Keynote Address by Minister for Law and Second Minister for Home Affairs Mr Edwin Tong SC, at the SIAC Symposium

26 AUG 2025

Mr Davinder Singh SC, Chairman of SIAC

Ms Lucy Reed, President of SIAC Court of Arbitration

Excellencies

Judges

Friends and colleagues from Singapore and further beyond

Introduction

I want to say a special warm welcome to all our friends from overseas. I know the weather has warmly welcomed you, but I like to think that we also welcome you warmly with our hospitality and with a great array of local offerings, delicacies, as well as friendship.

This year marks our largest and perhaps most vibrant edition yet since the inception of the Singapore Convention Week. We have nearly 70 partner events, organised by institutions from around the world – and this does not take into account the private sessions and events organised by law firms. Later this evening, we look forward to hosting almost 900 participants at our signature ‘Breaking with Convention’ networking event. It is going to be held at the historic CHIJMES, down in the central part of the Civic District. I look forward to welcoming all of you there. There will also be a Night Festival light show, one of the special features of the Ministry of Culture, Community & Youth, where I was from before I took up this appointment. So I look forward to welcoming you there.

We are very grateful to the larger international legal community for your continued support, and strong participation over the years. Your presence and contributions have played a vital role in shaping this platform, turning it into a high-level networking platform, exchanging not just know-how, but perhaps more importantly, building partnerships amongst different legal jurists, thinkers and thought leaders from around the world. I hope this week will be both meaningful and rewarding, offering rich opportunities for exchange, collaboration, as well as inspiration.

Beyond the Singapore Convention Week, this year is also a significant one for Singapore. Earlier this month, we celebrated 60 years of independence, or SG60. It is a moment, not only to commemorate our nation-building journey, but also, to reflect on our progress and to think about what has worked well for us as we chart our course for the next 60 years and beyond.

In my role at the Ministry of Law, SG60 naturally prompts me to think about what this milestone means for our legal system. Where do we go from here? What are the challenges ahead of us for the legal industry and the legal profession including, of course, in the area of international dispute resolution, which brings us all together here this week.

So, I will cover the following points in my speech:

(a) First, where the world and Singapore stood 60 years ago and where we are now, and what are some of the opportunities in this current landscape that we can avail ourselves of.

(b) Second, the key lessons we have learned along the way. As I said, we sometimes need to look back to look forward. Think about what has worked for Singapore. How do we preserve the core values, the basic principles, and use them to move forward for the next 60 years and beyond, informing our strategies for the legal industry?

(c) Third, how, from the Singapore perspective, these lessons apply to the field of international dispute resolution, and what it means for the development of our legal framework in Singapore.

(d) And finally, a glimpse into some new opportunities and fresh directions and how we can get there.

Singapore and the world 60 years ago

60 years ago, Singapore was once a fledging nation. We became a nation 60 years ago, almost to the day. Our survival was far from certain. Indeed, the odds were stacked against us – a small city-state with no natural resources, limited land, and a diverse population, still finding its feet, perhaps still reeling in shock from the separation from Malaysia. Poverty at that time was widespread, unemployment high, infrastructure weak, and racial tensions was the order of the day.

Globally, the world was deeply divided. The Cold War had split the globe into two ideological camps — the US-led Western bloc and the Soviet-led Eastern bloc. Southeast Asia was destabilised by the Vietnam War. The Cuban Missile Crisis had just passed – but the threat of a larger nuclear conflict loomed large.

(a) Politically, the world was undergoing upheaval – from decolonisation, to civil unrest, and volatile shifting power dynamics.

(b) Economically, much of the world remained underdeveloped. Global trade was dominated by Western powers. Tariffs were high, with average rates exceeding 35% in many developing countries. So for those who are not aware, tariffs are not a new thing. It was there 60 years ago, and it is there today. Global supply chains were in their infancy. Multilateral institutions, like the United Nations and World Bank, were still finding their footing.

In short, 60 years ago, we faced both internal vulnerabilities within Singapore, as well as external uncertainties.

Singapore and the world now

Fast forward to today, 60 years later, we find a world that, in many ways, echoes the past. Geopolitical tensions are rising, if not at a new high. Global supply chains are fractured. Trade sanctions, including tariffs, and regional conflicts are creating an increasingly volatile environment. And certainly, multilateralism is under threat. Most countries are looking at onshoring, reshoring, looking at bilateral relations rather than a larger multilateral framework. For example, the US-China trade war, the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, and a host of other regional flashpoints, including those closer to home, India-Pakistan, Thailand-Cambodia.

According to the 2025 Global Peace Index, we are witnessing the highest number of active state-based conflicts since World War II today, with 59 ongoing conflicts, and 78 countries involved in conflicts beyond their borders. That is roughly two in every five countries in the world! That is the extent to which we see the rise of geopolitical tensions manifesting in unrest across different borders.

The global trading system, partly as a result of what I have just said, but also because of new economic strains, is under unprecedented strain, with more than 3,000 trade-restrictive measures introduced in 2023 alone — that is triple the number pre-COVID-19 in 2019.

Yet, unlike six decades ago, the scenario that we are confronted with, and coming from the perspective of the Ministry of Law in the Singapore government, we look at this landscape, and ask ourselves – where does this take us, and what is this telling us? I will say in quite certain and convicted terms, that despite what we see and despite the picture that I have painted, we remain very optimistic about opportunities for trade, and certainly opportunities for the development of the legal industry here in Singapore, in the context of being in the wider Southeast Asia region, and certainly looking at the Asia Pacific region. Let me explain why.

Today, economic power is more distributed. Multilateral institutions like the IMF, WTO, the UN Security Council, World Bank and ADB are more mature and responsive in taking on a deeper development role. Global trade has become more inclusive.

Closer to home, Asia and ASEAN have emerged as engines of growth. That fills us with a lot of optimism.

(a) China and India have risen as economic powerhouses, fuelled by rapid urbanisation, expanding population, and the quickly rising middle class.

(b) ASEAN, which Singapore is part of, is now comparable in size to India’s. It’s a region brimming with potential.

The Asian Development Bank (ADB) estimated that ASEAN economies will require at least US$2.8 trillion in infrastructure investment between 2023 and 2030, to sustain economic growth, reduce poverty, respond to climate change, and to build up infrastructure around ASEAN.

ASEAN is home to over 670 million. More than one-third are young people, below the age of 35. By 2030, over 65% is projected to be middle class. This translates to larger workforce, more consumers, and consequently, higher economic growth.

Singapore too has transformed. From a GDP per capita of US$500 in 1965, to over US$90,000 today. From a small trading post to the world’s busiest transshipment hub. From a society divided by racial tensions to one which is truly multi-racial, multi-ethnic, multi-cultural, stable, and cohesive, where we value multi parties and we value harmony in our society. So while we remain vulnerable to the volatility that we see externally, we are a small, tiny, little red dot. What happens overseas will almost always inevitably have an impact in Singapore and on Singapore. But at the same time, we remain confident because of the framework that we have put in place, and because of the growth of ASEAN and Asia. But what we need to do is to have a legal framework that takes advantage of this – one that is open, that is collaborative in posture, and allows us to learn from the lessons of the past, what has made Singapore what it is today which Davinder spoke of earlier, and how do we harness these values to bring Singapore forward.

Lessons learnt

The transformation of Singapore did not happen overnight. We built up our infrastructure. Founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew famously said, “Over 100 years ago, this was a mud-flat, swamp. Today, this is a modern city. Ten years from now, this will be a metropolis. Never fear.”, and we have. We have built up the infrastructure – education, housing, healthcare, defence. But I believe that the next phase of our development has got to go beyond infrastructure. Although that has been important, I am conscious that we have got to go well beyond this.

What is equally, if not more important, but certainly a lot more difficult, is to build the intangibles: trust, credibility, and stability. These are three very essential ingredients in a thriving legal industry that we hope to build in Singapore – qualities that are increasingly rare in today’s world. These are values which do not happen overnight and take decades and generations to build up. They require not just good ideas, but consistent execution, even when it might be difficult, inconvenient, or unpopular.

Looking back, Singapore’s journey has been underpinned by three enduring fundamentals. These principles have guided us through past challenges as we emerged from an undeveloped country to one that is developing and then developed, and continue to shape how we respond to new challenges.

Let me say from the outset that this is not about setting out a blueprint or a framework for people to follow. This is Singapore’s story. It is unique in many ways, and in some ways, the steps that we took were a consequence of the challenges that we had as a small country from our early days.

The first value, I would say, is an almost unwavering, uncompromising commitment to the rule of law.

Since our independence in 1965, we have made a deliberate and unwavering decision to be a country governed by the rule of law. This was not just a philosophical ideal, not just because we want to be, but in many ways, it is a commitment forged by circumstances, and because of a practical necessity.

As a small nation with no natural resources, our survival depended on the strength of our institutions, the integrity in the systems we built, and the trust of both our people and international partners.

It was only through the fair, impartial, and consistent application of the law that Singapore could build credibility and stability – both at home and on the world stage.

Domestically, the rule of law has been the cornerstone of Singapore’s governance. Our judiciary is independent. Laws are passed with due process, and enforced without fear or favour.

Internationally, Singapore’s commitment to the rule of law is amply evident in our active participation in the international legal system. We have consistently supported and being part of the work of multilateral institutions, such as the UN, WIPO, World Bank or ASEAN.

(a) A Singaporean – Mr Daren Tang – currently serves as Director General of WIPO, and we have nominated him for a second term.

(b) We have also put forward Ambassador Rena Lee as a candidate for judge at the International Court of Justice.

All of these is our own small little way of contributing on the world stage - to play a part that perhaps does not fully represent the size and scale of this country, to be present on world platforms, to lend our name to multilateralism and to lend our name to a rules-based world order. And that rules-based world order remains the bedrock of Singapore’s credibility, stability and international standing.

The second principle that we have benefited from over the years has been the ability to be forward-looking, and to not just think, but to act in the longer term interest of Singapore and Singaporeans.

From the very beginning, we understood that survival meant looking beyond short-term needs — planning not just for a single political cycle, but for future generations. Many of the bold decisions made in our early years – through the boldness and vision of our forefathers. They were high-risk at the time, because in the 60s and 70s, there was no certainty. In fact, it was more likely that Singapore would not succeed. So these were very high-risk positions, but today they represent the cornerstones of Singapore’s success.

For example, in the 1960s and 70s, even as a newly independent nation with limited means, we decided to invest heavily into building a deep-water port and expanding Changi Airport. These projects were not immediately profitable, but they laid the foundation for Singapore to become a global hub for trade and aviation.

Today, aviation and maritime represent almost one-fifth of our entire economy and our GDP, and today, we carry on with that vision. Those of you who arrived into Changi Airport will see that we have got major construction works happening around Changi Airport. We are building Terminal 5. Changi Terminal 5 is the size of Terminals 1,2, 3, and 4, added together, when it is ready. Tuas Mega Port will nearly double our existing port capacity. Do we need that capacity today? Probably not. But these are long-term moves to secure Singapore’s position in two key industries, not just for the present, but certainly for the future and for subsequent generations, to ensure that airlines continue to fly in, from or through Singapore, and shipping routes continue to come through Singapore, and it will continue to remain relevant in the transshipment world. All of these are vitally important to the continuation of our economic strategies.

We also made a strategic early bet on economic diversification and foreign investment. In the 1970s, we deliberately moved beyond low-cost manufacturing, investing in higher value-added sectors like petrochemicals, electronics, and biomedical sciences. We allowed foreign firms to bring in their own workers, controversially, because local unemployment at that time was relatively high. But we said, “we want you to come with your own employees, with your own engineers, with your own researchers, to bring not just employment of these individuals into Singapore, but to bring know-how, and to transfer that know-how into Singapore”. And this was a fundamentally important pillar to being able to attract valuable foreign investment.

We tackled strategic vulnerabilities head-on. In the 1970s and 1980s, water security was a serious concern. Instead of waiting for a crisis, we developed a long-term national water strategy, including NEWater, desalination, and building our own reservoirs. Today, we are far more resilient, with local sources meeting up to 50% of our water needs.

This long-term mindset has enabled us to turn vulnerabilities into strengths, and prepare for challenges before they arise.

The third fundamental principle is to remain open and collaborative, and to always see the international community as part of what makes Singapore tick.

As a small country in an interconnected world, we have always recognised that our security and prosperity depend on a stable, rules-based global order. Openness and collaboration have therefore been at the core of our diplomatic approach.

We believe firmly in strong relationships – grounded on mutual respect and trust – are essential to navigate today’s complex geopolitical landscape, such as what we are doing right here at the Singapore Convention Week. Our aim is to be a principled, reliable, and constructive partner, regardless of size, geography, or more importantly, in today’s context, ideology.

We maintain strong ties with countries around the world. For example, we have a long-standing defence cooperation with the United States, while also being a trusted economic and diplomatic partner with the Chinese. Our approach has always been to engage constructively – to choose principles, and not to choose sides.

We have also consistently championed open, inclusive frameworks that benefit all – regardless of size - large and small, developed and developing. The Singapore Convention on Mediation is one such example, where Singapore played a leading role in facilitating and successfully concluding the negotiations. Singapore’s openness, posture and work attitude – anchored in principles, partnerships and in many ways, on friendship and networks – has allowed us to stay connected, relevant, and trusted on the global stage.

These lessons – learned through six decades of nation-building – continue to serve as our compass as we navigate an increasingly complex and fast-changing world.

As I said, we don’t have all the answers, but we offer a model of stability, adaptability, and pragmatic cooperation that countries may find valuable in a growingly uncertain world.

Application to International Arbitration

How do these principles come to bear on the legal industry, something that I guess most in this room will be interested in? Let me venture some of my own thoughts on this.

First, on the rule of law.

As I said, our judiciary is independent and respected, but we carry that same commitment to neutrality and integrity into our dispute resolution institutions like SIAC. SIAC treats every case with equal care, regardless of the party’s nationality or indeed the size of the dispute. We have a court and a board that truly represents a diversity of expertise from different jurisdictions. You saw the slide that Gloria flashed earlier on the SIAC Secretariat. I mentioned to Lucy that I counted at least 10 different nationalities from different jurisdictions around the world. We have an arbitration panel that truly represents the diversity of the room today – coming from more than 60 different jurisdictions.

The principle for SIAC is to be very agnostic to the nationality, as long as you bring value and you can contribute to the work of SIAC. Therefore, when appointing arbitrators, especially when requested by the parties, SIAC places great importance on neutrality. They were often asked: “Why are so few arbitrators of a certain nationality appointed, even when many of the cases involve parties from that country?” The answer is straightforward: to maintain fairness and the perception of impartiality.

Appointing an arbitrator from the same nationality as either party may raise concerns of bias. Instead, SIAC often appoints someone of a third nationality – yet someone who understands the business and cultural nuances of both sides, and has the relevant industry expertise. This approach has earned the trust of users worldwide, not just in Asia.

In fact, Singapore was the only jurisdiction that ranked among the top four preferred seats of arbitration in all regions, according to the latest Queen Mary University of London and White & Case’s International Arbitration Survey.

SIAC is also featured prominently among the world’s most preferred arbitral institutions. But perhaps the best testament to SIAC’s popularity is its appearance in the K-drama – “Beyond the Bar” – now streaming on Netflix! So that is when we know that SIAC has really arrived!

But leaving that aside, I think it is important that we pay attention to these surveys and standings, but not to be saddled up by it. We look at serving the wider public, serving the community, not just the lawyers and the arbitrators, but beyond that – the clients and institutions and commercial entities that use SIAC’s services.

Second, how do we look at forward-looking and long-term planning strategies for arbitration?

A little bit of history. SIAC was set up in 1991. Even before SIAC was fully established, and well before SIMC came about in 2014, we reached out to leading international arbitration and mediation institutions to invite them into Singapore. We travelled to the US, to Europe, and to other traditional arbitration hubs, with support from the wider group of economic agencies in Singapore.

So, we were thrilled when, in 2007, the American Arbitration Association (AAA) became the first to open an office here. That was swiftly followed by WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Centre (AMC), the ICC Court of Arbitration, and the Permanent Court of Arbitration.

And just yesterday, I signed a Letter of Intent with the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), to establish their first overseas office right here in Singapore. We are also in discussions with several others, and I hope to share more good news soon.

But the point I am making is that it is through the collaboration and the openness with which we welcome such institutions into Singapore that we can develop strong partnerships that are deep and sustained, and based on this, a set of shared principles. When AAA first opened here, it was not uncontroversial. SIAC’s caseload then was at 67 cases back in 2007, well below the caseloads of many other countries. It would have been easy to say, ‘hang on a minute, let’s be a little more protectionist, let SIAC grow before we start inviting foreign arbitral institutions into Singapore’. It would have been easy to do that, but we believe in the value of multilateralism. We believe in the value of international partnerships. That a truly global business hub, which Singapore aspired to be and continues to do so, must have options. We must offer the best of options to our users.

Third principle, openness and collaboration.

Just as Singapore has built its arbitration ecosystem to support global business, we must also welcome others doing the same, and that has been our consistent posture over the many decades. New centres today are emerging in China, India, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, and beyond, and these are all high value, well-funded, well-regarded and top-tier arbitral centers. Many of them are gaining, deservedly, the traction and recognition internationally. In Singapore, we do not regard this as rivalry, but it is a sign of a maturing and developing, in a very healthy way, a global arbitration ecosystem.

We actively engage international partners to deepen that collaboration. We do cross-training with other institutions, we invite them into Singapore, and we also travel to meet with them. We can learn from one another. What are some of the mistakes that we have made? We share. What are some of the best practices that have worked well for different sectors and different industries? We share as well.

(a) Last week, I attended the ASEAN Law Forum in Kuala Lumpur, where ASEAN Law Ministers adopted a joint statement on international arbitration and mediation development. I think that helps us to build a one ASEAN, or at least a consolidated ASEAN approach to arbitration and mediation.

(b) Yesterday, my colleague, Senior Minister of State Murali Pillai SC, signed a Cooperation Programme with the Uzbekistan Deputy Minister of Justice.

(c) Later this week, I will co-chair the first Singapore-India Joint Consultative Committee meeting with the Indian Minister of Law and Justice.

(d) We are also meeting with the Fijian Minister of Justice, and the Korean Deputy Minister of Justice, amongst the many, including a delegation from the Bureau of Experts at the Council of Ministers of Saudi Arabia, who are also present in Singapore to attend the Singapore Convention Week, but also to attend a training under the MOU, which we signed last year.

So my point is that all of these are examples of our posture. We remain open, we remain welcoming of foreign participation, we remain welcoming of international partnerships. If you are a global thought leader institution, we welcome you into Singapore. All of these add to our diversity. It is not competition. It does not take away from the work that we are doing, but fundamentally, it gives the broader ecosystem of commercial users, the choice - the choice of top-tier arbitrators, experts, professionals, institutions from which to choose. And we are very privileged to have the opportunity to work with so many of our international colleagues and partners.

As cross-border trade and investment grow, as it does, and it will, especially in ASEAN and Asia, so will the demand for arbitration. Our belief is no one centre can serve all users. The growing popularity of Asian arbitration hubs, I think, reflects the region’s economic rise. This is ultimately beneficial for all of us. In economics, we call it agglomeration, where clustered services benefit the region, benefit everyone around it.

So while institutions may compete as they do, which is not unusual, we believe we all gain more through cooperation – by growing the pie together, by offering more by way of ADR, by services in arbitration, mediation, conciliation or neutral evaluation. So, I hope very sincerely that we will continue to exchange ideas at platforms like this, learn from one another, and build a stronger, more resilient global arbitration ecosystem.

What’s Next

What then lies ahead for us in Singapore in international arbitration?

I believe that arbitration fundamentally must exist to support global business. Davinder puts it nicely: disputes, disagreement, conflicts - SIAC and the broader ADR mechanism serve to resolve these conflicts and these disputes. So, for it to remain relevant, it must therefore remain responsive to evolving commercial needs, while steadfastly upholding on its foundational values of fairness, transparency, and neutrality. This means continually enhancing how disputes are resolved – making the process more efficient, reliable, fair and enforceable.

Today, I thought I will share two key initiatives that we will be thinking about and introducing ahead of us as opportunities to venture into and reinforce the foundational values of Singapore as a dispute resolution hub.

First, I am happy to say that SIAC will be launching the Restructuring and Insolvency Arbitration Protocol, after this. It will be a specialised mechanism to address disputes arising during, or in anticipation of, insolvency proceedings.

I mentioned earlier that we must evolve and be responsive to commercial and mercantile needs, and we see this as one growing area. I have spent 25 years in private practice before I joined the Government, and in my time, I spent quite a bit of time practicing restructuring and insolvency, as well as arbitration, so this is an initiative that resonates deeply with me. I have always wondered why arbitration and restructuring and insolvency do not often mix. I think this is one very good solution. In particular, in the context of today’s global economic landscape marked by the geopolitical tensions we spoke about, with rising corporate distress, looming debt pressures, there will likely be more restructuring and insolvency cases.

The AlixPartners 2025 Turnaround and Transformation Survey found 96% of turnaround professionals anticipate geopolitical risks will increasingly drive corporate distress. Meanwhile in Asia, its Asia-focused study found that:

(a) 62% of respondents expect a rise in out-of-court restructurings, and the same percentage anticipate increased distressed M&A in the year ahead.

(b) Greater China is also poised for the most restructuring activity (33%), followed by Singapore (22%) and Japan (22%).

So the point I am making is that all you can take these numbers in whatever way you choose, but it signals that there is a growing need to meet a demand in the commercial world.

Therefore, this protocol adapts the SIAC rules for use in the insolvency context with modifications made to ensure that the process is properly adapted to the nature of insolvency proceedings, and is also time efficient. Among other modifications, the protocol modifies the timelines in relation to: responses to the notice of arbitration, arbitrator nominations, challenges to an arbitrator, the making of final awards, and the submission of draft awards to the Registrar.

We will continue to monitor developments and assess whether tailored protocols are needed for other types of arbitration proceedings.

The second initiative I want to tell you about, is something we have been thinking about and reflecting deeply on for some time.

Let me explain the background to this. I spoke a lot about the rule of law and the need for transparency, the need to not just adjudicate properly, quickly, but fairly. I think “fairly” is the key touchstone to a proper arbitral ecosystem. Efficiency, we are all after. We want things to be fast, cheap, but it cannot come at the expense of integrity and fairness. Faster and cheaper is not better than fairness in an arbitration.

Integrity requires that arbitrators and arbitral institutions remain steadfastly independent. For counsel, integrity means a steadfast commitment to candour, the way in which you conduct the arbitration, the professional ethics, and the true values of the legal profession. The transparency and accountability of conduct and decision-making is what gives arbitration its moral authority to hold parties to their agreement to arbitrate.

In the global international arbitration system, ethical values are the common language that binds us. What allows arbitration to function across these divides is the shared assurance that proceedings will be conducted by all concerned with integrity.

They did not sign up to a process that is unfair, that is not transparent. They signed up and agreed to be bound by a process that has transparency and fairness and integrity at the bedrock of the entire process. In the global international arbitration system, whether it is common law or civil law, you have one rule or another. You have different governing rules. But I believe that the ethical values are the common language that binds us across all genres of arbitration.

What allows arbitration to function across these divides is the shared assurance that proceedings will be conducted by all concerned with utmost integrity.

In this regard, Singapore’s core values are known globally. We stand by and we stand for the rule of law, neutrality and integrity. We are consistently ranked among the least corrupt of jurisdictions in the world. So it is time to really rethink and put back ethics as the core, at the very basic foundation of arbitration.

I am therefore very pleased to announce that the SIAC will be establishing an Institute for Ethics in International Arbitration. It will be established for targeted training, for research, and engagement in ethics in arbitration.

I believe that platforms like these will be crucial, because it allows SIAC to take the lead in thought leadership in ethics. It is also crucial to advance the entire discourse, that is going to be so valuable, on ethical practices and ethical values in international arbitration. It is also important for us to preserve the essential conditions for the legitimacy of international arbitration.

This, I believe, is yet another concrete step that signals our determination to ensure that when you choose Singapore to anchor your dispute resolution, you will be able to resolve your disputes within a framework, where the values of integrity and ethical conduct will always be upheld. SIAC will announce further details of this when it is ready.

Conclusion

Finally, let me wrap up this morning’s session. I want to say a big thank you to all of you, especially those who come from overseas and travel some distance to be here with us. Your presence, your contribution and your participation in the whole week’s events makes it special. This is what we have Singapore Convention Week for. This is the true value. It’s not about the the drinks at the reception; it’s about the networks that we can build, the thought leadership that we exchange, and the collaborative spirit that we have every year at the Singapore Convention Week.

We look forward to continuing our conversations with you in the course of this week, starting later this evening, with our ‘Breaking with Convention’ networking event. You can have a more social, more relaxed setting to build networks. Our experience has shown that this ‘Breaking with Convention’ networking event has been a timeless catalyst for great conversation.

Well, this year, Singapore Convention Week has just started. Let me make a plug and extend you a very warm invitation to come again next year. Every year, we have it at the end of August, the last week of August, and we decided that the Singapore Convention Week will be a special one, because next year we celebrate a very important milestone in Singapore’s modern legal history, and that is the 200th anniversary of the founding of Singapore’s jurisprudential basis. The Second Charter of Justice was incorporated and accepted into Singapore in 1826, and next year we celebrate the 200th anniversary.

Next year, we also celebrate the 60th anniversary of UNCITRAL. So it is SG 60 this year, but it will be UNCITRAL 60 next year. We look forward to welcoming you, all of you, back here again next year.

On that note, I thank you very much for listening to me. I hope that what I have said, contributes a little to the discourse that you have in the course of the day and the week. And that more important than know-how, you build up a good collection of know-who this week, because that is as important as the knowledge that you build up, whether you go back with a whole calendar and a rolodex of contacts from right across the world in different jurisdictions. Because in times of need where you need to pick up the phone and call on someone, that is going to be the real value of an occasion like the Singapore Convention Week.

Thank you very much.

Last updated on 26 August 2025