Welcome Address by Minister for Culture, Community and Youth, and Second Minister for Law, Edwin Tong SC at the Access to Justice Symposium 2025

26 MAR 2025

Madam Halimah Yacob
Chancellor of the Singapore University of Social Sciences

Honourable Justice Vincent Hoong
Presiding Judge of the State Courts

Honourable Justice Datuk Vazeer Alam bin Mydin Meera
Federal Court Judge of Malaysia

Ms Denise Phua
President of the Autism Resource Centre (Singapore)

Mr Dinesh Dhillon
Chairman of Pro Bono SG (PBSG)

Ms Peggy Yee
PBSG Ambassador and Chair of the Access to Justice Symposium Organising Committee

Distinguished Guests
My colleagues from the Bar
Ladies and Gentlemen

I. Introduction

  1. A very good morning to all of you. It is a real pleasure to be here.
  1. Today’s inaugural Access to Justice Symposium, with a focus on invisible disabilities, is, I would say, long overdue.

II. Access to justice is a key priority

  1. This inaugural symposium marks yet another significant milestone in PBSG’s continuing efforts to raise awareness, and promote access to justice.
  1. Rule of law is a fundamental pillar of our society – in everything that we do.
  1. From the time of our founding generation, the Government has embraced the Rule of Law, and we cannot for a moment take this for granted. It is a key pillar, and has become a cornerstone of our legal system.
  1. Many societies across the world are vexed by social divides – polarised by extreme views, fuelled by ideological differences, resulting in some segments of the community feeling excluded, with trust in institutions being eroded, including the legal institutions and the law enforcement institutions.
  1. When that happens, might sometimes makes right, and people feel helpless to defend their lives, their rights, and their property.
  1. History has shown us that when societies stray from the Rule of Law, justice becomes arbitrary, governance becomes unpredictable, but ultimately, it is the people who suffer, especially, but not only, the most vulnerable in society.
  1. It is therefore vital that Singapore remains anchored on the Rule of Law, ensuring every individual – regardless of background – can uphold their rights, and seek redress through a fair and efficient system.
  1. The public will not have confidence in our laws and legal institutions, if the barrier to justice is high, or if only some segments of society can access the justice system.
  1. Ultimately, the justice system that we all create as a society is meant for everyday people as well.

(1) We foster public trust in our legal system.

(2) It reinforces social stability by ensuring that people can solve disagreements and address their difficulties through the law, and not by shows of strength.

(3) This safeguards our reputation as a just and orderly society.

III. Measures taken to enhance access to justice

  1. Let me sketch out briefly what our overall framework for access to justice has been over the years, and what we will continually do to safeguard it, before focusing on the topic of today – invisible disabilities.
  1. Over the years, the Government has progressively strengthened and safeguarded access to justice. Let me give you a couple of examples.
  1. The Legal Aid Bureau (LAB) has had a long history of providing civil legal aid, in fact since its formation in 1958.
  1. In 2019:

(1) We introduced greater flexibility to grant civil legal aid to applicants who might not come within the means test criteria, but are nonetheless, despite not coming within the means test criteria, unable to afford basic legal services, sometimes due to extenuating circumstances. So, we granted greater flexibility to try to encompass these people within the legal aid framework.

(2) We also simplified the application process for civil legal aid, and reduced the amount of paperwork that applicants must submit.

  1. Today, partly as a consequence of these adjustments, LAB handles more than 7,000 cases each year.
  1. We have also expanded criminal legal aid, through the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme (CLAS), which is administered by PBSG.

(1) In 2015, MinLaw started to fund CLAS directly, which enabled even more to qualify for legal aid.

(2) In 2022, we took a further step – we set up the Public Defender’s Office (PDO) to provide criminal legal aid to needy Singaporeans and permanent residents (PRs). Last year, PDO received almost 1,900 applications – in its second year of running – with about 1,000 applications assessed to be eligible. A part of these applications was then referred to CLAS. Between PDO and CLAS, there is a system that is worked out to serve the needy applicants in the criminal legal aid system.

  1. We also updated the means thresholds for both civil as well as criminal legal aid last year. We do so regularly, and we did it last year to keep pace with the increase in household income and property value in recent years. This is to ensure that we keep a fairly clear eye on the group of Singaporeans, as well as PRs, who would be able to qualify for legal aid, and ensure that despite the growth in real income levels, the same group will remain eligible for assistance.
  1. LAB has also used technology to improve access to legal resources:

(1) In 2020, we launched the LAB chatbot, iLAB, which provides customised legal information on simple topics we come across everyday, such as divorce, employment issues, and family violence in a simple, easy to understand manner. iLAB is also able to generate simple legal documents.

(2) In 2022, we took one step further in matrimonial proceedings by launching the Divorce Assets Informative Division Estimator (Divorce AIDE). It uses an algorithm to estimate the share of matrimonial assets that each party can potentially receive, post-divorce. What this does is to help parties have a clear framework upfront, have an idea as to what that division might look like before they even enter into court. In most cases, once you have a framework like this that is reliable, you might decide you might not need to invoke the court process, which sometimes can be lengthy, and in the context of family and divorce proceedings, sometimes also very acrimonious.

  1. My Ministry also works closely with the Judiciary as well as other agencies, to ensure that legal processes are kept simple and efficient. Sometimes, we as lawyers, underestimate the extent to which legal jargon, documentation, hurdles such as form filling, which we take for granted, can really be a barrier to access. It can also be intimidating, so we try to lower the procedural hurdles as much as possible, and make the process as friendly and as accessible as possible.
  1. Where appropriate, we have created specialist courts, such as the Protection from Harassment Court and the Community Disputes Resolution Tribunals (CDRT) which we enhanced recently. We have specialist rules and specially trained judges who look at the details of the case, not only from a legal lens, but also from a problem-solving lens, particularly when it comes to community disputes. So what this results in is simpler, more focused cases, and more time and cost effective.
  1. I will end this section by saying that we have continually enhanced our legal system. I believe we have a legal system that we are proud of, world-class, first-rate. If you compare this to any system in the world, I think we stand shoulder to shoulder.
  1. But what is important for any legal system is accessibility. There is not much point in being a first class legal system if the members of the society that it is meant to serve are unable to access it, unable to find justice, and unable to use the system to enforce their rights.
  1. So over the years, we have worked very closely with our partners because we know that it is not possible just on policy alone, to establish a first class legal system that serves people in the community. We have been working with partners such as PBSG, to ensure that help and legal resources are readily accessible in the community, as far as possible where needy residents may reside.
  1. It has been a productive partnership, one which MinLaw is proud of, to keep pro bono assistance a key part of our justice policy.
  1. This is something we have strongly supported, working with PBSG as well as many members of the Bar to organise Law Awareness Weeks @ CDC each year, and in the setting up of two Community Law Centres, which were novel at that time.
  1. A couple of years ago, we set up the first one in Hougang in a temple. PBSG occupied two containers at the site of the temple. I visited it and it is really in the middle of the heartlands. Next to it is a big carpark and a coffee shop, and around it, there are many HDB blocks and the precinct around it. It makes access to justice not just accessible, but literally at your doorstep. We would like to see how we can continue this. We also set up a Centre at the Realm of Tranquillity in Woodlands last year. So these two examples, siting legal services precisely where the community is, are steps to advance access to justice in a more tangible way.
  1. Partly as a result of these efforts, in 2024:

(1) more than 10,000 individuals were assisted with essential legal knowledge, through more than 80 events organised by PBSG;

(2) more than 1,500 clients received legal support at the two Community Law Centres that I spoke about;

(3) another 1,500 residents attended PBSG’s Legal Clinics at the Community Development Councils; and

(4) over 800 individuals received legal representation.

  1. These achievements would not be possible without PBSG’s pool of 660 active volunteer lawyers. This number, I am very happy and proud to say, has been growing over the years, which shows that access to justice is not just a policy directive or a policy intent, or not even just an effort by PBSG. It is a movement that is shared by all members of the Bar, as well as people who serve outside of the Bar as well.
  1. We have also been able to see 230 law school undergraduates joining the programmes. We have gone further upstream, socialising pro bono work with law students and some of our activists in this space, particularly Ms Lim Lei Theng, who has been working with the university has been very proactive in the pro bono space.
  1. We also have been very happy to welcome 200 non-legal volunteers. Later on, as you discuss the issues around “invisible disabilities”, we will begin to see that this is an all of society effort, and it requires effort from people within and outside the Bar to make this work.
  1. I am so heartened to see so many lawyers embody this pro bono spirit because that is what will move the needle, contributing time and resources, not just financial resources, but their own expertise, the time, the contacts, the networks, to help needy and vulnerable clients, and in doing so, really paying it forward. We have all been beneficiaries of the legal system, it has worked for us, and I think it is time to pay it forward.
  1. I would also like to say a big thank you to the foreign Bar. They have been as much a part of this process, supporting PBSG, working alongside our local Bar. This is an effort that does not distinguish between foreign lawyers and local lawyers. I am very happy to say that when I say the Bar is supporting PBSG, I mean, all our foreign lawyers working side by side with the local lawyers.

IV. Persons with “Invisible disabilities”

  1. With that, I turn to the focus of the symposium today, on persons with “invisible disabilities” in the criminal justice system.
  1. This is not a topic that is often under the spotlight, unfortunately. But it is important and deserves our attention.
  1. “Invisible disabilities”, like mental conditions or intellectual disability, may be easily and often overlooked, as they may not manifest in an observable form, but they may impair a person’s ability to speak up for himself.
  1. Such conditions can also affect a person’s judgment and control, and sometimes contributing to their offences. We must be mindful of this, as the effects of these conditions are often unseen, and can have a serious bearing on fairness and process in the justice system.

V. Measures and reforms to support persons with “invisible disabilities”

  1. Over the years, we have introduced reforms and operational improvements to become more sensitive to those with mental conditions, particularly those who come into contact and interact with the justice system.
  1. Let me highlight a few.
  1. First, at the investigation stage, officers from law enforcement agencies are trained to identify and handle persons with mental health conditions. They may activate appropriate adults (AAs) under the Appropriate Adult Scheme for Persons with Mental Disabilities. AAs provide support to such persons during the interviews. We start very much upstream, ensuring that a person with disability is accompanied by an AA from the time of the interview to facilitate communication between law enforcement officers as well as the interviewees.
  1. To give an indication, it is well used, although we can resource it better, can go further upstream and we can look at the surrounding related ancillary resources a bit more.
  1. When MINDS was first appointed to run the scheme in 2016, they started with 90 volunteers. Last year, eight years on, as at December 2024, they have more than 360 volunteers – a four-fold increase in volunteers, which show that there is scope and a role for these volunteers, and the services they provide has been very welcomed.
  1. We need to look at how we can scale this up, not just with the numbers of volunteers, but also with the overall resources surrounding such a provision. For example, facilities, location, resources, allied professionals coming in with the volunteers to make assessments and to assist in hand holding the individual throughout the process.
  1. Under the Home Team Community Assistance and Referral Scheme, persons with mental health conditions may also be referred to relevant agencies, such as MSF and social service agencies, where required. Again, these are resources that are available, but what we do need to do is to build up the expertise that reside within these facilities.
  1. Second, in 2010, we made significant changes to our sentencing regime by introducing community sentences, including Mandatory Treatment Orders (MTOs). Offenders under an MTO would receive treatment to tackle the root cause of their behaviour. We know from many cases, and you see from the J, K and L example that Peggy outlined, that sometimes that disability goes towards the commission of the offence, the root cause of the behaviour.
  1. This regime was further expanded in 2018 to apply to even more offenders. Over the years, many have benefitted.
  1. One of whom was a lady who suffered from schizophrenia.

(1) She was diagnosed in her mid-twenties and resisted treatment for over 10 years. Those who work in this space will know very often they are in denial and through denial, stigma or otherwise, they resist treatment. They resist people even knowing about the condition.

(2) Because of this, her condition deteriorated, causing her to develop a fear of strangers.

(3) She was unable to hold onto a job.

(4) She was convinced that her neighbour was spying on her.

(5) She confronted him quite aggressively, and smashed the flowerpots that were outside his house.

(6) She was charged with public nuisance. But because of this scheme, she was diagnosed and received a MTO.

(7) After undergoing 2 years of mandatory treatment, she now acknowledges her condition, and her schizophrenia is currently in remission.

(8) She holds on to her job, and voluntarily returns for treatment.

(9) This in turn, since then at least, keeps her away from re-offending, and better ensures public safety and community relations with her neighbour.

  1. So we can see how we have introduced a stronger rehabilitative element in the system for offenders, particularly for those with mental conditions.
  1. Even for offenders who are incarcerated, our efforts to support them do not end after they enter prison.
  1. Let me illustrate this with another a real-life case:

(1) A is an inmate who is housed in the Prisons’ Psychiatric Correctional Unit (PCU).

(2) He suffers from several mental conditions, including intellectual disability and anti-social personality disorder.

(3) In prison, he is supported by a multi-disciplinary team, including prison officers, IMH specialists, correctional rehabilitation specialists, psychologists, as well as aftercare partners. A whole team, multi-disciplinary, assigned to assist persons like him.

(4) He attends classes designed for inmates with mental disabilities, conducted by IMH occupational therapists, to improve his functioning skills, and help him gain insight into his mental condition. Very often, we take the approach that once you start acknowledging and understanding your own condition, the path to rehabilitation is much smoother. So a lot of the effort is spent upstream trying to ensure that the individual acknowledges it and accepts help from the outside.

5) Whenever he experiences emotional outbursts, the PCU officers are trained to give him space, while at the same time ensuring his safety as well as that of the other inmates.

(6) As his caretaker is unable to care for him upon release, Prisons has referred him to aftercare agencies like MINDS to continue with his outpatient medical needs, and his employment and reintegration needs.

  1. Before stepping in, we had a short chat and Ms Denise Phua, my Parliamentary colleague, was saying that we do need to go further upstream and look at these resources. In her own words, the lawyers do a great job, judges understand the nature of the offender, we send them for MTOs, we rehabilitate them in prison, but when they are released from prison, back into society, there is no support system. What happens then?
  1. I agree, and I think we need to do more to look at it holistically from different angles, from the left to the right, to the top and to the bottom, to ensure that once you come back into the system, we hand hold that individual as much as possible. So, the example I gave of A suggests what we can do to good effect. But I think the issue for us is scalability. How do we ensure that we scale this up across society? It is worth studying what else can be done in the vein of what Denise and Peggy have said, both upstream and downstream, and across the justice system.

VI. Conclusion

  1. But I would end this morning by saying that it is upon all of us, as Peggy said, to ensure that access to justice is not just something that we have as a banner or is a nice policy, but it is really the lived and practical experience of people who come to use our legal system in Singapore.
  1. We cannot make it just a lofty ideal – we must continually review and enhance our system to ensure that no one is left behind.
  1. This is also very true of our criminal justice system.
  1. We will keep evolving our criminal justice system to ensure that vulnerable accused persons and victims – including those with mental disabilities – are as adequately supported and treated with fairness, compassion and justice, as anyone else.
  1. When Peggy spoke, she ended with a very strong clarion call for all of society to come together to set up a task force to study this problem, to understand it, and to think of what whole-of-society’s solutions might look like. I would tell Peggy that, on behalf of MinLaw, we will be committed to such a task force. We will be the first on this task force, and we will work with all of you to ensure that we do not just make access to justice something that we speak about at forum, but that we live through the experience of the users in our system.
  1. With that, let me reiterate my thanks to all of you for being here. Your presence overwhelmingly signals how important this is for all of us. I want to thank Peggy, Suresh, as well as Lei Theng, the co-chairs of the Organising Committee for flying that magic carpet, coming forward here and making sure that experiences such as those of J, K and L, while they are still in our society, over time, will become the minority.
  1. So, thank you very much. Enjoy the symposium and have a great day, not just understanding and listening to the great speeches and panels that you have. What is important and special about today is that we are doing this in person, across a spectrum of different stakeholders in this space, whether you are lawyers, or from the healthcare or social service agencies. I think what is needed is for us to come together, brainstorm ideas and collectively take it up one or two notches. So in as much as it is important to pay attention to the symposium, it is also important over the coffee breaks and the lunch breaks to make contacts, build networks and to make new friends in this space, because we need to do this all collectively. Thank you very much.

Last updated on 26 March 2025