Speech by Minister Shanmugam at Valedictory Reference in honour of Justice Chao Hick Tin

27 SEP 2017

27 Sep 2017 Posted in Speeches

The Honourable Chief Justice,
Honourable Judges and Judicial Commissioners of the Supreme Court,
DPM Teo,
Prof Jayakumar,
AG,
President, Law Society,
Registrar, Supreme Court,
Ladies and Gentlemen

We have come here to honour and celebrate Justice Chao, his exceptional life and service to this country.
I thank the Honourable Chief Justice for giving me this opportunity.
It is a privilege to join in this tribute, to a person who has dedicated his entire life and career to Singapore.
Justice Chao has been in public service for 50 years :
- As a Judge,
- As a lawyer in AGC, ultimately becoming the AG,
- And beyond the law, in the Volunteer Special Constabulary (VSC).
As a Judge, he is the only Judge who has served under all 4 of our post-independence Chief Justices.
At AGC, he held a wide array of roles, and rose through the ranks, to become the Head of Civil Division. And became AG as well.
Beyond the law, Justice Chao served in the VSC for 20 years. He was our first volunteer Commander, something not many people may know.
In the limited time we have, it is difficult to do justice to all his contributions. But I will try and sketch out some vignettes.
1. IN AGC
Justice Chao spent over 20 years in AGC. Joined in 1967, after his pupillage. At that time, AGC had only about 25 lawyers.
As a Legal Officer, he protected, advanced Singapore’s interests in the international arena.
Everyone knows about his involvement in the Pedra Branca case. He was involved right from the beginning, in the late 1970s.
Also a key member of the team that negotiated the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Professor Jayakumar, who worked closely with Justice Chao on these issues, will say more about both these aspects.
The importance of his contributions in these areas cannot be overstated.
I will highlight one other significant point, which not many people may know.
Within a year of joining AGC, in 1968, at the age of 25, Mr Chao, as he then was, was sent to a meeting in the United Nations (UN), to represent Singapore. It was the UN Conference on the Law of Treaties.
The young Mr Chao – found himself in the middle of giants of international law. One of the American delegates was Professor Myres McDougal, a leading authority on international law. Two other delegates, Professor Roberto Ago and Mr Taslim Elias, went on to become ICJ Judges.
In Justice Chao’s own words, he felt both “considerable excitement and concern” to be part of such an “august gathering of experts”.
But what transpired showed Justice Chao’s wisdom beyond his years.
During the discussions, the Malaysian representative acknowledged that:

“Some treaties might be so fundamental to the very existence of States that they simply could not be dispensed with, whatever political differences might arise.

For example, the new island State of Singapore was dependent on Malaysia for its water supply; The treaty under which Malaysia had to supply a certain quantity of water daily to Singapore could not be terminated or suspended between the two States for any political reason.”
Justice Chao heard this. He seized on it. He had the presence of mind and astuteness to quickly realise that this must be put on record.
Water at that time, from Malaysia, was linked to our very survival. Mr Lee Kuan Yew and later, Mr Eddie Barker, played a crucial role:
1. In drafting the Water Treaties,
2. Guaranteeing them in the Separation Agreement,
3. And making sure they were enshrined in the Malaysian Constitution.
In that context, to have an acknowledgment from the Malaysian representative, at the UN, in these terms, was very valuable.
Justice Chao quickly jumped in. He reiterated what the Malaysian representative had said, and I quote:

“that the representative of Malaysia had said that even the severance of diplomatic relations, which he hoped would never occur, would not affect the water agreement between Singapore and Malaysia.”
He made sure it went on official record - Malaysia’s express confirmation that our water agreements cannot be terminated, whatever political differences might arise.
Lawyers will understand the importance of an acknowledgment, in those terms. And the importance of having that acknowledgment, written into the record, at the UN, in black and white. It still is there.
Because in the nature of things, there can be one view in 1968, 3 years after Separation. And another view – 30 years later.
Not everyone may recall, but in 2002, 15 years ago, Malaysia’s then-PM Dr Mahathir criticised the water agreements, as being unfair. He said, by reference to the water agreements:

“Well, international agreements have been broken before. I have seen people go to war even, which is not by agreement.”

“They don’t go to war by agreement. They don’t say that this thing cannot be resolved so they go to war, but they still go to war. I am not talking about going to war with Singapore, I am just giving an example.”
Various other statements, from time to time, have been made along these lines.
When these things are said, across the Causeway, we note with confidence the Treaties and, of course, with confidence the exchange in the UN, which is there in black and white, for us to refer to, if it ever becomes necessary.
And, as Mr Lee had put it, Singapore would have “to go in, forcibly if need be… to restore the water flow”.
This is just one vignette, though a critical one, relating to Singapore - you can say relating to one of our arteries.
We owe Justice Chao a deep debt of gratitude for this, and many other ways in which he protected and advanced Singapore’s interests.
1. AS A JUDGE
Justice Chao was appointed a JC in 1987. He spent 28 years on the bench, and authored over 600 written judgments.
He was known amongst lawyers for his composure, judicial temperament – kindness, calmness, and a joy to appear before. The Chief Justice outlined his qualities, which all members of the Bar would agree with.
In the 1980s, appearing in some of our Courts could be like being caught in a tempest. So the calmness and kindness in Justice Chao’s court was like getting a safe refuge.
Coincidentally, I appeared before Justice Chao in my first significant High Court case. I was 28 when I took on the case. The case was imprinted in my memory for a number of reasons – I will come back to this later.
I was acting for the Defendant. The case was passed from a senior Partner to a junior Partner and then to me, then a 2nd year qualified lawyer. Basically, because no one wanted to do the case.
Why? I can put it this way – to put it delicately, the Court would have had considerable difficulties assessing who was being truthful, between the parties.
Set for hearing for several days.
Given the nature of the evidence, the documents, as objective evidence, would be important.
We appeared before Justice Chao, who was fairly new on the Bench.
I had applied to strike out the Claim, a very substantial one, for a series of reasons.
Counsel on other side was the late Mr Karthigesu, who went on to sit in the Court of Appeal.
As I mentioned earlier, this case is imprinted into my memory for a few reasons. For many of us, our first significant case or hearing - we will remember. I will mention two other important reasons why I remember the case.
First, I was very fortunate to have come before Justice Chao. At that time, I had many views on the case, and, sometimes spoke out of turn. I think I may have been a little impetuous – put it down to my youth. Justice Chao, however, controlled proceedings admirably and with calmness, patience, and kindness. He would give a quizzical look, and sometimes tell me kindly to wait for my turn - all with good humour.
The second reason I remember the hearing: Mr Karthigesu was very kind, courtly, gentlemanly and took my interruptions, in his stride. And advised me, now and then, very gently, kindly, on what I should do.
Justice Chao and Mr Karthigesu knew each other very well. It was a small profession. I was unknown to either of them.
Nevertheless, throughout the several days I received the best treatment a lawyer can expect from a Judge and from Counsel on the other side.
In the end, Justice Chao struck out the Claim, in a very detailed judgment. I thought to myself: this is a brave judgment, to strike out a large claim, on the basis of non-discovery. Would have been so much easier to find other ways of dealing with it.
But that is Justice Chao - He will do what he believes is right, without fear or favour. He always did what you expect from a Court: to do what he thought was right. You may agree, disagree, but you know he believed in it, and he has taken his time to think about it, and came to a view.
I appeared before Justice Chao in many other cases, after that. When I ask myself how he might rule – I leave aside the legal technicalities, and ask: really, what is the common sense answer, what is justice on the facts? And I know that he will try and get to that.
That comes through repeatedly. Earlier this year, we read about a case - a mother was charged with criminal breach of trust. The lady had stood as guarantor for a friend, who had borrowed from an unlicensed moneylender. Friend went missing. Moneylender came after her, and threatened her young son. Out of desperation, the lady misappropriated money from her employer. On appeal, Justice Chao reduced her custodial sentence. Said it was understandable that a mother may not act rationally, when confronted with a direct threat to her child’s safety.
Many in the audience will also remember the case of Pius Gilbert Louis. Then-AG, Mr Chan Sek Keong, filed a criminal reference to clarify the limits of the High Court’s sentencing jurisdiction. The sentence in question was meted out by the then Chief Justice. Justice Chao presided over the Court of Appeal coram hearing the reference, which ultimately ruled that the Chief Justice had exceeded his sentencing jurisdiction. Justice Chao delivered the Court’s judgment, focusing solely on the legal merits of the case before him. That is the measure of the man - Always does what is fair, and right, no matter the parties, and whatever the case.
1. IN THE VSC
Justice Chao was also actively involved in our volunteer police corp – or VSC, for 20 years, until he went onto the Bench.
When he first joined the VSC, part-time NS had just been introduced, bringing young NS-men into the ranks of the VSC. The young Mr Chao offered his expertise, taught law to the young men in the brigade.
In 1981, when VSC went back to being a wholly volunteer force, Justice Chao became its first volunteer commander. He was the first volunteer police officer to ever hold the title of “Assistant Commissioner”.
He led the VSC during an important transition period. And organised house-to-house recruitment exercises to attract volunteers.
Gave of his personal time, for 20 years, even while he was busy at AGC. Reveals his whole-hearted dedication to service.

CONCLUDING REMARKS
I will conclude by quoting what Judge Learned Hand once said, of another judge – it is very apt, for Justice Chao :

“He was wise because his spirit was uncontaminated, because he knew no violence, or hatred, or envy, or jealousy or ill-will…

I believe that it was this purity that chiefly made him the judge we so much revere; more than his learning, his acuteness, and his fabulous industry.

…[I]t was a rare and good fortune that brought to such eminence a man so reserved, so unassuming, so retiring, so gracious to high and low, and so serene.”
I think everyone will agree that these words fit Justice Chao completely.
Likewise, it has been Singapore’s good fortune to have had a Judge like Justice Chao. He embodies the noblest aspirations of our profession and how a Judge should be.
Justice Chao – for everything that you have done:

For the profession
For the law
And ultimately, for Singapore -

Thank you.

I wish you a very happy and fulfilling retirement.

Last updated on 13 Nov 2017