- Joined
- Aug 6, 2008
- Messages
- 19,724
- Points
- 83
Compulsory pro bono work? Some reject idea
Lawyers will have to offer free legal aid for 16 hours a year under proposal
ALTHOUGH about half of the criminal offenders here are unrepresented in court, some of Singapore's 4,200 lawyers recently said they are against the proposal of 16 compulsory hours of free legal work a year.
Lawyers who attended a townhall meeting on Nov 27 told The Straits Times that the majority of those present were against making free legal work compulsory.
One of the lawyers present - who did not want to be named - estimated that 90 per cent of the lawyers at the tense meeting took this stance.
Mr Gopinath Pillai, 42, chairman of the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme (Clas), said he has seen people pleading guilty in court just because they did not have access to lawyers or were unfamiliar with their legal rights.
Lawyer Gloria James, 42, said some defendants are advised that their offences are minor and they do not need a lawyer as they would only be fined. But they are not told of the consequences of having a criminal record, she said.
She said pro bono work should be made compulsory for junior lawyers with up to three years in practice.
"They would need to be exposed to all the different practices of the law," she said.
Last year, the Subordinate Courts handled 234,141 charges and summonses. One-third of the accused who claimed trial did not have a lawyer at the pre-trial conference stage at which - among other procedures - the judge sets the trial date.
Those who face capital charges in the High Court are assured of legal representation under the Legal Assistance Scheme for Capital Offences. But those facing non-capital charges who cannot afford a lawyer can seek help under Clas at the Law Society of Singapore's Pro Bono Services Office.
These applicants need to pass a means test to qualify for free legal aid. Last year, 245 offenders benefited from the scheme. As of Nov 30, lawyers had been assigned to 295 people for free.
Under a proposed Community Legal Services scheme, whose details were issued in a discussion paper by the Singapore Academy of Law (SAL) on Oct 31, lawyers must do 16 hours of free legal work each year for low-income and disadvantaged Singaporeans.
Lawyers could fulfil their hours by taking on criminal cases or providing advice at legal clinics. SAL asked the legal fraternity and public for feedback by Nov 21.
Lawyer Barry Delaney, in his 60s, who attended the townhall meeting, told The Straits Times: "It seems to be an oxymoron when one is forced to do charity."
"Those who were present were not happy. And I think those who turned up for the meeting were already doing pro bono work," added Mr Delaney, who does such work. He estimated that 30 lawyers attended the meeting.
Another lawyer who was present, Mr Andrew Goh, 39, was unhappy that the legal fraternity had been picked to do compulsory pro bono work.
"I am against the idea of making it compulsory for a sector in Singapore to solve a wider social problem," said Mr Goh, who also does some pro bono work.
The feeling among law students is that compulsory pro bono work is contrived, and resembles the Community Involvement Programme (CIP) in school.
But the students from the National University of Singapore (NUS) and Singapore Management University (SMU) acknowledged that it is a positive step.
"Having a bare quota to fulfil will be analogous to the CIP system... But it would (still) be a nudge towards what most lawyers are already inclined to do," said Mr Norvin Chan, 21, a first-year student at NUS.
Mr Victor Looi, 21, a first-year SMU student, agreed: "(The scheme) would be a good start in inculcating in lawyers the importance of community service."
Lawyers will have to offer free legal aid for 16 hours a year under proposal
ALTHOUGH about half of the criminal offenders here are unrepresented in court, some of Singapore's 4,200 lawyers recently said they are against the proposal of 16 compulsory hours of free legal work a year.
Lawyers who attended a townhall meeting on Nov 27 told The Straits Times that the majority of those present were against making free legal work compulsory.
One of the lawyers present - who did not want to be named - estimated that 90 per cent of the lawyers at the tense meeting took this stance.
Mr Gopinath Pillai, 42, chairman of the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme (Clas), said he has seen people pleading guilty in court just because they did not have access to lawyers or were unfamiliar with their legal rights.
Lawyer Gloria James, 42, said some defendants are advised that their offences are minor and they do not need a lawyer as they would only be fined. But they are not told of the consequences of having a criminal record, she said.
She said pro bono work should be made compulsory for junior lawyers with up to three years in practice.
"They would need to be exposed to all the different practices of the law," she said.
Last year, the Subordinate Courts handled 234,141 charges and summonses. One-third of the accused who claimed trial did not have a lawyer at the pre-trial conference stage at which - among other procedures - the judge sets the trial date.
Those who face capital charges in the High Court are assured of legal representation under the Legal Assistance Scheme for Capital Offences. But those facing non-capital charges who cannot afford a lawyer can seek help under Clas at the Law Society of Singapore's Pro Bono Services Office.
These applicants need to pass a means test to qualify for free legal aid. Last year, 245 offenders benefited from the scheme. As of Nov 30, lawyers had been assigned to 295 people for free.
Under a proposed Community Legal Services scheme, whose details were issued in a discussion paper by the Singapore Academy of Law (SAL) on Oct 31, lawyers must do 16 hours of free legal work each year for low-income and disadvantaged Singaporeans.
Lawyers could fulfil their hours by taking on criminal cases or providing advice at legal clinics. SAL asked the legal fraternity and public for feedback by Nov 21.
Lawyer Barry Delaney, in his 60s, who attended the townhall meeting, told The Straits Times: "It seems to be an oxymoron when one is forced to do charity."
"Those who were present were not happy. And I think those who turned up for the meeting were already doing pro bono work," added Mr Delaney, who does such work. He estimated that 30 lawyers attended the meeting.
Another lawyer who was present, Mr Andrew Goh, 39, was unhappy that the legal fraternity had been picked to do compulsory pro bono work.
"I am against the idea of making it compulsory for a sector in Singapore to solve a wider social problem," said Mr Goh, who also does some pro bono work.
The feeling among law students is that compulsory pro bono work is contrived, and resembles the Community Involvement Programme (CIP) in school.
But the students from the National University of Singapore (NUS) and Singapore Management University (SMU) acknowledged that it is a positive step.
"Having a bare quota to fulfil will be analogous to the CIP system... But it would (still) be a nudge towards what most lawyers are already inclined to do," said Mr Norvin Chan, 21, a first-year student at NUS.
Mr Victor Looi, 21, a first-year SMU student, agreed: "(The scheme) would be a good start in inculcating in lawyers the importance of community service."
