driving trends and broad-ranging issues Training & Development role in the Subordinate Courts’ pursuit platforms at the Subordinate Courts. Its which impact the legal and judicial world, and attainment of the coveted Singapore work forms an important component of coupled with editorial commentaries on Building a progressive and forward looking Quality Award with Special Commendation strategic planning because the innovative any particular areas such as technological judicial institution involves empowering staff (SQA SC). and effective use of suitable and up-to- SUBORDINATE COURTS 42 Annual Report 2011

date ICT platforms helps to enhance the Knowledge Management efficiency and effectiveness of the Courts. & Library Resources

ITD systematically recommends improvements Knowledge Management Unit to be made to existing ICT platforms The Knowledge Management (KM) Unit was and offers appropriate ICT solutions for set up in 2011 to gather, organise, share the business and operational needs of all and update the knowledge and expertise of the Divisions. In 2011, among the many the Judges and court administrators, so as IT projects and initiatives developed to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness and implemented was the Regulatory of every officer in his day-to-day work. Offences Case Management System Since its establishment, the KM Unit has (ROMS) – a transformational integrated implemented the KM Strategy Roadmap, case management and e-hearing system including the launch of five Communities which brings the management of cases of Practice (CoP) aimed to facilitate within the Subordinate Courts and all 16 sharing, retaining and transferring of participating agencies to a higher level essential knowledge in the provision of of excellence. ROMS was featured in the court services, interpretation services, recent 2011 Government Chief Information management of registries and cases, as Officer Achievement Video and won well as alternative dispute resolutions. Apart the Infocomm Development Authority from the CoP programme, the KM Unit of Singapore Achievement Award. I T D has also begun to audit information in key also rolled out the e-Calendar System databases and created portals to manage for the Criminal Justice Division to better and retain key knowledge. manage scarce trial resources. ITD also commenced development of the The Library Integrated Criminal Case Filing and The Library at the Subordinate Courts is Management System, and the planning one of the few specialist libraries which of the Sentencing Information and serves small-scale law firms and legal Awards and Research Repository and the new Family professionals in Singapore. In 2011, the Application Management System. Library extended its services to the general Accolades public, with the aim to provide ready and affordable legal resources and information services to an increasing number of litigants-in-person. SUBORDINATE COURTS Awards and Accolades Singapore Quality Award with Special Commendation 44 Annual Report 2011 45

an award which represents the pinnacle processes and eliminate unnecessary Singapore Quality of business excellence in Singapore. With workflows. As a result, the Subordinate the emphasis on the theme, “Towards Courts have become more productive Award with Special Greater Organisational Excellence”, the and efficient. For example, because of the Subordinate Courts embarked on their application of Kaizen, the time taken for Commendation quest for the SQA SC. processing bail applications has been cut from one day to 15 minutes. Quantum Improvement Since Winning the SQA Introduction in 2006 The Singapore Quality Award with Special Commendation (SQA SC) was conferred on the Subordinate Courts in 2011. Introduced in 2006, The Subordinate Courts have not sat on their the SQA SC is the highest accolade for organisational excellence laurels after attaining the SQA. They have in Singapore. The award is conferred on existing Singapore continued to introduce policies, strategies, Quality Award (SQA) winners that have demonstrated quantum initiatives and improvements which have improvement in management practices and key results and who enhanced their ability to deliver quality and are also recognised as global leaders in their industry, as well as timely justice. As an example, to enhance set the benchmark of excellence towards that end. The SQA SC has accessibility to court users, the Subordinate been conferred on only three organisations in Singapore prior to the Courts set up the HELP Centre to offer Subordinate Courts, namely the Singapore Police Force, Housing & basic information on court processes and Development Board and Singapore Technologies Engineering Ltd. procedures to litigants, especially those who are not represented by legal counsel. On the global front, the Courts have This has enabled self-represented litigants to enjoyed and continue to enjoy high ratings Reasons for Embarking on the Organisational Excellence make informed decisions about their cases. in surveys conducted by many external Journey and SQA SC The Subordinate Courts also established organisations, such as the Fraser Institute, embark on a journey towards organisational a Service Relations Unit to improve the the Institute for Management Development, The conferment of SQA SC award excellence. By introducing initiatives and standard of court services. By emphasising the Political and Economic Risk Consultancy marks yet another major milestone in the programmes over the years, the backlog and the need to provide the best possible Ltd and the World Economic Forum. The organisational excellence journey of the inefficiencies were eliminated, and which service to court users, record high ratings World Bank has also, in a publication in Subordinate Courts which began in the eventually culminated in the Subordinate of satisfaction were achieved in the Court 2007, hailed the Subordinate Courts as a 1990s. As the Subordinate Courts handle Courts being conferred the SQA in 2006. Users Survey and the Public Perception role model for successful judicial reform more than 95 per cent of court cases in Survey conducted in 2010. and modernisation. This recognition has Singapore, with more than 300,000 cases Five years after winning the SQA, instead spurred the Subordinate Courts to play a annually, it is important that the Subordinate of applying for re-certification for the same In respect of management practices, lean more prominent role in the international Courts deliver justice in a fair and timely award, the management of the Subordinate management was another significant arena. In 2008, the Subordinate manner. The mounting backlog of cases Courts decided that the organisation improvement made in the Subordinate Courts, in collaboration with overseas and inefficiencies in its processes in the early should “stretch” itself by taking on the Courts after 2006. In 2008, Kaizen partners, including the Australasian Institute 1990s pushed the Subordinate Courts to challenge of applying for the SQA SC, methodology was introduced to streamline of Judicial Administration and National SUBORDINATE COURTS Awards and Accolades Singapore Quality Award with Special Commendation 46 Annual Report 2011 47

Center for State Courts, set up a consortium to familiarise staff with the SQA SC that developed the International Framework processes and messages. A true sense of for Court Excellence (IFCE). The first of its esprit de corps was shown throughout kind in the world, the IFCE is designed the journey. to help courts deliver high quality services by providing measures and benchmarks against which their own performance can be measured.

Total Organisational Commitment in the Journey Towards SQA SC

The application for the SQA SC required monumental effort and total commitment Capping the Journey of on the part of every single member of the Organisational Excellence Subordinate Courts, from the management to all the counter service officers at the The Subordinate Courts were conferred registries. A comprehensive application with the SQA SC in October 2011. report that covered leadership, planning, This is a testament to and recognition information and knowledge management, of all the hard work put in by various The Journey Never Ends - Moving forward, there will be more human resources practices, processes and generations of leaders, as well as every Greater Heights, challenges for the Subordinate Courts, as a provision of services by the Subordinate member of the Subordinate Courts. At the New Horizons growing caseload which is also becoming Courts had to be prepared. In addition, Business Excellence Award ceremony, the increasingly complex is expected. Achieving trend results were furnished. A seven- Chief District Judge thanked the staff of the The attainment of the SQA SC does not mark greater heights of organisational excellence member assessment team comprising Subordinate Courts for their continual efforts the end of the organisational excellence also means that new horizons open up. In experienced business excellence assessors, to provide the best services to court users. journey in the Subordinate Courts. The the case of the Subordinate Courts, this including an international assessor, He also expressed appreciation to all local Subordinate Courts will continue the path of has encouraged us to reach out to assist conducted a rigorous site visit to the and foreign stakeholders for their unstinting organisational excellence, and continually other judiciaries which are embarking on Subordinate Courts over three days to support throughout the Subordinate Courts’ improve the way they deliver justice to the the same road towards organisational assess and validate what was set out organisational excellence journey. people of Singapore. excellence. The journey never ends. in the report. Staff members were also selected at random for interviews with the assessment team. To prepare for the SQA SC, task forces comprising staff members from different divisions and units were formed. Road shows, skits, quizzes, as well as exhibitions, were organised SUBORDINATE COURTS Awards and Accolades Our International Profile 48 Annual Report 2011 49

ranking has been consistently high since Ranking of Rating (0 = “Best”, Year Our International Singapore 10 = ”Worst”) 1997. In 2011, Singapore’s legal framework was once again rated very positively and 2000 1 2.57 Profile secured the first position (see Figure 2)3. 2001 1 3.28

2002 1 1.70 Figure 2 2003 1 1.38 IMD: Ranking of Singapore’s The Singapore Judiciary has It was reported in the 2011 PERC Asian Legal and Regulatory Framework, proven itself to be in the top Intelligence Report that Singapore’s judicial 2004 1 1.25 1997 - 20114 league of judiciaries. In 2011, system impressed expatriates with her high 2005 2 1.75 Singapore scored well in various rate of efficiency and she has consistently Rating No. of 2006 2 1.87 Ranking of Year (0 = “Worst”, countries surveys conducted by several been ranked either first or second since 1996 Singapore 2007 2 1.88 10 = ” Best”) ranked international organisations. (see Figure 1)1. The results of these surveys are 2008 2 1.92 1997 1 8.46 46 a tribute to the high quality Singapore’s robust protection of intellectual 2009 2 1.73 1998 1 8.20 46

of justice dispensed by the property rights by her legal system also 2010 2 1.88 1999 1 8.64 47 Singapore Courts. garnered strong confidence from the 2011 2 2.05 2000 1 8.82 47 expatriates. In the same report, the countries were also surveyed for perceived threats to 2001 6 8.03 49 POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC intellectual property rights and Singapore INSTITUTE FOR MANAGEMENT 2002 1 8.50 49

RISK CONSULTANCY was considered as the country that gives DEVELOPMENT WORLD 2003 1 8.22 53 COMPARATIVE COUNTRY the best protection, overtaking Hong Kong, COMPETITIVENESS 2004 1 8.34 60 RISK & ASIAN INTELLIGENCE Australia and the United States. YEARBOOK REPORT 2005 2 7.52 60 Figure 1 In May 2011, the Institute For Management 2006 2 8.11 61 The Political and Economic Risk PERC – Quality of the Judicial/ Development (IMD) analysed and ranked 2007 1 8.65 55 Consultancy’s (PERC) Asian Intelligence Legal System, 1996 - 20112 59 countries on their ability to create and 2008 1 8.65 55 Report published in October 2011 rated maintain the competitiveness of enterprises. Ranking of Rating (0 = “Best”, expatriates’ perceptions on the quality of Year One assessment component measured 2009 2 7.09 57 Singapore 10 = ”Worst”) Asian judicial systems. Singapore was whether each country’s legal and regulatory 2010 1 7.67 58 again rated one of the top three judicial 1996 2 2.76 framework encourages the competitiveness 2011 1 7.70 59 systems in Asia, together with Hong Kong 1997 2 2.72 of enterprises. On this aspect, Singapore’s

and Japan, in terms of independence and 1998 1 2.33 efficiency of the judicial system. 1999 1 3.18

1 Based on rankings published in the PERC Asian Intelligence Reports and/or the Comparative Country Risk Report for the 3 Based on rankings published in the IMD World Competitiveness Report 2011. relevant years. 4 Compiled from the rankings published in the IMD World Competitiveness Report for the relevant years. 2 Compiled from the rankings by PERC in the Asian Intelligence Reports and/or the Comparative Country Risk Report for the relevant years. SUBORDINATE COURTS Awards and Accolades Our International Profile 50 Annual Report 2011 51

Another assessment component measured WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM Figure 4 whether justice has been fairly administered. GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS WEF – Ranking of Singapore’s Judiciary, 2002 – 20116 On this aspect, Singapore was ranked REPORT Institution Pillar - Ranking of Singapore (Scored on a scale of 1 = ”Worst” to 7 = ”Best”) 12th, placing her the second highest- ranked country among Asian countries, The World Economic Forum (WEF) published Efficiency of Legal Framework – Judicial Property Intellectual after Hong Kong, which took the 11th the 2011 – 2012 Global Competitiveness Year (i) Settling Disputes Independence Rights Property place (see Figure 3). Report in September 2011. The report (ii) Challenging Regulations ranked 142 countries in the world to Figure 3 Rank Score Rank Score Rank Score Rank Score present a comprehensive picture of the IMD – Ranking of Singapore’s 2002 16 5.7 25 5.1 8 6.3 12 5.7 Administration of Justice, competitiveness of the economies. 12 pillars 2003 11 5.8 27 5.2 5 6.4 12 5.9 1995 – 20115 of the economy were evaluated, one of which was the institutional framework. This 2004 14 5.7 24 5.3 12 6.3 13 5.7 Rating No. of Ranking of is a critical component as strong institutions 2005 8 5.8 19 5.4 6 6.4 5 6.1 Year (0 = “Worst”, countries Singapore protect the rights of the people and provide 10 = ” Best”) ranked 2006 14 5.8 29 5.2 11 6.3 9 6.0 the stability and confidence to engage in 1995 9 7.91 48 economic activities. Five sub-indicators 2007 10 6.0 19 5.6 5 6.4 5 6.2 1996 4 8.31 46 under the institutional pillar related to the 2008 2 6.2 15 5.9 4 6.5 2 6.3

1997 14 7.64 46 judiciary were: 2009 (i) 1 (i) 6.3 19 5.8 4 6.4 1 6.2 (ii) 4 (ii) 5.6 1998 4 7.92 46 • Efficiency of legal framework for private 1999 7 8.54 47 businesses in settling disputes 2010 (i) 1 (i) 6.3 21 5.6 3 6.3 3 6.1 (ii) 6 (ii) 5.3 2000 5 8.59 47 • Efficiency of legal framework for private 2011 (i) 1 (i) 6.3 20 5.6 3 6.4 2 6.1 2001 14 7.73 49 businesses in challenging the legality of (ii) 8 (ii) 5.3 government actions and/or regulations 2002 7 8.50 49

2003 6 8.49 53 • Judicial independence FRASER INSTITUTE 2004 10 8.24 60 • Property rights ECONOMIC FREEDOM OF THE 2005 15 7.71 60 • Intellectual property rights WORLD REPORT 2006 13 8.11 61 The 2011 annual report of the Fraser Institute indicator was “legal structure and security 2007 11 8.12 55 In 2011, Singapore again attained favourable scores and rankings for all five released in September 2011 contained of property rights”. The variables measured 2008 6 8.60 55 7 sub-indicators. In terms of protection of an index measuring the degree to which under this indicator included : 2009 13 7.95 57 the policies and institutions of countries intellectual property rights, property rights • Judicial independence 2010 7 8.35 58 and legal framework in settling disputes, are supportive of economic freedom. The report rated 141 countries on their degree • Impartial courts 2011 12 7.96 59 Singapore took the top three positions. of economic freedom. One assessment (see Figure 4). • Protection of property rights

6 Compiled from the rankings published in the WEF Global Competitiveness Report for the relevant years. 5 Compiled from the rankings published in the IMD World Competitiveness Report for the relevant years. 7 The last three variables were added in 2007. SUBORDINATE COURTS Awards and Accolades Our International Profile 52 Annual Report 2011 53

• Military interference in rule of law and in terms of the number of procedures • Regulatory quality Ranking 2011 2012 the political process involved, time and cost. Singapore was • Rule of law the third highest rated Asian economy • Integrity of the legal system 10 New Zealand New Zealand after Korea and Hong Kong, and ranked • Control of corruption • Legal enforcement of contracts 12th globally, one position up in ranking 11 Belarus Finland compared to last year (see Figure 5). In this latest report, Singapore once • Regulatory restrictions on sale of real 12 Finland Singapore again scored well under the Rule of Law12 property Russian Singapore was ranked the economy with 13 Singapore component – Singapore has been placed Federation the least number of procedures involved in in the 90th percentile since 2003 under the Singapore has maintained her position 14 Latvia Belarus a lawsuit and the duration to process a Rule of Law indicator (see Figure 6). in the top 20 per cent banding for this case in Singapore was also the shortest indicator since 20008. In the latest report, 15 Moldova Lithuania among all the rated economies. Figure 6 Singapore was ranked eighth among the World Bank – Governance 141 countries rated and first among the Figure 5 WORLD BANK GOVERNANCE Indicators 2003 – 201013 Asian countries rated9. World Bank Doing Business MATTERS: AGGREGATE AND INDIVIDUAL GOVERNANCE Rule of Law WORLD BANK STUDY: Report - Enforcing Contracts (Top 10 INDICATORS Score No. of 15 Countries) , 2011 and 2012 Ranking of DOING BUSINESS REPORT Year (Max 2.5 countries Singapore points) ranked Ranking 2011 2012 The Worldwide Governance Indicators The World Bank released its Doing (WGI) project is a project by the World 2003 15 1.55 202 Business Report 2012 in October 2011. 1 Luxembourg Luxembourg Bank. The latest report released in 2004 13 1.68 209 In this study, 183 economies were ranked September 2011 reported the aggregate on their ease of doing business, based on 2 Iceland Korea, Rep. 2005 10 1.70 209 and individual governance indicators for various assessment variables, including 2006 17 1.65 211 3 Norway Iceland 213 countries and territories between contract enforcement. The ease of doing 1996 and 2010 for six dimensions of 2007 17 1.66 211 business index was an indication of whether 4 Korea, Rep. Norway governance11: 2008 16 1.65 210 the regulatory environment was conducive Hong Kong Hong Kong 5 to the operation of business. Singapore SAR, China SAR, China • Voice and accountability 2009 17 1.61 213 topped the ranking, followed by Hong Kong, 2010 15 1.69 212 6 France France • Political stability and absence of violence New Zealand and the United Kingdom. 7 United States United States • Government effectiveness The contract enforcement variable 8 Germany Germany measured the efficiency of the judicial system in resolving a commercial dispute, 9 Austria Austria 11 All facts and figures related to worldwide governance indicators are cited from The World Bank Governance and Individual Governance Indicators 1996-2010 Report. 12 Rule of Law measured the extent to which agents have confidence in and abide by the rules of society, and in particular the quality of contract enforcement, the police, and the courts, as well as the likelihood of crime and violence. 13 This is a compilation of the rankings in the Governance Indicator Report for the relevant years. 8 Based on rankings published in the Fraser Institute Economic Freedom of the World Report, 2000 (2002 edition) – 2009 (2011 edition). 9 Based on rankings published in the Fraser Institute Economic Freedom of the World Report dataset. 10 Compiled from the rankings published in the World Bank Doing Business Report for the relevant years. SUBORDINATE COURTS Awards and Accolades Our International Profile / Participation in International Conferences and Exchanges 54 Annual Report 2011 55

HERITAGE FOUNDATION • Order and Security AND WALL STREET JOURNAL • Fundamental Rights PARTICIPATION IN INDEX OF ECONOMIC FREEDOM REPORT • Open Government INTERNATIONAL • Effective Regulatory Enforcement This index published in January 2011 CONFERENCES measures 183 countries (179 countries • Access to Civil Justice are ranked) across 10 indices of economic • Effective Criminal Justice AND EXCHANGES freedom. High scores approaching 100 represent higher levels of freedom; the higher • Informal Justice the score on a factor, the lower the level of Name of Judge/ government interference in the economy. In the ranking of 66 countries, Singapore Date Name of Event Organiser Court Administrator In 2011, Singapore was ranked second was rated well for both “Effective Criminal 3 – 4 Feb District Judge Judicial Studies Board, Justice” (ranked number 5) and “Access to Serious Sexual Offences Seminar to Hong Kong in the overall ranking and 2011 Roy Neighbour United Kingdom scored a high of 90 points for the “property Civil Justice” (ranked number 14). The top District Judge rights” index. The report commented that spot was taken by Norway for both factors. Joyce Low The 2nd Asian Mediation Association 24 – 25 Feb Asian Mediation Singapore’s court system is efficient and District Judge Conference – Rediscovering Mediation 2011 st Association provides high protection for private property. Kevin Ng in the 21 Century New Zealand was the only country that (as speakers) earned a higher property rights grade than District Judge 26 – 27 Feb Presentation to the Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Justice, Tan Boon Heng Singapore, at a score of 95. 2011 United Arab Emirates United Arab Emirates (as speaker)

7 – 9 Mar Judicial Studies Board, With one of the strongest intellectual Civil Law Seminar 2011 District Judge United Kingdom property rights regimes among Asian 10 – 11 Mar Ong Chin Rhu Subordinate Courts, Attachment to the Royal Courts of Justice countries, there is no expropriation and 2011 Singapore contracts are secure. Chief District Judge Tan Siong Thye International 13 – 16 Mar THE WORLD JUSTICE PROJECT (as speaker) Court Excellence Conference Association for Court 2011 RULE OF LAW INDEX District Judge Administration Loo Ngan Chor

The Rule of Law index developed by the 21 Mar Visit to the Massachusetts Administrative Subordinate Courts, 2011 Office of the Trial Court Singapore World Justice Project assessed countries’ Society for compliance to the rule of law. In the report 22 – 24 Mar Workshop on Foundations of Leadership - Organizational 2011 Initiating and Sustaining Profound Change released in 2011, 66 countries were ranked District Judge Learning, Boston, US according to nine broad dimensions: Thian Yee Sze 25 Mar Study visit to the Federal Judicial Centre Subordinate Courts, 2011 and Administrative Office of US Courts Singapore • Limited Government Power 28 Mar Study visit to the New York State Court Subordinate Courts, • Absence of Corruption 2011 System & Centre for Court Innovation Singapore SUBORDINATE COURTS Awards and Accolades Participation in International Conferences and Exchanges 56 Annual Report 2011 57

Name of Judge/ Name of Judge/ Date Name of Event Organiser Date Name of Event Organiser Court Administrator Court Administrator

Study visits to Brisbane Family CMJA Conference – Judicial Commonwealth 3 – 4 May Subordinate Courts, Relationship Centres & Brisbane Law 18 – 21 Jul District Judge Independence: Diversity, Magistrates’ and 2011 Singapore Ms Audrey Lum Registry 2011 Brenda Tan Pluralism and Challenges in the Judges’ Association Commonwealth (CMJA) Mr Samuel Chua Child Protection in Australia and New 5 – 7 May Australasian Institute of Zealand - Issues and Challenges for 25 – 28 Jul District Judge The National Judicial 2011 Judicial Administration Judicial Writing Judicial Administration Conference 2011 Toh Yung Cheong College, USA

Commonwealth 25 – 29 Jul District Judge The National Judicial Chief District Judge Commonwealth Secretariat South Civil Mediation 13 – 15 May Secretariat and the 2011 Laura Lau College, USA Tan Siong Thye Asian Judges Regional Forum on 2011 Supreme Court of Senior District Judge (as speaker) Economic and Financial Crime 3 – 5 Aug Ministry of Justice, Sri Lanka Foo Tuat Yien Family Court Conference 2011 2011 New Zealand 26 – 27 May District Judge Judicial College of (as speaker) Workshop on Sentencing 2011 Janet Wang Victoria, Australia District Judge AFCC 48th Annual Conference – 24 – 26 Aug Jocelyn Ong Judicial College of Association of Family Workshop on Judgment Writing 1 – 4 Jun District Judge Research, Policy and Practice in 2011 Victoria, Australia & Conciliation Courts District Judge 2011 Nicole Loh Family Courts: What's gender got to (AFCC) Tan May Tee do with it ? 5 – 7 Sep District Judge Judicial College, Sixth Meeting of the Special Crown Court Sentencing Seminar The Permanent Bureau 2011 Lim Tse Haw United Kingdom Commission to review the practical 1 – 10 Jun Senior District Judge for Hague Conference District Judge AIJA Criminal Justice in Australia and Australasian Institute of operation of the 1980 Hague Child 7 – 9 Sep 2011 Foo Tuat Yien on Private International Kessler Soh New Zealand - Issues and Challenges Judicial Administration Abduction Convention and the 1996 2011 Law (as speaker) for Judicial Administration Conference (AIJA) Protection of Children Convention District Judge Chief District Judge 18 – 22 Sep Carrie Chan Best Practices in Handling Cases The National Judicial Tan Siong Thye (as Watts McCray Lawyers 2011 with Self-Represented Litigants College, USA 10 – 14 Jun opening address speaker) 12th Australian Family Lawyers’ on behalf of the District Judge Lynette Yap 2011 District Judge Conference Australian Family Law Kevin Ng Committee 30 Sep – District Judge 13th Governance and Leadership Institute of Policy (as speaker) 21 Oct Lynette Yap Programme Development 2011 Centre for Negotiation Envisioning, Designing and & Dispute Resolution, 4 – 6 Oct National Center for 20 – 24 Jun District Judge Ms Catherine Lam Court Technology Conference 2011 Implementing Court ADR: A Practical University of California, 2011 State Courts 2011 Dorcas Quek & Theoretical Program Hastings College of Chief District Judge the Law, USA Tan Siong Thye Australasian Institute of 6 – 7 Oct AIJA Australasian Court Chief District Judge (as speaker) Judicial Administration USAID Ukraine 2011 Administrators’ Conference Tan Siong Thye (as (AIJA) 21 – 22 Jun Rule of Law Project Deputy Chief District Judge keynote address speaker) Court Excellence Conference 2011 International Consortium Jennifer Marie District Judge for Court Excellence Straus Institute for Lim Wee Ming 13 – 15 Oct District Judge 5th Annual East Coast Professional Dispute Resolution, th 25 Jul – District Judge 18 Senior Management Institute of Policy 2011 Kevin Ng Skills Program in Dispute Resolution Pepperdine University 6 Sep 2011 Joyce Low Programme 2011 Development School of Law, USA Participation in International Conferences and Exchanges / SUBORDINATE COURTS Awards and Accolades Internship and Attachment Programmes 58 Annual Report 2011 59

Name of Judge/ Date Name of Event Organiser Court Administrator INTERNSHIP AND Creating Collaborative Solutions: 23 – 28 Oct District Judge Harvard Kennedy Innovation in Governance 2011 Amy Tung School ATTACHMENT (Executive Programme) District Judge PROGRAMMES Thian Yee Sze The International 31 Oct – 5th International Conference on the (as speaker) Organization for 3 Nov 2011 Training of the Judiciary District Judge Judicial Training Jasbendar Kaur Date Title of Programme District Judge Court Craft – 360-degree Feedback Hamidah Ibrahim Judicial College of 4 Nov 2011 and Communication in the Attachment Programme for Miss Tan Rowena Nieves District Judge Victoria, Australia Courtroom Workshop 9 May – 10 Jun 2011 Adena, the Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court, Paul Quan Balangiga, Supreme Court of the Philippines 7 – 10 Nov District Judge Asia-Pacific Coroners Society 2011 Asia-Pacific Coroners 2011 Imran Hamid Conference Society Judicial Internship Programme with participants from Leadership Decision Making: 13 – 18 Nov District Judge Harvard Kennedy Optimising organisational 8 Aug – 12 Aug 2011 the University of Cambridge, University of London 2011 Jasvender Kaur School of Government performance and University of Oxford District Judge Strengthening the Intersectoral National Assembly of 15 – 16 Dec Lim Keng Yeow Collaboration Against Child Abuse Vietnam & Children’s 2011 Senior Officers’ Law Clerk Programme with (as speaker) and Neglect in Vietnam Rights International 15 Aug – 9 Sep 2011 participants from King’s College London and San Francisco US University College London 15 – 16 Dec Senior District Judge Study visit to San Francisco courts on Attorney’s Office and 2011 See Kee Oon the judicial role in plea bargaining Subordinate Courts Singapore Public Service Commission Scholars Programme with 22 Aug – 2 Sep 2011 participant from the University of Cambridge

Senior Officers’ Law Clerk Programme with 29 Aug – 23 Sep 2011 participant from University College London

National University of Singapore International 19 Sep – 21 Sep 2011 Business Law Programme with participants from China and Indonesia

Senior Officers’ Law Clerk Programme with 19 Dec 2011 – 10 Feb 2012 participants from Women’s College, University of Sydney and Australian National University SUBORDINATE COURTS Awards and Accolades Caseload and Statistics 60 Annual Report 2011 61

CASELOAD AND Caseload Profile 2010 2011(p) STATISTICS FAMILY & JUVENILE JUSTICE DIVISION 21,385 20,407 Maintenance Fresh Applications 1,828 1,772 Enforcement of Maintenance Orders 3,279 2,982 (p) Caseload Profile 2010 2011 Variation/Rescission/Suspension of Maintenance Orders 1,176 1,124 Enforcement of the Maintenance of Parents Tribunal Orders 82 92 CRIMINAL JUSTICE DIVISION 277,221 234,138 Enforcement of Syariah Court Orders 455 476 Criminal Mentions1 Family Violence Criminal Mentions Courts2 65,668 55,413 Fresh Applications for Personal Protection Order (PPO) 3,058 2,871 Departmental/Statutory Board Mentions Courts 154,625 118,347 Variation/Rescission of PPO 133 158 Traffic Court 48,836 53,014 Breach of PPO 119 98 Specialist Courts Breach of Counselling Orders 27 15 Coroner’s Court 3,935 3,978 Divorce Magistrates’ Complaints 4,157 3,386 Divorce Writs 6,572 6,260 Ancillary Matters 1,795 1,929 CIVIL JUSTICE DIVISION 79,848 73,205 Others Originating Processes Adoption 331 447 Writs of Summonses (DC & MC) 39,136 35,786 Originating Summonses (Family) 312 453 Originating Summonses 593 485 Breach of Syariah Court Orders 280 233 Probate 3,800 3,864 Juvenile Court Interlocutory Applications Juvenile Arrest1 1,710 1,226 Summonses3 10,998 10,573 Beyond Parental Control 66 73 Summonses for Directions (O.25/37) 6,145 5,880 Child Protection Orders 37 58 Summary Judgment (O.14) 514 489 Police Summonses/Summonses & Tickets/Others 125 140 Others

Taxation 153 164 TOTAL 378,454 327,750 Assessment of Damages 2,222 2,594 Notes Small Claims Tribunals (p) Preliminary Figures as at Jan 2012 No. of Claims Filed 16,287 13,370 1. Refers to charges/summonses 2. Includes DAC, MAC, PSS, PS & other charges 3. Excludes O.25/37 SUBORDINATE COURTS Awards and Accolades Visits by Distinguished Guests in 2011 62 Annual Report 2011 63

VISITS BY Date Name of Visit Visit of the Honourable Justice Bat-Erdene Batbuyan, Criminal 29 Jun 2011 DISTINGUISHED Chamber, Supreme Court of Mongolia, and delegation

Visit of Judge Laurence Ryan and Judge Sarah Fleming, Ministry of GUESTS IN 2011 21 Jul 2011 Justice, New Zealand

Visit of the Honourable Justice Geoffrey Kiryabwire, Head, Date Name of Visit 3 Aug 2011 Commercial Division, High Court of Uganda, and delegation Visit of Mr Rafie Omar, Chief Executive Officer, AmanahRaya Legacy 24 Jan 2011 Visit of the Honourable Justice Andrew Cheung, Chief Judge, High Services Sdn Bhd, Malaysia, and delegation 12 Aug 2011 Court of Hong Kong, and delegation Visit of Mr Ibrahim Ahmed Manik, Chief Judicial Administrator, 18 Mar 2011 Visit of Judge Masahiro Hiraki, Director, Information Policy Division, Department of Judicial Administration, Maldives, and delegation 15 Aug 2011 Supreme Court of Japan, and delegation Visit of Ms Chu Lam Lam, Director, Law Reform and International 24 Mar 2011 Visit of Mr Thirayuth Lorlertratna, Senior Advisor, Supreme Law Bureau of Macau, and delegation 24 Aug 2011 Administrative Court of Thailand, and delegation Visit of Mr David Ware, Chief Executive Officer, Supreme Court of 14 Apr 2011 Visit of the Honourable Justice Kalyan Shrestha, Supreme Court of Victoria, Australia 2 Sep 2011 Nepal, and delegation from the National Judicial Academy, Nepal Visit of the Right Honourable Tun Dato' Seri Zaki Bin Tun Azmi, 29 Apr 2011 Visit of Mr Qu Ming, Deputy Chief District Judge, Xigang District Chief Justice of Malaysia, and delegation from the Malaysian Bar 2 Nov 2011 People's Court, Dalian, People's Republic of China, and delegation Visit of Attorney General Datin Paduka Hajah Hayati Binti POKSDSP 3 May 2011 Visit of Mr Li Peilong, First Deputy Chief Prosecutor, Shanghai People's Haji Mohd Salleh, Negara Brunei Darussalem, and delegation 9 Nov 2011 Procuratorate, People's Republic of China, and delegation Visit of the Honourable Justice Lisebo Chaka–Makhooane, High 26 May 2011 Visit of the Honorable Haji Abdul Walid bin Abu Hassan, Syariah Court of Lesotho, and delegation 2 Dec 2011 Court of the Federal Territories of Malaysia, and delegation Visit of Mr Pretam Singh s/o Darshan Singh, Chairman, Tribunal for 2 Jun 2011 Visit of Mr Sergey A. Kryukov, Head, IT Department, Supreme Consumer Claims, Malaysia, and delegation 6 Dec 2011 Court of the Russian Federation, and delegation Visit of the Honourable Dr Claudio Ximenes, Chief Justice and 10 Jun 2011 Visit of Uz. Hassan Saeed, Chief Judge, Family Court of Maldives, President of the Court of Appeal, Timor-Leste, and delegation 14 Dec 2011 and delegation Visit of Y.A.A. Datuk Hj Mahammad Bin Ibrahim, Chief Syarie 23 Jun 2011 Judge, Syariah Court of Malacca, Malaysia, and delegation SUBORDINATE COURTS Awards and Accolades Notes of Appreciation 64 Annual Report 2011 65

Appreciation for Mr Joseph John, Assistant Appreciation for Ms Elaine Lim Xiao Fen, NOTES OF Registrar, Small Claims Tribunals (SCT), Civil Registry Officer, Crime Registry, Criminal APPRECIATION Justice Division Justice Division “I was in Singapore for only a few days “In both my dealings with her, once at the to be able to access the Court’s online Crime Registry and once over the phone, material, to meet you at the Court early one Ms Lim had been very patient and polite “It was a pleasure to be in the Subordinate Courts of Singapore. The presentations were full Saturday morning, and to be able to extract in listening and answering to my queries. of information. We gained a good knowledge in judicial administration and best practices an acceptable settlement of the dispute. It was a pleasant surprise indeed. Her and innovation implemented in the Subordinate Courts of Singapore. Your patient and professional assistance, the dedication and attentiveness to customer Court’s clear and thorough online materials, service is commendable. With capable Thank you very much for the opportunity!” and the Court’s thoughtful procedures staff like Ms Lim, I am confident that the prevented the situation from marring my visit Subordinate Courts will achieve their Ibrahim Ahmed Manik to the beautiful city of Singapore.” objective of becoming a world class Chief Judicial Administrator, Department of Judicial Administration, Maldives organisation very soon.” 18 March 2011 James E Sullivan 12 April 2011 Dean Yeo 19 August 2011

“I am honoured to be in the Subordinate Courts of Singapore and very happy for learning

the experience of the Subordinate Courts of Singapore. It is very useful for the process we are Appreciation for Mr Johari Satiman, Bailiff, conducting to build a judicial system in Timor-Leste. Bailiffs Section, Civil Justice Division Appreciation for the Family Resolutions Chambers (FRC), Family and Juvenile Thank you very much, Chief District Judge Tan and the Subordinate Courts of Singapore.” “Mr Johari gave me a very good run down Justice Division of how the Bailiffs Section works. Having Dr Claudio Ximenes heard his explanation, I was able to properly “I feel that the work and services rendered Chief Justice and President of the Court of Appeal, Timor-Leste plan my schedule around facilitating a in the FRC are commendable. Kudos to the 10 June 2011 seizure. I am thankful to Mr Johari for his FRC for their ever willingness to help and vast knowledge and patience in explaining their very friendly and warm service.” the procedures to me.” Rajan Chettiar “The Family Court of Singapore is well organised for the citizens of Singapore. Claire Lim 15 September 2011 The people of this beautiful nation must be proud. Wishing you success in your work.” 22 June 2011

Uz. Hassan Saeed Chief Judge, Family Court of Maldives 14 December 2011 SUBORDINATE COURTS 66 Annual Report 2011 Quality Appreciation for Mr Shamsul Bahari Bin Appreciation for Ms Caryn Zou, Information Yusoff, Registry Officer, Family Registry, Counter Officer, Service Relations Unit, Judgments & Family and Juvenile Justice Division Corporate and Court Services Division Excellent “I write to compliment on your staff Mr “She is patient, polite and does her work Shamsul of the Family Court. He was diligently. Always with a smile to welcome Court Services really helpful and clear in explaining the her customers. Thank you very much.” procedures to all my enquiries. He was a very careful listener and eased my Jing Dao Rong worries…” 30 September 2011

T. Chandran 30 September 2011

Appreciation for Mr Albert Lim, Mr Abdul Rashid bin Sued, and Ms Masnah Bte Sebeni, Small Claims Tribunals, Civil Justice Division

“The above three staff were very professional and helpful. They don’t rush. They are polished diamonds that make the Courts work… Keep up the good work.”

Tan Yew Seng 3 October 2011 SUBORDINATE COURTS Quality Judgments & Excellent Court Services 68 Annual Report 2011 69

Some key judicial education programmes - a workshop on effective Bench Quality initiated in 2011 included: communication/public speaking skills as effective oral Bench communication Judgments • Introduction of the Court Craft Excellence is key to the effective delivery of justice; Programme to improve Bench skills and through observation sessions and confidential feedback from senior - a workshop on managing judicial The Role of In the Subordinate Courts, judicial training members of the Bench and the Bar; stress and transition to the Bench. Judicial Education is well institutionalised and structured under the auspices of the Judicial Education Board • Development of Bench books which • Strengthening of judicial research The key to delivering quality judgments is ( JEB), the highest body responsible for the provide practical step-by-step guides capability through the circulation of to develop a Bench made up of first-rate strategy and planning of judicial education for Judges on relevant legal principles the “Horizon Window”, an internal Judges who are skilled and equipped with for Judges. Chaired by the Honourable Judge and judicial practices; newsletter consolidating identified the right attributes to meet the challenges of Appeal, Justice V K Rajah, the JEB has international driving trends and forces st of judging in the 21 century. Maintaining developed a dynamic and comprehensive • Production of judicial training videos through environmental scans, cross- a quality Bench is a result of structured and judicial education framework for the training on judge craft as part of the Judicial jurisdictional studies, surveys and rigorous continuous judicial training and and development of judicial officers. Induction Programme; international comparisons; professional development over time. • Development of practice-oriented • Conduct of in-house ‘recap’ seminars The JEB is supported by workshops to hone judicial skills, over lunch (called “lunch refreshers”) to the Strategic Planning including: ensure the currency and relevancy of and Training Division each Judge’s knowledge in the areas of (SPTD) to translate its - an in-house workshop on court substantive law matters, court procedures strategies and policies craft with emphasis on dealing and processes, and practices; and through the design and with emotional litigants-in-person to development of training enhance Judges’ core competencies • Establishment of the Community programmes to meet such as Bench skills and case of Judicial Practice (CoP) to allow these learning needs management skills; interaction and sharing of experiences, and strengthen the core knowledge, resources and strategies competencies required - a judgment writing workshop to among the Judges when they focus to of Judges. help Judges write their grounds of discuss and/or innovate to address decision with appropriate concision certain recurring issues and problems. and expedition despite their heavy workload; SUBORDINATE COURTS Quality Judgments & Excellent Court Services 70 Annual Report 2011 71

HELP Centre Singapore Management University are also Excellent available to assist LIPs with basic form-filling Since 26 February 2010, the Subordinate and other assistance. Court Services Courts have run the HELP1 Centre to level the playing field for litigants-in-person (LIPs). If the LIP needs legal advice, the HELP Centre will refer him to a legal clinic held CFRC is managed by the Family and The aim is to make justice accessible to either at the Subordinate Courts or one of Juvenile Justice Division. It started operations court users, including those who cannot many community centres around Singapore. in September 2011. In the first phase of afford lawyers. These clinics are facilitated by lawyers from implementation, divorcing parents with the , Association at least one child below eight years old Situated at the Subordinate Courts building, of Criminal Lawyers of Singapore, and the will undergo mandatory counselling and and the Family and Juvenile Court building, Singapore Association of Women Lawyers. mediation at CFRC. The counselling and the HELP Centre has full time staff to handle mediation sessions, which are provided the day-to-day enquiries. It partners volunteer The work of the HELP Centre has not Child Focused free-of-charge, are conducted by a dedicated lawyers, students and various welfare gone unnoticed by the LIPs. Apart from Resolution Centre team of experienced Judges, counsellors and agencies to provide legal and social aid. the compliments received, the HELP Centre staff. This programme will be progressively In many cases, assistance is provided free team is encouraged that the collective Committed to providing an effective and extended to families with older children. of charge. efforts of staff and volunteers are meeting accessible system of justice for family law the practical needs of many court users. matters, the Subordinate Courts set up the Family Night Court The type of assistance administered is very Child Focused Resolution Centre (CFRC) much litigant-centred. In a recent survey for divorcing parents with children to attend From 1 November 2011, weekly night court conducted by the Subordinate Courts, the “The service here is really excellent. counselling and mediation. This initiative, sessions at the Family Court were introduced top three needs from LIPs are: the need to All the staff are very warm and which followed amendments made to the to further enhance accessibility to court users. know (e.g. information, advice); the need for helpful. Thanks a lot for setting up Women’s Charter in January 2011, aims to The Family Night Court sits every Tuesday empathy (e.g. someone to understand their such a HELP Centre.” help divorcing parents work with each other to deal with mentions of maintenance problems), and the need for convenience VK J A (a foreigner) to adjust to their new parental roles and summonses, where an application is made for (e.g. facilities, court schedules). arrive at practical holistic solutions for the maintenance or where an application is made “Thank you for the help and best interests and welfare of their children. for the variation, cancellation or suspension of Based on these findings, the HELP Centre assistance provided. The options a maintenance order. With the introduction of continues to refine its programmes to meet suggested are also very helpful to Probably one of the first in the world, the this initiative, parties need not take time off work users’ expectations. Apart from providing those of us who are not familiar with objective of CFRC is to help parents create to attend Court in the day for such matters. informational brochures, books, pamphlets legal procedures.” a suitable parenting agreement that focuses and videos, our experienced court staff KSM (Singaporean) on the best interests and future of their At the mention, the presiding Judge will give are available to offer a listening ear and children and which allows the children to parties directions for the subsequent conduct patiently explain court procedures and “The HELP Centre is very good and have meaningful relationships with both of the case. If an agreement is reached practices to LIPs. Law students from the efficient in assisting layman like me.” parents. CFRC also provides parents between parties at the mediation session National University of Singapore and PMH (Singaporean) with useful information that helps them to conducted before the mention, the Judge consider the unique needs of their children. will record a consent order. 1 Helping to Empower Litigants-in-Person. Litigants-in-person are court users without any lawyers representing them. SUBORDINATE COURTS Quality Judgments & Excellent Court Services 72 Annual Report 2011 73

Court Volunteers – Forging by the Pro Bono Services Office of the Law Bonds, Serving Together Society of Singapore. For civil cases, there are volunteer lawyers who provide free The Subordinate Courts strive to serve their legal advice at the HELP Centre. community by providing litigants with an effective and accessible system of justice, Law students from the National University inspiring public trust and confidence. of Singapore and Singapore Management Many legal problems that court users face University have also helped litigants to belie other social and emotional issues. navigate through court processes and They may enter the Courts with feelings provided a listening ear. of anger, loss, frustration, and seek justice to be served, to be reconciled with others The Subordinate Courts have also or even themselves, in the hope of having collaborated with community agencies New and Improved Facilities An intern at the Subordinate Courts their lives restored. through Project SHINE, a scheme that for Court Users commented: “It provides a platform for provides assistance to families suffering from people to engage and interact with one The court volunteers play a vital role in repeated failures by their spouses or ex- In an effort to provide an accessible system another.” Other court staff said that the serving together with the Subordinate spouses to provide maintenance. There are of justice, not just in the services, but also in refreshed atrium provides a “central place Courts, making a real difference in the also volunteers who provide help to juveniles terms of a warmer and friendlier atmosphere, for people to commune” and has made the lives of others through the giving of their through various support programmes. new and improved facilities were introduced Courts “a warmer place”. resources. They provide many services by the Subordinate Courts in 2011. complementary to adjudication. Many Justices of the Peace and volunteers Upgraded public lifts serve as mediators in criminal, civil and comprising academics and lawyers have Refresh@Atrium family disputes, contributing to bring peace assisted as Referees of the Small Claims Refresh@Atrium, a newly furbished facility at between individuals and promote harmony Tribunals. They play a vital role in helping to the Subordinate Courts building, provides in our society. adjudicate certain small claims cases and a place for people to relax, meet and rendering justice to the parties before them. connect with one another. Lawyers have also offered pro bono legal advice in the Subordinate Courts for needy On 18 November 2011, the Subordinate litigants who do not have the assistance Courts held their annual Court Volunteers’ of counsel. The Law Society of Singapore Appreciation Dinner at the Hilton Hotel. The The two public lifts in the Subordinate Courts and the Association of Criminal Lawyers Guest of Honour, the Honourable Judge of building were given a face-lift to better serve of Singapore have been working with the Appeal, Justice Andrew Phang, presented court users. Improvements made included Courts to run legal clinics for criminal matters. the following outstanding volunteers with faster speed, air-conditioning for better Members of the Law Society of Singapore, awards: ventilation, and buttons that come with the Legal Aid Bureau and the Singapore Braille to guide the visually handicapped. - Ms Foo Siew Fong and Mr Harold Seet: Association of Woman Lawyers have Feedback from court users and staff on the Outstanding Volunteers – Advocate and supported a legal clinic for family disputes upgraded lifts has been favourable. Solicitor Category for many years, a role recently taken over SUBORDINATE COURTS 74 Annual Report 2011 Our People - Mr Gavin Ng: Outstanding Volunteer – Public Perception of the Student Category Subordinate Courts

- Ms Linda Heng: Outstanding Volunteer – Public trust and confidence are key values Open Category in the administration of justice. Feedback from the community is vital as they provide relevant performance benchmarks for the Subordinate Courts’ strategic planning and [insert photos] policy development initiatives. It is therefore critical to take the pulse of the public’s perception of the administration of justice through independent local public surveys.

In 2010, a public perception survey of the

Not in picture: Ms Linda Heng confidence of the public in the administration of justice was conducted by an independent research agency. The results of the survey In 2011, in appreciation of the court released in 2011 showed that: volunteers’ dedication, the Subordinate Courts introduced the Long Service Awards • 99 per cent of the respondents felt that for volunteers. Chief District Judge Tan Siong they had trust and confidence in the fair Thye presented the 10- and 15- year Long administration of justice in Singapore. This Service Awards to volunteers at the dinner. is an increase of 2 per cent compared to a previous survey conducted in 2007;

• 99 per cent of the respondents agreed that the Courts administered justice fairly to all, regardless of whether actions were initiated by or against individuals, companies or the government, an increase of 1 per cent over the 2007 score;

• 100 per cent of those surveyed agreed that the Courts administered justice fairly to all, regardless of language, religion, race or social class, a 1 per cent increase over the results in the 2007 survey. SUBORDINATE COURTS Our People Welcomes and Farewells 76 Annual Report 2011 77

“My experience at the Subordinate Courts “I have been attached to the Subordinate Welcomes and has truly enriched me. Over the years, I Courts for the past 30 years before my rotated through the three Justice Divisions, retirement. I have fond memories and I Farewells dealing with a broad spectrum of cases that have enjoyed the attachment, especially impacted individuals, families and society. with the strong support of my bosses, I also served as Registrar, focusing on the colleagues and staff. Since my retirement, administration of the Subordinate Courts. I have embarked on doing more exercises “A leading subordinate court “I have been involved in business The work has been very varied, challenging and travelling. With the re-employment serving society with people as transformation initiatives across different and meaningful. scheme for retirees, I am back to working the most valuable asset.” industries like the civil service, consultancy and at the Subordinate Courts again.” Only with a valued and education. I appreciate that it’s about getting “Dynamic and responsive, the Subordinate motivated team can this vision the right people together and developing Courts constantly innovate and improve. As District Judge Liew Thiam Leng be realised. Incoming and strategies which advance an organisation an organisation, we work as a cohesive Former Senior District Judge-Consultant, out-going staff members attest towards a common goal. It is also about team, and share great camaraderie while Criminal Justice Division to this ethos. They share their cultivating partnerships and working in giving of our best to the public.” thoughts on working at the collaboration with brave hearts and like minds Subordinate Courts. to create a positive, lasting change. Ms Hoo Sheau Peng Former Registrar and Senior District Judge, “Since joining the Subordinate Courts, I Corporate and Court Services Division “Shortly after I joined, I had to gather have observed that my fellow colleagues’ information to address a court user’s queries. passion shines through in every aspect The Judges and court administrators I of their work. With their enthusiasm and met provided me with useful background commitment, I am able to function at the “I joined the Subordinate Courts in July information so that I could quickly grasp the forefront of their operation.” 1969 when it was known as the Criminal issues. On another occasion, when I needed District and Magistrates’ Courts and was to analyse some statistics, everyone pitched Ms Wendy Yeo located at South Bridge Road. I was very in to help. These experiences make the Senior Assistant Director, Family Registry, happy working at the Subordinate Courts as Subordinate Courts a great place to work.” Family and Juvenile Justice Division my supervisors took care of me and were Joined in February 2011 interested in my work and well-being.” Retired/retiring staff (Front row, LEFT to RIGHT): Mr Geoffrey Lim Senior District Judge-Consultant Liew Thiam Leng Criminal Justice Division Deputy Director, Crime Registry, Mr Yazid Bin Katon Retired in September 2011

Criminal Justice Division Former Court Administrator, Civil Registry, Mr Mohd Abdullah Rahim Joined in June 2011 Former Interpreter and Mediator, Civil Justice Division Maintenance Mediation Chambers, Family and Juvenile Justice Division Retired in September 2011

District Judge Tan Peck Cheng Family and Juvenile Justice Division Retiring in February 2012

District Judge Francis Tseng Civil Justice Division Retired in April 2011 SUBORDINATE COURTS Our People Staff Event Highlights 78 Annual Report 2011 79

staff whose outstanding performance have contributed to the accessibility and expeditious STAFF EVENT delivery of justice. Ms Shariza Bte Mohamed Shariff, Ms Yong Khai Ling and Mr Sim Jingyao, were awarded “Court Administrator of the Year 2011 Award” during the National HIGHLIGHTS Day Observance Ceremony. These award recipients will play an important role as mentors to new officers, to enhance and encourage best practices among fellow court administrators.

NATIONAL DAY CELEBRATIONS “Shariza is very professional and comfortable in her dealings with lawyers, Fund raising prosecutors and public service officers As part of their corporate social from other agencies. She is also very responsibility programme, the Subordinate knowledgeable of the functions of the Courts organised the annual National Day Registrar’s Secretariat. Many colleagues Carnival to raise funds for their adopted as well as those outside the Subordinate charity, the Children’s Cancer Foundation. Award recipient Ms Shariza Courts choose to make enquiries with her, Held over a three-week period in August Bte Mohamed Shariff, Personal knowing that she will be of good assistance Assistant to Senior Deputy Registrar, 2011, the highest sum to-date of $29,300 to them.” Registrar’s Secretariat, Corporate was raised. and Court Services Division “Khai Ling establishes good rapport with National Day Observance the court users she serves in the course of Ceremony (NDOC) carrying out her duties, both at the Civil During the NDOC on 5 August 2011, staff Registry and HELP Centre. Extremely were treated to two special performances, familiar with the work of the Civil Registry, in addition to the ceremonial singing of the she is a priceless repository of institutional National Anthem and recital of the National knowledge for the civil justice processes. She Day and Religious Harmony pledges. Some willingly and readily shares her knowledge court administrators put up a hip hop dance Award recipient Ms Yong Khai Ling, and experience with her colleagues.” Senior Deputy Head, Civil Registry, routine to the tune of Justin Bieber’s “Baby” Civil Justice Division while Judges led all to sing-a-long to the “Despite the high work load, Jingyao has familiar melodies of National Day songs. always demonstrated his commitment to The Chief District Judge also presented the ensure that events would proceed with no Subordinate Courts Long Service Awards interruption in terms of AV requirements. He to staff who had served for 10 years, in is always accommodating to users which recognition of their dedication. earned him compliments. One external user complimented: ‘What impressed me about Court Administrator of the Year him are that there was always a smile on Awards his face, and he looked cheerful regardless Award recipient Mr Sim Jingyao, First introduced in 2002, the Court of the time I needed his help.” Management Support Officer, Administrator of the Year Awards recognise Information Technology Department, Strategic Planning & Training Division SUBORDINATE COURTS Our People Staff Event Highlights 80 Annual Report 2011 81

NATIONAL DAY AWARDS PUBLIC SERVICE WEEK amongst the 99 award recipients in public ACTIVITIES service who received the prestigious PS21 Public Administration Medal Public Administration Medal Star Service Award. This award is traditionally (Gold) (Bar) (Silver) First started in 2008 as an annual event to presented during PSW to recognise public Chief District Judge Tan Siong Thye District Judge Thian Yee Sze instil in public officers a sense of pride and officers for their consistent commitment to District Judge Mathew Joseph belonging, the annual Public Service Week high standards of service excellence. (PSW) organised by the Public Service Commendation Medal Efficiency Medal Division from 16 to 22 May 2011 reminds CORPORATE SOCIAL District Judge Ow Yong Tuck Leong Mr Pandiyan s/o Vellasami officers to take pride in their roles and to RESPONSIBILITY ACTIVITIES Mr Ang Teck Heng Ms Seng Li Lian serve with dedication and commitment. Besides the annual organisation-wide Long Service Medal (25 years of service) The Subordinate Courts held a series of fund-raising event held in conjunction with District Judge Lau Chin Yui Laura Mrs Tamilmaran Rukmani activities such as quizzes and talks by guest National Day, on 2 December 2011, the District Judge Jasvender Kaur d/o Saudagar Singh Ms Ismawati Binte Ismail speakers revolving around service-centricity Civil Justice Division played host to 30 District Judge David Lim Hock Choon Mr Haris Bin Abdul Rahman over a two-week period, leading up to the children aged between seven and 12 Mdm Mary Doris Thomas launch of the inaugural Subordinate Courts years from Beyond Social Services (BSS). Service Excellence Conference on 20 May 2011, which was held in conjunction with BSS is a charity dedicated to supporting the PSW Observance Ceremony. literacy and reducing delinquency among Subordinate Courts Awards children and youths from under-privileged During the observance ceremony, staff backgrounds. During the event, themed Subordinate Courts Long Service Award were reminded of their service commitment “Love, Hope and Dreams in the Subordinate District Judge Leong Kui Yiu James Ms Yong Khai Ling through the Public Service pledge recital. Courts”, the children were given an District Judge Ng Peng Hong Ms Seng Li Lian The Chief District Judge also presented the educational tour of the Subordinate Courts. District Judge Tan Peck Cheng Ms Lim Chow Yeh Sarah inaugural “Service Staff of the Quarter” They were brought to the various sections District Judge Jocelyn Ong Ms Sayidhatunnisa Bte Syed Eussof Awards to Mr Stephen Pillay and Mr James within the Civil Justice Division and took District Judge Chia Wee Kiat Ms Shariza Bte Mohamed Shariff Chuah in recognition of their excellent part in a mock trial to better understand District Judge Lee-Khoo Poh Choo Ms Yap Pui Ling services to court users. civil proceedings. District Judge Roy Grenville Neighbour Ms Harpreet Kaur d/o Chancel Singh District Judge Miranda Yeo Eng Joo Ms Rahman Beevi d/o S M Ibrahim Ms Anne Durray Ms Norita Bte Nasibbuddin Ms Elyana Mohd Ishak Ms Nuzuliyah Bte Taib Ms Phua Thong Leng

Subordinate Courts Long Service Award (Contract staff) Ms Junaitah Bayham Bte Md Eusoff Ms Yasmin Bte Abdullah Ms Napisah Beevi d/o Abdul Gani Ms Doris Loghambal d/o Kumarasamy Perumal In 2011, Ms Arfah Omar, Ms V Padma, and Ms Salmiya Bte Sullam Ms Sarinam Bte Johari Mr Mohd Hatta (above, LEFT to RIGHT) were Ms Sandra Julie Pereira SUBORDINATE COURTS Our People Staff Event Highlights 82 Annual Report 2011 83

The children were also treated to an afternoon As Singapore prepared for the Formula- tournament up another notch by adding workplace safety through a combination tea party and light-hearted entertainment. One Grand Prix event in September, the cosmic bowling, with the light dimmed of informational talks and quizzes. A band comprising both Judges and staff Subordinate Courts had their own brand of and bowling pins painted fluorescent to of the Civil Justice Division enthralled the the F1 action during their annual Cohesion glow in the dark. In September 2011, staff The Subordinate Courts also participated children, and a Judge, dressed up as Day held on 17 September. Groups of members participated in the Yellow Ribbon actively in events organised by the Judiciary “Captain Justice”, presented gifts to all participants pitted their wits and resources Prison Run, an event held in support of the Recreation Club. The annual Dinner and of them. The children also put up a short against one another to create their own F1 Yellow Ribbon Project, an initiative of the Dance in July 2011 saw sporting staff performance and displayed the art pieces racing cars out of cardboards and other Singapore Prison Service to encourage the members dressed to the theme “Safari that they had prepared for the visit. These more modest materials. They then put community to accept ex-offenders and their Night”. At the Family Day held at the art pieces, along with other art work their creations to the test through a race families, and give them a second chance in Marina Barrage in November 2011, the contributed by the members of the Division, enabled only by teamwork, not technology life. Staff were also reminded to eat healthily participants literally reached for the sky with were auctioned at a pre-event art sale held or engines. The mettle of the Subordinate through the monthly Fruit Day organised their kites, together with their colleagues within the Subordinate Courts. Through Courts family was once again displayed by the Health and Welfare Committee. and family members. the proceeds of the auction and generous and proven through the series of team- In addition, yearly health screenings and contributions by many within the Subordinate building activities. health-related talks were organised. Courts, a sum of $5,000 was raised for BSS. OTHER SOCIAL EVENTS Safety at the workplace is another COHESION ACTIVITIES focus of the Subordinate Courts. The People are the Subordinate Courts’ most Workplace Safety and Health Committee To forge stronger bonds and foster closer valued asset. Staff are encouraged to was formed in July 2011 to foster and relationships amongst staff, regular cohesion maintain a balanced and healthy lifestyle, enhance a safe workplace culture. activities were organised throughout the year amongst other ways, through a series Staff learnt about the importance of at both the organisational and divisional of activities designed to stimulate their levels. The highlights of 2011 included interest in the fun and healthy aspects of a day at Universal Studios Singapore life. In May 2011, the Sports Committee where the strong-hearted provided moral introduced a weekly aerobics session which support and encouragement to their not-so- proved popular with female staff members. adventurous colleagues taking the death- The Sports Committee also brought the defying rides at the theme park. excitement of the annual divisional bowling SUBORDINATE COURTS Our People Judges and Staff of the Subordinate Courts 84 Annual Report 2011 85

JUDGES AND STAFF CRIMINAL JUSTICE DIVISION OF THE SUBORDINATE COURTS

District Judges of the District Judges of the Criminal Courts Criminal Courts Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Salina Ishak, Liew Thiam Leng, 1st row (LEFT to RIGHT) Ng Peng Hong, Low Wee Ping, Eddy Tham Soh Tze Bian, Wong Choon Ning 2nd row (LEFT to RIGHT) Mathew Joseph, Paul Quan, Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Kessler Soh, Lim Tse Haw, Imran Hamid, Kamala Ponnampalam, Roy Neighbour Christopher Goh, John Ng, Toh Yung Cheong 3rd row (LEFT to RIGHT) Ronald Gwee, Jasbendar Kaur, May Mesenas, Shaiffudin Saruwan, Wong Peck

Chief District Judge, Deputy Chief District Judge and Senior District Judges

LEFT to RIGHT Senior District Judge, Criminal Justice Division, See Kee Oon Senior District Judge, Civil Justice Division, Leslie Chew Senior District Judge, Family and Juvenile Justice Division, Foo Tuat Yien Chief District Judge, Tan Siong Thye Deputy Chief District Judge and Registrar, Jennifer Marie SUBORDINATE COURTS Our People Judges and Staff of the Subordinate Courts 86 Annual Report 2011 87

Crime Registry Officers Crime Registry Officers Criminal Court Officers Criminal Court Officers Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Puvana Ramasamy, Emily Lim Xin Yi, Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Belinda Chng Pei Yun, Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Chua Wenlin, Tan Wei Jun, Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Lim Chee Voon Lance, Zubeda Khanam, Ong Yan Rui, Geoffrey Lim, Jasmine Richard Thomas, Denise Yeo Selvi S Senthamarai, Chan Kok Hoong, Supaletchumi d/o Suppiah, Sharifah Farhanah Binte Syed Halid Almakbuly, Mariah Bte Amri, Teng-Soh Siew Foong, Caliph Md Sufiyan Bin Moezar, Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Sandhya Gopinathan, Mok-Goh Kit Kamissah Mahmud, Sarah Low Pei Ni Muhammad Hafiz Bin Jumahat, Kum Hui Min Nor Azliana Bte Khairuden Soon, Nisa d/o Raja Sekaran, Louis Kang Eng Hao, Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Rokiah Bte Harun, Siti Ainsha Bte Salim, Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Doris d/o Loghambal, Wang Lanzhen, Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Lim Peiyi, Valliammah d/o Alagapan, Mark Wang Shanying, Leow Xian Zhao, Ng Tio Yong, Doris Lee, Noran Farhana Bte Mohammed, Kasmah Wati Bte Wari, Shabrina Binte Shari, Lam Pei Ying, Chen Siyin, Halija Kurdi, Zaleha Rahim Rahman, Lee Peiling, Nazeini Parveen Binte Rahman Vanaja Jayaram, Vivian Koh Yui Weng Fong, Shawn Teo, Zainah Bte Sabtu, Sumathi d/o Sundrajoo, Wong Wai Yee, Noor Aini Bte Zumzuri, Shariff, Asmahan Bte Amir, Yeoh Xin Ning Evelyn, Habedah Bte Ahmad, Jamilah Bte Jaslan, Elaine Lim Xiaofen Kasumawati Binte Rifaie, Diana Nirmaladevi d/o Jayaraman, Intan Bte Sani, Suaidah Bte Sarnan Sherin Banu Bte Mohamed SUBORDINATE COURTS Our People Judges and Staff of the Subordinate Courts 88 Annual Report 2011 89

Community Court Secretariat and Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Nurhafidzah Bte Mohamed Kamal, Samuel Chua Chief District Judge’s Secretariat Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Nur Syuhada Binte Mohamed Shahril, District Judges of the Judges of the Primary Tay Kai Boon, Chew Chuee Seng, Yasmin Isma Bte Hamzah Civil Courts Dispute Resolution Centre Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) David Lim, Tan May Tee, Francis Tseng Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) District Judge Laura Lau, Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Loo Ngan Chor, Joyce Low, Seah Chi-Ling District Judge Joyce Low, District Judge Kathryn Low Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Magistrate Josephine Kang, CIVIL JUSTICE DIVISION District Judge Marvin Bay

District Judges of Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Lorraine Ho, James Leong, Ong Chin Rhu, Lim Wee Ming Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Sandra Looi, Miranda Yeo, Constance Tay, Tan Sue-Ann, Joseph Yeo, the Civil Registry Viveganandam Jesudevan, Ow-Yong Tuck Leong, Kenneth Choo, Kathleen Gomez, Lynette Yap, Low Lih Jeng SUBORDINATE COURTS Our People Judges and Staff of the Subordinate Courts 90 Annual Report 2011 91

Civil Registry Officers Civil Registry Officers Primary Dispute Resolution Small Claims Tribunals Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Amnah Ali, Tham Yeong Shin, Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Noraini Hj Omar, Yasmin Abdullah, Centre and Civil Court Officers Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Lee Kay Swee, Joseph John, Glenfield de Souza, Rozita Mahmud Lyon Oh, Anne Saramma Mathew Anne Durray, Samuel Chow Tha-Liang, James Chuah Kok On Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Krystal Tan, Koh Puay Chin, Zarina Banu, Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Kesuma Mohd Selamat, Sarinam Johari, Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Paul Toh, Nurhidayah Tumani, Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Sadila Bte Ali, Ng Zi Wei Yvonne, Napisah Beevi d/o Abdul Gani Hatimah Nawi, Roziana Selamat, Azizah Ibrahim, Norjahan Amoo, Chong Liwen, Michael Chua, Wahidah Somo, Jannie Low, Rita Anthony, Michael Leong Sek Kay, Choy Xue Ting Ginnette, Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Norzirafida Zakaria, Nur Atiqah Jainal, Faridah Abu Bakar, Salmiya Sullam, Ong Pek Se, B. Sayeeswari, Mohd Rezal Tan Hui Ying, Jaliah Bte Mohd Arif, Carmen Seah Yeu Chern Wilson Ong, Sayidhatunnisa Syed Eussof, Lau Pei Pei Uma Mageswari d/o Singaran SUBORDINATE COURTS Our People Judges and Staff of the Subordinate Courts 92 Annual Report 2011 93

Bailiffs Section Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Kalavathy Nadarajah, Kamaruzaman Bin Kassim, Chua Hong Siang, Mohamed Hatta Bin Abdul Razak, Eswaran s/o Balasubrahaniam, Ismail Bin Mat Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Omar Bin Bachik, Ruthreshwaran s/o Letchmanan, Koh Teow Peng, Cheng Ruo Xuan, Muhammad Akram Bin Amat Tugiman, Sapuan Bin Sanadi, Bakhit Bin Mohamed Ridwan, District Judges of the District Judges of the Siti Ellyna Bte Ali, Helen Low Peck Lan, Shawaluddin Bin Zainal Abidin, Johari Bin Satiman Family and Juvenile Courts Family Registry 1st row (LEFT to RIGHT) Lim Keng Yeow, Jocelyn Ong Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Amy Tung, Regina Ow 2nd row (LEFT to RIGHT) Crystal Ong, Michelle Woodworth Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Angelina Hing, Lim Choi Ming, 3rd row (LEFT to RIGHT) Masayu Norashikin, Kevin Ng, Brenda Tan Colin Tan, Nicole Loh FAMILY AND JUVENILE JUSTICE DIVISION

District Judges Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Tan Peck Cheng, Jen Koh Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Wong Keen Onn, Edgar Foo, Wong Sheng Kwai of the Family and Juvenile Courts SUBORDINATE COURTS Our People Judges and Staff of the Subordinate Courts 94 Annual Report 2011 95

Family Registry and Family and Family Registry and Juvenile Court Officers Family Court Officers Maintenance Mediation Counselling and Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Nur Atiqa Binte Abdul Kadir, Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Norleha Mohamed Hassan, Chambers Psychological Services Yeo Seow Aik, Norfarahziana Bte Abd Hamid Mahani Adam, Wendy Yeo Su Fen, Tay Ai Ling Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Jasmine Ng Mui Lian, Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Jaslyn Ng, Nur Izzah Amir, Sophia Ang, Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Nur Nadiah Binte Md Nasir, Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Sakthi Manogran, Lee Hui Ping, Lee-See Fong Pheng, Sanisah Bte Mahad Sarinah Mohamed, Audrey Lum Nussrath Barvin Abdul Jalil, Shamsul Bahari Yusoff, Siti Nabilah Bte Mohammed, Junaitah Bayham Bte Md Eusoff, Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Faridah Bte Atan, Azhar Bin Mohd Nasir, Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Jean Quek, Sujeeta Menon, Mohd Fazil Bin A Razak, Lee Khee Por, Sandy Pang Lin Sun, Zarinah Bte Muhamad, Nurhanim Bte Mohamad Hanip, Tamilmaran Rukmani Saiful Hisham Sidek, Ho Yew Wai, Chiam Toon Han, Cynthia Teo, Norasimah Sujai Jumahat Bin Ahmad, Mageswary d/o Subramaniam, Aminah Bte Ali, Suzanah Bte Che’ome, Kuck Xuanling, Jessie Koh, Dawn Wong Ang Chia Li Carrie, Azila Sueb, Hamidah Bte Yusoff SUBORDINATE COURTS Our People Judges and Staff of the Subordinate Courts 96 Annual Report 2011 97

CORPORATE AND COURT SERVICES DIVISION

Finance Section Human Resource Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Balasubramaniam s/o Tharmalinggam, Management Section 1st row (LEFT to RIGHT) District Judge and Senior Deputy Registrar Phua Thong Leng, Mark Tay Communications Section and 1st row (LEFT to RIGHT) Mikaela Oh, Dalbir Kaur Tan Boon Heng, Lee Chun Yip Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Padma Vengadasalam, Aston Chow, 2nd row (LEFT to RIGHT) R Thamayanthi, Stella Ho, 2nd row (LEFT to RIGHT) Samsiah M Mizah, Papinder Kaur Registrar’s Secretariat Gary Chiang, Josephine Tan Yeow-Mak Yuek Ling, Janna Goh, Siti Nadiah 3rd row (LEFT to RIGHT) Renuka Thanabalan, John Lee, Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Michelle Chiang, Elyana Mohd Ishak, 3rd row (LEFT to RIGHT) Alicia Ang, Raymond Mui, Daniel Ang, Lim Lay Kim Sarah Lim Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Choo Oi Peng, Caryn Zou, Patrick Chin, Wahidah Banu d/o Abu Bakar Shariza Bte Mohamed Shariff, Crystal Hoo SUBORDINATE COURTS Our People Judges and Staff of the Subordinate Courts 98 Annual Report 2011 99

Infrastructure Chinese Interpreters Indian Interpreters Malay Interpreters 1st row (LEFT to RIGHT) Teo Chor Hoon, Yap Pui Ling, Development Section Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Vijaya Thavamary Abraham, Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Salina Sinain, Rashidah Sirrat, Sharon Chua, Onh Khian Guan, Phoon Wing Oon, Low Meng Huat Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Nezam Zakaria, Mark Khng, Adrian Lai, Maheswary Kandesan, Tasmin Begum Shumsudin, Samsiah Shariff, Sulastri Slemat, Suhana Salleh, 2nd row (LEFT to RIGHT) Yeo Ai Fern, Chang May Fung, Siew Chin Yiew Santha Devi Sivanathan Nurfadhilla Md. Kamarulzaman Jasmine Ng, Ang Wei Yi, Ng Geok Meng Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Mohammad Rashikin Rajah, Lucy Goh, Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Prasakthi Allagoo, Jayanthi Jaganathan, Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Syed Syaiful Amir Syed Salleh, 3rd row (LEFT to RIGHT) Lucia Cheng, Tay Kuan Kuan, Nur Azilah Bte Ngasiran, Suhaily Bte Ismail, Rosalind Yap, Anees Parvin, E Mangalagowri, Juliet Fenendees, Norartiyangseh Jibani, Zaini Hassan, Md Haikal Md Harun, Chan Nga Yin, Neo Bee Lian, Yeo Keng Heng, Haris Bin Abdul Rahman, Alice Wong, Bhawani d/o Krishnasamy, Suseela Devi Ramesh Tumirah Abdullah Osman, Md Faizal Md Yusuf, Rokiah Mahdi, Wong Hee Huang, Tan Cheng Siong, Goh Chai Hoon, Wong Li Li Bernard Soh Md Rijal Khailani, Kamal Shaharom, Zaini Sojah, Rohaida Satari SUBORDINATE COURTS Our People Judges and Staff of the Subordinate Courts 100 Annual Report 2011 101

STRATEGIC PLANNING AND TRAINING DIVISION

Planning Unit, Research and Information Technology Knowledge Development Unit, Department (LEFT to RIGHT) District Judge Jasbendar Kaur, Centre for Research and 1st row (LEFT to RIGHT) Ryan Quek, You Chiou Har, District Judge Thian Yee Sze, District Judge Joseph Yeo Training, and Library Resources Statistics, Organisational Chan Khar Nai, Trevor Sim, Cheng Kim Yew, Catherine Lam Officers 2nd row (LEFT to RIGHT) Shirley Chia, Kelvin Low, Excellence Unit, and Front row (LEFT to RIGHT) Siti Fatimah Abdul Satar, Ng Kar Meng, Azreen Bin Ahmad, Felicia Quek Knowledge Management Nooraeni Ahmad and Charisshir Ng 3rd row (LEFT to RIGHT) Stanley Lau, Ronshone Chua, Sim Jingyao, 1st row (LEFT to RIGHT) Goh Wee Siang, Phang Tsang Wing Back row (LEFT to RIGHT) Rosyati Ahmad, Humaira Mohd Ali, Clarence Yuen, Jack Ho, Andrew Chee, Wong Hong Chew 2nd row (LEFT to RIGHT) Sabeena Beevi, Huang Caiwei, Noor Israni Ibrahim, Dang Ngoc Han Nguyen, Phua Lian Gek, Ho Sow Chue Joyce Rozilah Rohani and Rubiah Jaharah 3rd row (LEFT to RIGHT) Ong Meng Choo, Ye Pei Shi, Shen Qinghui ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Editorial Committee District Judge Loo Ngan Chor District Judge Lim Keng Yeow Ms Lim Lay Kim Ms Michelle Chiang

In Consultation with Chief District Judge Tan Siong Thye, Deputy Chief District Judge Jennifer Marie and the Senior District Judges

With Warmest Appreciation to All who have contributed to this publication

This page is intentionally left blank.