Closing Address by Minister for Law and Second Minister for Home Affairs Edwin Tong SC at Legal Profession Symposium

Honourable Judges,

Fellow Members of the Bar,

Friends and Colleagues,

Ladies and Gentlemen

Introduction

1.                 Good evening, everyone.

2.                 I would like to start by thanking all of you for your presence. I think that is perhaps the most important and the most significant step that we can take.

3.                 Earlier on, I heard “What do we do?”, “Where do we go from here?” And so on. The fact that we are present, exchanging ideas frankly with a lot of candour, speaking honestly, looking at ourselves and our own firms – that has been a big step. So thank you very much to all of you for being here.

4.                 I would also like to start by thanking the Singapore Academy of Law (SAL) for not just inviting me here today, but really organising the entire Symposium. It did not come easy because it took some time – over the course of the last few months to get us – to where we are today. So thank you very much to SAL for today’s event.

5.                 I was not able to join you for today’s discussions and dialogues, but I have been kept informed of what you have been discussing – the points that have come up and the suggestions. I was told that participation was active, with a very open sharing of ideas throughout this Symposium.

6.                 From what I have heard, there is a broad agreement on the challenges that faces our profession. I think we are less clear on what steps to take, but I think it is a very good first step. More importantly, there has been a genuine determination, not just to understand what the issues are, and understand that there have been problems that have been raised in the past, but there is a determination to fix it. There is a determination to take solid, concrete action and identify practical solutions. That is encouraging, because the future of our profession will be shaped by the choices that we make today.

7.                 In terms of how we see the pipeline of talent coming through, the sustainability of practice as we understand it to be, and how we would like it to be, we are really at a critical inflection point. I think it is important for us to really sit up, pay attention, and not just look at it as a cost or investment, as the panel said earlier, but really as something that defines the future of this profession.

8.                 Of course, a lot of the observations and comments have been framed against the backdrop of the recently published Legal Profession Sustainability Report.  Since it has been published, it has of course generated a lot of attention.

9.                 I spent 25 years in practice before moving to public service. When I read the report, which I did, practically cover to cover, I identified with a lot of the points that were raised. I read many of the verbatim interviews, the words that were chosen by the lawyers who were interviewed, and I could relate to many of them. In fact, over the years, it is not uncommon for friends and colleagues exchanging “war” stories over a social function – talking about the experiences in practice, stories about being sharply corrected in court, being told off by senior partners or clients, and maybe on occasion, having some projectiles hurled at you as well. We have all experienced that at some point. More common in the past, I suppose, than nowadays. But I had my fair share.

10.             When I once complained about projectiles like a stapler being hurled at you, someone said “You should just learn how to catch it”. So I suspect many of you would have your own “war” stories, especially the senior ones.

11.             When I read the Report, frankly, not much came as a surprise. Long hours, relentless pressures, difficult workplace cultures in some parts of the profession, demoralising experiences in court, and the constant challenge of balancing professional excellence with personal well-being, which is not unimportant. Many of these issues have been discussed within the profession for years.

12.             But as I set out in an article I put on LinkedIn a couple of weeks ago, the fact that they have persisted for so long is precisely why we now cannot afford to be complacent, and why we now must take action before it is too late. If anything, it underscores the need to understand these issues a lot more deeply and be able to address them a lot more effectively.

13.             That is in some ways why I welcome the Report. It has really brought into open frank, candid conversations that have taken place quietly within the profession. I think that is a very good thing. Every strong profession must have the confidence to examine itself honestly – not to assign blame or dwell on the past, but to always ask ourselves how we can do better.

14.             So this evening, I thought I would speak to you and just wrap up on three aspects.

a.                 First, to put some parts of the Report into context.

b.                 Second, for those who were not present at ‘The Next Charter’ event hosted by MinLaw in March, I would like to briefly set out what I see as my vision for the future of the profession, so that we have a common reference point.

c.                 Third, I want to talk about how all of us, and by that I mean the Government, the Judiciary, SAL, the Law Society of Singapore, law schools, law firms, in-house counsel, indeed every member of the profession and industry, how can we come together to build that future. Because building a stronger legal profession is a responsibility for us all to carry.

Context

15.             But let me start with the Report. If the findings are not entirely new, what then is the Report telling us? I think there are three important points to think about.

16.             The first is this: attrition is real and the numbers bear that out, but attrition alone does not tell us all that much. Lawyers have always left practice at some point in their career, usually at the earlier frame of their career. The attrition numbers that we looked at over the past 10 years provide some gauge, and they have remained broadly stable. Between 2015 and 2024, around 60% remained in practice after five years, and around 40% after 10. Every year, it is about the same.

17.             If I look back at my own cohort – more years ago than I now care to admit – a significant number of my classmates are no longer in private practice. That was part of the profession then, and it is part of the profession today. That is something that we will have to confront.

18.             At the same time, nor is this unique to the legal profession. It is not just the legal profession that is seeing this trend or this phenomenon. Across many professions, careers are becoming a lot less linear. We do not expect that people come into a profession at an early age, at 24 or 25 years old, and stay on. Now with lifespans what it is, and career paths what it is, staying on for the next 50 or 60 years, is not likely and increasingly unlikely.

19.             In fact, a Landbase study earlier this year found that Gen Z workers are expected to hold up to 17 jobs across seven different careers over their working lives. That is the profile of the Gen Z worker.

20.             So to me, the real question is not whether people are leaving, but rather it is why they are leaving. Are they pursuing different aspirations and opportunities? Or are they pushed away because legal practice has become intolerable, unsustainable, where otherwise they would have liked to be in practice?

21.             I think that distinction matters a lot. If someone discovers that their passion perhaps lies elsewhere, we should wish them well. We have seen many classmates who have transitioned into some other profession, and have done really well and been really happy. They still use their forensic analysis and skillsets in whatever profession they are in, and they have done well, but just not in the practice of law. We wish them well.

22.             But on the other hand, if talented lawyers are leaving because parts of legal practice have become unnecessarily unattractive or unsustainable, then I think we need to understand why, and we need to do something about it.

23.             The second point is that not every departure from private practice is a loss to the profession. Many lawyers leave law firms, but they do not leave the law.

24.             In fact, SAL recently surveyed this year’s newly qualified lawyers. You would have seen the headlines – about one in three are expected to leave their current firm within the next three years. This is a headline that has been much cited recently to make the point that attrition is growing, and that it is serious. But it is also a headline that we need to unpack a little bit more, and look more closely at the findings.

25.             In particular, at the survey, there were 289 respondents who were about to be qualified and working in law firms. They were asked if they might leave their law firms within the next three years, and if so, where might they go. They could pick several options – join another firm, go in-house, join the judicial service, legal service, offshore firm, go to academia or join the Public Defender’s Office (PDO). Only eight of the 289 respondents said that their sole intention, where they only picked one option, was to leave the legal profession altogether. That is less than 3% of the respondents.

26.             That tells me something important – the vast majority, including of those who were surveyed, for which the headline was published, still want careers in the law. They simply see themselves contributing in different ways. Maybe not as a legal practitioner, but as in-house counsel, academics, Government lawyers, or judges, and I see that not as a loss. In fact, it is one of the profession’s strengths.

27.             Senior Minister Shanmugam made a speech at the NUS Law Freshmen Inauguration Ceremony a few days ago. He said that it reflects the breadth of what a legal education prepares you to do, and I agree. Much of our lawyers end up in different fields, and they do really well in different aspects of practice.

28.             A strong legal profession is not defined only by strong legal firms, although that is important. It depends on outstanding lawyers across the entire legal ecosystem, each contributing in different ways to the rule of law and to the administration of justice.

29.             Take in-house counsel as an example. I believe it is a very important profession and a key part of our legal industry. The number of Singapore-qualified in-house counsel more than doubled over the last 10 years.  If you track the number of MNCs who have chosen to locate in Singapore, that is roughly consistent.

30.             That is why we have invested over the years in strengthening the entire legal ecosystem – working with the Singapore Corporate Counsel Association (SCCA), attracting in-house legal teams and legaltech companies – and we will continue to do so, because it is important for Singapore that we have the best of the MNCs located here. And when they come, they will want a Singapore-qualified in-house counsel. So it is a very important function that they are performing.

31.             Which then brings me to my third point. If not every departure is a loss, then we should be clear about what a sustainable legal profession would look like. It is not simply about working fewer hours. Nor is it just about paying people more to work longer hours.

32.             From my conversations with lawyers over the years, I have come to believe that when they first come into practice, or indeed when they first become in-house counsel or join the first employer, it is important to find value and purpose in the job. To see yourself as part of a valuable system, part of a chain, and part of an ecosystem that is positive, that contributes to a purpose, to a passion, and to an outcome that you can see yourself part of. This then makes the sacrifices worthwhile, and based on that, there is a longevity in the vision, in the outlook, and they see a future for themselves in the profession.

33.             I, for one, do not subscribe to the suggestion that lawyers today are afraid of hard work or are unable to withstand the pressure. I think that is not correct. Most lawyers know what it takes to succeed in legal practice, and I do not think they are afraid of putting in the hours or really making the effort to succeed.

34.             We all know that law has never been, and will never be, a regular nine-to-five kind of job. It engages you all the time. I am sure you have the same experience as I used to have when you have a case that is coming up. Anywhere in time you are trying to have a meal, take a shower or do something, an idea pops up in your mind, and you get distracted by it. You come back to your files, you write it down, and you remember it, in case the judges ask you a difficult question. So all of us have had that experience, and we all know what it takes to succeed. I believe today’s lawyers know that too.

35.             But there is a world of difference between hard work that builds you up, that strengthens you, that enriches your experience, and hard work that wears you down. We must make that distinction if we are to succeed in trying to chart a path that deals with the issues raised in the report.

Vision

36.             After all, sustainability, ultimately, is not an end in itself. It is a means to something bigger – building the legal profession for what we want to see in the future. That is the end outcome. We want sustainability because we want a strong pipeline. We want to retain the best and brightest of our legal talents in Singapore. We want them working with us in our legal industry because, ultimately, we want to build a legal profession for Singapore that is the best, if not in the world, at least in Asia, for now.

37.             At ‘The Next Charter’ event that we held in March, I shared my hope that Singapore will not only have one of the world’s leading legal sectors, but also one of the world’s strongest legal professions.

38.             Indeed, we have much to be proud of. Singapore – a small city-state with just 6,400 Singapore-qualified lawyers – is today the second most preferred seat of arbitration in the world. We have built a judiciary, legal institutions, and a legal profession that are trusted, respected, and consistently ranked among the best in the world.

39.             Yes, rankings and accolades are important, because it gives you a sense of where we are, as an indication. But, really, they are not the true measure of a profession’s strength. What matters more to me is whether the best and the brightest young legal talent will still continue to aspire to join the profession here in Singapore; whether lawyers remain proud to belong to it; whether clients continue to place their trust in our lawyers; and whether society continues to see the legal profession as a force for good.

40.             Those, to me, are the true hallmarks of a strong profession. And when we speak of sustainability, what we are really saying is that these hallmarks are what we should all be working towards to achieve.

The Way Forward

41.             So where do we go from here? Unfortunately, there is no single solution. There is no silver bullet. I think we all know that. Building a stronger and more sustainable profession will take time, and more importantly, it will take all of us.

42.             That is why we need to start now. My colleagues and I have been engaging lawyers for many years, and those conversations will continue. Not just to better understand the challenges, but to work with the profession on practical solutions.

43.             But I thought I will share some of our initial thinking. These are not final answers, but these are ideas that we are still mulling over, still refining. But broadly speaking, I thought I will break down my suggestions into three focus areas – our workforce, our workplaces, and our work.

Workforce

44.             I will start with our workforce. When I think back to my own journey, I ask myself: how did I develop as a lawyer? How did I improve from one season to another? Law school, of course, gave me a solid foundation. I am really grateful, as I am sure you all are, to the tutors, lecturers, and law school dean.

45.             Yesterday, I met Professor Lye Lin-Heng (Emeritus Professor at NUS Law) at an event. She looks exactly the same as when I was in law school. She did not say the same about me. These are the people who gave us our most important foundation. But I think the real learning for a practitioner starts after you leave law school, when you enter practice.

46.             In fact, it comes from doing the work from day one – reviewing bundles, drafting court papers, preparing for hearings, meeting clients, watching the experienced lawyers handle difficult clients and difficult cases, and also receiving honest feedback on where I can improve.

47.             I was shattered the first time I had a heavily amended draft letter. When it came back, it was completely unrecognisable. It was red all over, and crossed out all over. My then-mentor said, “You can send out your letter now.” I said, “It’s not even my letter.” But we all had that experience.

48.             I would say this as well: I think it made you stronger. It made me at least more determined to make sure that my next draft will not be as red as the previous draft. But we learn from it. By doing so, we refine ourselves, we get better, and we gradually become entrusted with growing responsibilities. That itself reinforces the confidence and builds you up to be a better lawyer. And that, I think, is how lawyers develop.

49.             I do not think that has changed, and I do not think that this will change for the foreseeable future. But what has changed is the environment that our young lawyers are graduating into and working in. Technology is reshaping our legal practice. Client expectations are evolving. Legal work is becoming more international, more multidisciplinary, and more technology-enabled.

50.             So I think we should ask ourselves a simple question. It is not about how to prepare lawyers only, but really, are we preparing them correctly in the time and age that this season demands? Our universities already do an excellent job teaching the law. But perhaps we can bring education and practice closer together. It has been something that we have been thinking about for a while.

51.             So one idea worth exploring is whether law students should spend a longer period of time whilst they are in law school immersed in legal practice. Perhaps one or even two semesters in a law firm, the Legal Aid Bureau, the Public Defender’s Office (PDO), or another legal setting, instead of just a few weeks or months that are typical today, just to get yourself into a position to apply for a training contract. It is not meant to replace classroom learning, so do not get me wrong, but to complement it with meaningful, real-world experience before they enter the profession full-time.

52.             Preparing students today also means preparing them for a profession that is rapidly changing. I think we cannot teach both curriculum as well as pedagogy in the same way as we used to several decades ago. Around the world, law schools are already rethinking how they prepare the next generation of lawyers.

a.                 Stanford asks students to critique AI-generated legal advice, identify errors and test its reasoning.

b.                 Harvard has partnered with Harvey so students learn to use legal AI tools before they graduate.

c.                 Boston University now offers subjects on AI and litigation, AI and compliance, and also how to recognise hallucinations, bias and confidentiality risks.

d.                 Tsinghua University has introduced comprehensive AI principles governing teaching, assessment as well as academic integrity.

53.             These are some of the innovations out there. I am not saying they are good or not good, but these are the changes that have been made, which we will do well in considering whether they might apply to us. We should study them carefully, not so much to copy them wholesale, as I said, but to understand what works, and what best serves the needs of our own profession.

54.             My Ministry will undertake a broader review of legal education in the context of today’s needs, today’s demands in practice, client demands, as well as the changing ecosystem that is technology.

55.             But no matter how well we prepare our students, the most important learning still begins after they enter practice, just as it did for my generation.

56.             Young lawyers will need opportunities to grow. When I look back, those are the moments that accelerated my own development – when someone trusted me with a little more responsibility. I still remember the first time I stood up in court, and I think those of you who go to court will remember the first time you were asked to stand up and address the court. I cannot recall at all what I said, but I can recall how I felt, which was complete terror. I was petrified. Of course, it got better the next time. So it is very useful to do it repeatedly, and that is why you need to be on your feet.

57.             Those experiences taught lessons that no textbook ever could. That is why I believe we should, as part of our response to ensuring that legal practice is sustainable, create more opportunities for young lawyers to shoulder real responsibility, with the appropriate supervision.

58.             For litigators, one idea worth exploring is whether certain categories of simpler proceedings, and I know it is not easy to define that, or cases below a prescribed value, could ordinarily be argued by junior lawyers below a certain PQE.

59.             Every litigator knows that there is a world of difference between first chair and second chair. As first chair, you have carriage of the case. You make the strategic decisions, often on your feet, on the fly. You prepare differently, and you bear ultimate responsibility for what happens in court. You look at the witness, you look at your opposing counsel, you look at the judge, and all of these different dynamics come to play, and I think nothing ever prepares you for that, except by doing it yourself.

60.             I use litigation as an example because that distinction is particularly clear between the first chair and the second chair, but really, the same principle applies beyond the courtroom. Corporate and commercial lawyers also develop most when they are trusted to lead negotiations, present directly to clients, manage key workstreams, and take ownership of the entire transaction end to end.

61.             In this regard, I am encouraged by initiatives, such as SAL’s Advocacy Pledge 2.0, which encourages law firms to provide young lawyers with structured advocacy opportunities, supervision and feedback. I commend the firms that have stepped forward to do so, and I hope that more will consider doing the same.

62.             I think it is a good programme, and I think young lawyers will find that it is useful. I heard one of the managing partners say earlier that he will do whatever it takes to help young lawyers. I think one step to allow young lawyers the opportunity to hone their craft is to allow young lawyers to do pro-bono work – volunteer with Pro Bono SG, volunteer through the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme (CLAS). It gives you a very good experience. It might not earn you very much by way of billings, but it will give you a lot of confidence and it will hone your craft very well.

63.             So I believe we should make these opportunities more structured and more widely available. We will discuss with the Judiciary, SAL and the Law Society on what more we can do. If we prepare our students well before they enter practice, and continue investing in them once they do, this will only develop confidence, judgment and resilience even more.

64.             I think those are the countermeasures to the growth of AI today. AI can help you with document sorting and organisation. It can read for you, summarise for you, but it can never replace your judgment, your intuition, and your instinct as a lawyer. I think it is particularly important that we focus our programmes on developing that instinct.

65.             At the same time, opportunities cannot simply be created from the top down. It cannot just be commitments made by law firms, by in-house counsel, and say that is how we will implement it. Young lawyers must also, themselves, take ownership of their own development. They should actively seek opportunities to step up, as I said, pro bono cases for example, volunteer for challenging assignments, and really put themselves in situations where they can learn by doing. Because experience cannot simply be given. It must also be sought. It must also be something that a young lawyer wants to seek out.

66.             But as one of the participants here pointed out, learning should not be limited just to young lawyers alone. In today’s times, it goes both ways. In a profession changing as rapidly as ours, infused with technology, learning increasingly goes both ways. Senior lawyers, of course, pass on judgment, ethics and experience, but now younger lawyers have something to offer too – fresh perspectives, technological fluency, and new ways of thinking.

67.             The strongest professions are those where every generation is willing to teach, and every generation is willing to learn. If we can do that, we will not just build a profession of better lawyers, we will build a much stronger profession, resilient for generations to come. It will not be affected by AI. We will rise above the AI challenges.

Workplace

68.             Next, let me turn to our workplaces. As I said, I spent 25 years in practice, but all of those 25 years was with one firm, so I cannot profess to know what every firm is like.

69.             But I know what made me stay for 25 years in that one firm. It was the people around me. Partners who took time to teach me, who challenged my thinking, who, of course, marked up my draft in all red, and who gave me honest feedback, even when it was really difficult to hear, and there were many moments like that. Senior lawyers, who entrusted me with work that stretched me, while being there when I needed guidance.

70.             Looking back, that was the one single factor that shaped me far more than I realised at the time. They taught me not just how to practise law, but what it meant to belong to this profession.

71.             This is consistent with what my Ministry and I have heard through our many conversations with lawyers over the years, even with the findings of the Sustainability Report. That workplace culture matters. Good supervision matters. Mentorship matters. Respect matters a lot. These are not just “soft” issues. They are fundamental to developing good lawyers and sustaining a strong profession.

72.             At the same time, I do not believe the experiences described in the Report is the majority of our profession. They do not define our profession. In my own experience, they probably reflect the actions of a small minority. Unfortunately, it only takes a few individuals to cast a shadow over a profession that is overwhelmingly made up of decent, committed people. One who wants to see their juniors succeed and will mentor them well.

73.             Let’s be clear – nothing excuses poor supervision, inadequate training, harassment, bullying, or the unreasonable treatment of lawyers. Being screamed at or ridiculed or being expected to work unreasonably is simply not acceptable.

74.             These issues must be taken seriously, and I believe that taken together, this kind of conduct is not professional conduct. We need to call it out, and we need to make sure that it gets stamped out for good from our profession.

75.             So where do we go from here? As I said, no single formula. Different firms will have different cultures and different ways of working.

76.             But I think that there can be a baseline set of certain basic values and core behaviours that should be commonplace across our profession. A workplace can be demanding without being demeaning. Feedback can be candid without being disrespectful.

77.             One idea that we have been toying with is considering a Legal Profession Sustainability Code or Guide, something similar to the GenAI Guide that we published some months ago. The GenAI guide was a set of best practices, not having the force of law, not intended to regulate anyone, but to try to drive behaviours in a certain way. That is the same thinking that we have for this code.

78.             It would not prescribe or dictate to law firms how they should run their business or impose a one-size-fits-all model. But it would set out professional norms and workplace behaviours that we should all aspire to, illustrated through practical examples and good practices. How junior lawyers are supervised, how feedback is given and taken, how responsibility is entrusted, and how colleagues treat one another with professionalism and respect.

79.             It would complement the important work already done by SAL through the Lawyers Sustainability Alliance, formerly known as the Mindful Business Movement. The objective is not to regulate culture, but to build a shared understanding of the kind of workplace that we want to see, and that our profession wants to aspire towards.

80.             At the same time, a guide alone will not be sufficient. Culture has to be shaped by people, and passed from one generation to another, which brings me to a point that I think we have been discussing a bit of – which is mentorship.

81.             To me, mentoring is not simply something experienced lawyers do if they have time. It is not something you do if you have a few hours or a bit of spare time after a hearing, and you bring someone into your room and tell them lessons from the hearing, or how we deal with the meeting.

82.             It is a professional obligation one that should be embedded as part and parcel of our professional obligations, especially as senior lawyers towards the younger lawyers.

83.             Historically, young lawyers have been known as “apprentices of law”, or in my time, “pupils”. We must remember that legal education was never intended to be about acquiring knowledge alone. It was about professional formation. As I said, developing judgment, advocacy skills, ethics and professional values, how to treat fellow members of the Bar, is a key part of that professional formation. I think that philosophy remains just as relevant today.

84.             Following the recommendations of the Committee on the Professional Training of Lawyers, we extended the practice training period from six months to a year, starting last year. So we only one cohort of that experience. But, even then, we are beginning to see that, simply extending the training period is not going to be enough if the quality of the training remains poor. More time will not produce better lawyers. In fact, I think it might make it worse.

85.             No amount of additional time will make a meaningful difference, unless those who are entrusted with the training young lawyers take a genuine interest and personal investment in the young lawyers. Good mentorship begins with a willingness to teach, to guide, to share, to be generous in your experience sharing for the next generation.

86.             At the same time, mentoring is also a skill. We often assume that because someone is an excellent lawyer, a very good senior advocate, that you will naturally be a good mentor. That is not always the case. The medical profession, as an example, recognises this. Considerable thought is given to preparing young doctors to teach, to supervise and to develop those coming after them.

87.             So perhaps we should ask ourselves whether we can do more to help experienced lawyers become better mentors.  Not because they lack the heart to do so, but because mentoring, like advocacy and client counselling, is a skill that needs to be learnt and strengthened.

88.             At the same time, mentorship is also not a one-way relationship. It is not a top-down, unidirectional. Young lawyers also have a responsibility. We should not make the mistake of assuming that a sustainable profession is the same as an easy profession. Or that we can make it easier and therefore it will be sustainable. Let me just reiterate that law has always been, and will remain, a demanding profession. There will always be urgent work, late nights and difficult cases. We all know this.

89.             Young lawyers must be prepared to shoulder those responsibilities as well and grow into those roles. At the same time, they should make the most of every opportunity to learn from those around them.

90.             I know it is very popular now to have flexible work arrangements, such as work from home. They have brought many benefits. But they have also reduced some of the informal learning opportunities that many of us benefited from early in our careers.

91.             Being present in the moment makes a tremendous difference. most of the lessons I learned outside of legal knowledge came from being present in the moment.

92.             They came from watching my pupil master interact with clients, what was said, what was not said. How cases were argued in court, watching what he chose to say or not say. Observing other senior lawyers in court. Listening to the conversations, sometimes between my senior partner and the clients, on the journey back to the office. Basically, simply being present.

93.             Those moments, quite difficult to recreate through a screen, whether it is meetings in the office or hearings. It is not possible to recreate those occasions. So while we must structure some learning intentionally, oftentimes, they occur opportunistically.

94.             So a young lawyer should preferably be present in person as much as you can. It is a golden opportunity because if you can work from home, then your employer can find another employee from another country to work from home at a cheaper rate, and we do not want to see that. We want that learning to be passed on in person.

Work

95.             Finally, let me talk a little bit about our work. Singapore is a small country with a limited domestic market. There is really only so much more work that one market can sustain.

96.             We should think about going beyond this market. What I will say in the next couple of minutes really go towards trying to strengthen, shore up, and build up our legal profession, so that there will be more opportunities for lawyers. So this is not a point that goes directly to the comments raised in the Sustainability Report, but it goes towards the overall well-being of the legal industry.

97.             For our firms to remain competitive, relevant, outward-looking, I think there are at least two areas that we should focus on. First, technology, and second, internationalisation.

98.             Let me start with technology. Again, I know that you have spoken a lot about technology – how it is embraced, how we are using it, how we could better use it, and so on. But for the foreseeable future, I do not believe that lawyers will be replaced by AI. But the lawyer that harnesses AI better than the next, will replace that lawyer. It is important that we all understand how AI can best be integrated to our own workflow.

99.             Even before the recent rise of AI, my Ministry has been supporting technology adoption initiatives, whether you look at Tech Start for Law some years ago, or Tech-celerate for Law, or more recently, the Legal Innovation and Future-Readiness Transformation (LIFT) programme.

100.          The aim is to lower the barriers to entry for technology adoption. We believe that technology adoption is not just about funding. It is not just about giving you grants or incentives. It is really about deeply understanding how technology can be integrated into your own firm’s workflow.

101.          None of this is going to be easy when there is pressing client work, when there are billing deadlines, when there are court deadlines. But if we put off tomorrow’s transformation to deal with today’s workload, we will find that there could be less work tomorrow. So this is an issue we need to confront today.

102.          That is why, under the Future of the Legal Profession Committee, we will establish the Singapore Council on AI for Legal Excellence (SCALE). SCALE will bring together leaders from across the profession, academia, technology companies, in-house practice and the public sector.

103.          Its work will focus on three areas: understanding how AI is reshaping legal work, jobs and skills; strengthening AI education and training, including exploring with SILE whether part of CPD requirements should be dedicated to technology and AI courses; and examining how AI is changing law firm structures and business models. The objective is straightforward: to build a clearer, evidence-based understanding of what is changing, and then working out what our response should be to these changes.

104.          The second area is internationalisation. As I said, our own domestic market in Singapore is not big enough. When Singapore firms succeed overseas, the benefit extends far beyond those firms. They strengthen Singapore’s reputation as a legal hub, attracts more work, more talent, more investments in return, creating opportunities for the wider profession.

105.          International arbitration is one example of how powerful this virtuous cycle can be. We started developing international arbitration some decades ago in the 1990s. We have done well. Singapore is now recognised, as I mentioned earlier, as one of the most important seats of arbitration. We have good practitioners and arbitrators practicing here, good chambers here as well, but we cannot take this success for granted. Others are improving at breakneck speed as well. Unless we continue to do well, excellent in every respect, and outperform even ourselves each time, they will eventually catch up.

106.          I have seen this myself, and I think you all have as well, as you travel overseas to meet your own clients, and to look at the landscape overseas. Over the years, I have travelled extensively to the markets that matter to Singapore – China, India, especially. In fact, I was in India a few days ago to launch the new SIAC Delhi office. Everywhere I go, I see jurisdictions investing heavily on legal infrastructure, strengthening their institutions, revamping their rules, and being open and developing world-class legal talent.

107.          So the competition is intensifying and we cannot afford to stand still. At the same time, I believe that there is a genuine window of opportunity. In a more uncertain and fragmented world, trust has become one of Singapore’s greatest strengths. Our reputation for neutrality, reliability and the rule of law has never been more valuable. We should double down on it. We should build on it.

108.          Over the next few months, I hope to meet with as many firms as possible, their Managing Partners and senior practitioners, to understand their ambitions and to discuss how we, in the Ministry, can better support them in several practical ways. Whether through funding, opening doors, making connections or other forms of assistance to allow them to go regional, if not international.

109.          The Government is prepared to play its part to work with each of the firms to do so – to allow you to progress, to stand on the shoulders of giants and build on what we have achieved.

110.          But at the same time, firms must be prepared to take that first step – to think boldly, to seize opportunities, and to be prepared to venture beyond our shores. There will be some risks, there will marginal returns initially, and there may have to be a period of time where it will be a loss leader. But opportunity might not come knocking again. Today, as a profession, as a country, I believe that we are at a unique place to take advantage of those opportunities.

Conclusion

111.          I began this speech by looking at where our profession stood, and I hope that as I finish up, I can leave you with a shared sense of where we want to go. Perhaps not yet quite solutions in its final form, but hopefully you walk away today knowing that these ideas will be acted upon, there will be genuine change, and we will be determined to make those changes.

112.          In fact, I was just discussing with Chief Justice-designate Sushil Nair, that tomorrow morning, the Judiciary, Government, SAL, together with many senior leaders of firms and Professor David Wilkins, will be meeting.

113.          We put aside a few hours to digest everything that has come up from these last few sessions, and to understand how we can make the most of it. What works, why might not work, and how we can ensure that we do not just focus on what the problems are, but that we come up with some solutions. So that is work that will start right away tomorrow.

114.          But I also said at the start that building this will take some time, and most importantly, take all of us. I hope that even as we look at the issues in the Sustainability Report that each of us also play our own part. Because as I mentioned, whether you are senior or junior, there is a role for each of us in this endeavour. But getting it right is important for us as an industry, as a profession.

115.              So I hope that we can all come together, be frank, be candid, exchange views, be constructive. I am very confident that we have the ingredients, the fortitude, the people, the talent, and the ecosystem to turn this around. To turn this into a legal profession that remains noble, to be a profession that the brightest and the best talents will still want to aspire towards, and to be able to retain the best talents in the legal industry itself.

116.          So on that note, I wish you a very pleasant evening. Thank you very much for having me. Have a good day. Thank you.

Last updated on 29 July 2026