Response Speech by Minister for Law and Second Minister for Home Affairs Edwin Tong SC at the Committee of Supply Debate 2026
2 Mar 2026 Posted in Parliamentary speeches and responses
Mr Chairman, Sir,
1. I thank the various Members who spoke last week. In particular, for each of their support of MinLaw’s work.
History and Context
2. Let me begin with history, because context matters.
3. In 1826, the Second Charter of Justice formally established the Court of Judicature of Singapore. At that time, a fledgling colonial legal order in a trading post that had barely found its footing.
4. The law then served a different purpose, a different master, and in a very different age.
5. Nearly two centuries on, what Singapore has built has been nothing short of remarkable. We now rank amongst the top legal and intellectual property systems in the world. Our courts and dispute resolution institutions – like the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (“SIAC”), the Singapore International Mediation Centre (“SIMC”) and the Singapore International Commercial Court (“SICC”) – are globally recognised for excellence.
6. While our legal beginnings were inherited, we have since moulded and contextualised the rule of law to serve our nation and our people.
7. This has been Singapore’s story of progress.
8. However, none of this happened by accident. Generations of lawyers, judges, academics, and policymakers understood that a rules-based society is the bedrock upon which everything else — commerce, safety, and liberty — is built.
9. Sir, in our Bicentennial year, this year, since the Second Charter of Justice, we are facing significant disruptive forces:
a) geopolitical tension, which escalated just over the weekend,
b) revolutionary technologies,
c) climate risk, and
d) pressures on the social fabric.
10. We will therefore have to redouble efforts to keep our laws updated and relevant, and also be bold and open to embracing changes.
11. MinLaw will continue to press on with reform and progress, in our legal policies.
12. In my speech this morning, I will set out our over-arching vision, the priority areas that we will focus on, as well as outline some of the key challenges that we will have to confront.
Legal Industry Development
13. Let me start with the continued development of our legal industry, which remains a priority.
14. We will continue our work to build Singapore as a legal and professional services hub. These are powerful growth engines, providing opportunities, driving economic expansion and job creation.
15. In order to achieve this, Singapore must constantly refresh its legal frameworks in an ever-changing and fast-evolving world, and also do it in a timely manner.
16. We will therefore be reviewing key legislation with a view to updating them to ensure that our laws stay fit for purpose. This will include, this year, reforms in arbitration, corporate insolvency and intellectual property.
17. Beyond reviewing legislation, we will also identify opportunities in emerging areas. This includes supporting the green transition, the digital economy, and major regional infrastructure projects, as well as sports and entertainment dispute resolution that Mr Kenneth Goh mentioned.
International Thought Leadership
18. Beyond domestic reforms, Singapore will continue to contribute to international thought leadership.
19. By being present in the global legal mindshare, we ensure that we will not merely be price takers, but we will actively play a role in shaping the law.
20. The Singapore Convention on Mediation bears our country’s name – a testament to our involvement in shaping international dispute resolution.
21. Maxwell Chambers continues to serve as a leading dispute resolution complex, hosting the highest concentration of international dispute resolution institutions worldwide.
22. This year, we welcome three more institutions to Singapore: First, the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (“ICSID”); Second, the Shanghai International Arbitration Centre (“SHIAC”); and third, the Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration (“SCIA”).
23. Besides being the first office outside its Washington D.C. headquarters, ICSID will join the four other World Bank Group organisations already based in Singapore, making Singapore the first country in the world to host local offices for all five World Bank Group organisations.
24. Indeed, Singaporeans also contribute to leadership on the international stage, including – Mr Daren Tang, and Ambassador Rena Lee, as mentioned by Mr Christopher de Souza.
Extradition
25. Our international engagement also extends to strengthening legal cooperation frameworks with our partners, ensuring that as commerce and cross-border activity grows, the rule of law keeps pace.
26. One such example is extradition treaties.
27. To Ms Sylvia Lim’s query on the ASEAN Treaty on Extradition (“AET”). The AET requires at least six ASEAN Members States to complete their respective domestic procedures and notify the ASEAN Secretary-General that they are ready to bring the AET into effect. The Government will also similarly ratify the AET once we have completed our own internal procedures. On the risks to Singaporeans, there are robust safeguards in the AET, which set out the circumstances where extradition will not be granted. One example is if the request is made to prosecute the fugitive based on his race, religion, nationality or political opinion.
Cultivating a Strong Legal Profession
28. Second, we must continue to cultivate a strong legal profession.
29. This is the backbone of our legal progress, and we want Singapore to remain a jurisdiction where the finest legal minds choose to practise here and where homegrown talent is given every opportunity to flourish, and remain at the core of our profession.
30. I encourage our law firms to expand their horizons and think about internationalising their practices. Given our market, Singapore’s size, we must build our legal ecosystem with the broader Asia and ASEAN in context.
31. The case for doing so is compelling. In ASEAN alone, it is set, as a bloc, to become the 4th largest economy by 2030, if not sooner. foreign direct investments into ASEAN has been steadily rising.
32. I believe our firms are well-primed to capture these opportunities.
Openness to Foreign Law Practices
33. At the same time, we recognise the value that foreign law firms and lawyers bring to our industry and the wider economy.
34. Ms Cassandra Lee mentioned balancing between open competitiveness and preserving a Singapore core.
35. We agree. The two can co-exist.
36. Singapore, in fact, has gradually liberalised the legal sector since the 1990s.
37. We have not changed our posture. Foreign law firms have more than doubled and foreign lawyers have more than quadrupled since the year 2000.
38. They complement our Singapore lawyers, offering advice and expertise on international and foreign law, which we need as a global business hub. This strengthens Singapore’s value proposition. Indeed, over the same period of time, since the year 2000, our legal services exports have gone up eight-fold, which shows that when we bring together foreign lawyers and Singapore practitioners, we can extract value.
39. We regularly review our frameworks to remain attractive to foreign law firms and lawyers. To Ms Lee’s query, we have studied the recommendations by the Committee to Review the Regulatory Framework for Law Practices and Collaborations, and gathered feedback from a public consultation and our industry engagements. We will share our decision on the Committee’s Report shortly.
Developing the Individual Lawyer
40. Third, we will redouble efforts to develop the individual lawyer.
41. The strength of any legal system, and indeed, of our legal profession, lies ultimately in the strength of our people.
42. We will therefore expand education and competency frameworks — not just in technical skills, but in civil law, technology literacy, and cross-border practice – so that every Singapore lawyer can serve their clients and their community with confidence and competence.
Retaining Legal Talent
43. This also means confronting the sustainability of legal practice – issues which Ms Kuah Boon Theng, Mr Vikram Nair and Ms Cassandra Lee spoke on.
44. Let me start by saying that attrition has remained stable so far, and in fact, the number of Singapore lawyers in practice grew 26% over the past decade. So, over the last ten years, the number of lawyers in practice grew 26%.
45. Nonetheless, I agree with the observations made by the Honourable Members, we must continue to explore ways to alleviate pressures on our lawyers in light of the changing environment.
46. There is however no magic bullet. As Ms Kuah has noted, the challenges are multifaceted.
47. It will require collective effort, including law firms, which will set the conditions for growth, exposure, and mentorship for lawyers, but also lawyers themselves, each of them, who can be stewards of their own careers.
48. We will have to think collectively and carefully about embracing technology to automate mundane tasks, equipping lawyers with relevant 21st century skills, widening the industry ecosystem, so lawyers can pursue diverse interests and strengths and find meaning, purpose and value, in the profession that they practice in.
49. SMS Murali will share our efforts on education and the adoption of Legaltech.
50. Sir, what I have found during my time in practice was that while the hours may be long and the pressure intense, a collaborative workplace culture helps in longevity, helps in building the ecosystem and the environment in which each lawyer practices.
51. The Law Society and the Singapore Academy of Law have introduced mentorship programmes and other initiatives to help promote sustainability.
52. The Chief Justice and I will oversee a Committee on The Future of the Legal Profession to consider and tackle these and other pertinent issues that may arise. The Committee will explore these matters, from the holistic perspective of ensuring the long-term sustainability of our legal sector.
53. In parallel, the Government will also continue to support in-house counsel, who are integral to Singapore’s legal ecosystem and economic competitiveness.
54. As Mr Vikram Nair noted, lawyers joining in-house legal teams are not a loss. MNCs present in Singapore have grown to over 7,000 present in Singapore today, and between 2015 to 2024, the number of Singapore-qualified in-house counsel more than doubled. So in that period of time, while our industry has remained stable, in fact, with a 26% increase, the number of in-house counsel has more than doubled over the last ten years. It reflects growth, in not just the number of lawyers in practice or in in-house counsel roles, but the growth of MNCs in Singapore, which supports the economy – in turn, requiring the in-house counsel legal support. In house counsel help companies navigate regulatory landscapes and invest with confidence in Singapore.
Enhancing Access to Justice
55. Next, Sir, let me turn to enhancing access to justice – ensuring that those who are most vulnerable and most in need can access our first-class legal system.
56. In the preceding years, we have streamlined laws and processes to meet our society’s evolving needs. For example:
a) We have shifted away from the adversarial approach in family proceedings and addressing non-compliance with maintenance orders;
b) We have simplified enforcement of civil claims;
c) We strengthened the management of community disputes through mandatory mediation; and
d) We support those with special needs in our criminal justice system.
57. We have also:
a) Made a firm commitment to Government legal aid through the Legal Aid Bureau and the setting up of the Public Defender’s Office;
b) We continue to work with the legal fraternity and partners like Pro Bono SG to deliver legal aid and expand outreach and assistance through schemes like the Community Law Centres;
c) We have introduced technology, such as LawGoWhere, to bring legal services closer to Singaporeans and help them to navigate the process and empower and enable self-help.
58. This year, we will make another shift to expand civil legal aid coverage –
a) Today, Legal Aid is available to the bottom 25th percentile of households with a Per Capita Household Income ("PCHI") of $1,050.
b) We will raise this means test criteria to a PCHI of $1,650.
c) This would cover more households, allowing them to benefit from legal advice in the appropriate cases.
d) When we did a survey, we found that between the previous threshold of $1,050 and $1,650, about half of civil litigants in this expanded income range remain unrepresented. Some may have done so by choice, but after we put this in place, we will allow them to now avail themselves of legal aid, should that become necessary.
e) This will extend more legal aid to more Singaporeans.
59. SPS Eric will share more details on these efforts.
Optimising our State Assets</b>
60. Next, I turn to optimising our State assets.
61. I thank Mr de Souza for recognising our efforts over the years to unlock underutilised spaces for social and community good – placemaking, such as providing arts spaces for practitioners, and sports and recreational facilities.
62. This is no easy undertaking.
63. The Singapore Land Authority (“SLA”) manages a substantial portfolio of around 2,600 State properties and 11,000 hectares of State Land – the equivalent of some 15,000 football fields.
64. SPS Eric will share how SLA continues to support our economic and social needs.
Attorney-General</b>
65. At this juncture, let me turn to address Ms Sylvia Lim’s cut on the appointment of the Attorney-General (“AG”).
66. Ms Lim’s cut was originally filed to the PMO. It was redirected to MinLaw, as I will respond on behalf of the Prime Minister.
67. Sir, Mr Lucien Wong has served as the AG since January 2017. As Ms Lim noted, Mr Wong has had a distinguished legal career. Prior to his appointment, he grew and led Singapore’s largest law firm, and was widely regarded as the country’s top corporate lawyer over many years, with an international standing. In fact, I would say that his reputation stands as amongst the best in the world.
68. As AG, Mr Wong has made major contributions across almost every area of law. Under his leadership, the AGC has advised the Government on complex legal and constitutional matters, prosecuted criminal offences fairly and firmly, and ensured that legislation introduced in Parliament is clear, sound, and fit for Singapore’s purposes. His experience and steady hand have also been especially valuable to Singapore in sensitive international matters, some of which are presently ongoing.
69. In January this year, Mr Wong’s term was renewed for three years.
70. Ms Lim, in her speech, has described the appointment process for the AG as “thin”, if I heard her correctly. But I would have to disagree and I would instead characterise it quite differently.
71. Sir, the appointment of the AG, whether the initial appointment or any subsequent renewal, is made in accordance with the Constitution. There is a clear, deliberate and very structured process of the appointment, with the appropriate checks and balances. Let me explain.
72. In the appointment of an AG, Article 35 of the Constitution provides that the Prime Minister must first consult the Chief Justice and the Chairman of the Public Service Commission (“PSC”) before tendering his advice as to the appointment to the President.
73. After receiving that advice, the President in turn consults the Council of Presidential Advisers (“CPA”), and makes an independent assessment of the appointment.
74. Sir, this is not a perfunctory process; nor is it “thin” by any measure. It involves consultation with the head of the Judiciary, the leadership of the PSC, and the elected President exercising his constitutional role, in consultation with the CPA, before the AG is either appointed, or renewed.
75. This process reflects a careful and considered balance between executive responsibility and institutional safeguards.
76. Ms Lim then goes on to suggest that there should be public disclosure of these deliberations.
77. Sir, I do not think that would be wise. First, these are matters for Chairman PSC and the CPA to assess independently, and take a considered view of. The CPA, for instance, does not publish its advice to the President, nor is the Government privy to its deliberations.
78. Second, confidential deliberations also serve an important function when it comes to making such appointments. If you put it out publicly, you put the candidates out for public debate, even the best of candidates will have some detractors. A small minority, but there will be some. suitable candidates may well then be deterred from even being considered if discussions as to their suitability, and perhaps their rejection, were to be made publicly.
79. The consultation process also requires candour and frank assessment. Turning it into a public debate risks politicising an office that must remain scrupulously non-partisan. It is easy to say, let’s have more information, let’s have more public debate, public discourse and deliberations, but we have seen other countries using such methods in other systems, and the question we have to ask ourselves is, are they better? Singapore’s legal system, our corruption levels, our adherence to the Rule of Law, have consistently been marked internationally very well, and I think we want to continue with this.
80. In some jurisdictions, the AGs are elected office holders, but Singapore has had a different model since our independence. Our AG is not a politician. He is appointed based on professional excellence, integrity and judgment. The safeguards, however, lie in the constitutional requirements and qualifications required, the consultative process that I have just outlined, and ultimately in the performance and conduct of the office.
81. Ms Lim also says that there are many qualified persons for the position. That may be so, if one considers only the basic eligibility criteria. However, the selection of an AG is not simply about meeting the basic criteria. It requires a careful assessment of who is best suited to discharge the heavy and very important responsibilities of the office. We want the best, not just those who might qualify.
82. What then does the Government look for in an AG? There are several considerations.
83. As I said, the role of an AG is a demanding one. It is, in fact, one of the most critical offices in our constitutional framework. Beyond formal qualification, it calls for an individual of high professional standing, wide-ranging legal experience, sound judgment and a strong sense of public duty.
84. The AG must also have unimpeachable integrity and strong moral fibre. He must render objective advice and act fairly in the conduct of prosecutions – even when doing so may be difficult or unpopular. He must be prepared to uphold the law impartially, and apply it equally to everyone, whether one is a Minister or the Leader of the Opposition.
85. Individuals with the requisite experience, judgment and integrity for this office are not easily found. The Government continually looks out for suitable candidates, one who can shoulder the full weight of these responsibilities.
86. At the same time, in making any appointments, the Government also takes into account a range of considerations – including the performance of the incumbent, his ability and willingness to serve, and whether there are significant ongoing matters that require continuity and careful oversight.
87. In particular, the Government continues to rely on Mr Wong’s counsel on significant matters that remain in progress today – including
a) negotiations on maritime boundaries,
b) tax and financial sector legal reforms, and
c) complex cross-border criminal matters.
88. These, and others, are substantial responsibilities that will benefit from deep expertise, sound judgement and a steady hand. Mr Wong has had a proven track record. We have seen, worked with him, we have assessed, and we know the quality of the work, including on sensitive matters. He remains fit, able, and willing to continue.
89. Having considered all these factors, and after the required consultations, the Prime Minister advised the President to re-appoint Mr Wong for another term based on the constitutional mechanism. The President then exercised his constitutional functions. I believe this is a system of appointment which is careful, structured, and designed to preserve both independence and public trust.
A New Era: Disruption and Opportunity</b>
90. Sir, I have sketched out our areas of priority in broad terms. My colleagues, SMS Murali and SPS Eric Chua will set out further details in their speeches.
91. However, even as we pursue these priorities, we must be very clear-eyed about the challenges that lie ahead of us. We are entering into an era of profound disruption, the kind of disruption the legal industry has not encountered in recent memory.
92. The most consequential driver of this disruption is artificial intelligence, AI.
93. The numbers tell a striking story. Based on Thomson Reuters’ survey findings last month, the proportion of legal professionals using generative AI in their organisation has roughly tripled since 2024. That is just about a year and a half, two years ago. Legaltech funding in 2025 reached USD5.99 billion, up from USD3.88 billion in 2023.
94. Closer to home, Singapore law firms, some with MinLaw’s support, have begun piloting AI tools. The Supreme Court’s own Audio Services System integrates audio recording and automated AI-driven transcription technology, allowing real-time conversion of spoken words into written text.
95. This, and many other examples, shows a profession already in motion - moving, evolving, with the advent of technology.
96. But we have to ask ourselves, what does this mean for us, as a legal profession, in practice?
97. AI-powered tools are already conducting document reviews, drafting contracts, flagging regulatory exposure across multiple jurisdictions – at speeds that no humans can replicate or even match. Some platforms can even analyse thousands of precedents and generate predictive assessments of case outcomes — work that previously demanded years and years of legal experience.
98. These are genuinely impressive capabilities.
99. But they also raise very important questions for the future of our profession:
a) How does a young lawyer develop judgment, intuition and professional instinct if the AI performs the basic tasks and gives the answers to these young lawyers? How will our lawyers develop these instincts, which are honed by process of doing and redoing and repeating it?
b) Who bears responsibility when AI produces errors with commercial implications?
c) How do we regulate cross-border AI-generated advice without at the same time, allowing regulation to stifle innovation?
d) And perhaps most fundamentally — how do we harness AI to serve the public interest, and not just allow it to widen the gap between those who can afford sophisticated legal technology and those who cannot?
100. The impact on legal education is equally pressing.
101. Our law schools have, for generations, trained lawyers through a well-established pedagogy, where the process of reading and analysing cases, drafting legal memos, crafting oral arguments, all of these, which I described as the process, is as important as the outcome, when it comes to training.
a) But if AI can do the research or draft a memo in minutes, what happens to this training? What happens to the cultivation of hands-on experience, in making mistakes?
b) Perhaps the law degree ought then to redouble its emphasis on what AI cannot replicate: Ethical reasoning, empathetic client engagement, and the exercise of judgment in areas of genuine ambiguity, and moral courage.
102. The challenge is equally acute for those who are already in practice and in continuing legal education. Can our structures support a landscape where skills will need to be updated every once in a while, to more recently, every once in a few months?
103. These questions do not admit easy answers. They go to the heart of what it means to practise law, to train lawyers and to uphold the standards of a profession entrusted with the heavy responsibility of the administration of justice.
104. Some of these issues will be studied by the Future of the Legal Profession Committee, which I spoke about earlier, and we will have to work with the profession and the broader legal industry, to understand these issues deeply and come together to find a solution.
105. But I want to emphasise this point: These are not matters which any single institution can resolve in isolation.
106. The challenges before us will require a collective response, from practitioners, in-house counsel, academics, regulators, policy-makers, law students, as well as members of the public whose interests the legal system ultimately serves.
107. As a first step, MinLaw is organising a gathering of the legal industry later this week – we titled it “The Next Charter: Shaping Singapore’s Legal Future Together” – on 6 March.
108. This is an opportunity for an open, frank and candid conversation about the challenges we face, starting with AI and technology, but also understanding the road ahead, and the opportunities that might lie ahead for us, and the future we want to build collectively, for Singapore’s legal industry.
Conclusion</b>
109. Sir, as I conclude, I want to close with a direct appeal to every member of Singapore’s legal community.
110. What you do matters a lot, not just to the profession, but to Singapore’s development and our continued success. In this extraordinary age of change, perhaps it matters even more.
111. Singapore did not build our legal system by accident, as I sketched out earlier. Nor can we hope to preserve and strengthen it by accident.
112. It will require all of us, my Ministry, the Bar, the Judiciary, our law schools, the firms, and every single lawyer, to engage with purpose and genuine commitment and intentionality, to tackling the disruptive challenges.
113. On this endeavour, what I can assure this House of, is that MinLaw will not be a spectator. We will be an active, present, and engaged partner, listening carefully, and investing purposefully in our people and in our institutions.
114. Sir, AI will not replace the lawyer. But the lawyer who harnesses AI thoughtfully and more effectively, will outpace the lawyer who does not. And the legal system that navigates these changes wisely will command far greater trust and attract more commerce and investment, than one that responds with uncritical enthusiasm or perhaps, unexamined fear.
115. The 1826 Charter of Justice gave Singapore a foundation. We worked on it.
116. The generations that followed built upon it.
117. Now it falls to us — this generation, to ensure that the next chapter is worthy of all that came before it.
118. Sir, the Ministry of Law remains fully committed to working with every stakeholder in Singapore’s legal landscape to advance a legal system that is excellent, accessible, adaptive, and just. That is work that we must continue together.
119. Thank you, Sir.
Last updated on 02 March 2026