Straits Times senior health correspondent Salma Khalik was troubled by how complaints about a doctor can take more than seven years to be heard (Medical watchdog body needs to move out of slow lane, July 16).

She expressed her concern that patients may be put at risk by such delays, and concluded by saying that the Singapore Medical Council should find a way for urgent cases to be fast-tracked.

Perhaps the medical profession can take a leaf out of the legal profession's book.

In 2001, then Law Minister S. Jayakumar said during the second reading of the Legal Profession (Amendment) Bill that the Law Society received more than 100 complaints a year, but more than half were without substance.

To ensure that the disciplinary process was not slowed down, a new machinery known as the review committee was introduced to act as a sifting mechanism.

Every complaint will first go through a review committee consisting of two members - a lawyer of at least 12 years' standing and a legal officer with at least 10 years' experience - which will have two weeks to decide whether there is sufficient substance in the complaint to warrant an inquiry.

A review committee does not have a blank cheque to dismiss any case. Its mandate is limited. It can dismiss a case only if both members agree that the complaint is frivolous, vexatious, misconceived or lacking in substance.

This arrangement sought to carefully balance the need for an efficient disciplinary process and the need to ensure that every complaint is looked into as thoroughly as possible.

It has been 19 years since the introduction of the review committee. The mechanism seems to have worked well.

Perhaps the Singapore Medical Council should consider something akin to a review committee.

Danny Quah Wei Sheng