Your Smiling Face – The Oddfellows

“Your Smiling Face” was released in 1991 by The Oddfellows in Singapore.

It starred the late Bonny Hicks, model and writer of the book, ‘Excuse Me, Are You A Model?, who died at age 29 when SilkAir Flight 185 crashed in 1997.

Gotta get up ’cause I can’t sleep all day
Gotta see you ’cause I’ve been thinking ’bout you
And everyday it’s the same
If only I know your game
Ya everyday it’s the same
I see that smile on your face

Hope tomorrow I’d have the guts to live
Another day, seeing you walking my way
And everyday it’s the same
If only I know your game
Ya everyday it’s the same
I see that smile on your face

And heaven knows how good I will be
And if love is blind then I can’t see
What you’re hiding inside
What you’re hiding inside

In the morning I hope I’d think of something
I can’t stand it
Another day of nothing
And everyday it’s the same
If only I know your game
Ya everyday it’s the same
I see that smile on your face

​And heaven knows how good I will be
And if love is blind then I can’t see
What you’re hiding inside
What you’re hiding inside

Interview with Michael Ma of Indochine

A Permanent Resident of Singapore and citizen of Australia, Michael was born in Laos of Teochew parentage. His country was then in the midst of a devastating war. Leaving their home that was all but destroyed, his family migrated to Australia. Settling in Sydney, the Ma family developed a successful food import business and through it all, Michael excelled academically and graduated from the University of Wollongong with a double major in Economics and Marketing. His commerce background has indeed served him well as he went on to work as a commodities trader before founding the IndoChine Group. Its inaugural outlet, IndoChine Club Street, was opened in late 1999 and was inspired by the modern Asian lifestyle with colonial influences. Inspired by his passion for food, entertaining and design, Michael Ma saw a potential market for ‘nutraceutical’ cuisine – food that is nutritional, with pharmaceutical benefits – from Indochina, namely Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam. Even while being his dynamic and adventurous best in keeping up with the constant competition faced in this ever-changing F&B industry, Michael remains an active and fervent environmentalist and conservationist. From the very beginning, Michael personally made it an IndoChine policy not to serve endangered species-related foods, such as sharks’ fin, caviar, bluefin or yellow-fin tuna in all of IndoChine’s kitchens, amongst other things, since inception in 1999.

The Padres – Joni (1994)

Track 1 of the mini album What’s Your Story by Singapore indie band The Padres, originally released in 1994

Last night, I dreamt of Joni In my dreams, I cannot find her, where is she

What can I do, what can I say

Then I realise that I am caught In between that little space

That little face, so full of grace

What can I do What can I say What can I do To rearrange

And we’ll miss her And we’ll miss her And we’ll miss her Like no other

The first time I saw her with my very own eyes I don’t know how she’s gonna be like

TPB Menon and Sat Pal Khattar

VETERAN TRIALS

These days, we are constantly reminded of the need for resilience and fortitude in the face of Covid-19.  For veteran lawyers Mr TPB Menon and Mr Sat Pal Khattar, it did not take a global pandemic to turn their lives upside down.  At an age when most of their peers were focused on their studies, they had to shoulder the added responsibility of being head of their households while grappling with the demands of law school. Their stories, taken from excerpts of their oral history interviews with SAL, are inspirational in these difficult times.

V

Mr TPB Menon was studying for his HSC (Higher School Certificate, equivalent to today’s A’ levels) when his father was diagnosed with cancer. “The doctor told me, your father has only got three months to live…I didn’t tell my mum. I think it would have finished her.” 

Within six months of his father’s passing, the family had to vacate the staff quarters at the Bukit Timah campus where the elder Mr Menon had been Supervisor of Works at Raffles College. They would live in rented premises for two years before Mr Menon purchased a $19,000 semi-detached house with money left from his father’s university provident fund.  “The first day we moved in, we only had a footstool and we all had to sit on the floor.”

At just 19, Mr Menon became head of the household. “My mother was only 37,” and he had three other younger siblings. “I don’t know how I did it. I didn’t fall sick but I was very, very thin.” He would wake up at 5am, drive his siblings to school, do the marketing on his way back before heading home to change and go to university. At 12.30pm, he would pick his siblings from school, go home for lunch and then he was back at university for lectures in the evenings and studies at the library until 10pm.

c

Above: The first batch of students at the University of Malaya Department of Law. Addressing the moot court is a young TPB Menon who later made his mark in trust litigation. Courtesy: Scales of Gold: 50 Years of Legal Education at the NUS Faculty of Law

The final year of law school was the hardest. “I had a heavy combination of subjects which meant that I had to work doubly hard.” But money was also running out. “My sister and brother were poised to go to university. So being the eldest, I had to worry about money which at that stage shouldn’t be the case… [At] night, I gave tuition and used to earn a little bit of money writing articles for [a friend at] The Straits Times.” Giving up was not an option; after all, Mr Menon recalled that it was his father’s dying wish that all the children complete their university studies. 

Unlike Mr Menon, Mr Sat Pal Khattar’s father had no wish for his son to further his education beyond the Senior Cambridge (equivalent to today’s ‘O’ levels). “My father had decided that he needed help in his tiny business. And I had very little say. So I sold sports goods for my father, and travelled to all the smaller towns in Malaya, Sarawak, Brunei and Sabah.”

“When I wanted to do law, I had to discuss with him to say that I would need only about three hours a week off. I managed to persuade the faculty to put all my tutorials after office [hours]. But lectures were not arranged [that way] for me. So quite often I used to rush to a lecture [and] rush back and sell sports goods.” He would also spend his university holidays travelling to different parts of Malaysia for the business. “My obligation to the family business was unaffected by the fact that I was doing law,” said Mr Khattar, who lost his mother as a child. Just before his second-year exams, his father died of a massive heart attack. It was a double whammy for him. “The second-year exams were crucial because if you did not get through, you had to leave the faculty.”

Despite his father’s unexpected passing, Mr Khattar got the best results that year and even nabbed a book prize. Law studies aside, the young man was also saddled with the full responsibility of running his father’s business and looking after an extended family which included his grandmother, his sister, step-mother and her three children. 

“Everybody was interested in getting the best [results] but I was more interested in getting a job because, for me, a job was the most important thing,” recalled Mr Menon. The convocation ceremony for this first batch of local law graduates was held in Kuala Lumpur but given their dwindling finances, his family couldn’t afford to attend. “My mother wanted to see her eldest son graduate but we couldn’t afford for all of us to stay in the hotel. So I had to go there all by myself.”

TPB2

Above: Mr TPB Menon’s graduation photo. He is standing in the last row, fourth from the right. Courtesy: Scales of Gold: 50 Years of Legal Education at the NUS Faculty of Law

THE DRAW OF THE LEGAL SERVICE

The Legal Service offered the best opportunity to get a job straight away after graduation. Unfortunately, Mr Menon recalled the day when he was told that his application was rejected. “It was my birthday… I even remember the shirt I wore.  It was a short-sleeved blue shirt with stripes. That was the blackest day, I thought it was a disaster.” 

When he broke the news to this mother that he would not have a salary for another year, “I still remember the words my mother said.  She told me, ‘Son, when one door closes, there’s always another window that opens.’” 

Mr Eric Choa opened that window for Mr Menon when he agreed to take him as a pupil for six months on the condition that there will be no pay and that he would have to leave at the end of the period.  However, after just three months, Mr Choa offered Mr Menon a job at his firm. Despite getting offers of higher pay later, Mr Menon chose to remain with Mr Choa who would eventually pass him the firm, making him a sole proprietor at a relatively young age.  “I thought to myself and I said, ‘What is more important? Is money more important or my relationship with Eric Choa who has taught me the ropes?’” 

CLIMBING THE RANKS

Unlike Mr Menon, Mr Khattar was not eager for a job in the Legal Service. He was earning a comfortable income from his family’s sports goods business and he had no intention of practising law. “I wanted to go back to university to become a graduate assistant.” 

At the behest of Dr Bashir Mallal, who chided him for wasting his legal education, Mr Khattar decided to join the Legal Service and was appointed a DPP and State Counsel doing criminal work. “I hated it. I was not made for a career prosecuting criminals and murders and rape and stuff like that.”

SPK

Above: Presidential candidate Ong Teng Cheong being greeted by lawyer Sat Pal Khattar at Singapore Conference Hall on nomination day for the first presidential election in 1993. Ministry of Information and the Arts Collection, courtesy of National Archives of Singapore

So when a vacancy in the tax department came up, Mr Khattar decided to make the switch; one that would change his entire career. Within seven years, he would rise to the rank of a superscale officer at an early age of 30. “I was the envy of a lot of people in the Legal Service because nobody below 30 ever got a superscale.  But after a while, I decided that I didn’t want to remain a civil servant all my life.” 

He left the Legal Service to start a one-man practice, Sat Pal Khattar and Company on 1 July 1974. About 15 months later, his classmate Dr David Wong joined him and Khattar-Wong & Partners was born. 

Mr Khattar attributes much of his success to what he calls ‘accidents’.” It was accidental that after I started practice… Graham Hill [who] was not only the leading lawyer in the tax field but the leading civil lawyer in Singapore… ran into some problems… and he gave up practice and went back to the UK. So suddenly, I was a tax practitioner with no other person to compete with, and I had a lion’s share of the tax work from the multinationals as well as from the local community.”

A LIFE IN THE LAW

Mr TPB Menon was among the pioneer batch of 22 law students who graduated from Singapore’s first law faculty in 1961. His former classmate Chan Sek Keong describes him as “the most experienced property and trust lawyer in private practice”.  Mr Menon was senior partner of Oehlers & Choa before it merged with Wee Swee Teow LLP in 1989. He was senior partner of Wee Swee Teow LLP from 1989 to 2000 and is now a Consultant at the firm. He was President of Law Society from 1980-83 and was awarded the Society’s highest honour – the CC Tan Award in 2004. Listen to his interview here.

Mr Sat Pal Khattar graduated with an Honours degree in Law from the University of Singapore in 1966 and started his career as a Deputy Public Prosecutor and State Counsel at the Attorney General’s Office. This was followed by a shift to the Inland Revenue Office as a Legal Officer. He founded Khattar Wong & Partners, one of the largest law firms in Singapore. After retiring from law practice in 2000, he established Khattar Holding, a private investment firm. Since the early 1990s, Mr Khattar has been investing in India, and this experience has helped him promote and support bilateral trade and investments between Singapore and India. He has served on many civic bodies in Singapore in various capacities and has been honoured at the May Day Awards on several occasions. He was the first resident in Singapore to receive the Padma Shri Award from the Indian government. Listen to his interview here.

The Development of The Singapore Legal System is a joint oral history project by SAL’s Legal Heritage Committee and the Oral History Centre, National Archives of Singapore.

Laycock & Ong

by Lee Hsien Loong
17 October 2015

In the early days, my parents and Dennis Lee worked hard to get Lee and Lee off the ground and pay the bills. My father had started off at Laycock & Ong. He spent a lot of his time representing trade unions, working often pro bono – so much time that John Laycock wrote him a letter, expressing his displeasure but in typical British understated style. They were unhappy but they put it in a polite way.

The letter was displayed at the “Remembering Lee Kuan Yew” exhibition held at the National Museum earlier this year. But in case you didn’t make the exhibition or didn’t see the letter, let me read it out to you because when you draft many letters, it is useful to know how to do these things.

“Dear Harry,

Ong and myself have been discussing the question of members of our firm appearing in these lengthy arbitrations or commissions on wages etc. which are now all the vogue. We have been suffering from these heavily during the past few months. Coupled with the absences of so many of our qualified lawyers during March, they have left us with a backlog of purely legal work in the way of our ordinary business which cannot easily be overtaken. We have come to the conclusion that we must not take any more of these wage disputes. They can never be short, we fear, because they are always preceded by long negotiations; and we can see clearly that it is likely there will be more, perhaps many more, in the near future.

If any special case arises, the same might be specially considered by us; in that case, please let us have full information before you accept any work.

Yours Sincerely,

John Laycock”

This is quite a classy letter and probably played a part in the foundation of Lee and Lee!

So my father moved next door – John Laycock was probably at 11 or 12 Malacca Street – set up at 10-B Malacca Street, Lee and Lee, and took on all sorts of cases to make a living. Divorces, chap jee kee runners, routine debt collection, and he continued to be active in the unions and politics.

After he became prime minister in 1959, he tapped Lee and Lee for talent, and persuaded some of the partners to join him in politics. Eddie Barker became minister for law and drafted the Separation documents, including the Proclamation of Independence. Chua Sian Chin, who joined Lee and Lee in 1959, became a partner in 1965. And he would enter politics and become the minister for health at the age of 34, making him the youngest Cabinet minister in independent Singapore’s history.

Then there was S. Ramasamy, who I think was the chief clerk at Lee and Lee, and he became legislative assemblyman for Redhill constituency. Later on after we became independent, and after Separation, he served as Member of Parliament for two terms, also for Redhill constituency. And so 60 years on, Christopher de Souza is continuing the tradition!

As my father became increasingly involved in politics, he left Lee and Lee’s affairs to my mother and Dennis.

My mother regarded her husband and children as her first priority but she did her work. Every day she came home for lunch from the office so as to see her children. She would take a nap and then go back to work. When I had chicken pox – I must have been aged four or five years old – she nursed me at home, with her work files at my bedside.

On days when business was slow, she would wait for new call-in clients at the office, because in those days there were no mobile phones, and she took along her knitting to office because she loved to knit. In the evenings, she would bring home files to do and the files would come as big bundles in the open cane baskets which some of you may remember. She would stack them up and do them one by one, mostly conveyancing documents, and I would be fascinated with the documents – not with what was written inside, but what was pasted inside – because the conveyance documents and title deeds would have revenue stamps for what seemed to me like fabulous denominations; we had $500 stamps, $1,000 stamps, and also old faces because these were transactions from properties which were 30 or 40 years old, from previous reigns.

I used to collect stamps – these were 10-cent stamps, 50-cent stamps – and you would be very lucky to find a $5 postage stamp, and here were $500 stamps.

My mother would look at me and say these are not postage stamps but revenue stamps; you don’t put them on envelopes!

My mother decided to do mostly solicitors’ work. When Kim Li (Mrs Lee’s niece) joined the firm, my mother advised her, and in fact told her “umpteen times”, that “women should not do litigation because that would make them argumentative, and more difficult to find husbands!”

And I understand my mother gave the same advice to other ladies in the firm, including Kim Li’s daughter, Joanna, who entered law school in 2005. I am reporting this to you as hearsay evidence, but on good authority, but of course I would never venture to offer any such advice to anybody.

My mother developed the Conveyancing Practice and the Trust and Probate Practice at Lee and Lee. Many of the clients she acted for became her friends, and remain to this day clients of the firm. She retired from partnership in 1987, nearly 30 years ago, but she stayed on as a consultant for many years after that.

Be wise people, not just smart lawyers: former Attorney-General V. K. Rajah tells NUS law graduates

Former Attorney-General V. K. Rajah noted that many young lawyers would want to emulate apparently successful lawyers and feel the need to assume some of their traits.
Former Attorney-General V. K. Rajah noted that many young lawyers would want to emulate apparently successful lawyers and feel the need to assume some of their traits.ST PHOTO: ONG WEE JIN 

SINGAPORE – Be yourselves. Embrace competition. Seek a larger purpose.

Former Attorney-General V. K. Rajah dispensed these advice to law graduates from the National University of Singapore (NUS) on Saturday morning (July 8), as he urged them to be not just smart lawyers but more importantly, wise people.

“Try and be lawyers with good heads and good hearts. Be wise lawyers. In Singapore, we have many clever people but not enough wise ones,” said Mr Rajah, who stepped down as the AG this January following a career as a Judge of Appeal, a High Court judge and the managing partner of law firm Rajah & Tann.

Speaking at a commencement ceremony that also marked the NUS Faculty of Law’s 60th anniversary, Mr Rajah noted that many young lawyers would want to emulate apparently successful lawyers and feel the need to assume some of their traits.

“A word of advice. Don’t. Be yourselves. By all means, absorb all the professional lessons but do not blindly absorb all the personal attributes that you witness,” he added.

“There are practising lawyers who have changed their identities and become uncaring in seeking to secure their clients’ ends. They practise ostensibly within the letter of the law without observing its spirit.”

On embracing competition, he said it would be sad “if lawyers still plead for protection from international competition” decades after Singapore started its first law school.

“I do not think that lawyers today have any right to try and deny clients access to the best legal minds available, Singaporean or international,” said Mr Rajah, who said he would be returning shortly to private practice without elaborating.

On seeking a larger purpose, he said law firms and lawyers “should not be defined by just billing targets, profits and compensation”.

“Unlike the hospitality business, the client is not always right. A good lawyer does not slavishly follow the client’s instructions. Instead, he counsels the client to achieve balance,” said Mr Rajah, who was from the 1982 batch that included Senior Counsel Davinder Singh and Judges of Appeal Andrew Phang and Steven Chong.

He also urged the graduates not to stay on longer in the legal profession than they have to if they are uninterested as “only those with passion will excel”.

“Unhappy lawyers are not just unhappy persons but a lack of commitment can have adverse consequences for others. Find your passion by all means. Today, a law degree opens many doors,” he added.

Mr Rajah’s comments come even as the third law school here opened in the SIM University earlier this year, amid an oversupply of young lawyers and declining interest in the law profession among youth.

Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon said last year that the number of new entrants to the profession has doubled in the past five years. Last year, 509 new lawyers were admitted to the Bar.

The Straits Times reported on Monday (July 3) of the waning interest in law among university applicants, with 17 per cent fewer applicants at NUS listing law as their first choice compared to last year. For the Singapore Management University, the drop was 22 per cent this year. More students were opting for majors such as computing.

But Mr Rajah assured parents of those who choose to leave the law that their children have not just wasted four years of their lives.

He noted that NUS law graduates have,over the last 60 years, excelled in many different fields beyond the law including diplomacy, high finance, the business world and the arts.

He cited several from the 1961 pioneering class, such as “Mr Chan Sek Keong, the finest legal mind Singapore has known; Professor Tommy Koh, the finest diplomat Singapore has produced; and Mr TPB Menon, Singapore’s finest Chancery lawyer until he left active practice”.

Mr Rajah described the 1961 batch as the “wise class” that trump the clever in making a difference to society and lives and added that that other batches, including his 1982 cohort, should seek to emulate them.

Seven members of the 1961 class including Prof Koh, who were the inaugural batch of students admitted to the Faculty of Law of the then University of Malaya (now NUS) in 1957, attended the commencement ceremony on Saturday to support the 2017 graduating class and celebrate the faculty’s anniversary.

Prof Koh told The Straits Times that he hopes Singapore’s very brightest students continue to see law as their first choice for their future.

“A legal education prepares our students not only for a career in the law but for a whole variety of options, the foreign service, business and even the arts,” he added.

Among the graduating class of 2017 – over 300 of them – is a team of students who emerged as champions against the University of Queensland in a hard-fought grand final of the 18th International Maritime Law Arbitration Moot on July 5.

Student Douglas Lok, 25, was also named “Best Speaker in the General Rounds”. This was NUS Law’s fifth win in this competition, with the previous wins in 2000, 2001, 2010, and 2015.

Said Mr Lok: “I am confident that as long as we are willing to work hard and maintain an open mind, we will have long and fulfilling careers regardless of whether we are in or outside of the legal industry.” 

Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s lawyer, Davinder Singh, remembers the man

SINGAPORE – Top litigator Davinder Singh, who represented Mr Lee Kuan Yew in his controversial lawsuits against opposition politicians and foreign media outlets, said on Monday that it was a “wild dream come true” to work for a man who was his parents’ hero.

“When I was growing up, I would hear my parents describe Mr Lee Kuan Yew as the greatest man alive who gave his people, especially the minorities, the ability to live with dignity and in safety,” he wrote.

When Mr Singh was a cadet in the Singapore Armed Forces Training Institute in the 1970s, there was once a parents’ visit where Mr Lee was guest-of-honour.

“My father immediately stood up when it was announced that Mr Lee had arrived, even though he must have known that, standing so far away in the midst of hundreds of parents and cadets, Mr Lee would not have been able to see him. After he stood up, others from all races followed. It was then that I truly realised what this Chinese man meant to my Punjabi father who was not even born in Singapore.”

“I will also not forget the time when my mother was moved and actually applauded when towards the end of one of his National Day Rally speeches, Mr Lee said that that he would get up even as he is lowered into the grave, if something went wrong. And she did that while sitting on the couch at home.”

“It were these spontaneous reactions from migrants, who had seen what life was like in their home countries and now felt protected by a man they completed trusted, that made me pause and think.”

Mr Singh, who is chief executive of law firm Drew & Napier, said that working for Mr Lee was “the greatest, most unforgettable experience of my life.”

Mr Singh won court victories on Mr Lee’s behalf against opponents like opposition politicians Tang Liang Hong, Chee Soon Juan and foreign media outlets like The Economist, Bloomberg and the New York Times.

“I sat with and talked to this genius who, more than anyone, understood human nature and societies, who had the third eye and could see trends and dangers which we mere mortals were blind or oblivious to, and who knew with complete confidence what was best for his people and Singapore.

“It was not possible to leave a meeting with him without being spellbound. Although he had not practised for decades, he remembered the finer points of the law from his days at university.”

“Every discussion was an exhilarating lesson which he taught with conviction and passion. It would invariably begin with the matters on which he needed legal advice, but he would always use the occasion to share his views about the issues of the day and to remind me of the importance of standing up to those who would do us harm and of showing them that we are their equal. He was the consummate teacher, giving his time and attention to every detail, even if it was just to show me how to elegantly sharpen a barb.”

“I do not know why the stars contrived to give Mr Lee Kuan Yew to Singapore or why they bestowed on me the priceless gift of working for him. But they did, and for that, my family and I shall always be grateful.”

Arbitration pioneer Alvin Yeo offers tip to young lawyers

Whether it is handling the decade- long Susan Lim court saga or a $250 million arbitration spat involving firms backed by famed Malaysian and Indonesian tycoons, Senior Counsel (SC) Alvin Yeo is a master of his craft – both in litigation court work and arbitration advocacy.

The former MP and veteran lawyer, who led teams in the two high-profile cases, told The Straits Times both were equally challenging but required the two different skill sets. He also advises young lawyers to cut their teeth in court work first, before plunging into arbitration where both your competitors and your markets are global.

SC Yeo, who turns 55 tomorrow, was last week lauded by the renowned London-based legal directory Chambers Asia-Pacific with the Outstanding Contribution to the Legal Profession award in its 2017 honours list for the region at a gala event held here.

Chambers Asia-Pacific described Mr Yeo as “an excellent strategist as well as a first-rate litigator” who is a “deeply impressive and extremely capable individual”, and who provided leadership on Singapore International Arbitration Centre and International Chamber of Commerce proceedings. The rare award is another mark of recognition for SC Yeo, who in 2000 became the youngest lawyer appointed senior counsel here at age 37.

SC Yeo was called to the Bar in 1988. He, current Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon and Senior Counsel Wong Meng Meng were the three founding partners of WongPartnership in 1992.

The firm, then a boutique litigation firm with 11 lawyers, has today become a top-tier full-service firm with some 300 lawyers and has offices in six countries in Asia.

CLIENTS’ EXPECTATIONS

The largest source of stress from disputes work stems from the win-lose nature of the work. At the end of the day, the client is looking for a positive result from his case, not just a valiant losing effort.

SENIOR COUNSEL ALVIN YEO

Mr Yeo is currently chairman and senior partner of the firm, which is the youngest of Singapore’s Big Four law firms, with each of the three others being more than twice its age.

SC Yeo’s legal work also spans the growth of Singapore as an international arbitration centre, being a pioneer in the field more than two decades ago.

Two high-profile cases he led in the areas of open-court litigation and closed-door arbitration attest to his broad experience and ability.

In litigation, he was lead counsel for the Singapore Medical Council (SMC) in its disciplinary proceedings against Dr Lim for overcharging in relation to a $24 million bill for a patient in 2007. She was eventually suspended for three years and fined $10,000 in 2012.

In the course of the saga, Dr Lim took the SMC to court to appeal against the outcome and failed.

SC Yeo said it was “one of the most contested SMC cases” and had an “international element”.

But, if he had his way, there would have been little publicity on the details of the case.

“This was a case which attracted so much media attention. In accordance with the SMC’s approach of preserving the confidentiality of its proceedings, I applied on its behalf to have the court proceedings held in camera,” he said. This was done to protect the reputation of the doctors facing disciplinary proceedings, prior to the conclusion of those proceedings, he added.

“Unfortunately, this was resisted, and the proceedings were held in open court, with all the resulting publicity,” he said.

By contrast, in the case of arbitration hearings, publicity is not an issue as confidentiality is a condition. But an arbitration case comes to the public’s attention when the private award is challenged in court.

He cites the spat over a failed pay-television venture between the Astro group controlled by Malaysian billionaire Ananda Krishnan and the Indonesian Lippo group where eight Astro units sued three units of Lippo to enforce the arbitration award in Singapore.

The Court of Appeal in 2013 overturned the $250 million arbitration award won by Astro, and Lippo’s PT First Media and PT Ayunda Prima Mitra had to pay about $700,000 to five units of Astro.

SC Yeo said the challenges in such an arbitration case stem from a range of issues which are fought out across a span of jurisdictions.

In the case, the proceedings took place in Britain, Singapore and Hong Kong, with a host of personalities of different nationalities as, variously, the arbitrators, the legal counsel, expert and factual witnesses.

“It is mastering the sheer breadth of issues playing out over multiple proceedings and executing an overall, coordinated strategy that is the biggest challenge,” he said.

“The arbitration process tends to be very intense, where everything is crammed into a week as some of the parties fly in from abroad and you start very early and finish very late.

“In court, it is not so cramped; they might give you four weeks, six weeks for your trial. In that sense, it’s slightly more spaced out but the fact that you are on your feet for four, six weeks itself is a challenge.”

He advised young lawyers to start off in court litigation to acquire the advocacy and cross-examination skills which they can then apply to the arbitration context.

“In arbitration, your chances for oral advocacy are actually more limited. So you have to make sure it counts because you actually have less time.”

Asked about winning and losing cases, he said: “The largest source of stress from disputes work stems from the win-lose nature of the work. At the end of the day, the client is looking for a positive result from his case, not just a valiant losing effort. If the outcome is not successful, which does happen, you have to analyse what the reasons are, learn from your mistakes, and move on. There is no other way to survive in this practice.”

V. K. Rajah: The ‘reluctant’ A-G and his ethos of fairness

Mr V. K. Rajah, who retired as Attorney-General last Saturday, hailed the work of AGC staff who work long hours in the belief of “serving a wider cause”. An AGC initiative for lawyers to work with abused foreign workers was also introduced under his watch.

Straits Times, 18 January 2017

Before he became the Attorney-General in 2014, Mr V. K. Rajah twice declined the offer in 2007 and 2013.

“I was a reluctant A-G, but once I decided to be A-G, I put my heart and soul into it,” he said in an interview with The Straits Times at his office last Friday. “I put in 110 per cent, and as long as I held office, I wanted to discharge my responsibilities to the best of my ability.”

In a wide-ranging interview, Mr Rajah, who left the post last Saturday, said one of the changes he implemented soon after taking the job was a reporting mechanism to review the prosecution’s sentencing positions. If the position was excessive or disproportionate, the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) would inform the defence counsel to go ahead and appeal, and prosecution would not object.

Mr Rajah, 60, said prior to this, prosecutors reported to the senior leadership matters that might attract media or public attention.

“I was more interested in (other) matters and our sentencing position that would affect the larger swathe of the population, from shoplifting to property, offences of any sort… and I wanted us to review our sentencing position on every possible area of criminal activity,” he said.

V. K. Rajah on two cases of significance
  • WHY AGC DID NOT PUSH FOR A HEAVIER SENTENCE FOR DAD WHO KILLED SON Banker Philippe Marcel Guy Graffart, then 42, had killed his five-year-old son last year amid a bitter custody battle.The charge was reduced from murder to culpable homicide as the Belgian national was assessed to be suffering from a major depressive disorder.

    His estranged French wife had engaged lawyers to press for a higher sentence.

    The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC), said Mr Rajah, would use the full force of law to prosecute cases that were cold-blooded and premeditated.

    “Where homicide takes place as a result of mental issues, it’s unpremeditated, where there is a momentary loss of control, we appraise the facts differently,” he said.

    He also observed that the case arose out of a bigger divorce squabble.

    This is why family law should be practised in a more collaborative and amiable way, he said.

    Mr Rajah added: “Unfortunately after reading the file – and I went through it very thoroughly – I felt that the lawyers advising the couple added fuel to the fire.”

    WHY PROSECUTION APPEALED TO REDUCE CYCLIST’S SENTENCE 

    Mr Rajah said the public might not be aware but the AGC has informed counsel to appeal when a sentence is excessive or disproportionate after reviewing the case.

    The 2015 case involving Mr Lim Choon Teck, then 35, was different as he did not have a lawyer. Mr Lim had received a jail sentence of eight weeks for knocking down an elderly pedestrian while cycling on a pavement. After a review, Deputy Public Prosecutor Prem Raj Prabakaran appealed to have the sentence reduced, arguing that the prosecution believed the original sentence was disproportionate to his culpability and the fact that he had pleaded guilty at the first reasonable opportunity.

    “If (Mr Lim) appealed, there was no certainty that the High Court judge might agree with him… So I directed my colleagues, and they were taken aback that we should appeal,” said Mr Rajah. Mr Lim’s jail term was cut to three weeks.

    Mr Rajah said: “I’m glad the case was publicised because it also assured the public that AGC was trying to do right rather than to punish people excessively.”

    Ng Huiwen

All cases that were concluded were reported in the form of a summary report and Mr Rajah would review these cases every evening.

In one unusual case, the AGC even appealed for a sentence to be reduced. The accused, a cyclist who had knocked down an elderly person, did not have his own lawyer.

Originally sentenced to eight weeks’ jail in 2015, his sentence was reduced to three weeks after the Deputy Public Prosecutor appealed to have it slashed.

Mr Rajah said his “obsessiveness for looking at things granularly” boiled down to a need to exercise the power of the prosecution carefully. Not all were on board at first with the decisions he made, including the move to appeal to have the cyclist’s sentence reduced.

Some colleagues had told him the decision would not have been possible in the AGC a decade ago, because “that’s not part of our culture”.

“But having said that, I think all of them were immediately on the same side because they realised and appreciated that this accorded with their role as ministers of justice.

“My operating ethos in every … office that I held is to ensure fairness. And fairness includes, apart from due process, proportionality. It’s in no one’s interest for individuals to be punished harshly,” he said.

Another initiative launched in his time involved lawyers in the AGC who volunteered to work with abused foreign workers. They halved the time it took to resolve cases that otherwise would require the foreign workers to stay for months or even years in Singapore to resolve their situation in court.

Mr Rajah hailed the work of AGC staff. “Many officers in the AGC and in the public service work anonymously as they should and get very little credit.

“They put in long, long hours of work over weekends, over holidays, and they do this not because they are looking for recognition, but they do this because they believe it’s the right thing and they are serving a wider cause.”

Mr Rajah spent 20 years in the private sector, becoming managing partner of law firm Rajah & Tann. In 1997, he was among the first lawyers to be appointed Senior Counsel.

V. K. RAJAH…

ON HIS ROLE AS ATTORNEY-GENERAL

I was a reluctant Attorney-General, but once I decided to be A-G, I put heart and soul into it. I put in 110 per cent and, as long as I held office, I wanted to discharge my responsibilities to the best of my ability. There is no point having a half-hearted A-G.


ON UPHOLDING FAIRNESS

My operating ethos in every appointment or office that I held is to ensure fairness. And fairness includes, apart from due process, proportionality. It’s in no one’s interest for individuals to be punished harshly.


ON SELECTING HIS TEAM

I pay particular attention to the way people interact and I am less than impressed by people who manage upwards and are all brown-nosed… I rather let the work speak for themselves.

He was then on the Bench for 10 years, first being appointed Supreme Court justice in 2004 and then Judge of Appeal three years later. It was then, in 2007, that he first declined the Attorney-General post.

“I enjoyed my work. Further, I was keen to continue working with Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong, whom I greatly respected. I regard him as the finest legal mind who has held public office in Singapore.”

Outside of his office, Mr Rajah reads extensively on social and political issues that affect Singapore and the wider world, as well as the sciences, such as psychology and neuroscience. “But since I became A-G, I’ve read only a handful of books,” he said, as he spent more time reading up on ongoing cases, even the minor ones, such as shoplifting.

Mr Rajah said: “I could leave my law firm when I wanted to and the fact that it continues to thrive 13 years after I left it means that I left it with good foundations and in good shape.” Former defence minister Howe Yoon Chong, in a conversation with Mr Rajah years ago, called the same quality a “walking capital” and the term stuck with him.

He entered the role as the “reluctant A-G”, but with his retirement, he said: “I made sure everything that I’ve done, every institution I’ve done, I have left it in better shape.”

How I became Chief Justice: Yong Pung How Chief Justice of Singapore, 1990-2006

Source: Straits Times
Date: 20 Mar 2016

After graduating, I went back to Kuala Lumpur where my father had a small law firm and was working for Tan Cheng Lock.

I travelled to Singapore a few times, hoping to get some lead work. I would meet up with Kuan Yew and he would take me out for lunch at a chicken rice stall in Middle Road. On my first visit, he asked where I was staying. I told him I was at the hotel next to the railway station. He said, “Oh, it’s a terrible place! I have a spare room in the house.” So I stayed with him a few times at Oxley Road. I think I slept in what would eventually become his daughter Wei Ling’s room because she wasn’t born then. He was very kind to me.

The first time I went to his home, his mother, who I had already heard was a very famous cook, insisted I stay for dinner. She cooked everything. I think I nearly burst myself that night.

When Kuan Yew won the elections in 1959 and became Prime Minister, I would meet him at his office at City Hall and we would go for lunch. Those were good times.

One of his favourite fruits was pomelo. Once, while enjoying some pomelo at his office, he told me it was from lpoh, specially brought in by Malayan Airways pilots. At the end of that visit, he called his secretary to ask how many of the fruit were left and asked her to put two in my car.

The last time I saw Kuan Yew was in late December 2014, at a dinner, together with a group of his friends. They always included me in these dinners, which were held every two months; they considered me to be his oldest friend, I guess, at least in age. Someone would organise a dinner for him. They would give the excuse that the poor chap was lonely, but actually all they wanted were his views. He knew everything!

MR LEE AS A CO-WORKER AND BOSS

There were a couple of occasions after graduation when Kuan Yew and I worked together on some legal cases. In one case, the richest man in Penang had insulted Dr Lim Chong Yew, a prominent politician and medical doctor. We worked on the case together for a short while until it was settled. We also did a few other small cases together. At that time, he was famous as a lawyer.

Clearly, he was brilliant. He was the most brilliant man I have ever met. If he was on a legal case, he would work through every detail and angle. When he set up the People’s Action Party, he was absolutely thorough, in the same way he responded to questions at university or analysed cases. When we studied our cases, he always made sure he covered everything.

The very first time he came to Kuala Lumpur was in the early 1950s. We went for dinner at a restaurant in an amusement park in Bukit Bintang. We walked into a room that was empty but this newspaper chap, who was part of a wedding reception in the next room, noticed him and recognised him as Lee Kuan Yew from Singapore. He came up to Kuan Yew and asked him some questions, and soon, half of the wedding guests trooped over. I think Kuan Yew never ever liked any of this attention.

In 1982, when I was vice-chairman of OCBC Bank, I was seconded to the government to help restructure the Monetary Authority of Singapore. Eventually, I was appointed to head the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation. But I had to leave after a while.

What happened was that there had been a question asked in Parliament which was filed but not published. The issue was about Singapore money being transferred to a Malaysian. Dr Goh Keng Swee asked me, “Are you a Malaysian?” Indeed I was. So I was sent to see Lim Siong Guan, who was then principal private secretary to Kuan Yew, who then said I should become a Singapore citizen.

He would put up a paper with three names – Lee Kuan Yew, Hon Sui Sen and Goh Keng Swee – and also get them to sign it. I remember going to Empress Place to get this done. There was a nice lady there who gave me a book. I held it, took an oath, and so I became a citizen.

I then worked for Lim Kim San. I was in a room next to Dr Goh, who was at the Ministry of Education at the time; Kim San’s office was across from Dr Goh’s. I was actually on loan to Kim San because he was short of staff. He wanted someone to write letters for him – he said lawyers always wrote good letters – but he looked at me and said to Dr Goh: “I just don’t like this bloody chap.” Dr Goh dismissed it and told me Kim San was just in a bad mood that day.

The next time I saw Kim San, he was in a good mood and had forgotten we had ever met. I wrote simple letters for him; they were for his constituents or people requesting help from him, promising them that things would be done but that it would take time and we would do our best in the meantime. Kim San was very nice to me after that.

I had learnt to write very short letters, and the minutes I wrote while at the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation were also short. When I first gave the minutes to Kuan Yew, its new chairman, he said: “I don’t like this. It’s rubbish. I want to know exactly what each person said.” He wanted more details.

In 1989, Kuan Yew was looking for a new Chief Justice and he said my name had been put up by several judges. He said, “Think about it,” and told me to make a decision quickly.

I replied: “Can I think about it?”

He said: “That was what I said. But I hope your answer will be yes because you have done nothing for Singapore!”

He practically scolded me, bringing up the fact that I had declined his offer to be a Supreme Court judge in 1972.

He said there was no time to waste. I asked him what I was supposed to do. He said: “Become Chief Justice! Just clean up the whole thing, you know what to do.”

I said: “Fair enough. But if the job is too much for me, will you release me?”

There was no answer.

The next thing I knew, he was telling people he had found a person and my name was published in the papers. So that was how I became Singapore’s second Chief Justice.

The Big Read: Four top lawyers share their experiences in the legal world

A DIFFERENT BREED OF LAW STUDENTS

Within the legal fraternity, Professor Walter Woon walks as a giant.

His roots are based in academia, although he had a dalliance with lawmaking, serving as a Nominated Member of Parliament from 1992 to 1996. The first Private Member’s Bill to be passed — the Maintenance of Parents Act — was drafted by him.

Prof Woon, 59, also served as an ambassador overseas, before taking up the Attorney-General (AG) appointment in Singapore in 2008, going on to argue several cases personally. One of his last court appearances was for the high-profile case of Malaysian drug trafficker Yong Vui Kong, in the latter’s appeal against the death sentence.

After stepping down as AG in 2010, he returned to his first love — academia — and is now dean of the Singapore Institute of Legal Education. Most recently, he joined RHTLaw Taylor Wessing as chairman and senior consultant.

Things have come full circle, he acknowledged. “I dislike litigation. If I liked litigation, I would go out and triple my salary. People did offer but I said, ‘No thanks. I’ll come back to my natural habitat which is academia, pass on what I’ve learnt over the last 30 years to the next generation, so they’ll be better prepared than we were’.”

The career choices that Prof Woon has made allowed him to spend more time with his twin sons during their growing-up years.

While his sons, Adrian and Alexander, have followed in his footsteps and pursued law, Prof Woon notes that the profession is no longer the same as when he was a rookie.

“Law has become more of a business, rather than a profession. It is a pity but it’s inevitable. The old clubby feeling disappeared when the profession expanded. Firms are 200, 300 (in size). They have to be run as a business,” Prof Woon says.

These days, young lawyers are a different breed. “They’re less hungry than they used to be. Nowadays, unlike my generation, they have the expectation of inheritance. The majority of the students who come into law school nowadays come from families that are well-off,” he points out.

Lacking drive, the newcomers no longer find it necessary to stay in the profession through “thick and thin”.

Prof Woon notes: “They have options. And I don’t say this to blame them; because why should you kill yourself doing something you do not like in order just to accumulate money, when you’ll inherit? So do something worthwhile with your life, instead of just make money.”

AN INTERESTING, WORTHWHILE LIFETIME JOB

One of the earliest impressions Senior Counsel Michael Hwang had of the legal profession came from fiction.

“Students of my generation were all inspired by this fictional lawyer called Perry Mason who never lost a case. It was the most famous lawyer novel series then,” says Dr Hwang, 72. “When you’re young, you’re reading these books, you think, ‘My goodness, what magic a lawyer can do if he is able!’; vindicate his clients and save them from wrongful conviction.”

Mason’s brilliant cross-examination of witnesses, portrayed in the novel series by Erle Stanley Gardner, enthralled Dr Hwang and inspired him to become a lawyer.

Very soon into his decades-long legal career, he realised that the tales were “completely unrealistic”. The sobering realisation did not lead to disenchantment with his profession though, he quickly qualifies.

“The reality is that this doesn’t happen. No lawyer can ever say that he’s never lost a case,” he says. “Also, everything was based on the lawyer’s brilliant cross-examination of the witness, whereas in real life, a cross-examination is very often a slow and steady interrogation to exploit weak points made in evidence and destroy the credibility of witnesses.”

Indeed when Dr Hwang stepped into law, his family expressed scepticism.

“It wasn’t considered a glamorous profession in those days. Everybody wanted to do engineering and medicine … My mother said to me, ‘You know lawyers don’t make a lot of money.’ With respect to my late mother, I don’t think that’s true anymore. Parents would be quite happy for their children to become a lawyer,” he says.

He likens law to the field of medicine, with “many areas you can go into”. Back in the old days, lawyers were expected to be generalists and juggle various areas of the law — capital markets, mergers and acquisitions. But these days, large firms bank on their young hires to be experts in highly specific fields.

“They become very specialised quite quickly. That’s good but what my former senior partner used to say is that you don’t want to be too left-handed, meaning you become too specialised to the extent that you know virtually nothing about other branches of law,” he says.

Starting out as a lawyer with Allen & Gledhill, Dr Hwang has risen through the ranks, notching accomplishments along the way including heading his fraternity as president of the Law Society and being a member of the Supreme Court Bench.

He has carved a niche in the fields of international arbitration and mediation, currently sitting as Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre’s Courts, presiding over a panel of 10 justices from other countries.

His string of accolades includes being the honorary vice-president and governing board member of the International Council for Commercial Arbitration (ICCA).

Despite his success , Dr Hwang says he has not finished learning about the work of a lawyer.

“Even at this late stage, I’m always learning something new because you cannot know it all. Almost every day, there’ll be some new legal knowledge that I acquire. Of course, the juniors will be learning five to 10 new things a day, while I’m learning one or two. It’s a lifetime job, which makes it more interesting and worthwhile,” he says.

MENTORSHIP A TWO-WAY STREET

When he first started out as a lawyer, Mr Amolat Singh would wake up in the middle of the night in cold sweat, and run through the details of a particular case in his mind.

“You ask yourself, ‘Is there something else I can do that I’ve forgotten?’” he says. “Behind my work, there are real lives at stake. In commercial, civil and corporate cases, everything boils down to dollars and cents. But when you’re doing criminal and family law, you know it’s not just dollars and cents. These people have to pick up the pieces.”

For newer practitioners, this emotional burden is very real; with each negative verdict comes devastation. But the senior lawyer learnt from his mentor and long-time friend, the late criminal lawyer Subhas Anandan, to keep his emotions at bay, and maintain professionalism and objectivity.

Mr Singh was a mid-career lawyer, having left the military at the age of 35. Later, he started volunteering for Legal Assistance Scheme for Capital Offences, and worked on his first capital case with Mr Anandan.

“Subhas had by then so many cases under his belt. Even for the very first case we did, every time we had a coffee break or we went for lunch, I would share my doubts with him. I was very fortunate in the sense that at the start of my career, I had somebody like that to shadow,” says the 59-year-old.

Mentorship is important for younger lawyers, Mr Singh stresses. “It helps them find some bearing in life, then they will stay the course.”

Current mentorship programmes in law firms tend to be more technical, and less focused on dealing with emotions, he feels. For mentorship to reap rewards, young lawyers must learn to voice their concerns, he said, and senior lawyers have to make time to address these worries.

Today, Mr Singh runs his own practice with two other partners, one of whom is his wife. But some things remain unchanged for the veteran.

“Even when you drive the car, you stop at the traffic light, and your mind goes back to this case,” he says. “Sometimes you do get a spark. So I quickly drive to the side of the road and write down in my small pocketbook, so that it remains there while it’s still fresh.”

PUTTING IN YOUR BEST FOR EVERY CASE

Decades after defending former footballer Abbas Saad in a match-fixing scandal, defence lawyer Edmond Pereira continues to feel “deeply aggrieved” over the case.

In the 1990s, the Lebanese-born Australian was a star in local football, turning out for Singapore in the Malaysian League and Malaysia Cup. But his footballing dreams went up in smoke in 1995, after he was found guilty of fixing matches, fined S$50,000 and banned from football-related activities here. The lifetime ban was only lifted in 2009.

Recounting the day the verdict was handed down by the court, Mr Pereira said many supporters were elated with the sentence and erupted into cheers in the courtroom “as if the team won the game”.

Two decades on, the lawyer still wonders if the outcome could have been different.

“(This) is one case which I feel deeply aggrieved about. Abbas happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. Unfortunately, he made some admissions in his statement,” he says.

During the trial, Mr Pereira challenged the admissibility of the statement as evidence — arguing that Abbas had been threatened and coerced into signing it — but to no avail.

“Looking back, could I have done it differently? Perhaps I could have. Would the outcome be the same? It’s hard to say. I could see at that time that (the authorities) wanted to make an example of somebody and Abbas was the right target,” he says.

The veteran lawyer, 66, started his career as a legal officer in the Defence Ministry, before becoming a Deputy Public Prosecutor and State Counsel in the Attorney-General’s Chambers, and serving as a District Judge in the then-Subordinate Courts. In 1988, he moved into private practice, and became one of the stalwarts in criminal law.

Even today, Mr Pereira remains passionate about the cases he takes on, despite the fact that it is less financially rewarding than other areas of legal practice.

“(Criminal law) involves the person’s rights and liberty. There’s an accusation, there’s a lot more cut and thrust, and there’s excitement,” he says.

Over the years, Mr Pereira has carved a niche in corruption cases. However, he shuns drug trafficking cases because drugs “ruin people’s lives”.

Asked about his portfolio of work, Mr Pereira is contemplative. “Sometimes when we look back on some of the trials we did, (we wonder) whether our challenge to the prosecution witness should have been in a particular way. Would it have been better? It’s very hard. You’ve got to make that judgment at that time.”

The Big Read: As a legal career loses its sheen, law firms take action 

BY: VALERIE KOH
SATURDAY, 05 MARCH 2016

SINGAPORE — Long considered a lucrative and respected career option here, the notion of becoming a lawyer — which, along with being a doctor or a banker, ranks highly among many parents’ wish lists for their children’s future occupations — is losing some of its shine.

Anecdotes abound of lawyers dropping out of the industry, citing stress and burn out — so much so that the hollowing out of the criminal and family law practice areas has become a growing concern. Amid a potential oversupply caused by a spurt in the number of Singaporeans studying to be lawyers overseas, starting salaries of fresh law graduates have also fallen, going by the latest graduate employment survey.

The unusual manpower predicament — a glut of fresh graduates seeking to join the industry couple with an exodus of experienced mid-tier lawyers — is threatening to hinder Singapore’s ambitions of becoming a legal hub at a time when its transitioning economy needs all the help it can get.

Veteran lawyer Gloria James-Civetta, who runs her own law firm, said her senior lawyers end up doing most of the heavy lifting themselves, due to the lack of mid-level talent.

“Senior lawyers end up having to go to court often to attend to heavy-duty matters, when they could have been dealt with by a lawyer with less experience,” she said.

“Sometimes, we can’t offer a client a mid-level lawyer, so it results in us having to compromise and reduce some of our rates as well.”

Lawyer Amolat Singh believes the thinning of mid-tier legal practitioners could have a negative impact on the competitiveness of the Republic’s legal industry on the global stage, though the impact might not be apparent at the moment.

“Parents see law as the land of milk and honey. People think that the courtroom drama is quite fun, but they forget that for one hour of drama, there are many hours of sweat not seen,” said Mr Singh, who noted that, anecdotally, many lawyers exit the industry after the three-year mark.

Statistics provided by the Law Society of Singapore (LawSoc) in 2014 showed that three in four Singaporean lawyers call it quits within their first decade of practice.

Responding to TODAY’s queries, LawSoc said that between 2011 and last year, the proportion of mid-tier lawyers (those with seven to 12 years of experience) has hovered between 7.6 per cent and 10.2 per cent. In comparison, lawyers with more than 12 years’ experience make up between 51.8 and 60.6 per cent, while the proportion of junior lawyers (defined by LawSoc as those who have spent less than seven years in practice) ranged between 29.6 and 39.5 per cent.

In response to the challenges faced by the industry, a third law school at SIM University — which will welcome its first batch of students in January next year — has been set up, primarily to attract mid-career professionals to criminal and family law. In contrast to the more lucrative corporate law practice, these two practice areas have borne the brunt of what Senior Minister of State (Law and Finance) Indranee Rajah described as a “hollowing out effect”.

STEMMING THE EXODUS

There are currently about 1,600 criminal and family lawyers here. About one in 10 is above 65 years old.

Lawyer Sunil Sudheesan, the acting head of the Association of Criminal Lawyers of Singapore, noted the great emotional strains on lawyers in these two practice areas.

“Criminal law is a very depressing game to play … the first case that really left a deep impression (on me) was Took Leng How’s,” he said. “I was involved in the psychiatric aspect of that case. After we lost in the High Court, I got quite upset and wondered, ‘Was it because my submissions were not good enough?’”

In a case that gripped the nation, Took was sentenced to death in 2005 for the murder of eight-year-old Huang Na.

But criminal and family law are not the only areas where warning signs are going up. Senior lawyers noted that in all practice areas, the attrition rate is high compared with other industries. LawSoc president Thio Shen Yi felt the demands of the profession may not necessarily be in sync with what many millennials are prepared for. Gen Y lawyers crave new experiences and have an array of options available to them, said Mr Thio, who is the joint managing director of TSMP Law Corporation.

The Singapore Corporate Counsel Association, which represents in-house lawyers, does not track the number of lawyers who have left private practice to go in-house. Anecdotally, however, the SCCA has observed a “gradual increase” in the number of in-house counsel over the years.

Currently, there are some 2,000 in-house counsel here — almost half the number (about 4,800) of lawyers in private practice.

One of those who made the switch was Ms Jaime Lee, 29, who started her legal career in 2010 at a Big Four law firm before joining a global commodities company as an in-house counsel. In December last year, she left the industry to focus on growing her stationery and lifestyle products business. “I was very happy where I was, but the business was growing and I had to decide whether I wanted to take the leap of faith to go full-time to bring it to the next level,” she said.

Ms Joanne Poh, 31, also cut short her legal career. After less than three years in the industry, she left to pursue freelance writing. “Most of my friends thought I was insane to want to leave a high-paying job,” she said.

Veteran lawyer Foo Siew Fong, Head of Family and Matrimonial Law at Harry Elias Partnership, offered a reason young lawyers opt out: “The best time (to leave) is when (one) is still young and has no financial burden of maintaining a family.”

Last year, LawSoc set up a taskforce to conduct focus group discussions with junior lawyers and find out “what might keep them in the industry, pull them away, (or) push them away”. “Once we understand the causes, we can try to work out solutions,” said Mr Thio.

He said he was not unduly worried about the situation, which he felt could be corrected by market forces in due course. “If there are fewer people in the middle category, then these people become very much in demand. The rewards for them increase, and more people are incentivised to stay,” he reasoned.

Nonetheless, some law firms — both big and small — have begun taking action to retain their young guns.

At Drew & Napier, the management recognises that lawyers need to “pause, recharge, and take care of their families and other aspects of their lives”. Mr Kelvin Tan, a director at the firm, said: “We have flexible arrangements to help our lawyers do that, like sabbaticals, the flexibility to work from home fortnightly, and part-time working arrangements.”

At smaller firms, lead lawyers encourage their juniors to take ownership of cases that they are helping with. “Assisting doesn’t mean taking notes only, they have to interact with clients and prepare (for the case),” said veteran lawyer Edmond Pereira, who runs his own practice.

To give room for young lawyers to grow, Mr Peter Low, who also runs his own practice, believes in pushing every member on his team to develop their “own public persona”. He said: “I don’t want a lawyer to tell me after five years that people think he’s my sidekick. It cannot be like that. Five years later, people must say, ‘Forget about Peter Low, forget about the law firm. You’re a good lawyer’.”

LawSoc president Thio Shen Yi felt the demands of the profession may not necessarily be in sync with what many millennials are prepared for. Gen Y lawyers crave new experiences and have an array of options available to them, he said. Photo: Koh Mui Fong
TRAINING CONTRACT WOES

While the industry struggles to hang on to its young talent, a constant stream of fresh law graduates seeks to enter the legal profession.

In 2014, Law Minister K Shanmugam warned that Singapore could face an oversupply of lawyers in the coming years, due to the spike in the number of Singaporeans studying law overseas. As a result, aspiring lawyers have to manage their expectations in terms of pay and job opportunities, he said.

The findings of the latest Joint Graduate Employment Survey released earlier this week showed that the median gross monthly salary for fresh law graduates from Singapore Management University fell to S$4,731 last year, compared to S$5,025 in 2014. The starting pay for those who graduated from National University of Singapore’s Law Faculty also fell to S$4,700, from S$5,150.

To guard against the oversupply, the authorities have dropped almost half of the 19 United Kingdom law schools on the list of institutions whose graduates are recognised for admission to the Bar from this year. But it will take some time for the impact of the move to be felt.

For now, law firms are spoilt for choice, with many fresh graduates vying for training contracts. “It’s actually good for law firms. When there’s an oversupply of law students, it means that law students may not be as fussy as before in terms of the areas they go into,” said Mr Thio. “If we take the situation five or six years back, all the law students wanted to go into corporate transactions or commercial disputes. You might find a situation now where law students say, ‘well, I’m quite happy to go into criminal law or family law … It might be easier for me to secure a job that way, and that’s my way of entering practice’.”

Mr Pereira used to have one or two trainees in his firm. These days, he has four trainees under his wing. He has even encountered applicants who said they were willing to go without the training allowance.

Rajah & Tann Singapore managing partner Lee Eng Beng advised fresh law graduates to chalk up relevant experience before applying for a training contract, which is required for admission to the Bar. Mr Lee, a Senior Counsel, said: “A lot of Singapore law graduates see being called to the Bar as a final qualification that they need to acquire as soon as possible. I don’t think it’s necessary. There’s too much focus on the qualification to practice, and not enough on gathering real experience and learning, which will produce a good practitioner in the long run. It’s an outdated mindset.”

He added: “If you are already very clear that you want to enter a certain industry…and if you’re prepared to spend a couple of years to work in that industry and gain knowledge, and two years later, apply to us for a training contract, I would put that name first. Grades will be secondary by then.”

Law firms are now spoilt for choice, with many fresh graduates vying for training contracts. Veteran lawyer Edmond Pereira used to have one or two trainees in his firm. These days, he has four trainees under his wing. He has even encountered applicants who said they were willing to go without the training allowance. Photo: Robin Choo
HOPE ON THE HORIZON

It is not all bad news, however.

While those in the legal fraternity fret that a core of practitioners to succeed the likes of Mr Shanmugam, Senior Counsel Davinder Singh, former Attorney-General Walter Woon, Senior Counsel Michael Hwang and the late Subhas Anandan on the pantheon of Singapore’s legal giants is not forthcoming — possibly a consequence of the industry’s struggles to hold on to its brightest talent — others are more sanguine.

Mr Amolat Singh felt that this is inevitable as the overall pool of lawyers gets bigger. In the past, it was easier to shine, he said. But these days, the gulf between top lawyers and “the rest of the crop” has narrowed considerably, he said.

Rajah & Tann’s Mr Lee also noted that large law firms have also shifted away from depending on star names. He added: “When you have your branding and profile revolving too much around individuals, that’s not healthy for large firms. All individuals will grow old and retire one day. So the institutional name is the one that remains.”

And while bright young legal minds here have been lured away by firms overseas — especially in Hong Kong, which serves the China market — Professor Woon feels this is not necessarily a bad thing. “I suspect that the brain-drain would be worse without the prospect of working for an international law firm in Singapore. The young and the restless will move abroad to get the international exposure; the presence of leading international firms in Singapore gives us the opportunity to lure them home,” he said.

Singapore is not standing still, either. It has been strengthening its position as a dispute resolution hub. The Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC) was launched in January last year, complementing the work of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre and the Singapore International Mediation Centre.

In the past, appearing in the courtroom was “the only avenue known” to lawyers, said Mr Amolat Singh. “For every dispute, we say, ‘See you in court.’ But now there are alternatives, and people are beginning to realise the benefits of alternative dispute resolution. The outcomes can be more custom-fit.”

Asked if such a shift could take away the thrill of arguing in court which some lawyers live for, Mr Singh said: “The disputes will still arise, but the manner of resolving them is a bit faster, and I can go on to the next file…It’s just a question of changing our mindsets and modus operandi to suit the new model.”

K Shanmugam SC – Tempering the law with compassion

The Straits Times Nov 04, 2012

IN THE four years since Mr K. Shanmugam took over the Law Ministry, he has wrought sweeping legal reforms. Not least of all is the easing of the mandatory death penalty regime for drug-trafficking and murder offenders.

The Criminal Procedure Code was also overhauled in 2010, providing new community sentencing options such as the mandatory treatment order and community service order, as alternatives to jail sentences.

If he has one goal in his lifetime, he lets on, it is to make Singapore a more compassionate society “with greater communitarian spirit and which looks after those who can’t look after themselves”.

To lead the way, the 53-year- old conscientiously looks for the exceptions, outliers or those who fall through the cracks. His legal training helps him to “first step back and look at things in perspective in terms of overall systems, structures, what’s legally possible” and to that, he adds “kindness and compassion” to see what he can do in each individual case.

More changes are afoot.

National University of Singapore law professor Michael Hor, who was his university classmate, expects the minister to continue to “inspire quiet and incremental change in favour of moderation and balance”. The changes so far stem from a humble and humane approach to law: “humble because of the awareness that when rules are crafted, we can never foresee (their) consequences with absolute certainty, humane because of the unwillingness to sacrifice individuals unfortunately caught by overbroad rules”.

Mr Shanmugam himself says he is trying to make the legal framework relevant to the times.

What lies ahead?

Liberal hopefuls have wondered: Will the Internal Security Act (ISA), which confers on the Government the right to arrest and detain individuals without trial for up to two years, be reviewed or repealed?

To this, the Law Minister says that nothing is written in stone, although he adds that the ISA is not under his purview but that of the Home Affairs Ministry. “Everything has to be looked at as society changes and the environment changes. Any law has to have public support.”

As a young lawyer, he too had misgivings about the risk of abuse with the ISA but, since the Sept 11 terrorist attacks on the US in 2001, his views have changed. “You have to ask yourself what are the consequences if we are not able to detain terrorists ahead of time without trial? What are the consequences for Singapore which has persuaded the world to invest here based on confidence?” he says, adding that often the information available cannot be made public.

“So you have a choice between arresting without trial or not arresting and waiting until the act is about to be committed. A larger country can afford to take that risk. Can we afford to take that risk?”

After 23 years as a top civil and commercial litigator, he now trains his firepower on transforming the criminal justice system. He wants to boost the quality of the criminal Bar and attract younger people to it. He is also looking at beefing up access to justice, beyond depending on lawyers to take on pro bono cases on an ad hoc basis.

Of late, he has taken on eclectic causes – dogs, cats, street dancers and itinerant hawkers. A dog lover, Mr Shanmugam has three of his own, and has worked with animal rights groups over the past four years to effect a slew of changes. Last weekend, he piloted a scheme allowing residents in Chong Pang to keep cats in their HDB flats. If successful, the scheme will go islandwide.

Animal rights group Animal Concerns Research and Education Society (Acres) founder Louis Ng says he alerted Mr Shanmugam last month to the plight of terminally ill Mr Tan Cheng Chu, who was told to give up one of his dogs according to HDB rules, after a neighbour complained of noise. Mr Shanmugam asked to meet Mr Tan and ruminated on his Facebook page afterwards that discretion must be exercised in applying rules. Mr Ng says: “What touches me the most about him is that no matter how busy he is, he always makes time to listen to the concerns of animal lovers and makes an effort to help.”

Meanwhile, the minister has applied an unsentimental rigour to his foreign affairs portfolio, which he inherited after the 2011 General Election. Well aware that no city state has lasted a long time, he sees his role as forging ties that are important to Singapore’s economic and strategic security, and defending Singapore’s interests.

His unvarnished, straight-talking manner has been an unlikely diplomatic asset. American diplomat and academic Kurt Campbell, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, says of Mr Shanmugam: “The quality of his mind is impressive. In meetings with him, he has legal framing, approaches problems in a deeply systemic way, is unsentimental about the world, clear- eyed and very strategic… He can be hard-headed about what is best for Singapore, but he is always upfront and clear.”

No social capital

FAR from his public image as an aggressive lawyer, the soft-spoken man, whom you have to strain to hear, comes across as shy in person and intensely private. All he will say about his childhood is that he was the youngest of three children and the only one born in Singapore to immigrants from Tamil Nadu with no formal education.

His father ran a small business, and his mother was a housewife. Home was a series of rented premises, usually shared with others, till they got their first Housing Board flat when he was 16.

He was born in 1959, just before the People’s Action Party (PAP) swept into power. His parents had “zero social capital”. But they bequeathed him “total faith, which I then adopted without question, that it didn’t matter who you are or the colour of your skin, what race you were, all that mattered is that if you study hard, you can do well in life”.

“It was a very simple philosophy. They had total faith in the PAP and that education was the passport to success.” He attended the now-defunct Newton Boys’ School, Raffles Institution and then National University of Singapore’s law faculty, graduating with first-class honours.

The PAP had started wooing the rising litigator through its tea sessions. Before he said “yes” to being fielded as a candidate, he wanted to get a taste of constituency work. Former MP Chandra Das remembers him as a “keen, earnest and patient young man, with sharp observation skills”, who dutifully attended all grassroots activities. He was fielded in 1988, when he was 29.

At first, the young English- speaking Indian lawyer thrown into Chong Pang in Sembawang GRC – a very Chinese, lower-middle-class constituency – seemed a poor pairing. “But the traditionalism of the constituency meant that there are certain advantages. One, if you work hard, are sincere, didn’t throw your weight around and are in a position to help, as I was as a lawyer, many deep and close friendships are immediately formed… And once you have done them a favour, they remember you for life. So that constituency in a way fitted my personality,” he says.

“Partly because of my own background, the milieu of the people I met were in the same social situation that I used to be in myself, so I was completely comfortable,” he says. He stayed five terms and is now the second longest-serving MP in Cabinet next to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who was elected in 1984.

Asked whether being plain- speaking has been a liability or asset in his political career, he shrugs and says: “People know I mean what I say. Sometimes it has served me well, sometimes it has comes across as harsh. I don’t sugarcoat or say something people like to hear. I prefer to be honest and direct. I think there is value to that.”

His law career soared. He has represented listed companies, multinationals and the Singapore Government. At 38, he became one of the youngest senior counsel. Juggling legal practice and politics, along with fathering two young children, took its toll. There were regrets and sacrifices along the way, such as “no time to read, smell the flowers or watch the kids grow up”. His marriage to Dr Jothie Rajah failed and they divorced after 15 years, due to “mutual incompatibility”.

Dr Rajah has since completed a law PhD at Melbourne University and written a book Authoritarian Rule Of Law, which alleges that the rule of law is a subjugating rather than liberalising force in Singapore. Asked about this, all he will say is he has not read the book. “My own views are set out in the speeches I have made on rule of law,” he adds with finality.

Big pay cut

MR SHANMUGAM remarried four years ago. His wife is Seetha, 41, a Berkeley-educated, Chicago-trained clinical psychologist – and a fourth-generation Singaporean. “Not a foreign talent,” he adds for good measure, in reference to online rumours.

She has quit private practice to travel with him on his official trips.

He visibly relaxes when she arrives midway through the three- hour interview at Old Town White Coffee at Chun Tin Court, their favourite weekend haunt. It is one of his rare pockets of downtime. The only other is his daily hour-long exercise routine, which involves calisthenics, yoga and cross-training.

He admits that in 2008, when he was asked to become law minister, it was a big decision to mull over, involving a sizeable pay cut. His income in the first year was less than the tax he had to pay on his previous year’s income, he lets on.

“Yes, it was a substantial financial cutback but I don’t see it as a great sacrifice. I was at a stage in my career where I was prepared to say I can do this… Of course I thought about the money. I will be lying if I said I didn’t. I went and looked at my obligations from an accounting point of view. Then I decided to do it.”

The clincher was when he reflected that if he looked back at his life on his deathbed, it would have been more important for him to “have worked to change society for the better” than to have made more money.

What fires Mr Shanmugam, a Hindu, is his deep religiosity. “If you look at the Bhagavad Gita, a central theme is about doing your duty and not worrying about the results. Whether you succeed or you fail, do what you think is right, and leave the consequences to take care of themselves,” he says.

He hastens to add that he has not fully internalised that. “I’ll be lying if I told you that the results didn’t matter. But I keep reminding myself and try to be on this path, and it influences the major decisions I take.”

That has shaped his understated, taciturn ethos of “Don’t talk much, just do what you can”. And of course letting his work speak for itself.

Mr Shanmugam on

His public persona

This comment that I’m aloof has been made more than once. People think that because I am somewhat introverted. I don’t speak much, I keep to myself.

Plus, the litigation training that is so much a part of my persona makes me deconstruct what people say clinically: “You said this. These points I agree, these other points, I don’t agree.”

And I will set out the reasons why they make no sense. In court, I didn’t think of this as being harsh. But outside court, people tell me sometimes it does sound harsh. I need to reflect seriously on that.

Levelling the playing field

We need to look at the academic system again, to make sure that it is truly meritocratic. Over the years, a class structure has developed. Middle-class parents are able to give a significant head start to their children. The State has to do more in the infant care and pre-school context, to help the children whose parents can’t give them the same advantages. The State can’t completely equalise the advantages educated parents give their children, but the State can do more to level the playing field.

Keeping fit, Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s way

Mr Lee Kuan Yew loves to eat, puts on weight easily and used to smoke 20 cigarettes a day. Now 68, he feels fitter than at 50, exercises daily, eats carefully, and has learnt to reduce stress.

MAY 10, 1992
Friday, 6.40 pm, and the sun is setting at Seri Temasek, the official residence at the Istana. The pre-war building overlooks a huge sweep of lawn. Bushy pines line the surrounding roads. In the distance, a squirrel scurries up a tree. There is greenery everywhere.

A car drives up the front porch and Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew alights, trailed by his security officers. He heads for the building and changes into a plain white T-shirt, blue shorts and Nike running shoes before starting his exercise routine: 20 minutes of cycling on a stationary bicycle; five to 10 minutes on a rowing machine; a 10-minute jog. Sometimes, if he is in the mood, he hops onto a bicycle and breezes through the grounds of the Istana.

At 68, Mr Lee feels fitter than he did at 50. His weight is lower, his heart stronger and his muscles more toned. This is a result of a concerted effort to make aerobics a way of his life, and to change his eating habits. At 1.78 m tall, he weighs between 74 and 76.5 kg, and averages 74.5 kg. “I tend to put on weight very quickly, so I have got to watch it,” he says in an interview at his office earlier that afternoon.

He became health conscious after taking office in 1959. “The pressures became very great and I knew that if my health is poor, then my work suffers. When you are under heavy stresses you must be in good health or you are in trouble. I began to be careful about how much I ate and how much I drank.”

Exercise

Exercise has always been part of his life, although it was only 15 years ago that he took up aerobics seriously. “Even when I was a young boy in school, when I was staying in Siglap, I used to swim, cycle and play games,” he says. “I find that if I am inactive I get slothful, I get slow.”

In the 1950s, 60s and 70s, his exercise was mostly golf and sometimes swimming and cycling. Golf was an antidote to the smokey conference rooms, and more a form of recreation than an exercise. “You go out to get fresh air, birds, wind, sun, green grass, green trees … The exercise was at the practice tee. If you hit a hundred balls, you can really work up a sweat, especially if you have to tee the balls up. But not the game itself.”

After the 1976 General Election, when he was in his mid-50s, he stumbled on aerobics. “I could feel that I was feeling sluggish. So after the elections, I took a holiday. It was winter, and we (his family) went to Hongkong, Taipei for the cold. But I was still feeling sluggish. So I started taking deep breathing exercises.

“My daughter, who was then a medical student, asked me what I was doing. I said I was feeling sluggish and breathing deeply. She said: ‘No, you will never get better that way. What you want is to get your heart pumping.’ ”

She lent him a book on aerobics. “I wasn’t very convinced,” recalls Mr Lee. “It was all very scientific.” But he decided to give aerobics a try. “In between my golf shots, I walked fast to work up a sweat. I felt I was getting better by fast walking. So at the end of the golf game, I decided to run one or two fairways. I found that that was better still.

“I really was convinced by my own experience. The sluggishness was countered. Then I took up aerobics seriously. I took up jogging 10 minutes, 15 minutes and eventually I even jogged half an hour … when I had eaten a heavy meal that day.”

Because of joint problems, he has cut down on jogging and does more stationary cycling, with stationary rowing to keep his upper limbs in shape.

He makes it a point to exercise daily. “If I don’t, I would feel sluggish. I find that the aerobics makes me feel better. I eat better, I sleep better.”

Even on overseas trips, he squeezes in his exercise routine, either before he starts the day, or in the evening before dinner.

His foldable stationary bicycle accompanies him if there are no gymnasium facilities in the places he is visiting.

By all accounts, exercising runs in his family. In an interview in 1988, Mr Lee’s father, Mr Lee Chin Koon, then 85, said that he swam every night and loved ballroom dancing.

Food

Mr Lee says that like the rest of his family, he lives to eat. His late mother, Madam Chua Jim Neo, who died in 1980 at the age of 75, was well-known in culinary circles and an expert Nonya cook whose cookbook is still on sale in bookshops. “I can eat anything and enjoy it, if it is good to eat,” he says. But he avoids foods which are oily and sweet.

His diet has changed with age, as his metabolic rate slowed down and his body could not burn up calories as quickly as before. “It is just silly to eat more than you can burn up … With time and age you must change, otherwise you are just overloading your system.”

While he once used to eat sirloin steak and many good things without any qualms, these days he eats very little meat.

He eats more fish and soya bean curd, plenty of vegetables and fruits, wholemeal bread and cereals.

He likes his fish grilled or fried, but not poached or steamed unless it is very fresh. He takes ikan kurau, pomfret or garoupa. “I also like ikan billis when it is nicely fried crisp.”

He admits to a soft spot for deep fried food. “I would like a well-fried chicken, drumstick or a wing, fried crisp. But these days I would take the skin and strip it off,” he says.

Breakfast is usually sugar-less soya bean milk and a small bowl of soya bean curd. If he is travelling to a country where there is no soya bean, he takes cereal and milk.

At lunch, he has fish or a small portion of meat, steamed green vegetables and lots of fruits such as pineapple and pomelo. He keeps his lunch light to avoid feeling heavy during the afternoon. Dinner is his biggest meal.

Because he puts on weight easily, travelling can sometimes be a problem. For instance, when he was on an official trip to Pakistan for a week recently, he put on 1.8 kg. He adds, rather ruefully: “And that was in spite of the gym there. But the food was different … all the Pakistani foods were good to eat but I got heavier.”

Mr Lee drinks plenty of water throughout the day. At social functions, he sticks to low-alcohol beer, which has between 0.1 to 0.5 per cent alcohol content, compared to the nearly 4 per cent of average beers. “If I drink full-strength beer and drink four, five bottles, which I can easily do in the course of an evening, the next day … my mouth tastes sour and I dont like the taste. I take low alcohol beer and the next day I am fine.”

Stress and relaxation

Since stepping down as Prime Minister, Mr Lee feels less stressed as he no longer has to make quick decisions. “My job is to reflect on problems which may arise,” he says.

“The stress comes when you have three or four tricky decisions to make and they are weighing on you. You know that once you have made it, things will start moving, you can’t retrieve it, so you have got to be very careful that you have made the right decision. Once you have made it, I find the stress is not so great because you have thought over all your alternatives and this is the best, you move.”

Before he was 55, golf and swimming were his main stress releasers. Then his doctor recommended a physiotherapist to teach him how to relax. The physiotherapist advised him to lie down and relax for 20 minutes after lunch.

Mr Lee was sceptical as he had, when younger, tried to rest after lunch without any success. But the physiotherapist urged him to lie down, relax his muscles and try not to think about work so that his mind could also rest. “I tried it. I found it was of some help,” he says.

At about the same time, his daughter, Wei Ling, a medical student, was doing meditation. Mr Lee also tried to meditate but could not do it. “But in the process, I learnt through reading books on meditation how to control my breathing and slow it down.

“When you are working on high pressure, your adrenalin flows. And you must have your adrenalin flowing or else you would not be working at a pitch … I learnt how to slow down my breathing and bring my metabolic rate down so that my heart beat will go down. That made the rest of the day much easier.

“It is like an electric shaver. When the battery is running out and if you switch off and you cool it down, and switch it on again, the current seems to be stronger. And that was what I was able to do for the second half of the day.”

With such a healthy lifestyle, one positive by-product has been that he always feels fresh. “I get six and a half, seven hours of sleep. I sleep late, I wake up late, I work late. I have no trouble sleeping.”


FROM 20 CIGARETTES A DAY TO NONE

Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew does not smoke and his dislike of cigarette smoke is well known today, but up to 1957 he was smoking 20 cigarettes a day.

He picked up smoking as a student at Raffles College in the early 1940s. “We were all growing up and it was a sign of manhood,” he recalls.

“I started to smoke in a serious way during the Japanese Occupation because life was a lot of blank spaces. You did your work, dull, miserable work, and you sat around and you smoked lousy cigarettes. It was a kind of recreation. Then it became a real habit.”

He tried to stop smoking several times but failed. The turning point came after the City Council elections in 1957. He recalls: “During the course of the election campaign, I made two or three speeches each night. I would go up on a platform and watch and feel the crowd first before I spoke.

“In that 20 minutes to half an hour, I could smoke seven, eight sticks, watching the crowd, getting the feel of the crowd and deciding how I should say what I wanted to say. At the end of the campaign, at the counting station at Victoria Concert Hall, there was a microphone at the balcony. I could not speak. I had burnt my throat dry.

“I decided that this was stupid. I was not enjoying my food, I was losing my voice, so I gave it up.”

The next two weeks were very “painful and uncomfortable. It was terrible because immediately after a meal, the sweetest thing would be the puff of a cigarette. It sort of caps it … a cigarette gives you a sensation of well-being.”

“I used to wake up dreaming that I had started smoking again and feeling very sad about it when I found out that it was just a dream. But I have never touched another cigarette.” Now he says that people should be warned about the dangers of smoking even before they start, because it is difficult for heavy smokers to quit.

After he gave up smoking, he made smoking colleagues like Mr S. Rajaratnam, Mr Lim Kim San and Mr E. W. Barker smoke outside the Cabinet conference room. “I told them smoking was no good for them, they never believed me,” he says.

Mr Lim finally stopped smoking after he had angina. Mr Rajaratnam gave up before undergoing a heart by-pass operation. But Mr Barker still smokes. “I’m quite sure he has read what the medical journals say, what the popular magazines say, but it is an addiction, so he carries on,” says Mr Lee.

He notes that whenever he has dinner with Dr Albert Winsemius, a long-time economic adviser to the Singapore Government, the economist refrains from smoking. A man of dry humour, Dr Winsemius once consoled himself by noting to Mr Lee that “all smoked things last longer – smoked meat, smoked fish”.

Adds Mr Lee: “When I told this joke in Cabinet, Goh Chok Tong said, yes, but they are all dead!”

Concludes Mr Lee: “My advice to someone who has not smoked is just stay that way. It is stupid, it is addictive, it is no good for you, and it will harm not only you but everyone else around you.”

Lim Siong Guan shares his experience as Lee Kuan Yew’s first Principal Private Secretary

He recounts how staff learnt to meet Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s demand for perfection, the latter’s view of the role of the civil service and the core values which were important to him.

The Group President of the Government Investment Corporation, Mr Lim was previously the Head of the Singapore Civil Service, and the Permanent Secretary at various ministries. He was also the first Principal Private Secretary to Mr Lee.

DEMAND FOR PERFECTION

He told Channel NewsAsia about how staff learnt to meet Mr Lee’s demand for perfection. Mr Lim said: “He had me sit in for lunches and dinners which he gave ever so often, most particularly to foreign visitors. He had me sit in at the lunches and dinners as part of my education, and also to take notes of the conversation.

“One thing I noticed was that the menus for lunches and dinners were the same all the time. So I asked the Secretary to the Cabinet, who has since passed away many years ago, why were the menus just so unchangeable, and he said ‘we had experimented in the past with different dishes, and they always had one criticism or other from Mr Lee, and here they came to this menu, and Mr Lee appeared quite satisfied with it. He no longer had any complaint about it.’ So they just stuck with it.

“The funny thing is on some of our overseas trips, Mrs Lee was the one who would urge Mr Lee to try out some other things, and one time he remarked, he wondered why he was always served the same thing in Singapore and never something else. The reason for that was that people in Singapore, they thought … having come to a formula that was satisfactory to him, they would stay with something that was satisfying enough, if not perfect.”
Continue reading “Lim Siong Guan shares his experience as Lee Kuan Yew’s first Principal Private Secretary”

Remembering Lee Kuan Yew: Tender side that not many see

Ng Kok Song, 67, is the former chief investment officer of Government of Singapore Investment Corporation
MAR 24, 2015

When my wife Patricia was diagnosed with stage four stomach cancer in July 2003, I saw a side of Mr Lee Kuan Yew that not many see.

Two weeks after the diagnosis, Patricia told me she was going to write a letter to Mr Lee, who was then Senior Minister. It had nothing to do with my job, she said, but my job was to deliver it. This is what she wrote:

“Dear SM Lee,

When National Day approaches each year, I feel fortunate and blessed to live in Singapore. And I’ve always wanted to express my deep gratitude to you, but lacked the courage to do so. Now I feel a sense of urgency as this may be my last National Day, as I have recently been diagnosed with advanced stomach cancer.

On this auspicious occasion of the 38th birthday of Singapore, I thank God that we have been blessed with a leader who has a gifted vision, and the courage, will and ability to make his dream a reality. I have the deepest respect and admiration for you and regard you as truly the Father of our Nation.

My husband Kok Song and I raised three children in our 31 years of married life, and we are all proud to be Singaporeans. Happy National Day.

Yours respectfully,

Patricia.”

Four days later, Mr Lee replied, thanked her for her letter and said:

“I am grateful and deeply moved that you wrote this letter at a time when you are burdened with the thought of leaving your loved ones behind. I have heard from my son Hsien Loong that Kok Song’s wife had been diagnosed with stomach cancer. Three children, two grown up, and one still a minor. I am sad at this cruel act of fate.

“I understand how you and your family must feel. My family experienced it when we were told that Hsien Loong himself was diagnosed with cancer of the lymphatic glands. It was a traumatic blow. It is so unfair. One small consolation is that modern medicine can make your suffering less unbearable. My wife and I send you and your family our sympathy, understanding and support. Kok Song will need them most of all.

I have no words to describe our sadness, or to comfort him, your family, your daughters and you.”

He wrote once more to Patricia, saying: “Many things in life can make or unmake a person. But the single most important factor is that someone who shares your life with you. In that respect, my wife and I have been very fortunate. We are happy for you, Patricia, that you have a soulmate in your husband Kok Song. It is a relationship that evolves with time and circumstance, and grows with age.”

I am sharing this exchange of letters because I think the way Patricia felt is probably how my generation, and maybe the older generation, felt about Mr Lee.

We are proud to be Singaporeans because of what he did for Singapore. He gave us hope when the future was bleak. When we separated from Malaysia, he inspired us to believe in ourselves, to defy the odds to prosper economically as an independent country.

But another thing that came out from those letters is that while Mr Lee can come across as a stern person, you can feel from the way he responded to Patricia’s letter that he is a man with a tender heart.

Soon after, Mrs Lee had a stroke and was bedridden. Patricia lived on for another 19 months.

During that time, he always asked about Patricia, telling me to tell her: “Don’t give up. Soldier on.”

Once he said to me: “Now we are in the same boat. You are looking after your wife and I am looking after my wife.”

I had begun meditating with him. One evening in 2011, after our session, I asked him about rumours swirling that he was very ill, when he was actually perfectly all right.

“Don’t you think the Government should put out a statement to rebut the rumours that you are seriously ill in hospital?” I asked.

He looked at me and said: “No, no, Kok Song, there’s no point. Because one day it is going to happen.”

Then he added: “I have lived such a long life. I hope that I can live on for maybe another five to seven years. By then, the Marina Bay developments would be completed, the water barrage would be operating, the whole Tanjong Rhu area and the reservoir will be finished. And our entire landscape will be changed. The city is going to be so beautiful.”

He was always looking forward to Singapore’s future progress.

It was as though he had captured all this in his imagination, and just hoped he would be able to see it before he passed on.

The Padres – November 91

Tonight we see another face
Another broken gaze
By the light that barely burns on
She’s held by electric wire
Delivered a crying baby
A youth so what
You bring her home
Wherever she wants to
November 91
I thought it rained… forever… forever

Did you see her
She steal your heart by chance?
I like to know your crime
When you hear your heartbeat sleeping
Bit by bit good night
She floats across the dance hall
Towards that exit door
She’s wasting every moment
November 91
I thought it rained… forever… forever

End of CD era


Gramophone was famed for its huge selections of music as well as secondhand CD’s and DVD’s. –PHOTO: ST/CAROLINE CHIA


Local music retailer Gramophone, finally pulled down its shutters for the last time on Sept 18 2013. –PHOTO: ST/JASON QUAH

BY IGNATIUS LOW

It seems to be the season for saying goodbye.

Two weeks ago, we said goodbye to Nokia mobile phones after the Finnish telecoms giant sold the business to Microsoft.

This week, a different sort of player made its exit – one much closer to home but, for me at least, no less loved.

After struggling the past few years with huge changes to the music industry that have decimated its business, local music retailer Gramophone finally pulled down its shutters for the last time last Wednesday.
Continue reading “End of CD era”