Latest news with #SingaporeAcademyofLaw
Malay Mail
3 days ago
- Malay Mail
‘Shut the gates': Singapore judge criticises victim-blaming tactics in sexual offence cases
SINGAPORE, July 21 — High Court Judge Vincent Hoong criticised inappropriate cross-examination tactics during sexual offense trials in Singapore, citing examples where lawyers made degrading suggestions to victims, including telling a rape victim's mother she 'could have easily avoided' assault by crossing her legs. In another disturbing case Hoong noted, a defence lawyer inappropriately stared at a molestation victim's breasts and asked her to stand up to demonstrate potential 'motive' for the assault based on her clothing, The Straits Times reported. Hoong, who also serves as presiding judge of the State Courts, delivered these remarks during a keynote address to Singapore Academy of Law members at a private event held on July 2, with the speech subsequently published on the Singapore Courts website. The judge said that courtrooms should not be battlegrounds and witness stands should not serve as arenas for humiliation, stating there is neither honour in extracting testimony through degradation nor skill in exploiting witnesses' emotional vulnerability. This judicial guidance follows Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon's December 2024 emphasis on judges taking more active supervisory roles in managing sexual offence cases, particularly regarding how complainants give evidence. New measures introduced in January include pretrial checklists designed to identify contentious issues, enabling judges to prevent irrelevant questioning during trials. Hoong acknowledged that while robust cross-examination within proper bounds remains essential for fair defence representation, inappropriate questioning can become traumatising without proper sensitivity. The judge specifically condemned questions that reinforce outdated victim-blaming notions, such as expectations that victims should physically resist attackers or immediately report crimes, calling such approaches gratuitously harmful and irrelevant. Defence lawyer Luo Ling Ling, who represents clients accused of sexual offenses, supports protecting victims while vigorously defending clients, sharing her experience of learning to balance tough questioning with respectful tone after witnessing a victim's emotional breakdown during cross-examination. Luo said that while she would still ask necessary challenging questions in similar cases, she would now employ a gentler approach after realising the impact of her questioning style on a young victim who was testifying via camera.
Straits Times
3 days ago
- Politics
- Straits Times
Witness stand not arena for humiliation in sex offence cases, judge reminds lawyers
Justice Vincent Hoong said: 'There is no honour in extracting testimony through degradation, nor is there skill in exploiting the emotional vulnerability of a witness.' SINGAPORE – During the trial of a man accused of raping his mother, his lawyer suggested that the woman 'could have easily avoided' the assault if she had just crossed her legs and 'shut the gates'. In another case, a lawyer stared inappropriately at the breasts of a molestation victim and asked her to stand up in an attempt to show that there would be 'motive' to molest her if she was wearing a low-cut top. These examples were cited in a recent speech by High Court Judge Vincent Hoong as cross-examination questions that have no place in the Singapore courts. Justice Hoong, who is also presiding judge of the State Courts, said: 'We would do well to remember that the courtroom is not a battleground, and the witness stand is not an arena for humiliation. 'There is no honour in extracting testimony through degradation, nor is there skill in exploiting the emotional vulnerability of a witness.' He was speaking to members of the Singapore Academy of Law at a private event held at the State Courts on July 2. The keynote address has been published on the Singapore Courts website. Justice Hoong's speech on navigating the sensitivities of cross-examining complainants in sexual offence cases is the latest reminder from the judiciary to the legal fraternity to be aware of the impact that the trial process can have on victims. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore Priority for singles, higher quota for second-timer families to kick in from HDB's July BTO exercise Singapore Both Bukit Panjang LRT disruptions in July linked to newly installed power system: SMRT Singapore 1 in 3 vapes here laced with etomidate; MOH working with MHA to list it as illegal drug: Ong Ye Kung Asia Johor Bahru collision claims lives of e-hailing driver and Singapore passenger Sport Arsenal arrive in Singapore for pre-season matches with AC Milan and Newcastle Business Crypto exchange Tokenize to shut down Singapore operations Singapore More initiatives and support for migrant community announced at Racial Harmony Day event Singapore ComfortDelGro to discipline driver who flung relative's wheelchair out of taxi Most recently, in December 2024, Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon emphasised the need for judges to take a more active supervisory role in the management of such cases, including the giving of evidence by complainants. This was followed in January by the introduction of measures, such as the use of a checklist at the pretrial stage, to identify contentious issues so that the judge can shut out irrelevant lines of questioning during the trial . In his speech, Justice Hoong noted that judicial guidance in recent years has reinforced and clarified the legislative safeguards against improper questioning. When conducted within proper bounds, robust cross-examination is essential to ensure that the defence can put forward its case fully and fairly, he said. However, cross-examination can be traumatising if conducted without appropriate sensitivity. 'It is therefore incumbent upon us, as judges and counsel, to approach this process with care, precision and a heightened awareness of its potential impact,' he added. Justice Hoong said questions that reinforce outdated notions, such as the expectation that a victim would put up physical resistance or immediately report the crime, can cross the line into being gratuitously harmful, irrelevant or demeaning. 'It is the judge's task to discern and draw that distinction with care and vigilance,' he said. However, lawyers must also be mindful to ensure that their questions are appropriate and relevant. 'Cross-examination is not an opportunity for theatricality nor for an advocate to demonstrate a flair for antagonistic or aggressive, repetitive and oppressive questioning,' he said. He listed past cases where lawyers' questions impugned the complainant's morality, relied on harmful stereotypes and victim-shaming tactics, tried to link the complainant's attire to the accused's 'motive', or suggested that the assault could have been avoided if the complainant had not parted her legs. Justice Hoong added: 'It is entirely possible to challenge the reliability and credibility of a witness in a way which is measured, respectful and upholds the decorum of the court.' Lawyer Luo Ling Ling, who has defended clients accused of committing sexual offences, told The Straits Times: 'I fight all the way for my clients, but I'm also in favour of protecting sexual assault victims. Both objectives can be achieved if you consciously cross-examine the witnesses with respect and restraint.' Ms Luo, who is the managing director of her eponymous firm, said she learnt this 'the hard way' in a case where three girls had accused their stepfather of molesting them. The lawyer said she did not cross the line, but one of the victims broke down when questioned about the contradictions between her police statement and her court testimony. The victim was testifying via a camera, and those in the courtroom did not realise that she was crying until the counsellor who was with her informed the judge, Ms Luo recalled. '(In) hindsight, I would have still done the same cross-examination and asked those hard questions, but I would have used a gentle tone,' she mused.
Singapore Law Watch
28-05-2025
- Business
- Singapore Law Watch
Beyond training, Singapore's legal industry needs a culture shift to curb attrition: Opinion
Beyond training, Singapore's legal industry needs a culture shift to curb attrition: Opinion Source: Business Times Article Date: 28 May 2025 Author: Tessa Oh A post-call survey found that 60% of new lawyers are likely to move out of legal practice within the next five years. As high attrition rates among young lawyers raise concern, a new structured training initiative seeks to curb the outflow of talent, among various aims. The Junior Lawyers Professional Certification Programme (JLP) by the Singapore Academy of Law (SAL) aims to help young lawyers stay ahead of the artificial intelligence (AI) curve, while also strengthening basic legal skills. Launched on May 21, the programme targets lawyers with up to five years of post-qualification experience. Yet, as SAL chief executive Yeong Zee Kin told The Business Times in an interview, the JLP focuses on skills and knowledge acquisition, while many young lawyers cite the demanding nature of legal practice as reason for leaving the industry. Said Yeong: 'The JLP can address one aspect, which is training, and hopefully also a nurturing environment in the office that supports training... 'But it won't address the workplace pressures, because clients are in competitive global markets and (local law firms) need to compete with foreign law firms for the same kind of work.' Some in this cohort have expressed disappointment via social media. Their beef is that the programme focuses on technical skills, and not solutions to address such workplace pressures. Excessive workload, poor work-life balance and negative work culture were reasons cited by young lawyers for leaving legal practice, according to a survey of post-call lawyers this year. It found that 60 per cent of respondents were likely to move out of legal practice within the next five years, to pursue an in-house career, academia or employment with other legal service providers. Slightly more than a third of the new lawyers said they are likely to leave the legal profession altogether. The reasons for such departures are cultural factors which training cannot address. Disruption To be sure, there is no denying that generative AI will disrupt the legal industry, and lawyers must prepare for that. As Yeong explained, the widespread accessibility of AI tools like ChatGPT and Microsoft Copilot means that clients can easily generate basic contracts and seek advice on legal strategies. A programme that informs lawyers of the developments and ethics of AI is thus necessary and important. Further, lawyers in smaller firms – which may have fewer resources for training – can also benefit from a structured programme that hones basic advocacy and drafting skills. One must also acknowledge that the legal industry is a challenging one. Singapore law firms face an increasingly competitive global market, and are up against international firms with significant resources. As a service industry, firms also face rising expectations from clients for better, faster and cheaper solutions. But training alone is not enough to incentivise young lawyers to stick it out in legal practice, if the more pressing push factors are not addressed. To meaningfully address attrition, the legal industry must make headway in addressing the cultural and environmental reasons pushing young lawyers away. In the long run, law firms will not be able to compete if they lack a healthy pool of new talent to refresh their ranks. It is thus in their interest to address these issues, as a dwindling workforce will hit them hardest. For instance, young lawyers have called for better protection against bullying and exploitation. Hence, it is a good start to see the SAL convening a legal profession symposium in July to discuss some of these issues. Spearheading change Still, to be fair to the SAL, as a promotion and development agency, it cannot prescribe how law firms develop and mentor their associates. It is for the senior lawyers to lead the change in the culture at their firms. As Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon said at the JLP opening conference, any solution to address the sustainability of legal practice is unlikely to be effective unless the mindsets of both young and older lawyers change. On one hand, young lawyers must appreciate that a legal career is demanding and requires long-term commitment. Meanwhile, senior lawyers 'have a duty and a responsibility to impart their knowledge and experience to their juniors'. The Chief Justice added: 'Indeed, much of a young lawyer's development comes through mentors and seniors who maintain a personal interest in their welfare, and who invest the time and the effort to guide and support them in their work.' In this regard, in addition to catering programmes for young associates, there can be initiatives to engage older lawyers on these issues and on how to cultivate better workplace practices. After all, if the legal fraternity is serious about keeping young lawyers from leaving the profession, then it is key for the law firms and their leaders to lead the cultural change. Source: The Business Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction. Print
Business Times
27-05-2025
- Business
- Business Times
Beyond training, Singapore's legal industry needs a culture shift to curb attrition
[SINGAPORE] As high attrition rates among young lawyers raise concern, a new structured training initiative seeks to curb the outflow of talent, among various aims. The Junior Lawyers Certification Programme (JLP) by the Singapore Academy of Law (SAL) aims to help young lawyers stay ahead of the artificial intelligence (AI) curve, while also strengthening basic legal skills. Launched on May 21, the programme targets lawyers with five and fewer years of post-qualification experience. Yet, as SAL chief executive Yeong Zee Kin told The Business Times in an interview, the JLP focuses on skills and knowledge acquisition, while many young lawyers cite the demanding nature of legal practice as reason for leaving the industry. Said Yeong: 'The JLP can address one aspect, which is training, and hopefully also a nurturing environment in the office that supports training. 'But it won't address the workplace pressures, because clients are in competitive global markets and (local law firms) need to compete with foreign law firms for the same kind of work.' BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up Some in this cohort have expressed disappointment via social media. Their beef is that the programme focuses on technical skills and not solutions to address such workplace pressures. Excessive workload, poor work-life balance, and negative work culture were reasons cited by young lawyers for leaving legal practice, according to a survey of post-call lawyers this year. It found that 60 per cent of respondents were likely to move out of legal practice within the next five years, to pursue an in-house career, academia or employment with other legal service providers. Slightly more than a third of the new lawyers said they are likely to leave the legal profession altogether. The reasons for such departures are cultural factors which training cannot address. Disruption To be sure, there is no denying that generative AI will disrupt the legal industry, and lawyers must prepare for that. As Yeong explained, the widespread accessibility of AI tools like ChatGPT and Microsoft Copilot means that clients can easily generate basic contracts and seek advice on legal strategies. A programme that informs lawyers of the developments and ethics of AI is thus necessary and important. Further, lawyers in smaller firms – which may have fewer resources for training – can also benefit from a structured programme that hones basic advocacy and drafting skills. One must also acknowledge that the legal industry is a challenging one. Singapore law firms face an increasingly competitive global market, and are up against international firms with significant resources. As a service industry, firms also face rising expectations from clients for better, faster and cheaper solutions. But training alone is not enough to incentivise young lawyers to stick it out in legal practice, if the more pressing push factors are not addressed. To meaningfully address attrition, the legal industry must make headway in addressing the cultural and environmental reasons pushing young lawyers away. In the long run, law firms will not be able to compete if they lack a healthy pool of new talent to refresh their ranks. It is thus in their interest to address these issues, as a dwindling workforce will hit them hardest. For instance, young lawyers have called for better protection against bullying and exploitation. Hence, it is a good start to see the SAL convening a legal profession symposium in July to discuss some of these issues. Spearheading change Still, to be fair to the SAL, as a promotion and development agency, it cannot prescribe how law firms develop and mentor their associates. It is for the senior lawyers to lead the change in the culture at their firms. As Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon said at the JLP opening conference, any solution to address the sustainability of legal practice is unlikely to be effective unless the mindsets of both young and older lawyers change. On one hand, young lawyers must appreciate that a legal career is demanding and requires long-term commitment. Meanwhile, senior lawyers 'have a duty and a responsibility to impart their knowledge and experience to their juniors'. 'Indeed, much of a young lawyer's development comes through mentors and seniors who maintain a personal interest in their welfare and who invest the time and the effort to guide and support them in their work,' he added. In this regard, in addition to catering programmes for young associates, there can be initiatives to engage older lawyers on these issues and on how to cultivate better workplace practices. After all, if the legal fraternity is serious about keeping young lawyers from leaving the profession, then it is key for the law firms and their leaders to lead the cultural change.
Singapore Law Watch
22-05-2025
- Business
- Singapore Law Watch
New training programme launched for young lawyers to stay ahead of AI curve, strengthen basic advocacy and drafting skills
New training programme launched for young lawyers to stay ahead of AI curve, strengthen basic advocacy and drafting skills Source: Business Times Article Date: 22 May 2025 Author: Tessa Oh The Junior Lawyers Professional Certification Programme (JLP) will bring structure to what was previously left to chance, says Singapore Academy of Law CEO Yeong Zee Kin. In response to technological disruptions in the legal sector, a new training programme will equip young lawyers with skills and knowledge in artificial intelligence (AI), as well as strengthen proficiency in basic advocacy and drafting skills. Set up by the Singapore Academy of Law (SAL), the Junior Lawyers Professional Certification Programme (JLP) offers structured training for young lawyers in both disputes and corporate practice areas. Participants, for instance, can take courses on the ethics of generative AI, prompt engineering for lawyers and cross-boarder contract drafting, among others. The programme was launched on Wednesday (May 21), with an opening conference held at Parkroyal Collection Marina Bay. It is open to lawyers with up to five years of post-qualification experience. In addition to the mandatory opening conference and masterclass, participants are required to complete 11 more modules within two years in order to obtain certification. To earn certification in either the disputes or corporate track, lawyers are required to complete at least four modules that are specific to their chosen area of specialisation. Most of the disputes modules will be led by current or former members of the judiciary as trainers or guest speakers. In his opening address, SAL chief executive Yeong Zee Kin said the JLP will 'bring structure to what was previously left to chance', ensuring that lawyers learn fundamental legal skills in a holistic way. Participating in this programme is voluntary but recommended. Lawyers can use SkillsFuture to offset fees, while some law firms have offered to sponsor their associates. Disruptive shifts The JLP chiefly seeks to address the disruptive impact of generative AI on the legal sector, Yeong told The Business Times in an interview before the launch. The widespread accessibility of generative AI tools such as Microsoft Copilot and ChatGPT has made it possible for anyone to generate simple contracts, or even seek advice on litigation strategy – even without formal legal training, noted Yeong. 'Because all these tools are coming on stream and clients have access to them, it means that clients' expectations when they come to see a lawyer is going to be higher,' he added. In this environment, lawyers need to move beyond basic information gathering to deliver greater value to their clients. The JLP thus aims to plug this gap, by helping young lawyers keep abreast of AI advancements and strengthening their proficiency in basic legal skills. Yeong views the programme as a bridge between the Bar exams and the specialist accreditation exams that senior lawyers take when seeking to specialise in a particular field. Lawyers are required to take modules each year to fulfil continuing professional development (CPD) requirements, but these courses are usually ad hoc in nature, he said. The JLP, on the other hand, provides a more 'structured way for some of these very fundamental skills and very crucial domain knowledge' for young lawyers. And since the programme is voluntary, Yeong hopes it attracts serious participants. 'If you want to just take enough courses to fill your CPD requirements, there are a lot of free and cheap courses,' he said. 'This course is not for lawyers with that kind of mentality… it is meant for those who want to learn.' Addressing attrition While the JLP reduces attrition among young lawyers by focusing on career support, Yeong recognised that it does not resolve the perennial issue of the high work demands and long hours within the legal profession. To this, he said SAL has other plans in the works, such as the legal profession symposium in July. 'That's intended to address workplace issues, (such as) the changing expectations between different generations of lawyers, the interactions between juniors and seniors,' he said. Workplace pressures could also be an obstacle for young lawyers, who have to juggle their personal development with tight work deadlines, to take up training courses. Acknowledging this, Yeong said it would not be feasible to require all law firms to allow their associates time off to attend the programme. What SAL has done is to get law firms to sign a training pledge to demonstrate their commitment to supporting the JLP and other training initiatives. Fifty-two legal organisations have signed this pledge. SAL will work with the firms to ensure that they develop good practices over time, said Yeong. It will also monitor the programme's sign-up rates to see if its 'message is not getting through', he added. More than half of the 80 slots for the programme have been taken up thus far. 'Law is a knowledge-based profession, so the acquisition of knowledge will never end, because things change, business models change… new areas of law will come out,' said Yeong. 'We need to continue sharpening our skills and learning new things.' Source: The Business Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction. Print
