Comments on: Law Society President SC Michael Hwang on Apathy and Independence in the Singapore legal fraternity

By: John

John — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 04:44:23 +0000

The Law Society under Francis Seow was independent, fearless
in challenging the Govt on all policies that it viewed as
unjust until LKY clipped its wings.
The current Law Society now functions more like a social
club for its members.
Having said so much, would Michael Hwang be maverick
enought to steer the Society back to its original role?

By: John

John — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 04:14:13 +0000

The Law Society under Francis Seow really functioned
as its name, confronting the Govt on unjust and dictatorial
policies with fear until LKY clipped its wings.
Currenty the Law Society in nothing but a social club
for its members.
Would Michael Hwang be the maverick to steer it back
to its original role?

By: Gosh

Gosh — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 03:03:51 +0000

“But while I have publicly stated my admiration for their courage, I have also said that we in Singapore should thank our lucky stars that we don’t have the same cause to have our courage tested, because, thankfully, we don’t have the same evils that require us to take such a drastic stand. I have been careful not to say that, should such a situation arise in Singapore, we would follow the Malaysian example, because they did not apply for a permit for their march, and I cannot encourage any organised action by the Law Society in breach of the law (unless we want to demonstrate against the unjustness of that very law).”

How hilarious, the judiciary is not independent of government as it should be – reason enough!

“Only then can we ensure that all Singaporeans who deserve legal representation for a worthy cause will get adequate and competent representation and, in time, we will be able to educate Singaporeans to listen to us as members of the Bar and respect the Bar’s leadership when we tell them that they must fight for their own rights and interests and not meekly accept the status quo where there are clearly wrongs to be righted.”

Once again HAR HAR HEARTY HAR – Dr Chee Soon Juan – I rest my case.

“There is nothing wrong with Singapore’s legal hardware – we have a fine infrastructure and legal system; not even much wrong with our software either, as our law schools are good and our judges and lawyers of high intellectual quality.”

Multi-million dollar defamation suits? DURING elections? This boy with a wittle weewee is a joke!

Singaporeans, Good Luck and God Bless.

By: And Justice For All

And Justice For All — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 07:52:22 +0000

fair and square

Very well said. It’s going to take a long process to change our legal and judicial “culture” here, but every single little drop of effort will go a long way when the “osmosis” effect sets in eventually.

By: fair and square

fair and square — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 06:25:51 +0000

The LAW in itself is sound in letter…it is the spirit of the LAW that needs to be be upheld.
Lawyers do not dictate the spirit of the LAW,it rest more on the shoulders of good and wise judges.
In the USA,judges are approved by congress,though they are recommended by the President.
Here in singapore,who appoint and approve the judges?
you know the answer…so sometimes,it is difficult for judges
to be impartial.
we have a long,long way to go but first let put more diverse
voices into parliament.

By: And Justic For All

And Justic For All — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:15:07 +0000

All these are nothing but rhetoric. Words must be spoken if you are a leader of a ruling authority. You simply can’t just hold the office and do ….nothing. He’s got to manifest some justification for his ex-officio position, so at least some outburst of verbal courage is better than no show, right?

Maybe Mr Hwang has forgotten easily a few decades ago when some housewives wanted to sue the wife of the late Wee Chong Jin for fraud, and no reputable lawyer wanted to take the case. I mean there was not a single lawyer willing to handle it. You see Mr Wee was, at that time, the Chief Justice. And it does not take much common sense for a practising lawyer at that time to know that any such a case against Mrs. Wee would have been through out the door by the Registrar of the High Court. Worst still, any such white knight lawyer would have blemished his stand through court procedural proceedings, threatening their livelihood. Remember Glen Knight the ex-CAD director who launched an investigation on a member of LKY’s family and he was removed from office with 2 trumped up charges, one in succession of the other (the second one being deliberately withheld till near the end of the 6 year cycle under the statues of limitations act, to ensure that he be debarred for another 6 years from practicing law).

These are realities of the situation.

By: Exposer

Exposer — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 04:48:58 +0000

坡仔哥哥,
that is what social engineering is all about. Engineer a nation of apathetic and selfish citizens. LCY should know that since he is mastermind of the engineering.

By: 坡仔哥哥

坡仔哥哥 — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 04:13:30 +0000

1. If we dont care about ourselves, no one will care about us.
We need to challenge the status quo – but not for the sake of challenging – but for improvement and for “making another step”

2. The “bo chap” mentality in Singapore is thick, really really thick – if Mr. Tan’s livehood is not attacked, he will not care about Mr. Lee’s problems – will listen and buy him a beer, but will not take it upon himself to help, sadly, even if Mr. Tan has the resources (money or avenue) to help Mr. Lee.

3. I dont blame the PAP for this – their paternal instinct – helped to create one of the most comfortable social, economic enviornment in Asia…but the repercussions here is that everyone will only look after himself and feel no need to help thy neighbour

4. Mr. Michael, please ask yourself and please revert via Temasek Review…what can you (individually) or as Law Society, contribute to the advancement of apathy in Singapore…concrete action plans….

By: bornloser

bornloser — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 04:07:29 +0000

BTW, would any Senior Counsel dare to represent CSJ? Surely some of the trials are winnable except for the lack of legal representation. At least in any other jurisdiction, he would have won. This affects our civil liberties. Why are they not standing up and be counted?
So please stop talking about apathy. The legal profession is dead and buried as well as the whole judiciary. Stop the joke and stop the rot.

By: bornloser

bornloser — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 03:04:27 +0000

Pay the judges a few million bucks for their job and they will lick whatever you ask them to lick.