PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE

Shock and Shame
 


David Rasif’s disappearance, having cleaned out his clients’ account, shocked the profession to its core. Here was a man who participated in professional activities – secretary of the Association of Criminal Lawyers, a regular singer for Law Society events and generally a well-liked individual. Here too was a man with strong family and social ties – a wife and three daughters, a party-goer, a regular speaker at seminars. For him to have thrown everything up for a life on the run, in constant fear of capture, seems mind-boggling,
lunatic even.

We tightened our clients’ accounts rules two years ago, introducing a two-signatory rule for all firms, except for sole proprietorships which were given the option of engaging an approved bookkeeper. This tightening took place after extensive discussion and consultation to seek the right balance to protect clients from unauthorised withdrawals without unduly impeding the carrying on of good, honest business by the vast majority of the profession. It was an inventive solution that strengthened the protection of clients’ monies above that existing in other common law countries.

 

David Rasif’s case must prompt further consideration of whether the balance needs to be shifted, notwithstanding that it will add more costs to the operation of a clients’ account.

 

It is not that Singapore lawyers are less trustworthy than elsewhere. Recent years have seen egregious cases occurring in Australia, Taiwan and elsewhere. But Singapore prides itself on integrity – and the legal profession should lead the way, not lag behind. Public expectations are high, and the profession should match or exceed those expectations.

 

The costs of the public perception that its monies are not safe with a lawyer are heavier than the costs of implementing stronger measures. We also have to recognise that there is a difference between partnerships and sole proprietorships – partnerships have their own systems to guard against fraud of partners, because the partners collectively will have to make good any loss suffered by a client. Partnerships have a second key in place. The challenge is to institute a second key for sole proprietors that will be effective without being too expensive or cumbersome. Ways to enable more firms to operate without handling clients’ monies, if they so choose, must also be explored.

 

I have met with our Small Firms Committee. I have had many discussions with individual lawyers too. I know that many share my shame that a fellow professional can have behaved in this way, and I know that most share my determination to put an end to it once and for all – short of the most heinous criminal ready to forge signatures and the like, and so evade all possible controls.

 

The specific way forward has not yet been decided by Council at the time of writing. But the proposal will be in front of you by the time you read this. It will certainly have to include an additional check on withdrawals of money from clients’ accounts for which there is currently only one signatory. I am confident that members will support Council in its objectives. The profession’s regulating itself (under the overall supervision of the Chief Justice) is central to the role of the legal profession in civil society. It was to promote and defend this principle of responsible independent self-regulation that I came onto Council seven years ago, and why I decided to seek election as President.

 

In the past two-and-a-half years, we have taken a much more active role as a profession in making recommendations to the government in matters of policy. We have received a good hearing, as we deserve to, given that we are a profession of experts committed to service of the public. But as a body of experts ready and willing to serve the public, we will lose respect if we are not stringent in our own regulation.

 

So let us demonstrate to the public that we as a profession have zero-tolerance for betrayal of clients’ trust, and will do what it takes to ensure that the public can trust us, always.

 

Philip Jeyaretnam, SC

President

The Law Society of Singapore