Law Society members strike compromise over election of new president

Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox

The group have called for an extraordinary general meeting on Dec 22 to protest Mr Dinesh’s election as president.

Some members have called for an extraordinary general meeting on Dec 22 to protest against Mr Dinesh Singh Dhillon’s election as president.

PHOTO: MAXWELLCHAMBERS.COM

Follow topic:

SINGAPORE – Different factions of the Law Society have met to resolve some unhappiness over the election of Mr Dinesh Singh Dhillon

as the new president of the Law Society of Singapore

.

Speaking to The Straits Times on the night of Dec 10, Senior Counsel Jimmy Yim revealed that the meeting involved three factions.

The groups comprised two members of the current Law Society council including president Lisa Sam; the four office-bearers of the incoming council including Mr Dhillon; and veteran lawyers Peter Cuthbert Low and Chandra Mohan Nair.

Mr Low and Mr Nair, both former Law Society presidents, are leading the group that had called for an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) to discuss the impact of Mr Dhillon’s appointment on the independence of the Bar.

This is because Mr Dhillon – a non-elected member of the council – was elected president of the society.

Mr Yim said he had brought the three groups together to meet Law Minister Edwin Tong on Dec 3.

He said the solution offered was to recognise that Mr Dhillon was properly elected under the law, while respecting the expectations that Law Society members may have regarding how their president is elected.

The senior counsel said it was agreed that Mr Dinesh should serve as president in 2026, and if he wants to continue, he would have to stand for election among the general membership in October 2026.

Despite the compromise, the EGM will go ahead as scheduled on Dec 22, for lawyers to vote and place on the record that only someone who has been elected by general members of the society should be chosen as president.

In Singapore, lawyers vote every October for members of the Law Society council, the highest body within the society responsible for managing its affairs. The society has about 6,400 members.

Under the Legal Profession Act, the Law Minister can appoint up to three members to sit on the council. Mr Dhillon was one of the three brought in this time.

The council can also co-opt three other members.

The council members then vote among themselves to choose a president, two vice-presidents and a treasurer.

Various sources have told ST that the first round of voting resulted in a tie. Mr Dhillon eventually won by a single vote against Mr Samuel Chacko.

On Nov 17, the Law Society announced that Mr Dhillon will lead the new 21-member council.

Lawyers who spoke to ST on condition of anonymity said disquiet began brewing soon after Mr Dhillon was elected president by the council. A document then began circulating among lawyers to collect signatures to requisition an EGM.

Any 25 members of the society can request that such a meeting be held.

They made the request to the Law Society on Nov 24, but when the EGM was not called by Dec 8, the members who sought the meeting notified the society that they would hold an EGM on Dec 22.

The proposed resolution stated in the letter was to record the view that “as a matter of past practice and existing convention, good governance and to uphold confidence in the independence of the Bar”, only someone who has been elected by the members of the society should serve as president.

The letter made it clear, though, that the resolution “does not alter or invalidate any office-bearer election”.

The motion was proposed by Mr Low and seconded by Mr Nair.

However, another former Law Society president, Senior Counsel Thio Shen Yi, told ST on Dec 10 that he disagreed with holding the EGM, which he said would divide and weaken the Bar.

“Dinesh put his name up for president and won fair and square,” said Mr Thio.

The meeting would likely prove to be extremely divisive, said Mr Thio, adding that the new council has important work to do.

Mr Thio, who served on the council for 10 years, noted that he was a MinLaw nominee in 2012 and 2013 while serving as vice-president.

He contended that there is no convention against an unelected council member being chosen as president and that due process under the law was followed.

Mr Thio pointed out that the society’s first president, Mr Tan Chye Cheng, better known as C.C. Tan, was an appointed council member.

Meanwhile, the Law Society council had organised a tea session on Dec 10 for members, to “address any queries or concerns of members on any issue, in particular the transition of Council-elect 2026 into office”.

More than 200 members attended the three-hour session at Maxwell Chambers either in person or via Zoom, said Ms Luo Ling Ling, who was one of those who were present.

Heated words were exchanged as lawyers questioned the current and incoming council, and debated whether non-elected council members should run for president, she said.

Mr Shashi Nathan, who was at the meeting, said he asked for unity.

ST reached out to Mr Low, but he declined to comment. It has also contacted Mr Dhillon and the Law Society for their comments.

See more on