Redacted reports on Law Society probe should be disclosed to members: Edwin Tong

MinLaw sent the e-mail to the then council, which appointed the society’s audit committee to carry out an independent investigation and make appropriate recommendations.

The committee sent its report to the council on June 5, and the council sent a copy of the report to MinLaw on July 1.

On July 23, the current council told members via e-mail that the report had been submitted to the council.

The council said it has resolved to implement governance reforms and gave a brief account relating to certain allegations.

In his response on Aug 14, Tong said he welcomed the Law Society’s council’s engagement with its members. 

He said the Law Society plays an important role in Singapore’s legal system and carries responsibilities both to its members and to the wider public.

“It is therefore important that the issues identified in the report are followed through appropriately, with transparency and accountability, and that the necessary steps be taken to strengthen the society’s governance and functioning.

“This will help maintain confidence in the Law Society as an institution.”

Tong said MinLaw will continue to follow developments closely, including updates by the council on the steps being taken to address the issues identified in the report.

In a LinkedIn post on Aug 14, Law Society president Tan Cheng Han highlighted confidentiality concerns in addressing the calls for disclosure.

He said those who assisted in the investigations were assured that any information they provide would be shared with only those who need to know for the purposes of the investigation.

Tan said members who attended the meeting broadly recognised the need to protect the privacy of these individuals and to seek their permission for their identities to be revealed, or for their names to be redacted.

“As I explained to members, the council must honour the promise made to them and will need time to reach out and consult the individuals concerned and respect their wishes, many of whom are former staff members of the Law Society.”

He acknowledged the “passionate exchanges” at the meeting, but stressed that the session was primarily a constructive and meaningful discussion between the council and members.

Tan noted that the members were updated on the progress made on a strengthened whistleblowing framework and a more comprehensive travel policy.

“Our focus remains on implementing the recommendations, strengthening governance, and working together as a profession with mutual respect,” he said. 

Senior criminal lawyer Shashi Nathan, who was at the meeting, said Tan handled the session admirably and fairly despite the “difficult conversation”.

It was heartening that the council was working to improve things, he said, but there was not enough information to piece together what actually happened.

Nathan was also grateful for the law minister’s latest comments.

“The Bar just needs the complete picture,” he said.