Guest of Honour Speech by Minister of State for Law Murali Pillai at the Launch of the “Stephen Brogan-Jones Day Legal Fellowship on the Rule of Law”

10 DEC 2024

I. Introduction

Professor Tan Eng Chye, President of the National University of Singapore

Professor Andrew Simester, Dean of the National University of Singapore Faculty of Law

Mr Greg Shumaker, Jones Day Global Managing Partner

Ms Sushma Jobanputra, Partner-in-Charge of the Jones Day Singapore Office

Ladies and gentlemen
A very good evening to you.

  1. Thank you for inviting me to this evening’s event to commemorate the launch of the Stephen Brogan – Jones Day Legal Fellowship on the Rule of Law.

II. Celebrating Jones Day’s endowment to NUS Law

  1. I warmly welcome Jones Day’s endowment to NUS Law, in honour of former Managing Partner Mr Stephen Brogan.

a) Mr Brogan has been a strong advocate for the strengthening of legal systems and advancement of the rule of law in Asia. In fact, he has written quite prolifically in this area, and I have seen some articles that he has written as well. He recognises the critical role that the rule of law plays in economic integration and human development.

b) I commend the Jones Day Foundation for celebrating his remarkable legacy through this endowment.

  1. My congratulations to NUS Law, the Centre for Asian Legal Studies (CALS), and CALS’s leadership for bringing CALS to where it is today.

a) CALS has made remarkable strides in cementing its reputation as a leading centre for research and thought leadership in Asian legal systems.

b) Over the past decade, CALS has played a crucial role in advancing the rule of law across the region, by fostering a deeper understanding of Asia’s diverse legal traditions and systems.

c) A key milestone in this journey was the launch of the Jones Day — CALS Visiting Professorship on the Rule of Law in Asia in 2022. This has enriched CALS’s mission by bringing distinguished legal scholars and practitioners to Singapore, facilitating dialogues on the challenges and opportunities in shaping the rule of law in Asia.

III. Singapore’s approach to the rule of law

  1. I would like to take this occasion to share some reflections on Singapore’s approach to the rule of law.
  1. Many countries say they adhere to the rule of law. However, the true test lies in upholding it during the most challenging times. For Singapore, adherence to the rule of law is not merely aspirational, but a necessity borne out of the exigencies of our history.

a) We are a young nation, having celebrated 59 years of independence recently. Those familiar with the turbulent times which led to Singapore being thrust with independence will agree that Singapore was and will always remain an “improbable nation”.

b) We are a small State with only about 700 square kilometres in land size, we have few natural resources, and a diverse population that lives together almost cheek by jowl.

  1. Our shared values have defined and made Singapore the nation it is today:

a) Equal opportunities for all,

b) A commitment to meritocracy,

c) Equality before the law and zero tolerance for corruption,

d) A commitment to free trade and the market system; and

e) Developing our primary natural resource – our people – who form the foundation of the country.

  1. Our nation building effort continues. However, we have made tangible progress. A big part of this reason is that we have installed the rule of law as the bedrock of our governance and dealings; be it between people or with Government.

The separation of powers in Singapore

  1. Our system is based on the Westminster model of government and the separation of powers.
  1. We have three branches of government, each operating independently within its sphere of power and responsibility.
  1. Our Constitution, which is enshrined as the supreme law of our land, defines the responsibilities of each branch of government:

a) The Parliament – which consists primarily of elected members – passes laws for our country. It has the power to amend the Constitution, and thus decides on the overarching framework for our system.

b) The Executive is drawn from the governing party. It administers the laws and formulates policies to secure these objectives.

c) The Judiciary, referring to Supreme Court, is appointed by the President if he, acting in his discretion, concurs with the advice of the Prime Minister. It applies the law faithfully when disputes are brought before it.

Interplay between the different pillars of government

  1. For our system of governance to work, there must be mutual trust and respect for each branch’s expertise and competence.
  1. To illustrate how the Singapore model works for us, let me say a few words about the repeal of section 377A of the Penal Code in 2022.

a) There had been several challenges over the years to the constitutionality of S377A – a law from colonial times that criminalised sex between men.

b) In its judgment in Tan Seng Kee, the Singapore Court of Appeal held that the appellants did not have the standing to mount the constitutional challenges against S377A, but postulated in obiter that S377A may be unconstitutional under Article 12 of our Constitution, which guarantees equal protection.

c) The Court of Appeal’s comments indicated a significant legal risk that section 377A will be struck down the next time the issue arises before it.

d) Importantly, the Court recognised that politically contentious societal issues like S377A ought to be resolved through the political process in Parliament. It noted that the Legislature and Executive were best placed to decide such issues through the “public forum of democratic discourse”, where compromises and consensus can be achieved.

e) Indeed, Parliament, comprising elected representatives, is therefore best placed to accommodate different interests and opinions, and make the necessary compromises.

f) Leaving the Judiciary, an unelected body, to resolve such controversial issues would not be right. The Courts’ legitimacy is jeopardised if perceived as overstepping their boundaries.

g) Following the Singapore Court of Appeal’s judgment, the Executive and Parliament worked closely together to put the S377A issue through the necessary processes.

h) S377A was repealed later that year, and was accompanied by a significant compromise, where the definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman – as defined in the Women’s Charter – was constitutionally safeguarded. This quid pro quo sought to provide clarity and assurance to different segments of society, while advancing inclusivity.

  1. Although the repeal of 377A would not satisfy all segments of society, it has been met with calm and normalcy. This has reflected a collective respect for the rule of law and the stability it underpins.

Checks and balances

  1. As a matter of policy, the conferment of power is balanced by an accountability process, so that no power is unfettered. Let me illustrate this with our Internal Security Act (“ISA”):

a) Under the ISA, the Minister for Home Affairs is empowered to order detention without trial, on the grounds of national security. This allows us to detain, for example, persons who have become radicalised as terrorists. However, before an Order for Detention is made, the President must be satisfied that doing so is necessary.

b) If the person appeals, there is a separate process – an independent Advisory Board, chaired by a Supreme Court Judge, appointed by the President. The Advisory Board must consider any appeal within 3 months of that person’s detention, and make recommendations thereon to the President, who is elected by the people and has the final say in the matter.

c) Given the sensitive nature of national security, the Executive is put in charge, and there is no judicial review of decisions under the provisions of the ISA, save in regard to questions of compliance with procedure.

d) Our approach was borne out of Singapore’s history – where we witnessed the insurgence of communism after World War II. The practical effect has been that acts of terrorism are thwarted, without having to wait for innocent people to get hurt or killed. Let me share some examples:

i) A few years ago, a Singaporean youth, who was a protestant Christian, was radicalised by far-right extremist ideologies. He planned to conduct terrorist attacks against Muslims at mosques in Singapore and was detained. He has since been released, after making good progress in his rehabilitation and is no longer assessed to pose an imminent security threat.

ii) A 17-year-old Singaporean was recently detained after investigations found that he was a staunch ISIS supporter and planned to conduct a terrorist attack in Singapore. He also planned to travel to Syria to engage in armed violence.

  1. Our approach is recognised by some countries as draconian, but because of it, Singaporeans are able to go about their lives with peace of mind.
  1. It is the people’s vote that serves as the ultimate check and balance. Our highly educated electorate will decide for itself on the policies, and decide on the Government’s performance, with a scorecard at the end of each term.

Outcomes-based approach to governance and rule of law

  1. Singapore’s approach to the rule of law is focused on tangible outcomes. That is to say, our citizens’ lives must be improved and there must be socio-economic stability. Here, I give 3 key indicators of this stability:

a) First, absence of corruption: In our early years of independence, Singapore faced significant corruption challenges, and our political leaders decided to prioritise the eradication of corruption.

i) Today, our Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (“CPIB”) plays a pivotal role in combatting corruption. There are structural safeguards enshrined in the Constitution to enable the CPIB to carry out its functions independently:

A. Under our Constitution, the Director of CPIB reports only to the Prime Minister, not any other Minister.

B. If the Prime Minister refuses to give consent for CPIB to investigate a case, the Director can go directly to the President for his concurrence to proceed with investigations.

ii) We have prevailed in the fight against corruption, but cannot take it for granted. We continue to adopt a zero-tolerance approach, to ensure no one is above the law. Many of you would be aware of the recently concluded case involving a former Minister, Mr S Iswaran. That was a result of the CPIB’s proactive and thorough investigations.

iii) Our approach has been working for us. Singapore was ranked 5th globally on Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index last year, and 3rd on the World Justice Project’s (“WJP”) Rule of Law Index for the Absence of Corruption this year.

b) Second, access to justice: The rule of law would only be a theory, if citizens do not have access to justice. This is an area that the Singapore Government is heavily involved in. Some significant steps we have taken include:

i) Setting up the Protection from Harassment Court and the Community Disputes Resolution Tribunal. These provide simplified processes to allow Singaporeans to enforce their rights more easily.

ii) Over the years, we have implemented measures to simplify family law proceedings, making it easier for litigants-in-person to understand the processes.

iii) The Public Defender’s Office institutionalised public defence within our criminal justice system, and we have made available criminal defence aid to more Singaporeans. In this regard, the income limit was raised from the 25th percentile to cover up to the 35th percentile of resident households.

iv) The Legal Aid Bureau (“LAB”) provides the less privileged legal aid in civil matters, including matrimonial issues, monetary claims, and probate matters. LAB’s Intelligent Legal Assistance Bot (“iLAB”) provides basic legal information and can even generate simple legal documents.

These show that the average Singaporean has access to justice – through low-cost legal proceedings, simplified procedures, and with the support of the government and our legal profession.

c) Third, businesses trust in Singapore and Singapore’s legal system. A strong rule of law, upheld through stable and progressive legal frameworks, instils confidence in investors, making Singapore an attractive destination for investment. This creates many good jobs and opportunities for Singaporeans. Today, Singapore ranks 2nd globally in the World Bank Ease of Doing Business Rankings, and 1st in the sub-category of Enforcing Contracts.

Singapore’s approach to the international rule of law

  1. Internationally, Singapore champions a rules-based approach and strives to promote a global order governed by the international rule of law. In a system where “might is right”, small States like us would stand little chance of survival.
  1. Singapore therefore actively participates in regional and international fora, including ASEAN and the United Nations, to contribute to the development of international law and advocate for principles that ensure fairness and stability for all.
  1. Singapore plays a significant role in legal harmonisation efforts taking place in multilateral institutions, such as the UN Commission on International Trade Law; the Hague Conference on Private International Law; and the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law. Such efforts uphold the principle that laws – not power – govern relations between nations. This fosters trust, predictability, and cooperation in the international community.

IV. Closing remarks

  1. In closing, I extend my heartfelt congratulations to Jones Day and CALS on the establishment of the Stephen Brogan – Jones Day Legal Fellowship on the Rule of Law at NUS Law.
  1. Singapore is a steadfast champion of the rule of law, and we recognise that scholarly research and education play a critical role in its promotion. This Fellowship will help address pressing challenges facing our region and reaffirm the centrality of the rule of law as a cornerstone of peace, stability, and progress. It will help foster fresh perspectives, nurture future leaders, and deepen engagement on issues that matter to the region and the world.
  1. I look forward to continued partnerships between the legal profession, academia, and government to foster dialogue on building understanding and upholding the rule of law in Asia.
  1. Thank you very much.

Last updated on 10 December 2024