Legal Profession (Amendment) Bill is introduced

The Legal Profession (Amendment) Bill was introduced in parliament on 25 August 1986 to tighten up the way the Law Society regulates the legal profession.^[1] The bill proposed to amend the Legal Profession Act in two areas. First, the bill required any legal practitioner who was suspended from practice for six months or more, or convicted of fraud or dishonesty, to be barred from holding office as a member of the council of the Law Society. Second, the bill sought to amend the legal profession’s disciplinary processes by introducing non-lawyers in the Law Society’s disciplinary committee so as to ensure impartiality in the review process.^[2] The bill was introduced as the government was of the view that some provisions in the existing legislation, particularly those dealing with disciplinary processes, were lacking. The government felt that it was necessary to review the processes so that the public could continue to maintain their utmost confidence in the ethical standards, and financial and personal integrity of lawyers.^[3]

More than 400 lawyers, including the entire council of the Law Society, however, were unhappy with the proposed law. On 23 September 1986, the lawyers passed a motion in an extraordinary general meeting held by the Law Society to reject the bill.^[4] The motion argued that the proposed law should be withdrawn because it was crafted without consulting the legal profession. The motion also stated that the independence of the legal profession had to be maintained so that it could continue to serve and protect the rights of the people.^[5]

Following the motion, the Law Society then presented a set of compromise proposals to the parliamentary select committee that was appointed to hear public views on the Legal Profession (Amendment) Bill.^[6] In its proposals, the society suggested, among other things, that an errant lawyer should only be barred to run for election to the council of the Law Society for a period of five years after his or her conviction date instead of a lifetime debarment as provided in the amendment bill. The society also proposed that non-lawyers should be appointed to the inquiry committee, which handles all complaints against lawyers and decides whether they should be passed on to the disciplinary committee, rather than the disciplinary committee as suggested in the proposed law.^[7] The proposals by the Law Society were reviewed and accepted by the select committee.^[8] The Legal Profession (Amendment) Bill was then revised accordingly before it was put forward and passed by parliament on 27 October 1986.^[9] The Legal Profession (Amendment) Act came into force four days later on 31 October.^[10]

References
1.Singapore. Parliament. Parliamentary debates: Official report. (1986, August 25). Legal Profession (Amendment) Bill (Vol. 48, col. 551). Singapore: Govt. Printer. Call no.: RSING 328.5957 SIN.
2. Singapore. Parliament. Parliamentary debates: Official report. (1986, September 22). Legal Profession (Amendment) Bill (Vol. 48, col. 669). Singapore: Govt. Printer. Call no.: RSING 328.5957 SIN.
3. Parliamentary debates: Official report, 22 Sep, 1986, Vol. 48, cols. 670–675.
4. Raj, C. (1986, September 23). Lawyers reject Legal Profession Bill at EGM. The Straits Times, p. 1. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
5. The Straits Times, 23 Sep 1986, p. 1.
6. Raj, C. (1986, September 24). Law Society to submit compromise proposals. The Straits Times, p. 9. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
7. The Straits Times, 24 Sep 1986, p. 9.
8. Jacob, P. (1986, October 18). Proposals accepted by select panel in report. The Straits Times, p. 1. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
9. Singapore. Parliament. Parliamentary debates: Official report. (1986, October 27). Legal Profession (Amendment) Bill (Vol. 48, cols. 770–806). Singapore: Govt. Printer. Call no.: RSING 328.5957 SIN.
10. Law Society co-opts two to fill council seats. (1986, December 6). The Straits Times, p. 21. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.