Singapore is set to join Australia, Hong Kong and England in requiring lawyers to undertake mandatory continuing legal education, while overseas-qualified lawyers no longer have to complete a compulsory course to practise locally.
Law minister K Shanmugam announced the changes in Parliament as part of a broad raft of "essential measures" to improve the legal industry. "A comprehensive and holistic legal education framework is necessary, because most essential for a vibrant legal sector are good quality lawyers," he said. "Therefore, ensuring that legal education and training is top notch is extremely important."
The minister's proposals came after a report on the legal industry submitted by Justice VK Rajah found that regulatory restrictions were acting as a deterrent to joining the profession, which in turn could lead to a future shortage of lawyers.
Overseas-qualified lawyers will no longer have to complete the mandatory one year Diploma of Singapore Law (DipSing) course in order to practise locally. This requirement has been scrapped in favour of a three stage process - two exams and a training contract. Schemes allowing foreign lawyers to practise local law after completing a one-year stint with a domestic law firm have also been simplified, with the qualification system streamlined into a single exam.
Meanwhile, education for fledgling lawyers is also set to be revamped. Firms taking on graduates will be required to provide more 'hands-on' experience, and will also have more responsibility for supervising and mentoring new trainees with the introduction of new training contracts.
The changes were welcomed by industry commentators. "The ministry should be applauded for its decisiveness. I fully agree that the one-year DipSing course had outlived its utility, because you have very good legal minds qualifying in overseas universities deterred from returning, as they had to do the DipSing," said Lee & Lee litigation partner Christopher De Souza.
De Souza, who is also a local MP, had made suggestions that regulations be revised after attending a conference in London, where he met with overseas qualified lawyers who expressed their concerns about restrictions. He said that both law firms and lawyers would now benefit from the changes. "The returning lawyer gets his pay check one year earlier than they would have. They study on the revamped PLC, on subjects extremely relevant to practice. Because of the revision of training contracts, they are learning at a very early stage of their legal development. Law firms will have a lot more choice [in candidature] to choose. Competition between candidates will increase, which only means better service to the client," he explained.
The broader aim of the measures is to address an anticipated decline in lawyers. Overall, it is projected the measures will seek to increase lawyer numbers by up to 70%. However, this surge in lawyers to the profession has attracted criticism for potentially decreasing the quality of candidates.
"That criticism can easily be answered with a very high standard bar exam - so that the people who do get through and qualify are fully able and equipped to practise," said De Souza. "The [measures] will increase the supply of lawyers, and well-qualified lawyers who have passed a high standard will then allow market forces to recruit top talent. That again can only benefit law firms' clients, because you will have a number of good lawyers working on your case, rather than fewer."